I just finished watching the ABC News Special, Earth 2100, and while the advertisements of it appeared rather sensationalistic and "over dramatic", I found it to be a mostly thoughtful presentation of future "as it could be if we don't...". But I was concerned about a main underlying premise that might slip by someone who was not hard wired to watch out for subtle propaganda supporting nuclear power. Seems in this dramatization, the future hinged largely around the 2015 Climate Summit. And that summit was undone when the US refused to give China and India nuclear power technology. It was a fleeting connection, but clearly there. I do not believe nuclear power will get us out of the threat of global warming without presenting several larger frying pans: costs, security, safety, waste issues and weapons proliferation. I do not believe this was inadvertent on the part of ABC News, but a carefully planted (verging on subliminal?) seed that could have repercussions for the upcoming Copenhagen Climate Summit. I keep thinking with the current economic meltdown and climate crisis, anyone getting the billions of dollars and 10-15 years it takes to build a nuclear power reactor is unlikely. Yet there are also persistent efforts on the part of the nuclear industry to get in on all the money going to "clean energy technologies", which could get funding from carbon credits. I'd like to stop worrying, but can't while "all energy options remain on the table" for this administration. Nuclear power enthusiasts are nothing if not persistent and wily. I will remain alert. Don