Steve Russell

CO2 Cuts Will Cost a Lot More Without Nuclear and Clean Coal

"Clean coal," so-called, is not ready for prime time. Nobody is against it, but it's nothing more than a research project right now, albeit one worth pursuing because we have ample coal reserves.

Nuclear looks a lot more attractive than it used to, and there are many proposals to cut down on the waste problem. At the University of Texas, they have designed a "hybrid" fission/fusion plant that manages to burn almost all of its own waste...but we don't know if it will scale yet.

Both "clean coal" and "waste free nuclear" are wonderful ideas. But there are so many power sources that have hitches that are not theory problems. The intermittent nature of wind and solar and tidal is something we can deal with using current tech. Geothermal could make a major impact on air conditioning in the desert Southwest just by changing the building codes to require digging a blooming hole every time you build a house.

There's so much stuff we already how how to do and all that're lacking are the economies of scale and the will.

And it all works for investors. Whatever gets the necessary subsidy to achieve scale will be investable and those who can pick the right companies will make money.

I'm less worried about my money than about my planet.