2 ms·

> the anti-nuclear movement operated in good faith They didn't - they never proposed anything to replace nuclear. The renewables success was unexpected and is

• PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  A comment which shows that you apparently don't know much about the luddites, who didn't want to "revert humankind to a pre-industrial state" but were concerned about the implications of technology and in particular the question of control. The anti-nuclear movement at its peak was already after the soft/alternative technology wave that had started at the end of the 1960s and generally wimpered out by the mid to late 1980s. Maybe you and/or the mainstream were not aware of the suggestions, but solar (hydronic and PV) was already known, small scale wind and hydro were being developed, and groups like the New Alchemists and others were busy working on concepts that would eventually translate into stuff like Passivhaus construction. The renewables success was entirely expected by people who knew about this sort of thing. The movement (such as it was) at that time (and to some extent in its modern forms too, such as Extinction Rebellion, not so well known in the USA) was much more focused on energy use reduction rather than replacement of fossil fuels outright. There were plenty of tinkerers, engineers and starry-eyed folk who shared that vision, and quite a few have been involved in "the renewables success".