A Message to Children About Climate Change

catkinZ8a

A Message for Children About Climate Change

Posted September 23, 2019

Dear Children,

I’m sorry adults have frightened you about climate change and how it might affect your future. You might be less afraid if you knew some facts that adults intentionally do not explain to you. I’ll tell you here.

The news was once a source of real information, or so we thought. But in the modern world, the news people discovered they can make more money by presenting scary news regardless of whether it is true or not. Today, much of the news on the right and the left is opinion that is meant to scare you, not inform you, because scary things get more attention, and that makes the news business more profitable. The same is true for people who write books; authors often make books scary so you will buy them. Most adults know all the scariness is not real. Most kids do not. You just learned it.

Nuclear energy used to be dangerous, back in the olden days. Today’s nuclear power plants (the ones built in the past 20 years all over the world) have killed zero people, and are considered the safest form of energy in the world. More people have died installing solar panels and falling off roofs than have died from nuclear power problems anywhere in the world for the past few decades. And nuclear energy is the obvious way to address climate change, say most of the smartest adults in the world, because it can provide abundant, cheap, clean energy with zero carbon emissions.

Nuclear energy as a solution to climate change is one of the rare solutions backed by several Democrats running for president and nearly all Republicans. Please note that two Democrats in favor of nuclear energy (Corey Booker and Andrew Yang) are among the youngest and smartest in the game. To be fair, the oldest Democrat running for president, Joe Biden, also supports nuclear energy because he is well-informed.

If you are worried about nuclear waste, you probably should not be. Every country with nuclear energy (and there are lots of them) successfully stores their nuclear waste. If you put all the nuclear waste in the world in one place, it would fit on one football field. It isn’t a big problem. And new nuclear power designs will actually eat that nuclear waste and turn it into electricity, so the total amount of waste could come way down.

The United Nations estimates that the economic impact of climate change will reduce the economy by 10% in eighty years. What they don’t tell you is that the economy will be about five times bigger and better by then, so you won’t even notice the 10% that didn’t happen. And that worst case is only if we do nothing to address climate change, which is not the case.

A number of companies have recently built machines that can **** CO2 right out of the air. At the moment, using those machines would be too expensive. But as they come down in cost and improve in efficiency, we have a solution already in hand should it ever be needed. It would be expensive, but there is no real risk of CO2 ruining the world now that we know how to remove any excess from the atmosphere. (Plants need CO2 to thrive, so we don’t want to remove too much. Greenhouses actually pump in CO2 to make plants grow better.)

Scientists tell us that we could reduce climate risks by planting more trees. (A lot more.) That’s all doable, should the world decide it is necessary. There are a number of other companies and technologies that also address climate change in a variety of ways. Any one of the approaches I mentioned (nuclear energy, CO2 scrubbers, planting trees) could be enough to address any climate risks, but there are dozens of ways of dealing with climate change, and more coming every day.

Throughout all modern history, when we humans see a problem coming from far away, we have a 100% success rate in solving it. Climate change is no different. All the right people are working hard at a wide variety of solutions and already know how to get there, meaning more nuclear power plus CO2 scrubbers, plus lots of green power from solar, wind, and more.

If you are worried about rising sea levels, don’t be. The smartest and richest people in the world are still buying property on the beach. They don’t see the problem. And if sea levels do rise, it will happen slowly enough for people to adjust.

Adults sometimes like to use children to carry their messages because it makes it hard for the other side to criticize them without seeming like monsters. If adults have encouraged you to panic about climate change without telling you what I am telling you here, they do not have your best interests at heart. They are using you.

When you ask adults about nuclear energy, expect them to have old understanding about it, meaning they don’t know the newer nuclear energy technologies are the safest energy on the planet.

What I told you today is not always understood even by adults. You are now smarter than most adults on the topic of climate.

My generation has a lot of faith in your generation. You will be the most educated and effective humans of all time. My generation (and a few generations younger than me) already has the fixes to address climate risks coming online. Your generation will finish the job.

