# 'Global leaders are to blame'...a(nother) discussion about climate change **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 23, 2019, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726 "2019-09-23T21:55:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/101 "2019-09-25T11:51:28Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > And here I thought that the fact that “her audience is global leaders and power brokers” is just another indication of her privilege. > > You and I will almost certainly never be given the privilege of addressing an assembly of world leaders. Given the privilege, I’d say, “please, listen to what Ms Thunberg is saying”. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/102 "2019-09-25T12:14:58Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > Given the privilege, I’d say, “please, listen to what Ms Thunberg is saying”. Particularly as Ms Thunberg is saying “I am using my privilege to try to get you to listen to what the scientists are saying.” I mean, she literally made the point that it’s not important whether people listen to her as long as they actually listen to the scientific experts on the matter. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/103 "2019-09-25T12:57:43Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > And many problems are “impossible” to fix when it would cost those in power something, and while they won’t be around to live with the consequences of inaction. I call that the “fuck the grandkids” mindset. The point is that anything we do to address AGW is going to cost poor people as much or more as it does rich people, rich countries, or those in power in either poor or rich countries. Solar and wind is more expensive than fossil fuels (or nuclear), so the increased cost of energy is going to hurt poor people. If we try to stop industrialization, the traditional path for developing nations is choked off and they don’t develop. If we try to get away from fertilizer-intense agriculture, poor farmers can’t raise as much food. If we push for bio-fuel, that raises the cost of food crops and that hurts poor people who need to buy food. If we make it illegal to have another child, people in poorer countries who tend to have more children are impacted more than people in rich countries who reduce their reproductive rates automatically. Poor people in SE Asia can’t have air conditioning while we try to address the long-term causes of AGW, because that uses up fuel and contributes to AGW. The notion that we aren’t doing anything about AGW because it hurts those in power is way too narrow a view. It will cost a lot of money to address AGW, and money doesn’t grow on trees. Which, again, is what’s wrong with Ms. Thunberg’s speech. ‘Global leaders are to blame’ is both wrong, and counter-productive. It assumes that there are solutions that can be implemented if the leaders just decide they should be. There aren’t any easy, cheap, or politically viable solutions, and blaming ‘global leaders’ misses the point. Fixing the blame instead of talking about practical solutions is why we aren’t going to do much about AGW. Solar and wind will not scale up, subsidies do not reduce cost, they shift them, we do not have batteries that can store energy on a practical level, China is the largest emitter of GHG and they ain’t gonna stop, the world is not going to go vegan and give up cars, the Green New Deal failed in Congress without a single vote in its favor, and the Greens here and in Europe determinately change the subject and/or go into fainting fits when we try to implement nuclear. I hope Ms. Thunberg feels better after her speech, because it isn’t going to accomplish anything beyond that. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/104 "2019-09-25T13:17:32Z")
> [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > XT, how sure are you that the absence of a robust nuclear infrastructure is the keystone to the demise of future generations? For instance, there was a time in this country when most major cities had cable car systems. Companies like Ford and Esso (Rockefeller’s original oil company IIRC) didn’t like that because it reduced consumption of personal cars and oil. They pulled strings and arranged to have those systems mostly ripped out. Have you considered how much more efficient robust public transportation would be? I know, that’s Socialism, but think about it. > If that is really true, I am afraid the solution is to bring back the guillotine, on the basis of the universal right to self defense. Are we all supposed to stand idly by while a small claque of wealthy assholes ruins the lives of future generations? If rational argument can’t work, and if emotional appeals by affected young girls doesn’t work, tell me- is accepting that Nothing will work a viable option? We all just grab our ankles and kiss our asses goodbye because these wealthy destroyers need to spend a lifetime getting jerked off by teenagers and what have you? > > Bringing back the guillotine and convincing the decision makers that they are absolutely, definitely next would have strong persuasive power for the argument that there are worse things than being a little less wealthy and powerful. Or, it would clear the way for decision makers who care about the human race. Bad for them, but win-win for the 7.5 billion rest of us. > > Don’t you think so? I hate to raise such a point, but if this set of people are Literally Killing Us All and nothing else whatsoever can reach them, do we all just meekly lay down and die and sacrifice our grandchildren to their avarice? Does humankind not have a right to defend itself? History teaches that all a revolution does is change the members of the elite. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/105 "2019-09-25T13:20:54Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > History teaches that all a revolution does is change the members of the elite. This seems like a childishly simplistic view of history. Sure, some revolutions don’t really change anything, or don’t change things for the better, but some do. