Så kan vi faktiskt säkra vår elproduktion för framtiden.

På sistone har mer och mindre seriösa kritiska röster höjts för fortsatt avveckling av all kärnkraft. På sina ställen har politiker vara snabba att agera och givit de som klagat vatten på sin kvarn. Nu spökar säkerheten efter händelserna vid Fukushima-reaktorerna, som, märk väl, efter att ha skakats av den kraftigaste jordbävningen som träffat Japan sedan mätningarna började år 1900 vilket är en av de 5 kraftigaste jordbävningar som någonsin uppmätts följt av en 23 m hög tsunami fortfarande endast utgör ett allvarligt hot på plats vid kärnkraftverket. Dessa reaktorer kan ha saknat de filter som anses vara standard för att minimera radioaktiva utsläpp vid olyckor och saknar passiv kylning. Reaktorerna ritades på 60-talet. Även om vi bortser från dem ovan av mig föreslagna reaktortyperna finns det gott om senare beprövade varianter som åtgärdat de brister som nämnts i samband med Fukushima och fler därtill.

Men ändå argumenteras det att vi istället för att ersätta våra nuvarande, också de gamla om än inte lika utsatta,  reaktorer ska skrota allesammans och istället satsa på effektivisering, solkraft, vindkraft och biomassa.

Hur trevligt det än vore om vi kunde effektivisera vår väg helt bort från fossila bränslen så kommer det inte att lyckas och även om vi effektiviserar vår användning och effektiviserar och bygger ut sol- och vindproduktion så är det ändå osäkert om det blir tillräckligt i kapacitet och blir det knappast i pålitlighet. Vi kanske kan börja närma oss den rena kapaciteten som vi har idag men hur länge kommer det vara tillräckligt? Var ska vi förresten lagra all den där energin som vi kommer få så mycket av? Jag antar att vi kommer få ganska stora överdäckade dammprojekt att ta ställning till då det verkar vara det bästa sättet just nu att lagra vind och sol tills vi faktiskt har användning för den, ni vet, det där halvåret då solen inte skiner här. Biomassa ger fortfarande ytterst små vinster och personligen ser jag hellre en skog som får stå kvar eller till och med används till byggmaterial än en som ska brännas i våra bilar när el från växthusgasfri kärnkraft fungerar minst like bra som drivmedel.

Elektricitet är underbart till det mesta, från kylskåp och belysning till industri och tåg- och bilkörning, men just nu kommer världens elektricitet främst från rent livsfarliga källor som kol, gas och olja.

Detta otroliga motstånd mot kärnkraft framstår idag som närmast religiöst betingad. Kärnkraft kan vara säker, lika outtömlig som sol och vind, oerhört effektiv och ta upp mycket liten yta samtidigt som den inte är beroende av i dagsläget och i den överskådliga framtiden om inte längre än så helt okontrollerbara naturkrafter.

Visst ska vi effektivisera vår elanvändning. Vi kommer ändå att behöva elproduktion. Om det då skulle visa sig praktiskt, miljömässigt och ekonomiskt gångbart att öka antalet vindkraftverk och att sätta solpaneler på vart och vartannat tak så låt gå men våga inte lova att det kommer att räcka och låtsas inte som om kärnkraft är någon form av magisk ondska som inte ens hör hemma i diskussionen, det är inte seriöst.

The paper ran an article about allowing pets, no, strike that, they were only really discussing the magical properties of dogs, in the workplace. I became aware of the article when it was favorably tweeted about by Birgitta Ohlsson.

People lose all sense when dogs are discussed. Everyone conjures up the mental image of the puppy they got for their fifth birthday and so anyone who isn’t oohing and aahing  and spontaneously extolling the greatest of virtues of dog-kind must quite obviously be evil, surely even Hitler loved dogs so why don’t you.

Since even monsters love pets everyone would be thrilled to have everyone bring their pets to work with them! What could be more lovely than a bunch of dogs running around the office, darting between the chairs during meetings, barking in the next room when you’re talking to clients and making a few of your coworkers sneeze uncontrollably? Allergies are so funny I can’t breathe.

Now, even some dog owners may interject that some people would be uncomfortable around dogs and still not be worse than Hitler, obviously these people actually love dogs but they’re terrified of the little angels. They’re confused and don’t know any better, you see, they see them as large animals with sizable teeth and tiny capacities for reasoning that have been bred over the many centuries never to grow up and calm down! The only sensible solution is to train them. They have to understand that they live in a society and in that society respect for one’s personal space doesn’t preclude the occasional cute invasion by a slobbering little dog wanting to hug you and lick your face! Dogs are equal members of society after all. None of that is scary so, clearly, once these people realize this they too can get a dog!

Dogs are only ever a force for good in the world. There is no way that they’d be the least bit distracting or cause the slightest problem ever.

Nonsense. Utter and absolute nonsense.

I don’t hate dogs. I’m not afraid of them. And, no, I’m not a crazy cat person either.

There is a time and a place for these things.  If I found that having a nice Martini for lunch had a calming effect I still wouldn’t insist that it be a practice accepted in the workplace, and not just because some people would have a completely rational fear of drunks or because it would  cause unnecessary problems for anyone struggling with alcoholism, and those objections are quite reason enough.