We adults respect your passion and your energy on the topic of climate. But it isn’t fair for us to deny you the basic facts while at the same time scaring you into action. I hope this letter helps you sleep better. We adults have this problem under control, or will soon, and you’ll help us finish the job. So get some good sleep tonight. Together, we got this.

Scott Adams

https://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/09/23/a-message-for-children-about-climate-change/

SaveComment81Like4
Comments (81)
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

Hear, hear!!

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

PS The question is does science stand a chance against the current narrative. I doubt it. The stories people tell are more powerful than facts, or climate change.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mudhouse

Thank you catkin. Nice to read a voice of sanity.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catkinZ8a

Please share this with the young-and older people in your lives.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
shaxhome(Frog Rock, Australia 9b)

Lovely guy...

Dilbert Creator Scott Adams Is Evil (And Why You Should Follow His Lead)


"Donald Trump’s latest campaign to stamp out the immigrant wave that has “infested” (his word) America has alienated even some of his staunchest supporters.
Not Scott Adams. Always the entrepreneur, the creator of the Dilbert
comic strip has lately positioned himself as the defender and
interpreter of all things Trump.

So far it’s been a winning bet. Adams’s book Win Bigly: Persuasion in a World Where Facts Don’t Matter has achieved bestseller status and his blog
has racked up a whole lot of eyeballs. Like a hermit crab that can
sense when to skitter along the ocean floor from one host shell to
another, Adams has found the perfect mechanism to protect his career in
the face of a newspaper industry that is collapsing around him.

In fact, just yesterday Adams uncovered a new opportunity to spread
the word about his revamped brand. In response to the children-in-cages
news cycle, he recorded an episode of his video blog where he defended the President’s policy as the only defense against an uptick in human trafficking..."

King of the Kool Aid


1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catkinZ8a

Where is Adams wrong in the letter to children?

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Chi

"Today’s nuclear power plants (the ones built in the past 20 years all over the world) have killed zero people, and are considered the safest form of energy in the world."

Considering the average age of power plants in the US is 39, that's not saying much.

And he conveniently ignores the many deaths from older power plants. Many old ones are still very much active.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catkinZ8a

'Today’s nuclear power plants (the ones built in the past 20 years all over the world) have killed zero people, and are considered the safest form of energy in the world.'

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
foodonastump

The United Nations estimates that the economic impact of climate change will reduce the economy by 10% in eighty years. What they don’t tell you is that the economy will be about five times bigger and better by then, so you won’t even notice the 10% that didn’t happen.

Sounds like ACA savings. You ok with this sort of statement now?

But more to the point, I’m glad to see a conservative acknowledging manmade climate change risks. But beyond that the opinion doesn’t impress me much. He’s trying to tell children not to worry about a problem because there are potential solutions. But we allow our government to exacerbate the problem and we don’t allow our government to invest enough on these solutions.

That’s all doable, should the world decide it is necessary.

Yeah, that’s the problem. Maybe Adam’s kids are naive enough to take solace in this piece, but I hope mine wouldn’t be. Wonder if he also tells his kids not to worry about diet and exercise because medicine will advance to cure the results of an unhealthy lifestyle by the time they are old.

Oh wait, just checked, he doesn’t have kids of his own.


6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
terrene(5b MA)

People should read about the science and what scientists have to say, not some cartoonist.

There is currently no technology available that will suck CO2 out of the air on the scale required to bring down CO2 levels in the atmosphere and even if there were, it has to be put somewhere. Back in the ground from where the carbon was pumped in the first place? That's brilliant. And apparently the prototype technology requires a lot of energy.

Trees could be part of the solution, but there isn't enough land to grow enough trees to sequester enough carbon, especially when humans use and need most arable land for agriculture (and most of it livestock). And trees grow slowly. Besides, we've already lost 50% of Earth's trees and last I looked the taiga and rainforests have been burning and releasing not sequestering carbon.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2019/07/can-planting-trees-save-our-climate/

And sea level rise is a very slow moving threat and it's not going to kill people. I think we are going to be clobbered with other climate change effects like heat, drought, wildfires, severe storms, crop failures, etc. long before SLR.



Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Nuclear energy is the worst. Remember, it isn't about the climate and a puny 1 degree change in the meaningless average...It's all about the redistribution of any and all wealth, and taking over the energy industry. Money for the wealthy from taxing the poor.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catspa_zone9sunset14

"Throughout all modern history, when we humans see a problem coming from far away, we have a 100% success rate in solving it."


Waves of derisive laughter for that statement alone....overall, a crock.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Global warming is BS scam.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
socks(10a)

Nonsense. US has had issues storing nuclear waste.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

I love that Scott Adams is dismissed as a cartoonist, but Greta is the unassailable Messiah of climate change. Double standards are unbecoming and belie an inability to cope with the argument at hand.

Chi, here is the wiki page for all nuclear related accidents in the world. The list is more paltry than even I imagined. Furthermore, there have been no commercial nuclear accident related deaths in the USA, ever. There were three deaths in 1958 from an Army experimental reactor. This reactor was ill conceived even by that day's standards. Three Mile Island, nothing happened there. Less than a banana's (yes, bananas have radioactivity) worth of radioactivity escaped from TMI. The operators misread gauges and their reaction caused the so-called problem.

Add to this, all the nuclear power plants operating on Navy ships without incident and a picture of anti-science, knee jerk hysteria emerges.

I know the word nuclear is frightening. The risks sound horrifying. But just because we associate nuclear with mushroom clouds and three headed babies does not make it so.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_by_death_toll

What is the toll of climate change so far? In terms of lung disease, brain cancers, food insecurity, flooding and extreme weather? Nuclear fifty years ago was the answers. The hippies told a better more powerful story about death and destruction from nuclear, and won the argument. And here we are with a gigantic problem that science had well in hand, but we dropped.

Terrene, we have CO2 scrubbers, air separation that pulls CO2 directly out of the air, and other carbon capture capacities. Of course none of this is a magic bullet. But it's not nothing either.



3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

Socks, what is the issue with storing nuclear waste? We have had zero problems safely storing our waste. And we, btw, operate nuclear plants in the world, thanks to the US Navy, so we have plenty of waste. The problem we have is ignorance.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

The soda industry recovers CO2 from the air. Couldn't be that expensive or they would just buy it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

While I am not totally against some nuclear energy solution I find his writing to be stilted and odd. It is like he is talking down to children or is he just framing it as a letter to kids while really addressing adults.

It would be expensive, but there is no real risk of CO2 ruining the world now that we know how to remove any excess from the atmosphere. (Plants need CO2 to thrive, so we don’t want to remove too much. Greenhouses actually pump in CO2 to make plants grow better.)

Scientists tell us that we could reduce climate risks by planting more trees. (A lot more.) That’s all doable, should the world decide it is necessary.

IMO it is a highly simplistic view of what is needed, I notice he agrees with scientists who agree with him. How long does it take for all those trees to grow to make enough of a difference? How do we convince hostile govt. who see treeless land as money making land to participate? That is Greta's point, not just that climate change is happening but that because of money no govt. is willing to do anything. What about Trumps revoking CA vehicle emission standards in the name of cheaper vehicles, or Brazil refusing to stop burning the rainforests? He talks like he is talking to kids who don't understand that the climate change problem is one of govt. greed. Sure humans can fix it but it will never be done as long as leaders such as Trump don't see it as a problem in the name of economic growth.

I also note that he makes no mention at all of controlling large industry to decrease their level of carbon emissions, that would be a good start and just as easy as making the entire world plant trees, not to mention have an immediate effect.

This type of letter is a platitude I would tell my kids so they did not worry, it is not the type of letter I would use for direction on what to do about climate change.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

Socks, what is the issue with storing nuclear waste? We have had zero problems safely storing our waste

It could be one of space, it could be one of where, it could be one of people saying 'not in my back yard'. We can't even get a handle on where and how to store our plastic bags. The amount of nuclear waste that would increase with every year if the whole planet relied on nuclear energy could become a future problem. Without looking way into the future as to how our grandchildren would deal with this problem, we are not doing them any favours. But hey, as the OP says, why worry, stay calm, humans have a 100% chance of fixing the problem maybe, someday, if they can.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
foodonastump

He’s addressing children because they tend to be more gullible.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

Having my children not worry about matters outside of their control is a pretty important issue. I don't see Adams condescending. I see him making the problem seem manageable for young people.

