"And Lewis.......how about a comment on the latest Canadian ice shelf news - sorry I'd forgotten you're far too partisan for a balanced view...............!"
Well, here's a comment for you. Ellesmere Island was once entirely ringed by a single enormous ice shelf that broke up in the early 1900s. Possibly due to CO2 from horse buggies? All that is left today are the four much smaller shelves that together cover about 300 square miles. Last Wednesday, in a continuation of this process which has been going on for over a century, a 19 sq mile fragment broke away. Not a huge story, nor one associated with Global Warming.
It should be noted that each summer the Arctic loses some 8 million sq km of ice cover, which is replaced each winter. The somewhat greater melts of the last two years seem to be associated with changes in ocean currents, and not CO2 driven warming, since the air temperatures have actually got colder over the Arctic during this time. So no story there either.
"Before some idiot posts a "let's go nuclear" comment..
There is no chance of finding new economically recoverable fuel supplies..."
Afaict you're not to be trusted technically, commercially, or politically when commenting about nuclear power. You seem to have the economics arse-about-face! Whether a supply is economic or not depends on market price. As it rises, new sources become economic to exploit.
Nuclear power slumped in the 1980-2000 period, and the price of uranium bottomed at about $7/lb. At that price very few mines were economic. By now, the price is about £120/lb. At that price, seawater extraction becomes economic. The quantity of this resource is gigantic and it is practically limitless with respect to world-wide demand.
The Japanese have shown that this is technically possible - if the price stays at the present high level the technology will be developed.As it is the OECD state that the uranium resource base described in this document (http://www.neutron.kth.se/courses/reactor_physics/NEA-redbook2003.pdf) is sufficient to meet all possible future needs, so there is no need to look at seawater, or the comparable amount of thorium in granite around the world...
"Hardly anyone is building breeder reactors that could extend fuel life.."
Well, there's a simple answer to that - build some...! Is this really being proposed as a reason for not starting a major nuclear push? Hardly anyone is building massive tidal barrages, so I suppose you don't want those either?