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/106 "2019-09-25T13:23:22Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The notion that we aren’t doing anything about AGW because it hurts those in power is way too narrow a view. It will cost a lot of money to address AGW, and money doesn’t grow on trees. > > Which, again, is what’s wrong with Ms. Thunberg’s speech. ‘Global leaders are to blame’ is both wrong, and counter-productive. It assumes that there are solutions that can be implemented if the leaders just decide they should be. > > There aren’t any easy, cheap, or politically viable solutions, and blaming ‘global leaders’ misses the point. > > Fixing the blame instead of talking about practical solutions is why we aren’t going to do much about AGW. That is an amazingly defeatist attitude. So we just give up? It’s all over? Because it’s hard, we simply can’t save ourselves or the planet? When did humanity get so feckless? We landed on the moon, we defeated global fascism, we’ve conquered deadly diseases. The history of our species is filled with amazing achievements, but all of a sudden now we are just totally incapable of solving a problem we know exists, and we know is a threat to us and to all life on the planet, but it’s just too hard? How do you think that sounds to today’s youth? You are literally telling them, sorry kids, we are fucking up the place, but we don’t want to have to sacrifice anything at all to try to fix it for you, so good luck!! I thought we were better than this. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/107 "2019-09-25T13:26:13Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > History teaches that all a revolution does is change the members of the elite. So the American Revolution was a failure? The French Revolution? I think your understanding of the lessons of history is a bit lacking. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/108 "2019-09-25T14:11:03Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > So the American Revolution was a failure? > > The French Revolution? > > I think your understanding of the lessons of history is a bit lacking. Where in my post did you see the word “failure ?” I clearly said the composition of who makes up the elites changes in times of revolution. Do you dispute that? ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/109 "2019-09-25T14:14:07Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > So the American Revolution was a failure? > > The French Revolution? > > I think your understanding of the lessons of history is a bit lacking. No doubt he slept through history class, but the American revolution isn’t a good example because it was a reactionary revolution (rebellion by a certain elite for the purpose of retaining elite status). As was the American Civil War. That’s why American conservatives admire & defend these revolutions and disdain pretty much all the other ones. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/110 "2019-09-25T14:36:45Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > That is an amazingly defeatist attitude. So we just give up? It’s all over? Because it’s hard, we simply can’t save ourselves or the planet? When did humanity get so feckless? We landed on the moon, we defeated global fascism, we’ve conquered deadly diseases. The history of our species is filled with amazing achievements, but all of a sudden now we are just totally incapable of solving a problem we know exists, and we know is a threat to us and to all life on the planet, but it’s just too hard? We could do something. We could tell global leaders (like Sanders and Warren) and the Greens to “follow the science” just as much as we do, or Thunberg did, everyone else. > [@](#): > > How do you think that sounds to today’s youth? You are literally telling them, sorry kids, we are fucking up the place, but we don’t want to have to sacrifice anything at all to try to fix it for you, so good luck!! No, we need to tell today’s youth that the solutions that are practical are going to cost _ **them.** _ It is not going to be ‘soak the rich’ - China and the Third World are going to suffer as much, or more, than the rich countries, and that includes if we do something vs. if we don’t. Maybe we can save the planet, overall, and suffer less in the long term than if we just concentrated on remediating the effects as they occur. But that does not mean the short- and medium- and long-term solutions are not going to significantly impact the poor. It’s going to hurt. And it is going to hurt _ **you** _. _ **You** _ have to deal with the drawbacks of nuclear waste. _ **You** _ have to deal with the toxic waste of the solar panel factories. _ **You** _ have to give up your car, or another child, or forgo the economic growth that results when we spend on higher cost energy sources instead of lower cost. Not just “the rich”. Maybe we are better than that. The question is more are _ **you** _ better than that, in that you will sacrifice, and especially concentrate on solutions, instead of focusing on the much more emotionally satisfying blame game. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/111 "2019-09-25T14:51:46Z")
I think you are putting a lot of words in my mouth, or you are making a general response on the issue while specifically addressing me? I have no problem with the fact that society has to make some big changes if we really want to make things better for the future. I’m prepared to be just as much a part of the solution as everyone else will need to be. Our most important job as members of the human species is to do our part to leave the world a better place for those that come after us. If we do not do that we are dooming our own species out of selfishness. Are _you_ prepared? Are _you_ willing? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/112 "2019-09-25T16:15:49Z")
