Preliminary warmup rally calls of 'Or should we become climate rebels?' from 'gurus', such as Tim Flannery this week, do not bode well.
Ecosystems provide services to human civilization: they need to be paid for.
Spurred on by green activists, governments have progressively expanded recycling to the point that it has now become a costly end-in-itself.
Even on the pro-nuclear side, there are some reservations, and not all are sceptical of renewable energy.
Sydney's existing water policy guarantees shortages and an increasing reliance on expensive desalination plants, to the delight of rent seekers.
A recent report from this organization says that to avoid the worst effects of climate change, 'we can’t afford to drill up any oil and gas from new fields anywhere in the world.'
The scientific evidence is overwhelming, and denying that climate change is already upon us, especially as the president and his party does, flies in the face of the indisputably dire consequences.
The recent flurry of inquiries into nuclear power in Australia is a unique opportunity to seriously consider an alternative energy future, one that embraces science, modernity, and innovation, rather than ideology and fiction.
In the past it's been the global Green movement that has been declaring that clean green invisible carbon dioxide, the life food of all the plants on the planet, is 'dirty carbon'.
History shows that a much smaller population could indeed survive in Australia without using mineral hydrocarbons, but life with zero man-made emissions would be grim.
The HILDA report, released this week, showed that median disposable income in Australia dropped by $542 from 2009 to 2017, despite the fact that Australia has had the highest population growth rate in the developed world.
Even at 30% penetration, the high estimate for nuclear (US$192 / megawatt-hour (MWh)) is far higher than the high estimates for coal ($144), solar PV ($88), onshore wind ($84), and gas ($75).