Comments on: Indonesia Burning & A Rock That’s the ‘Anti-Coal’ http://www.earthbeatradio.org/indonesia-burning-a-rock-thats-the-anti-coal/ Your climate change broadcast. Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:10:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Elsie Errethttp://www.earthbeatradio.org/indonesia-burning-a-rock-thats-the-anti-coal/#comment-745 Elsie Erret Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:57:06 +0000 http://www.earthbeatradio.org/?p=1476#comment-745 Do you have an opinion of the film <a href="http://starnewslive.com/actors/amitabh-and-shahrukh-in-bhoothnath" rel="nofollow">Bhoothnath</a>? I really liked it when it first came out last summer. Based on what you've written on this site, I think you would like Bhootnath. <a href="http://www.starnewslive.com" rel="nofollow">Visit my site if you'd like to read more</a>. Cheers! Do you have an opinion of the film Bhoothnath? I really liked it when it first came out last summer. Based on what you’ve written on this site, I think you would like Bhootnath. Visit my site if you’d like to read more. Cheers!

]]> By: David Lewishttp://www.earthbeatradio.org/indonesia-burning-a-rock-thats-the-anti-coal/#comment-542 David Lewis Sun, 29 Nov 2009 21:34:22 +0000 http://www.earthbeatradio.org/?p=1476#comment-542 Tidwell's "Blame Obama" rant made little sense. Everyone in the world is learning about how the US government works, except perhaps Mike Tidwell.Obama can't make the US Senate pass anything they don't want to pass. And when it comes to ratifying any treaty signed at Copenhagen or later, it will take 2/3 of the Senate, not just 60 votes, to ratify. By blaming Obama for what the Senate is responsible for, Tidwell further encourages people to direct their efforts to change things toward the wrong target.When Tidwell said if carbon capture technology and nuclear power are encouraged even further in the Senate climate bill than they were in the House bill, there might as well not even be a climate bill, he illustrates very well a divide that is occurring worldwide among people who are concerned about climate action.There are a lot of people claiming they understand how serious climate change is pushing other agendas, like anti nuke at all costs, anti carbon capture at all costs, who make arguments that make no sense at all.Tidwell is one of these people. He claims to want to see significant action on climate, yet defines a successful climate bill as one that would not encourage the development of nuclear and carbon capture technologies, both of which promise to facilitate large reductions from BAU emissions. A successful climate bill would advance an agenda that would reduce GHG emissions. Tidwell thinks it would be something else.Tidwell seemed to think James Hansen knows what he is talking about on climate legislation. Let's see, what does Hansen think about nuclear power:“Some of the anti-nukes are friends, concerned about climate change, and clearly good people. Yet I suspect that their ‘success’ (in blocking nuclear R&D) is actually making things more dangerous for all of us and for the planet. It seems that, instead of knee-jerk reaction against anything nuclear, we need hard-headed evaluation of how to get rid of long-lived nuclear waste and minimize dangers of proliferation and nuclear accidents. Fourth generation nuclear power seems to have the potential to solve the waste problem and minimize the others. In any case, we should not have bailed out of research on fast reactors.” Tidwell’s “Blame Obama” rant made little sense. Everyone in the world is learning about how the US government works, except perhaps Mike Tidwell.

Obama can’t make the US Senate pass anything they don’t want to pass. And when it comes to ratifying any treaty signed at Copenhagen or later, it will take 2/3 of the Senate, not just 60 votes, to ratify. By blaming Obama for what the Senate is responsible for, Tidwell further encourages people to direct their efforts to change things toward the wrong target.

When Tidwell said if carbon capture technology and nuclear power are encouraged even further in the Senate climate bill than they were in the House bill, there might as well not even be a climate bill, he illustrates very well a divide that is occurring worldwide among people who are concerned about climate action.

There are a lot of people claiming they understand how serious climate change is pushing other agendas, like anti nuke at all costs, anti carbon capture at all costs, who make arguments that make no sense at all.

Tidwell is one of these people. He claims to want to see significant action on climate, yet defines a successful climate bill as one that would not encourage the development of nuclear and carbon capture technologies, both of which promise to facilitate large reductions from BAU emissions. A successful climate bill would advance an agenda that would reduce GHG emissions. Tidwell thinks it would be something else.

Tidwell seemed to think James Hansen knows what he is talking about on climate legislation. Let’s see, what does Hansen think about nuclear power:

“Some of the anti-nukes are friends, concerned about climate change, and clearly good people. Yet I suspect that their ‘success’ (in blocking nuclear R&D) is actually making things more dangerous for all of us and for the planet. It seems that, instead of knee-jerk reaction against anything nuclear, we need hard-headed evaluation of how to get rid of long-lived nuclear waste and minimize dangers of proliferation and nuclear accidents. Fourth generation nuclear power seems to have the potential to solve the waste problem and minimize the others. In any case, we should not have bailed out of research on fast reactors.”

]]>