Clinton Crackel, Co-Founder, Nuclear Fuels Reprocessing Coalition, Executive Consultant to Quantum Dynamic Sciences, Inc.: Since the 2006 test, the technology has improved so that now it is possible to achieve a CO2 stack outlet efficiency of 98% or better. Assuming an efficiency rate of 98% without a scrubber, the estimated lifecycle greenhouse gas emission of a coal-fired power plant would be reduced from 1050 gCO2/kWh to 21 gCO2/kWh. This value is lower than the estimated value of 32 gCO2/kWh for a solar PV unit made of polycrystalline silicon.
Ed Berry, physicist and climate scientist: These 8 words are the death of climate change: It violates the Equivalence Principle, therefore it’s wrong. IPCC’s Big Idea (its fundamental hypothesis) is that nature treats human CO2 emissions differently than it treats nature’s CO2 emissions. Einstein used the Equivalence Principle to develop his General Theory of Relativity. He realized that data cannot tell the difference between gravity and inertial forces. Therefore, they are the same thing. This equivalence is the foundation of Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity that we use today.
Vijay Jayaraj, Climate Scientist, Contributor to Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation: It is easy to associate climate skepticism with the Republican Party and climate alarmism with the Democratic Party. It’s also easy to brand skeptics as beneficiaries of big oil and proponents of unfettered capitalism and alarmists as in the pocket of big wind and solar and boosters of socialist central planning. But attitudes about climate change transcend political ideologies, and they should. Here are a few reasons why I, as a climate scientist, am a skeptic.
Garth Paltridge,retired Australian atmospheric physicist. Visiting Fellow at the Australian National University and Emeritus Professor and Honorary Research Fellow at the Institute of Antarctic and Southern Oceans Studies, University of Tasmania. The bottom line of politically correct thought on the matter—the thought that we must collectively do something drastic now to prevent climate change in the future—is so full of holes that it brings the overall sanity of mankind into question. For what it is worth, one possible theory is that mankind, or a fraction of it has become both over-educated and more delicate as a result of a massive increase of its wealth in recent times. It has managed to remove the beliefs of existing religions from its consideration—and now it misses them. As a replacement, it has manufactured a set of beliefs about climate change that can be used to guide and ultimately to control human behaviour. The beliefs are similar to those of the established religions in that they are more or less unprovable in any strict scientific sense.