4 ms·
I don't understand the distinction you are trying to make. An effective environmental organization is going to engage in politics; that doesn't make it a non-en
by panopticon 7y ago
I don't understand the distinction you are trying to make. An effective environmental organization is going to engage in politics; that doesn't make it a non-environmental organization.
- dexterdog 7y agoAn environmental org is concerned about the environment. If they are anti-nuke that is almost always for political reasons and not environmental ones.
- panopticon 7y agoNuclear energy does pose environmental risks though--specifically with respect to mining, spent fuel storage, failure scenarios and decommissioning. Now you can make the case that the benefits outweigh the environmental impacts (I personally think this is the case), but to imply there aren't valid environmental reasons to be against nuclear energy is ignorant at best.
- dexterdog 7y agoEvery 'green' energy out there also poses environmental risks as well, but those are played down while the risks of nuclear are exaggerated.
- acdha 7y agoThat’s a very blithe dismissal of a real problem, especially lacking any sort of supporting evidence and analysis. For example, the current U. S. spent fuel storage crisis would seem worth addressing since that’s a long-term problem if it goes wrong.
- dexterdog 7y agoCalling it a crisis is just the kind of exaggeration I'm talking about. Sure, it's an issue and politically there are myriad interests that keep the problem from being solved. Some of those interests have a motive to keep nuclear looking worse than it is by manufacturing crises around it like this.