> [@HMS\_Irruncible](#): > > No doubt he slept through history class, but the American revolution isn’t a good example because it was a reactionary revolution (rebellion by a certain elite for the purpose of retaining elite status). As was the American Civil War. > > That’s why American conservatives admire & defend these revolutions and disdain pretty much all the other ones. Instead of yet another directly insulting post why not demonstrate the error in my post? Preferably with a quote that isn’t 1% of the post.🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/113 "2019-09-25T17:16:41Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > I think you are putting a lot of words in my mouth, or you are making a general response on the issue while specifically addressing me? I was addressing the idea that we are being prevented from doing “something” about AGW because it will hurt the rich. “Something” will hurt everybody, not just the rich. There are no solutions that will only hurt those I want to blame for the problem. > [@](#): > > Are _you_ prepared? Are _you_ willing? Yes. Therefore, Sanders and Warren and Ocasio-Cortez and the Greens in the US and worldwide and [Austria and Australia and Germany and Belgium and Denmark and Italy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_energy_policy_by_country) can go pound sand. Nuclear power is the way to go, and does not receive nearly the attention or commitment that it needs if the issue of AGW is to be addressed effectively. Maybe I should take a boat and address the UN on the topic. It might help more than an appeal to emotion. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/114 "2019-09-25T17:29:47Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Instead of yet another directly insulting post why not demonstrate the error in my post? Preferably with a quote that isn’t 1% of the post.🙂 1% of the post? Literally your entire contribution in post #104 was this sentence: > [@](#): > > History teaches that all a revolution does is change the members of the elite. Don’t expect me to bother disproving something that you didn’t bother to prove. It’s just an ignorant opinion that I suspect hinges largely on a bad understanding of history combined with weaseling around a uselessly broad definition of “elite”. Feel free to prove me wrong, though. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/115 "2019-09-25T21:13:22Z")
> [@Try2B Comprehensive](#): > > XT, how sure are you that the absence of a robust nuclear infrastructure is the keystone to the demise of future generations? For instance, there was a time in this country when most major cities had cable car systems. Companies like Ford and Esso (Rockefeller’s original oil company IIRC) didn’t like that because it reduced consumption of personal cars and oil. They pulled strings and arranged to have those systems mostly ripped out. Have you considered how much more efficient robust public transportation would be? I know, that’s Socialism, but think about it. Well, the answer to this is…I never said it was, and I don’t think it is. Really, it’s…huh? I pretty clearly stated that we have to move forward without nuclear, and that I don’t think it’s going to destroy either our species, as a whole or our civilization, though it’s going to be some rough times ahead for the next century or so. Demise of future generations isn’t my schtick, it’s the folks who are saying that global climate change is going to wipe us out or destroy our civilization. Personally, I don’t think that’s the case, though I think that poor nations and peoples are going to fair a lot worse than you, I or most in this thread…or most in Sweden, Canada, Germany, and most if not all of the 1st world nations. Not sure what the point of the rest of that is in the paragraph. I don’t think having cable cars would have or could have had the benefits that fossil fuels have had in the explosive growth of not just this nation but pretty much across the globe, or what that has to do with socialism or whatever, or what any of that has to do with nuclear or what I was saying. I honestly don’t see the connection. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2019, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/116 "2019-09-25T21:53:10Z")
Yeah that was a weak point… Of course it is then obligatory to point out how nuclear power became so prominent in France, it was by doing it in a way that made a good socialist proud. With education to the people and direct government intervention in the construction of the nuclear plants. [https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html) > [@](#): > > What is about French culture and politics that allowed them to succeed where most other countries have failed? > > Claude Mandil, the General Director for Energy and Raw Materials at the Ministry of Industry, cites at least three reasons. First, he says, the French are an independent people. The thought of being dependent for energy on a volatile region of the world such as the Middle East disturbed many French people. Citizens quickly accepted that nuclear might be a necessity. A popular French riposte to the question of why they have so much nuclear energy is “no oil, no gas, no coal, no choice.” > > Second, Mandil cites cultural factors. France has a tradition of large, centrally managed technological projects. And, he says, they are popular. “French people like large projects. They like nuclear for the same reasons they like high speed trains and supersonic jets.” > > Part of their popularity comes from the fact that scientists and engineers have a much higher status in France than in America. Many high ranking civil servants and government officials trained as scientists and engineers (rather than lawyers, as in the United States), and, unlike in the U.S. where federal administrators are often looked down upon, these technocrats form a special elite. Many have graduated from a few elite schools such as the Ecole Polytechnic. According to Mandil, respect and trust in