There are solutions, and then there is what we saw on CNN
The CNN climate change extravaganza got bad ratings. Worse than that, there were no serious solutions proposed.
How can you have a serious discussion about energy alternatives without discussing nuclear power? You can't, as we see here:
The International Energy Agency has concluded that meeting the goal of keeping warming to no greater than 2 degrees Celsius would require doubling global nuclear energy generation capacity by 2050.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which is often cited as the leading authority by liberals, reached a similar conclusion.
A 2015 article posted by Scientific American quotes Harvard's Robert Stavins, one of the authors of the IPCC report, as saying, “It is virtually inconceivable that the 2 degree or 450 parts per million target as a cap can be achieved in this century without a variety of factors, among which are substantially greater reliance on nuclear power than current trajectories would suggest."
Did you hear that at the CNN town hall meeting? Instead, you heard candidates talk about shutting down our current capacity.
In other words, any effort to eliminate "fossil fuels" will require more nuclear energy, currently providing 19% of of our energy.
So what did hear at the CNN town hall? We heard a lot of fearmongering and more government programs.
So the Democrats are probably lucky that no one watched their town hall!
PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.