[Dave]

To put aside the Climate Change issue for one moment (JimBraiden and wonkishere are at opposite poles and will never agree) Uranium is a finite resource just like fossil fuels. Nuclear Fission is only a short term answer itself, but the long term answer would come from Fusion (which may always be science fiction) or from sunlight (but you would need to think very big i.e. shadow squares in orbit with the energy collected beamed back down to Earth.) The main problems with wind and sun are that the sources are intermittent and cannot be turned on when more power is needed. Another problem with Nuclear Fission is it cannot be turned on and off quick enough either. And our current ability to store energy is extremely poor.

Putting all of that aside - I'd very much doubt that any Climate Change at present is responsible for a current fall in wildlife numbers (I'm not saying it won't be in the future) but I'd have thought that it was much more due to loss of soils due to deforestation and urbanisation, cutting of wildlife corridors; damming of rivers and loss of floodplains and wetlands; mining and mining spoil waste; the pollution of air, water and land; over-fishing; and a whole host of other items that we are responsible for.

I don't understand why there is a belief that our modern civilisation is invincible. A quick look at the historical record would give a different perspective. Sorry to be morbid. We may have a lot of technology but it is just a pack of cards.

Can I suggest a book for you both:
The God Species (How the planet can survive the age of humans) by Mark Lynas.

It is not an eco-doom book. He presents a case for using new technologies to protect and nurture the biosphere, against current green orthodoxy.