All of this without a single molecule of carbon dioxide. Part of being environmentally friendly is supporting green organizations.
If we want to reduce emissions, we have to leave the fearmongering behind and accept that this is just part of the solution. PETA and Greenpeace sound like they’re pro-environment, with their pictures of a cat looking very innocent and the planet with a Band-aid on it, so you’ve signed a petition for them like a good environmentalist.
So if you want to buy environmentally friendly (and save some cash), you don’t have to hunt for the non-GMO label on produce. A more accurate term would be “cleaner coal,” but that doesn’t sell as well.
Don’t get me wrong, you’re probably doing a lot of things you’ve read are right, and your heart is in the right place.And in that time, we’ll build up a lot of carbon if we don’t consider other sources. I’m not claiming there have been zero problems with nuclear energy in the past (because there was an island and it was three miles, you may have heard of it), but you can’t advocate for the environment seriously without keeping nuclear in your purview.Nuclear energy doesn’t produce any carbon emissions. As a result of both some of the failures and continued research, nuclear has not only gotten safer in how the energy is produced and contained, the ways we manage nuclear waste long-term has gotten much safer.I’m not saying this because I’m against other sources of renewables.Rather, we’re a minimum of a few decades away from being able to meet all of our energy needs with solar due to myriad reasons (infrastructure scale-up, low solar energy capture rate, accounting for seasonal variability in solar energy generation just to name a few).