Well, I am not so sure that I agree with you that cars are where burning fossil fuels adds the most value (nor do I agree that they are the most criticised... coal power comes to mind as a likely candidate). I for one can do without a car, but I would not like living through a Danish winter without central heating.

Chemical factories are criticised for other reasons: Mainly that a lot of them churn out substances that have not been rigorously tested for safety and efficacy.

As for nuclear plants, that may well look silly today, where the waste disposal problems have been if not solved then at least substantially mitigated, but do you really think that that progress would have happened if not for a strong lobby against "burn and dump" nuclear plants?

If you do, I invite you to take a look at the hardrock mining industry, where the waste disposal problems have simple technical solutions... But these are only implemented when substantial political pressure is applied. And if after examining that exhibit, you still think that substantial progress would have been made in nuclear waste management and disposal if the industry had been left to its own devices, then I have some $100 oil futures I want to sell.

And, of course, opposition to nuclear power might look less silly when you consider the fact that proliferation of peaceful nuclear technology makes it easier for countries to expand into - shall we say - less benign uses of the atom.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.