I found the discussion of nuclear power to be surprising and enlightening. The conversation explained how it is very important to ensure that we derive our energy from a variety of sources. In this way, we can prevent larger failures because even if one source fails or is less reliable, others can continue to provide energy. Additionally, nuclear power is cleaner than other energy sources like oil and gas, so there are potential positive climate impacts from using this type of energy. O course, nuclear power also may include risks if accidents occur or war breaks out. I was also surprised to learn about small modular reactors and how that could have potential implications for the expansion of nuclear power. This would allow for smaller nuclear plants to be built than normally.
I would ask about “What are some other sources of climate and energy innovation not mentioned in the interview that seem particularly promising, such as solar geoengineering or geothermal energy?” I would ask this question because I am curious about the potential variability in the sort of energy-related climate solutions that we might implement in the future. This question would help me to further understand whether we have many solutions developed, and the problem is funding and implementation, or whether we do not have solutions developed. This relates to the challenges with climate-related spending that was discussed during the interview. In reality, both problems likely exist, but I am curious if the development vs implementation is the bigger issue right now.
Here is the link to the audio content from this interview with David Wallom: