Why we abandoned nuclear energy

It's just after sunrise, and I'm leaning against the railings of Memorial Drive, which snakes along the Charles River Esplanade in Boston. Rowers move in tandem, back and forth, then gone: leaving behind glistening blue water, framed by old city grandeur rising from the banks above. Joggers pass by on the strip between promenade and road. Despite the activity, there's a striking stillness and serenity on that optimistic autumn morning. Though it's almost November, the scarf and gloves I'd packed before leaving London are redundant. A guilty thought crosses my mind: if this is climate change, then it ain't half bad.

In the 1950s, the US was on a path to a low-carbon energy future before the antinuclear movement, including the fossil fuel industry, successfully capitalized on Cold War fears of radiation.

Immediately my thoughts turn to melting ice caps, and the reality that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where we are headed to that morning, could be submerged under a 12-feet sea level rise within decades. Under that scenario, the streets of Boston's Back Bay we are gazing out across at would become capillaries of the Charles River. I banish the thought, not wanting to ruin the calmness of the moment. Besides, we are here to discuss solutions to prevent climate catastrophe — the biggest existential threat that humanity has ever faced.