Even for grown ups there are only two avenues available for dealing with climate change. First, manage your own carbon footprint, and second, work to elect the people you believe will put the best policies in place to address the problem. That's it. All the hand wringing and drama is superfluous and useless, unless you profit from it, in which case, knock yourselves out. Participating in demonstrations, and boycotts and what not might help, so there is that too.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Vote for the person who created your boogieman and fears because they are the only ones who can see and fix the imaginary fears they created in your minds.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

Nuclear waste, specifically the spent fuel rods, are stored in the bottom of indoor pools located at the nuclear plants. They really aren't big and can hold all of the spent fuel rods that the plant will ever make. You can safely enter the pool room and observe the rods deep underwater. As for the low level wastes, such as the used white suits you wear, are stuffed into barrels that are put in the room. Low level wastes present little if no radiation threat.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
foodonastump

Zalco I have to admit I’m a little surprised to see your view. Don’t worry about it because you can’t do much about it? But knock yourself out if you can profit from it? How about, don’t let the people who profit from ignoring/denying it win? Of course I don’t want my kids losing sleep and suffering from anxiety over it, but I’d be shirking my responsibility to them and the world if I just told them don’t worry about it with fairy tails of massive carbon scrubbers.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Global warming is another smullett. Another Russia, Russia, Russia. Everything from the left is fear mongering nonsense...Every single thing. Delusional nonsense.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

I disagree, unless you make it a vocal issue those in charge will not act. Do you think that any govt. that does not have it's citizens speak out would bother to do anything? Women would have never got the vote, MLK would never have drawn attention to his cause.

Yes, manage your own carbon footprint but working to elect officials does not necessarily garner an elected official who would do anything to help. Assuming that all countries have a leader who would do anything is not real. As I said, you yourselves have one who is a climate denier and in the case he gets elected in 2020 it will just kick the environmental issues down the road and increase the problems. How many years should we wait for elected officials to act? an eternity?

FYI many children have worried about issues that they had no control over I remember the cold war scares. Sure keep your kids happy and unconcerned until a certain age. Greta is 16 an age where she could have kids of her own, I highly doubt a 16 year old should be kept ignorant of the world problems.


1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catspa_zone9sunset14

The soda industry recovers CO2 from the air.

Oh? Most of the CO2 from ammonia production (current main source of it for the soda industry) comes from steam reforming of coal or natural gas.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

And there are the cancers and other bad things that come from acquiring and preparing the fuel.

It being less bad than the numbers with coal doesn't make it good.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Climate deniers are a figment of your imagination. Climate is a statistic that only exists on paper. Don't be fooled. Climate is not a force of nature and could never be the cause of anything.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

I happen to think exercising my personal agency to reduce my carbon footprint and supporting the elected officials who can put better policies in place are crucial. My utility company allows me to pay more in order to support fully renewable power, which I do. On top of that I have curtailed driving, using a bicycle for in town errands, reduced my meat consumption further, refuse to participate in fast fashion and other disposable trends. On top of that I donate to candidates whose views are aligned with mine. What more should I do? Where did I to profit from the problem? I spend my money in accordance with my values. I vote and support candidates likewise.

My children know more about climate change than the average adult. They have since they were quite young and two of them have received recognition from members of congress and their city for an app hey developed to help people keep track of their carbon footprint, eight years ago.

So if you believe technology is a fairy tale, go ahead and live in your emotional nightmare. I believe in doing what I can and moving on.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
blfenton

Where do you plan on planting all these trees which will take 30-40 years to grow big enough to do any good?

https://globalnews.ca/news/5471379/planting-trees-climate-change-theory/

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

Urbo, I never said to keep children ignorant and I never said not to take political action. Demonstrations, boycotts and whatnot were mentioned in my list of what you have control over.

As for kicking the problem down the road, indeed that has been the game for decades, under left and right governments.

