tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35347561.post1499255747913015305..comments2023-06-06T10:33:30.689+01:00Comments on The Lazy Environmentalist: The Environmentalist's Nuclear Debate: (1) George MonbiotPolly Higginshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06426446366175195351noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35347561.post-17963400588933021972008-11-01T11:36:00.000+00:002008-11-01T11:36:00.000+00:00You're right that Monbiot qualifies his support in...You're right that Monbiot qualifies his support in such terms as to effectively all but rule out the nuclear option.<BR/><BR/>Being charitable, my guess is that he was aiming for a reaction along the lines of 'we know nukes are bad, yet new coal is even worse'.<BR/><BR/>However, that's not been the reaction - in a political climate where reduction of consumption is unpalatable, we're being pushed towards an 'either coal or nuclear' choice. Whilst monbiot may qualify his support, that's not the message that goes out. The message is that Monbiot's supporting nuclear.<BR/><BR/>As a very experienced media person and someone superbly aware of the nuances of language, he must surely have seen that coming. <BR/><BR/>As Jonathon Porritt <A HREF="http://www.jonathonporritt.com/pages/2008/08/coal_verses_nuclear_1.html" REL="nofollow">commented</A>, in messaging terms there's a big difference between saying 'yes if' and 'no unless'.merrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10959849087751101034noreply@blogger.com