Will Climate Change Campaigning Simply Mean a Big Boost for Nuclear Power?

Here in BC small scale run of the river hydro is being pilloried, elsewhere in North America wind is being attacked. Climatologists say we have to stop making electrical power from fossil fuels. So where does this leave us? Nuclear?

There are those arguing against it and those in favour.

Being from BC, I am like most people have no desire to touch nuclear power. This is one of the few things almost everyone agrees on. But in absence of new nukes and strong opposition to most green power sources, where will we get our power from?

The Suzuki foundation is strongly recommending wind. They also come out in favour of micro hydro but do so with fudging.

The Pembina Institute comes out in favour of micro hydro, wind, geothermal, and others.

The Sierra Club of Canada wants to see an end to fossil fuel use and nuclear power, but has no suggestions on how to go about it.

The Dogwood Initiative says they are working on climate change but is very short of any details.

Unless people opposed to green power sources like run of the river or wind come up with realistic alternatives to move away from more coal and natural gas fired electricity production, we are not going to see the reductions in green house gas emissions that climatologists say we need. If things are hard enough for green power production companies, I can see a rise in nuclear power all over North America as a way to reduce CO2 emissions.