The Convenient Solution

Posted by admin on August 27th, 2009 and filed under solution |

Find out more at http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/solution

A short film about climate change, energy and nuclear power. If you’re confused about whether we need nuclear power to stop climate change, take nine minutes of your time to watch our new film. It doesn’t just explain why nuclear power can’t stop climate change - it also points the way to a better, cheaper, more convenient solution.

Duration : 0:9:27


[youtube xfzVQwW_8Jk]

25 Responses

  1. lancashirepolice Says:

    That’s very good in …
    That’s very good in Swizerland when you have hundreds of mountains and a very tiny population and look after everyones stolen Billions, more should be done here i agree and have done for 30 years.

  2. alexkvaskov Says:

    that’s brilliant my …
    that’s brilliant my friend :) there is so much that can be done to generate “greener” electricity - solar, wind farms, tidal power - there is huge potential potential in “green” technologies

  3. metanoid Says:

    Wow, 98% from hydro …
    Wow, 98% from hydro. That’s amazing, and shows yet again that it IS possible to base (and then rely) on renewable sources.
    Let’s hope the Dirty Old Man that is the UK dies soon and rises from the ashes to become again the inventive, innovative pioneer it once was!

  4. metanoid Says:

    There IS a cleaner, …
    There IS a cleaner, more sensible and cheaper solution at hand, so close and blatantly obvious, as this video demonstrates. Yet the UK goes down the most expensive, most stupid and backward thinking path of nuclear power which couldnt be more in-efficient and wasteful.
    Those in power making these decisions should be imprisoned for such mal-decision and short-sightedness and not rewarded by the profits they get from the shares they own in the nuclear industry !

  5. talkingbookworm Says:

    I currently live in …
    I currently live in the Canton of Basel, in Switzerland, where 98% of electricity comes from hydro. Another 1.4% comes from solar, with just 0.4% coming from an unknown source. Hence this comment is 99.6% green. That`s amazing methinks. The UK still is the Dirty Old Man of Europe. And you don`t have real democracy there neither, with which to speak out against the wrong decisions being made. The only say you have is who is going to dictate to you, the need for nuclear and more runways.

  6. talkingbookworm Says:

    I downloaded an …
    I downloaded an extended version of this video, with some great examples of what our European neighbours are doing with CHP multi-fuel plants + renewables. If the figures for energy efficiency are to be believed, and surely they are, then clearly the UK should be going down the same -proven- decentralised CHP pathway. A small power plant in every town, capable of using many sources of fuel, topped up with solar and wind where applicable + offshore tidal, wave and wind. That`s the way forward.

  7. EDS01475634763 Says:

    Thats very true …
    Thats very true every one is biased towards their own views Or their own agenda.

    Thanks for a sensible comment shame no one else has noticed.

  8. rentoz Says:

    That was very …
    That was very interesting. However what is the cost of Windafarms and CHPs compared to fossil solutions?

  9. GreenpeaceUK Says:

    Er, the point is …
    Er, the point is that nuclear has had over £70 billion invested in it over the past 30 years, and renewable energy around £1 billion. We’ve wasted billions of pounds already on nuclear energy, largely for political purposes (to keep a seat on the UN Security council) - had we spent a similar amount on renewables (including wind, wave and solar) we’d have taken a significant step on the road to being self-sufficient by now, and started to wean ourselves off climate wrecking fossil fuels.

  10. imconfusednow Says:

    “nuclear is only a …
    “nuclear is only a slice of our over all electricity”

    What are GreenPeace on renewables are an even smaller “slice”. So what is their point.

  11. cntrybillsfan Says:

    There so much about …
    There so much about this How in the world do we under stand it when Are Leaders dont?
    USA

  12. thebloatedtoad Says:

    Greenpeace is just …
    Greenpeace is just as bloody biased as the government!

  13. alexkvaskov Says:

    sadly yes
    sadly yes

  14. yohaneuano4 Says:

    Governments can’t …
    Governments can’t be bothered because there aren’t votes in it, it would result in large costs in the short-term (which would lose votes), and would reduce their tax revenues in the long-term

  15. alexkvaskov Says:

    Governments need to …
    Governments need to invest money into putting up hydro energy generation centers in places with long shore lines (UK, Spain, Portugal, Sweden etc)
    In countries where there is a lot of sun and wind - put solar panels and wind farms. Put solar panels on buildings. Properly insulate old building to conserve energy. Force stricter emissions and energy usage standards. It can be done - except the Gov’ts can’t be bothered to do it

  16. ejbh3160 Says:

    well there’s a huge …
    well there’s a huge argument for having a high quality electric rail system for most cities & do away with personal transport altogether bar cabs. Cars are necessary where you can’t do that like rural areas. The electric car is ready for sunny climates. One sporty model sold in California with a photo-voltaic system for your home, guarantees you’ll produce more electricity that it uses if used daily to its full range (200 miles). I say if it CAN be done do it & use other ‘renewables’ elsewhere!