Dogs have no place at work unless you’re a vet or a pet psychiatrist just as a nice cocktail has no place unless you work in a bar and even then I would recommend not bringing in your own when you should be focusing on your clients. There will be distractions. It doesn’t matter how well-behaved your dog is, dogs have needs and people will feel compelled to tend to them and if they don’t they will only grow more distracting. Dogs will bark, run around and actively seek attention.

The article in the paper suggested in places that it was about pets, in places that it was about dogs specifically. For many dog owners having a pet equates always and only to having a dog. Get a goldfish for your desk and get over yourself. Better yet, get a fern. I assure you the fern is equally capable of understanding the long conversations you have with it when you should be doing something else.

I’ll end with a quote from the newspaper article: “If you are creative enough you can find solutions and work around problems with allergies, for example, with different rooms and buildings”.

Let’s at the very least hope that the special separate building is for the dogs and not the people with allergies.

Word is that he has now foregone attending the fabled wedding this weekend to stay on site on the gulf coast. This would probably normally be an obvious course of action but assuming past to be prologue I half expected the chairman to take time out of his caring for the small people to celebrate with the royalty, heads of state and representatives from the dictatorships of the world.

To say that the Deep Water Horizon spill is a massive disaster is something of an understatement. To find any aspect of it funny is just a little bit offensive but BP is hard at work with their handling of PR to make us all capital offenders.

At least they’re hard at work doing something.

And apropos of nothing:

Who the heck is Alvin Greene?

On June 6 1523 a new king was elected in Sweden who abolished the elective monarchy and established in its place an autocratic hereditary monarchy.

In 1809 and 1974 autocracy was gradually replaced with democracy. The monarchy remains, however, hereditary.

What does a celebration on June 6 represent? The reestablishment of an independent Sweden? Autocracy? Democracy? Revolution or reform?

Perhaps it is the recognition that our nation is one capable of change. Capable always of terrific and terrifying things but that as the pendulum swings back and forth we hopefully, however slowly, inch ever also forward.

Today SvD espoused a wonderfully medieval view on its political editorial blog. An analogy is made between republicans and anarchists. Yes, that happened. Because demanding that the coverage of the impending wedding of the crown princess should be less of a wide-eyed celebration of fairy tale love and more a critical investigation of the political consequences of the event is apparently akin to the demand for the abolishment of any and all government.

Or maybe it’s that republicans are in such a tiny minority that their views really ought not be given much attention, just like no one cares about what those couple anarchists in the corner thinks?

But none of that adds up. Republicans are still probably in a minority but it is a fairly sizable one. A minority that, I believe, would swiftly grow and perhaps even become a majority if the issue was seriously debated in public. The idea that we should be allowed to elect our head of state is pretty far from anarchy. It is at the very core of modern democracy that the people should be allowed a say in who represents them and if they so choose replace them. It’s not a question of abolishing the core principles of our system of government but a question of finally fully realizing them.

Until we get the chance to elect our head of state, so long as they are born to the position, their weddings will remain first and foremost a political event. When ascending to the position relies whose blood runs in your veins, the wedding can’t be covered as though it was simply about the persons marrying or their immediate family. It becomes much more than that and it becomes much more serious than that. This is the closest thing we’ll have to an election so you’re damned right we are going to expect a debate and journalists who are willing to ask some serious questions.

I see where they’re coming from, I really do, the support for the monarchy rests almost solely on a sense of familiarity and tradition and it is quite conceivable that in time this familiarity would wane if the symbols of the monarchy were not so frequently used to symbolize the nation in day-to-day life. It might actually, eventually, work.

I’m still opposed to it. The argument against the continued existence of a system of hereditary monarchy is one, at its core, of principle. The question of the monarchy is as simple as being a democracy or not. Of being a nation for the people or for the ruler. Symbols are powerful and important things and we should be mindful of what they represent. Should we try to find a better representation of our nation than the portrait of a hereditary king? Sure, we absolutely should, but we can not allow ourselves to forget that these tyrants have shaped our past and continue to do so in our present. We are not a true democracy. Nor are we a zoo. We are a nation of peoples who unfortunately continue to tolerate that the position of head of state is one reserved for the firstborn of one particular bloodline, one not subject to the laws of the rest of us but held above them.

Let us be familiar with that situation, let us be always reminded of that and maybe in time we will also truly realize what that means and change it. Until then I fear the portrait of a king on our coin is very much fitting.

The moon is alright. Mars is fun enough. Europa is just screaming for a colony, people. There is a lot of interesting crap in the Kuiperbelt and the asteroid belt! And surely, surely there’s something interesting closer to the center of the galaxy, we are stuck out here in the sticks! Come on folks! Let’s go!!

Of course, there is the depressing thought that Earth is actually the most happening place in all of the galaxy. My point is really that we won’t even know unless we go check it out. If that is the case then there’s a whole universe out there to fill up with excitement! It’s space! It’s there to be filled with adventure!

How do we manage such an incredible feat you may ask.

I haven’t a clue, I’m an ideas man myself, not much for the execution of things. Now go forth my pretties! Go forth into the world and solve the problems I imagine for myself!

Oh, and today I had some toast and coffee.