Sacha Ismail’s report on the TUC congress (Solidarity 606) misses a crucial point on climate change.
“The most lively debate was on climate change... [m]uch of the debate focused on the motion’s support for nuclear energy. As some speakers pointed out, the much wider problem is that it advocated essentially not very much change at all.”
The motion is not left wing, detailed, environmental or substantive. The reason to oppose it (rather than bemoan its inadequacies) is its support for gas, for gas-derived “blue hydrogen”, for carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) to help drive further gas. It has nationalistic undertones. Supporting nuclear power is not a problem, being pro-business (including nuclear business) is.
Opposing nuclear while overlooking gas is to tacitly accept gas as a “lesser evil”.
Doing so minimises the threats of climate change, irrationally distorts the dangers from nuclear power out of all proportion, and/or makes a reactive conflation between rightly abhorred nuclear weapons and the distinct issue of nuclear energy supply.
Zack Muddle, Bristol