technocrats is widespread. “For a long time, in families, the good thing for a child to become was an engineer or a scientist, not a lawyer. We like our engineers and our scientists and we are confident in them.” > > Thirdly, he says, the French authorities have worked hard to get people to think of the benefits of nuclear energy as well as the risks. Glossy television advertising campaigns reinforce the link between nuclear power and the electricity that makes modern life possible. Nuclear plants solicit people to take tours–an offer that six million French people have taken up. Today, nuclear energy is an everyday thing in France. I think **Try2B Comprehensive** is close to that argument, and I will have to say what I pointed before in a previous discussion: The current conservative party in the US would prefer to die before investing more in education and allowing mostly big government to build the big energy nuclear projects like the French did. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2019, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/117 "2019-09-26T04:12:15Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This seems like a childishly simplistic view of history. Sure, some revolutions don’t really change anything, or don’t change things for the better, but some do. Yeah, we wouldn’t want childish simplistic thinking. What was the thread about? Oh yes, people taking cues on how to solve a global, highly complex problem from a child. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2019, 9:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/118 "2019-09-26T09:23:55Z")
> [@Ale](#): > > Yeah, we wouldn’t want childish simplistic thinking. > > What was the thread about? Oh yes, people taking cues on how to solve a global, highly complex problem from a child. The “cues” she’s giving are “look at the actual science and listen to the actual experts in the field”. That seems like a pretty good first step to solving a global, highly complex problem. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2019, 10:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/119 "2019-09-26T10:11:38Z")
The content of her message is simple and emotionally delivered but that is pretty much what you’d expect of a sixteen year old. Having read all the speeches she’s given they are high on anger and emotion and low on concrete suggestions. She isn’t a speaker of the calibre of Malala and she sounds like an angry teenager because she is, I don’t think she is deserving of any scorn or insult at all for that. I’m just not sure what she says has any real substance to it outside of the volume and publicity it generates. The end point of all of this is practical action and all the anger and outrage generated is not a substitute for that. There is the novelty value of a young girl getting angry at world leaders and building up popular momentum but I’m really not sure how that helps move us to do the right things. It may lead us to do \*something \*sure but not necessarily the right things, and potentially some counterproductive things. I thought it was rather depressing that she was encouraged in her sailing stunt. Something that was far more environmentally damaging than actually just taking a flight or organising a container ship journey, or organising telepresence. It superficially looked like it was the right thing to do but I don’t think taking a ride on a millionaire’s sailing yacht is a particularly good look for an environmental figurehead. I don’t think such such things ultimately help the environmental cause because they perpetuate such superficiality of thought. It made a point, but ignored a more powerful one that things are more complicated than they appear at first glance. Not her fault, let me stress that. She’s acting as a conduit for anger and despair and we can’t expect to her to be particularly wise or incisive but others are and I hope that if she accomplishes anything it is to prepare the stage for those that do have the nuanced solutions but I do fear that what they have to say will not have the clarity of Greta’s anger or appear as interesting or engaging now that we have basically had a schoolgirl call Trump a twat. (which, seeing as she can do little wrong at the moment she must be tempted to do) ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2019, 10:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/120 "2019-09-26T10:23:48Z")
For interest, [here](https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/data-portal/electricity-generation-mix-quarter-and-fuel-source-gb)is a breakdown of the UK’s power generation over the last 13 years: ```auto Fossil fuels Nuclear Renewable Other Total Q1 2006 75% 19% 4% 2% 100% Q1 2019 44% 14% 33% 8% 100% ``` It’s pretty good news. Fossil fuel use has fallen by more than a third and now accounts for less than half of energy use. The reason I bring it up is that this hasn’t been done through nuclear - it too has fallen as a share of energy generation, although not by nearly as much. What has increased dramatically are renewables, which is almost entirely due to Wind and Solar (one category in the data). Now, quite possibly, had we renewed our nuclear plants when we had a chance, we could have even lower fossil fuel use now. Just as possibly, nuclear would have crowded out the rise in renewables. But even so: while reducing our nuclear capacity, we have driven down fossil fuel use significantly, and are continuing to do so. In fact, if you look [here](https://gridwatch.co.uk)you can see that (at time of post) renewables are generating 42% of the UK’s electricity demand: coal and oil are generating **0.0%** It’s also worth noting that the cost of renewable energy in the UK is now below that of fossil fuels. So good news - nuclear is good, but it’s not the only viable solution. NB, the percentages above are my calculations based on the terawatt hour figures given in the first link. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726.md?page=7)