NervousEnergy

I would really love to support the Greens, considering the real lack of progressive liberal parties in the UK at the moment; but I simply cannot reconcile the anti-science, anti-nuclear stance that the Greens take.

The end goal for the Greens is surely to become energy independent when it comes to fossil fuels; which is the biggest net contributor to environmental destruction on the globe.

Nuclear power is logically the only current alternative to our energy needs. Why not wean ourselves off the tit of fossil fuels by embracing nuclear power? Considering that the energy needs of the planet are going to continue to grow, and considering that other renewable sources of power such as dams and tidal estuaries create significant environmental disruption.. surely nuclear power is the best of a bad bunch?

Wind and solar currently is not in any state to provide the consistent power needs for the country, let alone the planet. Whereas Nuclear power, although hideously expensive, at least produces far less environmental destruction. Sure, nuclear waste is awful; but the advancement of science is showing that the new generation nuclear reactors are cleaner and safer than ever before.

I just cannot reconcile these two issues. We're going to need energy, we're going to need to get off fossil fuels, but unfortunately relying solely on renewables cannot in their present state give us energy security.

New generation nuclear reactors can. Especially the thorium-type which are laughably clean. Therefore my question is:

Can you suggest any way that the Greens could embrace nuclear energy for the very obvious and clear long and medium term positives it has?

It really is my killer issue with the party.

Thank you for replying.

You know: I really am hoping that solar power will become massively affordable and highly efficient (let's hope those recent tests with graphene prove mass-marketable); although we do have to ensure that we somehow revolutionise energy storage technology or it won't work that well considering that solar panels don't work for 50+% of the day. But I would love to see decentralised solar generation...but I'm still not sure it would meet our demands.

Glad to see that the issue was debated, and really glad to see that a lot of members supported it. That gives me hope that the party can modernise some of its views.

I'm still of the opinion that nuclear power is the only real stop-gap to energy independence, but, thanks for taking the time to answer!

They're against GMO crops, which is another bit of a killer issue. I get that GMO's can be used by multinational companies to promote pretty awful capitalism (looking at you Monsato), but a lot of the GMO research can only do good for the planet: higher yields so that less space is taken up with farmland and resistance to diseases so you don't have to spray them with pesticides for instance.

Great point! And I hadn't seen that no. It's very encouraging.

I think the Green party suffers slightly in that it has really quite fringe and extreme elements (the "kiwi" Greens: green through and through), as opposed to the more rational and modern ones (the "watermelons": green on the outside and orange on the inside).

Hopefully the party will modernise, and drag themselves into the 21st century.

I know this isn't quite the topic at hand, or even an area of interest, but as somebody who has been with the BBC for over 30 years, what's your opinion on axing BBC Three, and what do you think would be the most effective campaign to preserve it?