And while you decry Trump, what has Trudeau done about the tar sands? Tar sands oil is filthier to extract and refine than regular oil. Trudeau makes all the right noises, but bows down to the oil money anyway.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

It doesn't matter now that the left has admitted that it is all a scam. It's over. After 30+ years of failed fear mongering and bogus predictions, only the blind are left.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Chi

"It doesn't matter now that the left has admitted that it is all a scam"

Where has "the left" admitted it's a scam?

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

So let me understand, FOAS, you believe worry outside of action is fruitful and find my approach of managing my economic and political choices useless? I find that surprising. I'll take doers over worriers every day and twice on Sunday.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

The inability to edit is maddening. Apologies for the typos.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
foodonastump

Zalco it seems I misinterpreted your posts and if that’s the case I apologize. Sounds like you are actively doing your part. You‘re not alone, but there are far from enough who so. Hence the importance of passing on the concern to our kids. What else will motivate them if not the grim reality of where we’re headed? If our elected leaders’ inaction is any indication, we’ve done a poor job of doing “what we can.”

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
foodonastump

(Ditto on editing typos. Even if I can see them (iPhone 6 and no reading glasses) it’s too much of s PItA to fix

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg Z-7 Va(Z-7)

Stockpiling dangerous waste whether it be nuclear rods, coal ash, etc is just a ticking time bomb waiting for the next earthquake or 1,000 year flood to mix it up into our soil, air, and water environment.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
miss lindsey (stillmissesSophie,chase,maifleur,others(8a)

catkinZ8a

9 hours ago

Where is Adams wrong in the letter to children?

——-

Have you ever talked to a child?

Two minutes.

That’s your window of attention. After that they drift. This letter drones on for about five minutes when read aloud.

Short sentences should be used. Simple vocabulary that matches their comprehension level is needed.

Like what I did here.

That’s what he did wrong if he is truly addressing children. But we all know he’s not. He’s pretending to address children while actually riling up people who agree with him. So he’s just exploiting the abstract idea of “children” to foment unrest.

I thought it was bad to use children that way?

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

I don't think Adams has children in his audience. Saying Dear Children here is meant to represent a message for children to be carried by the adults who read the missive. Using an epistle format to convey a message is pretty standard. I don't see this as deceiving.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

And while you decry Trump, what has Trudeau done about the tar sands? Tar sands oil is filthier to extract and refine than regular oil. Trudeau makes all the right noises, but bows down to the oil money anyway.

Trust me I agree with you, but it is not just Trudeau but before him all PMO's did the same and Scheer will (as well as Trudeau) in the future.

I am listening to Scheer this morning and he has stated, that if he is elected, for every regulation on the books he will eliminate two, and he did not rule out this including environmental regulations applied to industry, including clean water. WTH, who eliminates two regulations on the basis of reducing red tape?

I don't support the tar sands but again, money talks and Alberta tar sands has money. Any politician that takes on Alberta oil will eliminate themselves politically, and put Canada into a crisis of separation once again.

I failed to point out the tar sands not because I don't want to condemn it or portray Canada as some type of 'better', but because I slipped up. I also condemn our faux recycle program, and the shipping of waste to poorer nations.

I think my point is that if we do not collectively push the environment to the forefront of issues govt. will fail to act. Just like ours fails to act on the Tar Sand issue.

I live in a province that mines Uranium that ships yellow cake out to other countries. I am not opposed to possible nuclear options for energy, I just don't trust that those aims will be done without greed and power muddying all the good intentions.



3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
miss lindsey (stillmissesSophie,chase,maifleur,others(8a)

“I don't see this as deceiving.”

I don’t see it as deceiving either.

It is blatantly obvious what he is doing.

And I don’t like it.

Kids need to be educated, this is not the way to do it, and I see it as exploitative. Not exploiting a certain child, but exploiting people’s feelings toward their children. Not cool in my opinion and definitely not going to advance his message past those who already believe it.

Now if he had begun with “Dear Parents Everywhere” I would have no objection.

but to be honest I was reacting to catkin’s question of “where did he go wrong in his letter to children.”

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Chi

For every "fact" he uses that agrees with his argument, there are other facts that disagree.