  17. christo930 Says:

    most renewable …
    most renewable energy sources create electricity which doesn’t lend itself well to transportation with the exceptions of trains and trolleys. Displacing coal fired electric plants is great, I’m all for renewable electric, but high energy liquid fuels are needed. The electric car isn’t ready for prime time and forcing it on the public won’t work. A switch to 100 mpg diesel would be a step in the right direction.

  18. ejbh3160 Says:

    I agree that algae …
    I agree that algae & other bio-solutions may exist but these should be used in COMBINATION with other renewables which are available NOW.
    Electric cars make perfect sense in California or Souther Europe or anywhere sunny, just as wind can be sited where its predominently windy. In the UK we have one of the largest tidal reaches on the planet & we could use tidal lagoons a LOT more etc..
    Renewables are about having a MIX of sources. i.e. NOT putting your eggs in one basket!

    Use them ALL I say!

  19. ejbh3160 Says:

    I wasn’t suggesting …
    I wasn’t suggesting hemp as a bio-fuel altho Henry Ford DID!! But that aside Hemp is perfect for pharma & chemical uses (can even make plastics) & its also excellent because it grows on rough land in climates where you can get two crops a year… with a multitude of uses for every part of the plant from the fibres for cloth & paper (better than wood) etc… to the oils.
    Great way to sequester CO2 too!
    It has more protein than Soya & is highest in omega oils in useable forms. All round eco-plant!

  20. ejbh3160 Says:

    well I seriously …
    well I seriously disagree with you! The dangers of proliferation; from terrorism, accidents, leaks & potential serious damage to the very structure of life (DNA), far outweigh any perceived gains of ‘energy’. It costs a bloody fortune. It prevents the money from being spent on the clean alternatives & it’s only back on the agenda because the cold-war nuclear weapons are coming to the end of their ’shelf-life’ & so to replace them requires a nuclear industry! Its ALWAYS been about weapons!

  21. christo930 Says:

    Fast breeder …
    Fast breeder technology is great, I wish they would use it. The energy density of nuclear is incredible and is most likely the energy of the future, though probably fusion not fission. DU is not good for weapons btw, except armor piercing which is deplorable. That seems to be what you are saying. The DU could be put to much better use. It’s far from depleted. Check out Energy Matter Conversion Corporation. There is a good google video by Robert Bussard from them (emc2:) Nukes are a long term sol

  22. christo930 Says:

    Generally, gas is …
    Generally, gas is not explosive in the tank. Gasoline is only explosive under pressure. You can drop a match in a bucket of gasoline and most of the time it won’t light. The slightest spark can ignite NG and these batteries are simply not energy dense enough to be useful and are prone to failure and expensive. The electric car is not ready, and it won’t be for decades. Waste Bio-mass, algae and other veg oils will be the best solution in the near future. Use electric where it makes sense.

  23. christo930 Says:

    hemp oil is better …
    hemp oil is better than corn oil and other veg oils but isn’t sustainable. Algae is sustainable. ALL CROPS degrade the soil and on a large scale displace forests and farmland. ANYTHING made from FF can be made from Algae, but not if use sugar to grow it. Algae will create a carbon circle. Using oil to build infrastructure is what will happen anyway, we should do it while oil is still cheap. Nukes are the safest energy source we have. Every year more people die from FF than all of nuke history.

  24. ejbh3160 Says:

    The French are …
    The French are storing their spent fuel in the HOPES that it can be recycled later! There’s still no safe method of storage OR ‘recycling’.
    Depleted uranium is being spread all over the planet in weapons rounds! This is highly irresponsible & its really stupid!
    FAST breeders produce more waste than they use! That is why they’re called FAST breeders! In a very short time we’d be up to our necks in radio-active waste!
    Nukes are NOT the answer! Never were!
    They’re a DANGEROUS distraction!

  25. ejbh3160 Says:

    On top of all the …
    On top of all the things you suggest here regarding insulation, CHP, solar etc. We should use the Fossil Fuel we’re using NOW to set up a totally renewable, non-polluting (no nukes) civilisation for future generations! We’re going to use it anyway; so it would make sense to use it to guarantee our grandchildrens’ futures rather than destroy any future they may have.
    BTW… Hemp oil can be used to produce the chemicals & pharmas we currently get from crude oil… But Sustainably!

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.