Showing posts with label video. Show all posts
Showing posts with label video. Show all posts

Friday, 15 January 2010

Videos on Ionizing radiation

Today, I received a kind Email from a Mr Georg Herlitz, a Swede, who has just completed a project to develop some nuclear information, education and instruction videos of potential interest.

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=DE82FF9404E57FF3
Swedish version

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=2F32241381ECC3E7
English version

Thanks for the Email Georg. Your embedded video is also included below.

Sunday, 30 December 2007

Pro-nuclear video from the USA



Any comments?

As for me, I don't really care for the left-bashing.

I posted it because of the emotive nature of the presentation. Personally, I've been waiting for this for some time. I wasn't sure if it would be a dramatic disruption of an anti-nuclear rally or someone chaining themselves to Caldicot's car to prevent her delivering an anti-nuclear presentation - but I assumed it would begin.

I can't say I'm disappointed that it has.

Sunday, 4 November 2007

Professor James Lovelock - 2005


Professor James Lovelock



Click here to go to a new webpage to see the movie using Flash Media. Sorry wasn't able to embed this one. Try here if you can't get the video to play or go to the site linked below.

The video is from the Canadian Nuclear Association's video archive.

This video is was made by Professor Lovelock and presented at the 2005 Canadian Nuclear Association annual seminar. Within, Professor Lovelock discusses some history of the green movement and why current 'green' endorsed energy policy is not just wrong, but quite dangerous.

Like this blogger, Professor Lovelock takes a critical and objective approach to defining the problem as well as evaluating alternative solutions - looking hard at the demonstrated performance of different technologies around the globe.

Tuesday, 30 October 2007

Gweneth Cravens & Rip Anderson - Video



For the past week or so, I've had the above video parked at the top of the blog. I'll leave it here for posterity.

ABOUT THIS VIDEO Another Long Now seminar. This one is from September 2007. In this video Gweneth Cravens and Rip Anderson preview the history and details relating to Gweneth's new book - "Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy". It's 1:43 long and worth every second. Much about the ten year journey that transformed Gweneth from a passionate anti-nuclear activist into an informed nuclear advocate can be seen from this sneak peek into her book. Enjoy.

Considering the progression of the nuclear argument from the first video - saved in a post below [from a nuclear debate in early 2006], we can see how fast the world's minds [some very interesting minds] are changing. In this presentation, the issues are given proper time and consideration. KUDOS to Long Now!!

Saturday, 6 October 2007

Last week's video - Moral and Ethical aspects of climate change




From a meeting at the United Nations on 30-April, 2007.

This is a more articulate way of explaining why I believe - and frequently proclaim - our emissions are so embarrassingly high.

Find the referenced paper at this link.

Listen to Tim Flannery's 2-cents on this topic here.

Saturday, 29 September 2007

Last week's video - Nuclear debate in early 2006



I'll store the video from last week here for history along with the original comment I made.

Note this 'discussion' [the host, Stewart Brand, is reluctant to refer to it to a debate] took place in the very beginning of 2006 - over a full year before I even started this blog. Certainly A LOT has changed since then technologically, socially and politically. [Catch Schwartz's scepticism regarding whether the Bush administration would ever acknowledge climate change and yet here we are.]

The pro-nuclear argument is presented by Peter Schwartz - an environmental scientist with a fluid mechanics background. The opposing view is presented by Schwartz’s friend/foe Ralph Cavanagh, an attorney from the National Resources Defence Council. I don't know if I would have the courage to trade points with an attorney, but good on Schwartz for having a go.

I would like to point out a few interesting aspects of the discussion. First, Schwartz's perspective - as pointed out by Stewart Brand - is more global; second, Cavanagh accuses Schwartz of 'wishing' for advanced technologies that may or may not come to fruition and raises the 'spectres' of waste, proliferation, etc. without providing any tangible [i.e. quantifiable] detail of his own points [e.g. a purely 'renewable' solution]; and third Cavanagh claims nuclear is a historically competitive loser in the open market system - while California remains in the midst of a 30 year ban on nuclear development.

Please, watch and enjoy with the 20/20 hindsight of over 20 months' history.