He's cherry-picking the ones that fit his narrative and doing exactly what he's accusing the "climate scarers" of doing.

He's trying to convince children there's nothing to worry about, and that's just not true. It's not beneficial for children to be anxious but they must be aware. Surely there's some middle ground between panic and being told it's all a lie. Reasonable steps that everyone can take to help.

There is no downside to helping the environment.

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
miss lindsey (stillmissesSophie,chase,maifleur,others(8a)

This is why it would have been nice if governments were promoting a calm, rational, consistent policy of conservation and responsible consumption right along.

Kids understand the concept of “we don’t know for sure what the future holds but we are doing x, y, and z to make sure we are making the least amount of impact possible.” They understand a hierarchy of needs and they can understand trying to make the best of a bad situation.

People like the letter writer or the critics of Greta Thunberg want to reduce kids to brainless idiots until they “grow up.” The letter writer did it by addressing his letter to children but writing it to adults. Greta’s critics do it by dismissing her as a puppet.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catkinZ8a

Thanks for stating the obvious for our readers who don't get it.

.


Zalco/bring back Sophie!

I don't think Adams has children in his audience. Saying Dear Children here is meant to represent a message for children to be carried by the adults who read the missive. Using an epistle format to convey a message is pretty standard. I don't see this as deceiving.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
miss lindsey (stillmissesSophie,chase,maifleur,others(8a)

Oh we get it. We just don’t like it.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Carro

Zalco/bring back Sophie!

I don't think Adams has children in his audience. Saying Dear Children here is meant to represent a message for children to be carried by the adults who read the missive. Using an epistle format to convey a message is pretty standard. I don't see this as deceiving.

I see it as age-appropriate honesty and frankly, he's not taking advantage of their lack of sophistication.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catkinZ8a

Naw, you don't get it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

Thanks for stating the obvious for our readers who don't get it.

I get it, I also get that in addressing it to children he is trying to push his cherry picked points forward to change the minds of.......children, pot or kettle


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

Naw, you don't get it.

Are you judge and jury of what other people understand?

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Embothrium(Sunset Climate Zone 5, USDA Hardiness Zone 8)
4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
miss lindsey (stillmissesSophie,chase,maifleur,others(8a)

If I read that letter to the average six year old eyes would get big at the first sentence about adults scaring him/her then those eyes would glaze over under the sheer volume of words.

If I gave that letter to an average eight year old to read, the reaction would be “huh?”

The average twelve year old would have lots of good questions. Some of which would have to do with climate change. The rest would probably revolve around “why isn’t the government doing these things? Why should I care where rich people build their houses?” Etc.

A 14-16 year old is going to be infuriated that he is patronizing them.

I get it. I get who his audience is, I get what his point is. I even agree with some of his thoughts.

I just refuse to pretend that he’s doing it “for the children.”

Do you think he is, catkin?

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catkinZ8a

Of course not, Urbo.

It's my opinion.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

What was that about there's never been any problems with storing nuclear waste?

As I said upthread, I live in a province that has Uranium mining, although it has declined in the last years. We have yellow cake being trucked down our main highways, over our one bridge into the city, and right thru the middle of town and further south to be shipped out by rail.

Scientists say it doesn't pose a high risk to human and animal health if stored and handled properly. However, it is a radioactive substance, which means merely standing close to yellowcake without protective clothing can cause organ damage. The level of damage, which includes cancer, depends on how much pure uranium there is in the yellowcake and how long you've been exposed to it. Ingesting or inhaling the dust of yellowcake is the most serious form of exposure.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/yellowcake-explained-1.703864

The dangers of nuclear power is not only about the final destination, but about all aspects of the mining process itself.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Iris GW


1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg Z-7 Va(Z-7)

sad, just sad

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg Z-7 Va(Z-7)

Yes, a child who is more articulate than trump could ever be.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
miss lindsey (stillmissesSophie,chase,maifleur,others(8a)

If the MAGA hat Covington kids can know and speak their minds at 15/16/17, why can’t Greta?

Are they marionettes? Brainwashed by their parents?

No.

