Day 2. Danish Foreign Secretary Per Stig Møller explains that Denmark is not investing in nuclear power stations because there’s no long term solution to the waste problem. But, interjects a feisty member of the audience, in that case why is Denmark investing in carbon capture and storage – which, she says, is toxic too?
Moller disputes that carbon dioxide is a poison; audience member retorts that yes it is, people died in Canada when a volcano erupted and CO2 concentrations in the air became too high. Back and forth the squabble goes.
But the toxicity point is a red herring. More interesting, surely, is that an unplanned, large scale release of CO2 storage fields is potentially just as hazardous as nuclear waste. So why is one a risk that can be managed effectively over the very long term, and not the other?
