3 ms·
I don't think that is a very fair assessment. There are some legitimate concerns about vulnerability to earthquakes and the discharge of warm water into the oce
by whyenot 3y ago
I don't think that is a very fair assessment. There are some legitimate concerns about vulnerability to earthquakes and the discharge of warm water into the ocean. I think keeping Diablo Canyon running is the better option for the environment, but there are knowledgeable people on the other side of this issue who are also concerned about the earth and would rather move quickly to wind and solar. That doesn't make them "implacable enemies of the Earth."
- reducesuffering 3y agoIf their uninformed choices actually result in millions of tons of CO2 emissions and people’s lifespans shortened by worsened air quality, then the title is deserving. Because the most likely scenario is Diablo Canyon is simply replaced with an extra 10% CA grid load of natural gas for 20 years.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y agoAnti-nuclear is the anti-vax of the environmental movement. They focus on side effects that are scary but rare and in general much less than what it is trying to prevent. Closing nuclear power plants increases CO2. We have seen that with Germany. If after all this evidence, you are still anti-nuclear in 2023, you are anti-science.