Why Did Global Warming Proponents Want More CO2?

Question

In the 1990's, the same people that wanted the Kyoto Treaty had been blocking nuclear power even when nuclear power is cleanest form of energy around. Former Vice President Gore showed to America he was trying to destroy America's nuclear power industry. And in committees, Gore and his buddies quickly rejected scientists' ideas of using nuclear energy to fight CO2 emissions. Now (ten to fifteen years later), many of those same global warming proponents now want to use nuclear energy to reduce CO2 emissions. Those global warming proponents don't stop to think that America could be building new nuclear reactors right now if they never opened their mouths. They caused a 20 year delay.

Gore refused the idea of using nuclear power plants to make cheap hydrogen fuel for cars. (During non-peak hours, nuclear power plants can be configured to generate hydrogen which can be used to power cars). The only emmission from burning hydrogen in modified car engines is pure water.

I understand nuclear energy.

Answer 1

This is so typical of Liberals. They have "convenient amnesia" about their nutty reversals. When it suits their political agenda, they can be for or against practically anything.

Conservatives are the real conservationists, not Liberals. Liberals say they are truly concerned about the environment, but what has been been their overall impact? Which group is responsible for setting aside all the national parks? Was it Conservative sportsmen, game hunters, botanists, and naturalists who had an intimate knowledge of the land, and sought tirelessly to protect it, or some clueless Liberal in NYC who just saw some pretty picture and thought it would be nice to visit someday?

Conservatives are the true conservationists. Liberals just make matters worse. They are inept blunderers who can't get anything right. If they had not opposed nuclear energy back in the 70's, we would be energy sufficient right now. We wouldn't have to even think about the Middle East. They could just go "pound sand". Wouldn't that be nice? Well, thank Liberals for the mess they created.

Think about it. France pursued nuclear energy, and they are laughing their @ss off at us.

Answer 2

If the final public knew that each and every person this fuss grew to become right into some one million/a hundred of a p.c. strengthen (even accepting cherry picked documents) in the ambience, of a gas which has already maxed out its means to soak up/re-emit infrared, they'd study the placement and notice it for the farce it incredibly is. The omission of common info with regard to the placement are significant for public attractiveness. curiously lots of your answerers have not examine up on the worldwide warming concept. no person, not even the IPCC claims that CO2 is going to quickly reason the predicted catastrophic strengthen in temperature. the belief is that the very gentle temp strengthen led to by skill of CO2 (nicely interior organic variability) will reason greater water to evaporate in the ambience, and the lots greater desirable greenhouse consequence of water vapor will consequence in a runaway chain reaction. yet water vapor does not count type as a motive force? because of the fact it condenses out quickly? This ignores the reality that greater water vapor is continually taking its place. And it absorbs a great form of warmth on the exterior on an identical time as evaporating, and releases that warmth whilst it condenses in the bitter chilly bigger environment. additionally because of the fact bigger clouds will preclude a great form of solar ever reaching the exterior, and there's a huge form of cooling consequence in the water vapor cycle. BTW enthalpy in basic terms skill the flexibility contained in a gas. Its use in those different solutions is to imprecise meaning, not clarify something. it would in basic terms sound stupid in the event that they stated that in spite of being the biggest area of the greenhouse consequence water vapor does not impact the flexibility interior the ambience. by skill of obscuring what they say with technical words, they'd have water vapor the two procedures - it will strengthen temp, yet its not a component? and we could forget with regard to the obtrusive detrimental feedbacks of evaporating , convecting and condensing all that water. As for the "fashions" - in case you tell a working laptop or laptop to foretell considerable warming whilst CO2 will strengthen, this is going to dutifully churn out that answer. Its in basic terms yet another democrat rip-off. sensible, unscrupulous people searching for political ability by skill of fooling the ignorant. I in basic terms desire the financial unwell-consequences and the possibly cooling type will make sufficient people understand they have been scammed, and no democrat will ever get elected lower back.

Answer 3

Gore is not concerned about Global Warming he is only interested in the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$!~!

Answer 4

have you considered that maybe there are other reasons he doesn't want the nuclear power plants?

"why did global warming proponents" ..."Gore"

Gore is the only global warming proponent?

lastly, it's hard to believe anything you say with your user name being "a bush family member"

conflict of interest?????

Answer 5

"even when nuclear power is cleanest form of energy around."

Ha.. the real question here is why you buy the nuclear power industry's propaganda.

Answer 6

I like it warm.