the n word

ok, the other n word, just to clarify: nuclear

just watched the TV3 20/20 bizzo on the need to go nuclear to avoid global warming. as the Man Sitting On The Comfy Chair said, it was almost grounds for a BSA complaint.

there was one person interviewed who was opposed (Rod Donald, either not in good form or edited to look that way) and FOUR who were in favour.

there was next to no discussion of a serious attempt to stop using so much power. in fact one of those in favour of turning NZ into Little Springfield said that the current estimates about our future power needs were based on low economic growth - interesting that those on the right say that our economy is in good shape when they need it to be to justify creating waste that is deadly for thousands of years.

and there were some interesting figures about the switch to hydrogen engines for transport meaning we will need three-quarters more electricity (more than what i hear you ask - more than the total amount we use now? or more than the total amount used to run cars and transport now? TV3 wasn't all that interested in making this clear). no mention of the huge impact that emissions from petrol powered engines has on the climate, or that the shift to hydrogen engines would see this basically eliminated.

they had the guy from Environment Canterbury who put up the original motion about investigating nuclear power talking about how he was glad it had started a debate. If this was TV3's contribution to a fair and informed debate then they should be ashamed.

Update: Greyshade has a much more informed post on this than me - go read it :-)