The climate cult’s true colours are revealed when it actively agitates against nuclear power; bad enough that they won’t promote it, worse still when they seek to sabotage nuclear power’s prospects, altogether.
This is the crowd out to convince us that man-made carbon dioxide gas is “pollution” which, unless you stop generating it, will result in an inevitable Armageddon, where all life on earth perishes. The naturally occurring kind doesn’t trouble them, apparently.
If, however, these characters were in earnest, they would be berating governments to start building nuclear power plants as fast as humanly possible. Nuclear power is the only stand-alone power source that does not generate carbon dioxide emissions during that process and that’s also available on demand, whatever the weather or time-of-day.
Just why those who jump up and down about human-generated carbon dioxide gas refuse to promote ever-reliable, safe and affordable nuclear power is hard to fathom.
That they continue in their obsessive fixation with unreliable, intermittent and costly subsidised wind and solar speaks volumes. They can’t be serious about supplying reliable and affordable power to all comers, nor can they be serious about reducing CO2 emissions.
Britain’s government was overrun by wind and solar cultists, years ago. So, it comes as little surprise that its operatives have done everything in their power to sideline those promoting nuclear power generation.
Alok Sharma under fire as nuclear industry claim they have been banned from the COP26
The Sunday Telegraph
28 August 2021
Up to 15 applications from nuclear-related bodies are understood to have been rejected by Mr Sharma’s COP26 Unit in the Cabinet Office.
Alok Sharma has come under fire for preventing a series of nuclear bodies from displaying exhibits at the COP26 climate change summit.
In an open letter to Boris Johnson’s minister in charge of the event, global nuclear industry leaders revealed that “every application” so far to put on nuclear-related exhibits or events at the UN summit had been rejected.
The move comes despite senior Tories insisting that nuclear energy, including investing in a new fleet of reactors, must form a significant part of Britain’s plans to cut net greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2050.
Craig Mackinlay, the chairman of the new Net Zero Scrutiny Group of Conservative backbenchers, said: “The fact that these applications have been denied speaks volumes about the muddied thinking that underpins our domestic policy in this area.
“If COP26 is serious about reducing carbon dioxide emissions, a fundamental existing industry and technology that could help achieve this has to be nuclear.”
Mr Sharma had invited businesses and other groups to “bring climate action to life” with events, displays and workshops at the Glasgow Science Centre, which will host COP26’s so-called “green zone” in November. The area will be open to the public, while world leaders meet in a UN-run “blue zone”. The criteria for applications to put on exhibitions and events in the green zone included those “showcasing innovation helping to tackle global climate change”.
But 15 applications from nuclear-related bodies, including trade and research associations, are understood to have been rejected by Mr Sharma’s COP26 Unit in the Cabinet Office.
They included an application involving the World Nuclear Association, which represents the global nuclear industry, to put on an exhibition featuring a life-size model of a nuclear reactor.
The trade body will still send delegates to attend events in the blue zone, after their applications were approved by the UN.
But in an open letter to Mr Sharma, Sama Bilbao y León, director of the World Nuclear Association, said: “We are deeply concerned about the news that every application on nuclear energy for the Green Zone at the upcoming COP26 conference has been rejected.
“We hope this is not indicative of how nuclear will be treated at COP26 as a whole. We would therefore urge you and the other organisers of COP26 to treat nuclear energy fairly and to ensure that it is well represented alongside other low carbon energy sources, in line with the recommendations made by numerous expert organisations.”
The Sunday Telegraph