5 ms·

The strange part is that even if all climate change scientists are completely wrong, what do we really stand to lose by switching to renewable sources and just

The strange part is that even if all climate change scientists are completely wrong, what do we really stand to lose by switching to renewable sources and just polluting less? If you could replace a coal guzzling, smoke spilling power plant with a silent solar panel field, why wouldn't you?

RcouF1uZ4gsC 7y ago
> what do we really stand to lose by switching to renewable sources and just polluting less? Except that if we really knew about climate change in the 1980’s we should have been building Nuclear Power Plants at a massive rate. However, a lot of environmental groups were against that, and actively were anti-nuclear. In fact, some countries and states are decommissioning active working nuclear power plants. There is no room for anti-nuclear sentiment if you really believe that climate change is the biggest threat to civilization.
- beerandt 7y ago
  Or should we hold environmental groups accountable for being anti-nuclear when surely they knew that nuclear would have resulted in less CO2, yet they openly opposed it.
  - puranjay 7y ago
    At this point, nuclear power needs to be rebranded to be viable. The tech is fantastic but 50 years of apolcalypse porn has ensured people see mushroom clouds as soon as they hear "nuclear". A name change should be the first priority.
    - AstralStorm 7y ago
      Once there was a good association when it was called atomic power. That was before 80s. We could call it rock power, but the bad association will persist and get boosted by alarmists anyway.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
bcrosby95 7y ago
Electricity and heat generation is a lot but still just 25% of emissions. It's probably the easiest part to fix and it's still hard. The harder part of the pie would be agriculture and industry.
SamReidHughes 7y ago
> what do we really stand to lose by switching to renewable sources and just polluting less? Hundreds of millions of human lifetimes of effort? Extreme social unrest? See what's going on in France, Holland, and Chile for a taste.
Merrill 7y ago
Lawrence Livermore National Labs publishes a great chart of US energy sources and consumption. In 2018 we used over 101 quadrillion British Thermal Units of energy. Renewables are a tiny fraction, mostly hydro and biomass. https://www.llnl.gov/news/us-energy-use-rises-highest-level-ever https://www.llnl.gov/news/us-energy-use-rises-highest-level-...
sitkack 7y ago
I am reminded of the comic, "What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"

RcouF1uZ4gsC 7y ago

> what do we really stand to lose by switching to renewable sources and just polluting less? Except that if we really knew about climate change in the 1980’s we should have been building Nuclear Power Plants at a massive rate. However, a lot of environmental groups were against that, and actively were anti-nuclear. In fact, some countries and states are decommissioning active working nuclear power plants. There is no room for anti-nuclear sentiment if you really believe that climate change is the biggest threat to civilization.

beerandt 7y ago
Or should we hold environmental groups accountable for being anti-nuclear when surely they knew that nuclear would have resulted in less CO2, yet they openly opposed it.
- puranjay 7y ago
  At this point, nuclear power needs to be rebranded to be viable. The tech is fantastic but 50 years of apolcalypse porn has ensured people see mushroom clouds as soon as they hear "nuclear". A name change should be the first priority.
  - AstralStorm 7y ago
    Once there was a good association when it was called atomic power. That was before 80s. We could call it rock power, but the bad association will persist and get boosted by alarmists anyway.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

bcrosby95 7y ago

Electricity and heat generation is a lot but still just 25% of emissions. It's probably the easiest part to fix and it's still hard. The harder part of the pie would be agriculture and industry.

SamReidHughes 7y ago

> what do we really stand to lose by switching to renewable sources and just polluting less? Hundreds of millions of human lifetimes of effort? Extreme social unrest? See what's going on in France, Holland, and Chile for a taste.

Merrill 7y ago

Lawrence Livermore National Labs publishes a great chart of US energy sources and consumption. In 2018 we used over 101 quadrillion British Thermal Units of energy. Renewables are a tiny fraction, mostly hydro and biomass. https://www.llnl.gov/news/us-energy-use-rises-highest-level-ever https://www.llnl.gov/news/us-energy-use-rises-highest-level-...

sitkack 7y ago

I am reminded of the comic, "What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"