Cont.
Nuclear energy does not fit with some BS narrative about climate change cultism! But does deal with it on several fronts!

The first being it's carbon-free energy! The second being it's the cheapest, safest and most reliable!

After that, reliable, dispatchable and given the right technology is chosen, the safest most affordable energy available and resisted to the last man standing by the fossil fuel industry, big nuclear and big pharma alike given the economic harm MSR thorium could do to the bottom line of all these parasitical or weaponized industries!

MSR thorium can also be deployed to burn up the world's stockpile of nuclear waste and with the return of sanity, its stockpile of weapons-grade plutonium!

The former if sanely adopted, would allow a world's repository nation, i.e., Australia to earn annual billion for safely storing said waste, but not before we have reprocessed it a few dozen times extracting the remaining 98% unspent energy! And be paid annual billions for providing the burial service. (eventually)

Moreover, nuclear energy as affordable as MSR thorium (2.98 cents PKWH) would allow the conversion of inexhaustible seawater to all manner of alternative fuels, indefinitely and sustainably, using proven and well-established science and unused spare capacity! TBC.
Alan B.

Dear Alan B.,

I think we need a few Un-Chernobyls and Un-Fukushimas to convince people that nuclear is the way to go. And tell them when we have mastered nuclear technology we can then start making and stockpiling nuclear weapons so that no one better mess with us.

Cont.
After of before that, we out to replace aging and increasingly vulnerable transmission towers/millions of miles of wires and step-down transformers (most of them) with the progressive rollout of superconductor, graphene to prevent the current astronomical losses during transmission and distribution which combined add up to around 75%.

Given the deployment of the world' strongest material, graphene, for this new role, it can be laid as a thin film that also quite massively reinforces whatever infrastructure that incorporates it, roads, bridges, tunnels and highrise buildings etc. And use it (superconductor) to transmit the nation's energy wherever the is a highway or byway, even on farm tram tracks!?

The end result would be the doubling/tripling of capacity, without build any new power station or the ability to service up to four times as many customers from existing or new power generation!

Even if nothing else changes, Carbon emissions per capita would be quite massively reduced by up to a factor of four, wherever graphene highways, etc., replaced aging and increasingly vulnerable transmission towers!

Add deionisation dialysis desalination to the mix and we have affordable potable water cheap enough for proven, cost-effective, broad-scale irrigation and in arid desert regions if we want! Simply put, there are no economic or environment downside to any of the above!

And should you want to fact check an of my claims, some of them can be validated by you if you go to, Alan Goulding's Facebook page and have butchers at a couple of short interesting shared, public domain videos.
Alan B.

Mr opinion.

Obviously your not concentrating on "the world according to Al".

Thorium reactors actually consume nuclear weapons as fuel. :-)).

Dan

Dear Alan B,

I know you have a bee in your bonnet about thoruim reactors but it is getting a bit tiresome seeing the same spiel trotted out every time no matter how tenuous the link might be.

“Al Gore has made a fortune doing this.”

Rubbish.

We all know Flannery is over the top but to be running the line that Gore has profited enormously from spruiking climate change impacts is just BS.

“Contrary to the claims of right-wing critics, the profits generated from Gore’s best-selling climate books and film ― 2006’s blockbuster “An Inconvenient Truth” grossed $24 million at the box office ― were directed to the Climate Reality Project, his foundation focused on battling global warming.
Gore made most of his money off things that have nothing to do with his climate activism. In 2000, his nest egg took the form of an inherited family farm and royalties from a zinc mine, according to Bloomberg. In 2004, he founded Generation Investment Management, a sustainability-focused fund. The firm got a major boost in 2007 when it partnered with Silicon Valley-based venture capital giant Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield and Byers to “find, fund and accelerate green business, technology and policy solutions with the greatest potential to help solve the current climate crisis.”
The firm lost money on some early investments, such as the now-defunct Chicago Climate Exchange and First Solar LLC, a solar panel maker crushed by competition from cheap Chinese imports in the early 2010s. But the company bounced back, and its $1.2 billion Luxembourg-based fund now vastly outperforms the S&P 500. In March, the financial magazine Barron’s declared: “Al Gore is winning at investing.”
But Gore made the bulk of his money as a media mogul and an Apple board member. In January 2013, he pocketed about $70 million after taxes from selling the Current TV network he co-founded in 2004 to Qatari broadcaster Al Jazeera. He’s earned tens of millions more in recent years by selling off Apple stock awarded when he joined the tech giant’s board of directors in 2003.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/al-gore-wealth_n_599709f2e4b0e8cc855d5c09  

Go do some better research mate.