3 ms·

> clean, reliable, safe energy that gets us further away from carbon fuel > shut those all down first anyways What grand conspiracy am I missing? How does a

> clean, reliable, safe energy that gets us further away from carbon fuel > shut those all down first anyways What grand conspiracy am I missing? How does a miss like this happen?

Melting_Harps 5y ago
> What grand conspiracy am I missing? How does a miss like this happen? The actual factual events and details? There was NOTHING safe about how SONGS and to a lesser extent Diablo Canyon operated. Violations, falsified safety reports, and continued maintenance costs for upkeep make it untenable to keep them open given the immense risk being taken for less than 9% of total power consumption in CA. I find Tech's view of Nuclear to be so childlike that I wonder if anyone has actually done more than watched some influencer de jour's hand waving podcast on it being the magic bullet to everything and actually taken the time to visit the areas in which these plants are and just look at the physical infrastructure bottle necks they create in the event of an evacuation since they are built along the coasts and more importantly the San Andrea's fault line. SONGS was built next to a Military base (which means it cannot be accessed by citizens) and one of the most congested freeways in all of SoCal, that means you seriously have no way of leaving without creating a massive amount of traffic. Which means that evacuation is impossible. Look at how people fled to higher ground during Fukushima's Tsunami, that would be impossible for most residents in the S. OC and N. San Diego areas in the case of such an event. It was simply bad city planning at a time when it was clear that profits > safety and Edison built these with reckless and headlong abandon. Personally speaking this is so typical of 20th Century thinking that if we have to start from scratch to get these new 'miracle' power plants up and running, or create an incentive for renewable to increase it's share than so be it. Personally speaking, I just wonder why rather than discussing an endless need to adding more power to the grid is never challenged and the thought about consuming less isn't discussed more. Then again, that is just another reason why I don't live in CA anymore, either. Nuance seems to be entirely lost on the most critical topics, be it energy, water, housing, homelessness etc...
MrBuddyCasino 5y ago
A majority of men support nuclear power, a majority of women opposes it: https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3726846/morning-consult-nuclear-gender.png https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3726846/mo... I have a hard time interpreting this as anything else than being the result of greater female risk aversion and their increased influence in politics.

> clean, reliable, safe energy that gets us further away from carbon fuel > shut those all down first anyways What grand conspiracy am I missing? How does a miss like this happen?

Melting_Harps 5y ago

> What grand conspiracy am I missing? How does a miss like this happen? The actual factual events and details? There was NOTHING safe about how SONGS and to a lesser extent Diablo Canyon operated. Violations, falsified safety reports, and continued maintenance costs for upkeep make it untenable to keep them open given the immense risk being taken for less than 9% of total power consumption in CA. I find Tech's view of Nuclear to be so childlike that I wonder if anyone has actually done more than watched some influencer de jour's hand waving podcast on it being the magic bullet to everything and actually taken the time to visit the areas in which these plants are and just look at the physical infrastructure bottle necks they create in the event of an evacuation since they are built along the coasts and more importantly the San Andrea's fault line. SONGS was built next to a Military base (which means it cannot be accessed by citizens) and one of the most congested freeways in all of SoCal, that means you seriously have no way of leaving without creating a massive amount of traffic. Which means that evacuation is impossible. Look at how people fled to higher ground during Fukushima's Tsunami, that would be impossible for most residents in the S. OC and N. San Diego areas in the case of such an event. It was simply bad city planning at a time when it was clear that profits > safety and Edison built these with reckless and headlong abandon. Personally speaking this is so typical of 20th Century thinking that if we have to start from scratch to get these new 'miracle' power plants up and running, or create an incentive for renewable to increase it's share than so be it. Personally speaking, I just wonder why rather than discussing an endless need to adding more power to the grid is never challenged and the thought about consuming less isn't discussed more. Then again, that is just another reason why I don't live in CA anymore, either. Nuance seems to be entirely lost on the most critical topics, be it energy, water, housing, homelessness etc...

MrBuddyCasino 5y ago

A majority of men support nuclear power, a majority of women opposes it: https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3726846/morning-consult-nuclear-gender.png https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3726846/mo... I have a hard time interpreting this as anything else than being the result of greater female risk aversion and their increased influence in politics.