Page 1 of 1

Union of Concerned Scientists?

Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 2:28 am
by JoeStrout
For those who don't know, the is an organization consisting mostly of practicing scientists, who have in common a concern for the environment and a desire for rational solutions to environmental problems (plus a few other issues like scientific integrity). They testify before Congress, prepare talking points for the media, write letters to scientific journals, etc., and generally appear to know people in high places.

They have a keen desire for clean energy, but have grave concerns about the safety of nuclear power plants. They're currently pushing for greater use of "renewable" energy sources, but I'm sure they recognize that wind and solar won't be able to provide a majority of baseline power needs.

In addition, of course, they're scientists — at least in theory, they should be better equipped than most to tell the real opportunities from the snake oil.

Maybe we should be working to bring the UCS on board. If we can convince them that polywell fusion has potential, they have connections to reach a lot of funding sources and policy makers who could help make it happen.

Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 6:15 am
by Nanos
That sounds a good idea to me, I wonder if there are any other world based groups along similar lines.

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 4:40 am
by Schneibster
Good idea, Joe.

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:42 am
by Zixinus
Don't they have a massage board of some kind?

Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI)

Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 10:48 pm
by DKelley
What about the Rocky Mountain Institute? Might they have close ties to UCS and also be an important ally? They were commissioned by the Pentagon to prepare the publication "Winning the Oil Endgame".

Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 8:10 pm
by MSimon
They are on board with global warming. How scientific can they be?

Me I'm a lukewarmist. i.e. The amplification factors are wrong.

All the lukewarmists agree with the IPCC on the contribution of CO2. Where the IPCC differs from the lukewarmists is in the amplification factor. Which the IPCC itself says it it doesn't even know the sign of let alone the magnitude. So the "results" of the IPCC are not very scientific.

BTW the rate of rise of CO2 has slowed for a couple of months this year. First time ever. Proof of nothing of course. It is attributed (preliminary) to the cooling oceans - which we do have proof of.

There are now definite hints that CO2 follows warming and is not the cause. I expect the evidence along those lines will get better as time goes on.

We should not tie ourselves to the CO2 monster. Just in case they flop badly.

No sunspots yet.

BTW the sunspot number (which is mathematical and not a count of sunspots) was .5 for July. The lowest number since 1954. I sure hope we are not headed for a Dalton or Maunder minimum. It could be brutal.

Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 8:18 pm
by MSimon
Let me add if the scientist at the Union want to help I'm all for it. It is just wise to remember their agenda is more political than scientific.