4 ms·

Nuclear: zero-carbon energy. #headduck

• archgoon 7y ago
  Unfortunately, despite prominent climate scientists like James Hansen advocating that Nuclear be considered a tool in the toolbox for combating Climate Change, it's been regularly dismissed by many activists it seems. Foolish, it would have been an excellent talking point to communicate that environmentalists were serious about this problem and weren't simply trying to leverage it to push their personal wish list of policy proposals. Missed opportunities.
• munk-a 7y ago
  US Energy interests did a really bad thing in the 70s, 80s and 90s that's lead to this bull-headed knee-jerk response from a lot of otherwise environmentally minded people. At the same time... in Vermont the Vermont Yankee[1] plant destroyed anyone's ability to reasonably advocate for safe nuclear power by repeatedly violating the public trust to make a quick buck and saddling the state with a heavy burden, specifically: > In December 2014, Entergy submitted the Post Shutdown Decommissioning Report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This report estimated that the total cost for decommissioning the reactor would be $1.24 billion. The same document reported that only $665 million had been collected in the 42 years of operations of this plant for this purpose. Entergy hopes to raise some of the shortfall funds through "external financing". The sorta TL;DR here is that nuclear power, at the tech level we had in the 70s/80s/90s is incompatible with capitalism and the greed that goes with it. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont_Yankee_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont_Yankee_Nuclear_Power_P...