They are all passionate young adults. They all deserve a voice and to be shown respect (eta yes, even those who are disrespectful should be shown respect with a clear admonition that “in the adult world we behave with courtesy,” along with a modelling of that courtesy.)

I don’t happen to believe that people this age should be speaking to world leaders on the world stage no matter their political position.

But to say or imply that a teen who does so is brainwashed, or exploited, or a puppet shows a remarkable misunderstanding of the minds of teens.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
margaritadina

''

lurker111

Nuclear
energy is the worst. Remember, it isn't about the climate and a puny 1
degree change in the meaningless average...It's all about the
redistribution of any and all wealth, and taking over the energy
industry. Money for the wealthy from taxing the poor.

''

Exactly. And mentally ill child will lead us.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg Z-7 Va(Z-7)

Too late, you already voted him into office.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
heri _ cles

Nuclear energy used to be dangerous, back in the olden days.

More people have died installing solar panels and
falling off roofs than have died from nuclear power problems anywhere in
the world for the past few decades.

-------------------------

The "olden days" what does that mean to kids?

Chernobyl in 1986

Fukushima in 2011.

This is an article filled with half-truths..a dastardly way to try to indoctrinate children,,,kind of like how religion is taught to children.

And someone was ranting about liberal indoctrination of children around here recently.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

3 Mile Island was a big deal until we saw how bad it could be.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Calling Greta mentally ill shows fear of the truth she speaks. Attacking the messenger instead of the message.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

What bad thing happened at Three Mile Island? Please explain. No one died, and the sum total for radiation emitted was less than a banana's worth.

As for Chernobyl and Fukushima, how many deaths? Those power plants were not up to US standards and if climate scientists and epidemiologists are to be believed, far more people have died of pollution related deaths than nuclear ones.

I understand how we see a catastrophic possibility and blow it out of proportion in our imagination. And yet we ignore the things we do every day that have catastrophic consequences. But bandying about nonsense about nuclear dangers in the face of what burning fossil fuels has done to the planet and human health is not helpful.

People left of center blocked nuclear at every turn insisting their fears were more valid than the science that showed how safe the technology was. As a society we decided to trust our imagination and maintain the status quo. Now the left of center say pollution from fossil fuels threatens life on earth. I agree. But doubling down on anti science, and anti evidence is irresponsible. Nuclear is safe. Those who can't understand that simple fact, based on decades of evidence are no better than anti vaxxers.


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Yes, coal burning has killed many.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
socks(10a)

zalco, I didn't read all the other replies, but the Hanford site has had a collapsed tunnel and leaking canisters.

Ask Japan how they are doing with Fukushima. Not all nuclear plants would be at risk of an earthquake/tsunami, but Diablo Canyon in California would be at risk in my opinion.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catkinZ8a

Where's the letter to the children from liberals?

We'd love to read it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Though sticking a nuclear plant in Wyoming might be worth exploring.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

Hanford has leaks (there are always leaks) and those leaks are contained so no one can get hurt. BTW, Hanford's waste is from bomb making, not power plants. Power plants require less enriched uranium, thus they have less waste.

Fukushima has many ongoing problems so bad that I don't think it can ever be contained. As i mentioned above, Fukushima was never to US standards.

Sure Diablo Canyon is at risk of earthquakes, but so is everything along the coast of California. This risk has updated over the life of the plant, and efforts have been made to update the plant structurally to protect the plant.

The bottom line is no catastrophes have befallen commercial or military nuclear power plants in the US. Not only has nothing terrible happened, nothing mildly bad has happened. Burning fossil fuels has caused a catastrophe.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
cait1

@ Miss Linsey

Kids need to be educated... Have you ever talked to a child? Two minutes. That’s your window of attention.

I could educate them on CC/AGW in less than that...

'Children, everything they taught you in school about global warming is wrong. Now go look up the Minoan Warming Period, Roman Warming Period, Medieval Warming Period and Little Ice Age (Maunder Minimum)."

Homeschooling at its best.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
batyabeth

"plus lots of green power from solar, wind, and more."

