From: jamesh@aifh.ed.ac.uk (James Hammerton)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: Why do they hate us?
Date: 18 Dec 92 04:44:38 GMT
Reply-To: jamesh@aifh.ed.ac.uk (James Hammerton)
Organization: Dept of AI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland

In article <JMC.92Dec16090218@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John
McCarthy) writes:
# In article <1992Dec16.140735@aifh.ed.ac.uk> jamesh@aifh.ed.ac.uk (James
Hammerton) writes:
#    In article <JMC.92Dec15105733@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
(John
#    McCarthy) writes:
#    # Dingo says Greenpeace does some good research.  I'm curious about
#    # that.  Do they do any research?  Is there a Greenpeace laboratory
#    # somewhere, and are there Greenpeace employees who do scientific
#    # research?  I'm sure they do legal research, i.e. looking for
#    # information and people tending to support their positions.
# 
#    I refer you to the Greenpeace Global Warming Report, which at least
draws
#    together
#    lots of different reasearch areas and scientific reports to back up the
cases
#    they make
#    in it. This report is a collection of essays and reports by top
scientists
#    from the
#    fields of climate research, renewable energy, energy efficiency and many
other
#    areas.
#    It is edited by Jeremy Legget who is the Scientific director of
Greenpeace, 
#    the fact that they have such a position in their organization does
suggest
#    that they
#    have some interest in the science involved, as does the publishing of
this
#    report.
# 
# 
#    James
# 
# Publishing a collection of selected essays, especially if only those
# supporting a single point of view are selected, does not constitute
# doing research even if some of the essays are by scientists.  It is

True. In this publication most people are scientists, but only two I believe 
are on the Greenpeace international board(Susan George and Jeremy Legget).

# not objectionable, but it isn't research.  Giving someone the title of
# Scientific Director doesn't necessarily imply more interest in science
# than is possessed by the average lawyer or politician trying to win
# support for a position determined entirely on non-scientific grounds.
But at least they bring science into it...

# Question: Did any of the essays in the Greenpeace Global Warming Report
# support nuclear energy, which does not contribute to global warming?

No, but there was an essay which convincingly supported the proposition
that a substantial increase in nuclear power(replacing current coal & gas
supplies) would NOT lead to a stabilization of CO2 emissions, and that
investment in energy efficiency and renewables would be financially 7 times
more effective(ie 1 dollar spent on these would displace 7 times more carbon
dioxide than 1 dollar spent on increasing nuclear power capacity).
Now you, the true nuke believer, may dismiss this, but it IS backed up with
plenty of evidence on both the potential of renewables and the infeasability
of nukes... after Xmas(when I have more time to do this) I will post some
articles on this very subject, using Greenpeace's evidence in conjunction
with others.


James
-- 
*  James Hammerton               *  If Pascal is equivalent to the     *
*  Email: jamesh@uk.ac.ed.aisb   *  mini-metro,then ML is the concept  *
*                                *  car where steering is done         *
*                                *  recursively using the gearstick.   *