So how exactly is this going to happen if climate change really isn't that scary? No one will invest in these technologies until change becomes inevitable, and the article is saying it's not at all, nothing to see here, no worries. So who is going to invest, develop, install and support all these new - and apparently unnecessary - innovations?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

Rather than limit consideration to the number of immediate deaths due to nuclear power, we should look at the cancer (and other illnesses) caused by long-term exposure to radiation leaks. And not just for humans, given the contamination of the ocean by the disaster at Fukushima.


Re nuclear power plants in California and earthquakes -- please remember that the 1994 Northridge earthquake was caused by a previously unknown fault. Just recently, a fault was discovered running through Hollywood (which has caused problems for a nearby proposed housing development). What else is out there?


My understanding is that a major deterrent to development of new nuclear power plants in the US is that underwriters will not insure the plants.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Andie



Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
margaritadina

''

Kathy

Calling Greta mentally ill shows fear of the truth she speaks. Attacking the messenger instead of the message.

''

Greta IS mentally ill. And acts accordingly to Aspenger's - talks obsessively about one specific topic.

I am not attacking her, I am recognizing the truth. I am not afraid of her either...why would I be? She is a tool, nothing more.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
margaritadina

''

Zalco/bring back Sophie!

Nuclear
waste, specifically the spent fuel rods, are stored in the bottom of
indoor pools located at the nuclear plants. They really aren't big and
can hold all of the spent fuel rods that the plant will ever make. You
can safely enter the pool room and observe the rods deep underwater. As
for the low level wastes, such as the used white suits you wear, are
stuffed into barrels that are put in the room. Low level wastes present
little if no radiation threat.

''

In the meantime in Japan:


Fukushima: Japan will have to dump radioactive water into Pacific, minister says

More than a million tonnes of contaminated water lies in storage but power company says it will run out of space by 2022


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/10/fukushima-japan-will-have-to-dump-radioactive-water-into-pacific-minister-says


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
margaritadina

''

Zalco/bring back Sophie! As for Chernobyl and Fukushima, how many deaths?

''

Chernobyl survivors kids were blasted with thyroid cancer. There is no real statistics, though. Who will keep it, a totalitarian regime? There are also people that never left the area, even the worst part of it, and they are still alive and non cancerous.

Wild life in Chernobyl is thriving. Nature is doing so well dealing even with radiation that it brings up pretty unpleasant thought - if all humans disappeared, Earth will be a lovely place. Humans don't belong.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zalco/bring back Sophie!

Margaritadina,

Yes, the destruction and nuclear release caused by Fukushima is horrific and is having world-wide consequences. I have already explained several times that the Fukushima plant was built to poor standards and really very little has been done to contain the mess. The world will suffer for a very long time. But, the US plants are built and operated to much higher standards so that such a disaster could never happen. Maybe, I covered this in the other tgread on the same topic occuring in parallel to this one.

The same is the case with Chernobyl.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
margaritadina

Zalco, but poorly built nuclear plants somewhere other than the US are still a threat. The cloud from Chernobyl headed straight to Western Europe, Fukushima contaminated the ocean waters and people of Kamchatka and the rest of Russian ocean line still don't consume ocean fish....Traces of F radiation were found even in Ca wine

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/20/science/fukushima-radiation-levels-california-wine-nyt.html

How many oceans creatures were affected no one will ever know.

My point is - even of we build super safe NPPs, there always be a neighbor to screw it up for us...


Fukushima NPP was engineered and run in conjunction with General Electric by the way

Save    
Browse Gardening and Landscaping Stories on Houzz See all Stories
Room of the Day Room of the Day: Children’s Bathroom Gets a Rustic-Chic Makeover
A designer remains focused through challenges to deliver a luxurious gender-neutral bathroom the kids will not outgrow
Full Story
Landscape Design 15 Ideas for a Children’s Discovery Garden
Pique curiosity and encourage creativity by adding play features that appeal to kids’ imagination and senses
Full Story
Decorating Guides What to Know About Switching to LED Lightbulbs
If you’ve been thinking about changing over to LEDs but aren't sure how to do it and which to buy, this story is for you
Full Story
Star Floor, Inc. has been proudly serving the major metropolitan area for years. We believe in providing... Read More