Youtube:https://youtu.be/d9uTH0iprVQ
A well made video and a needed dose of optimism.
The next decade will be a deciding moment for us.
Has she backtracked on her anti-nuclear power stance? Her Green New Deal is a bandaid on a bullet wound without nuclear power.
Has she backtracked on her anti-nuclear power stance? Her Green New Deal is a bandaid on a bullet wound without nuclear power.
That's the thing, we need to be expanding nuclear. Building more plants in geologically stable areas. Solar and wind is great for localized systems, but we need nuclear for mass power. We need to be investing in nuclear research to make molten salt reactors a reality. We need to invest more in fusion research.As someone who is for nuclear in the medium-short term, isn't the idea with GND to transition off of nuclear, ie not expanding it through "sustainable investments" and not labeling it "green" (eg. this is what ie EU's taxonomy on "sustainable assets" (which excludes nuclear) directed at investors implicate) and try to speed up R&D investments into alternative energy sources (while not "banning" nuclear) - the last time I checked the NGD it only mentions "clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources" - rather than particular tech. Not being "pro-" is not necessarily the same as being "anti-". Compare how GND documents are clearly "anti" fossil fuels while ambiguous about nuclear...
That's the thing, we need to be expanding nuclear. Building more plants in geologically stable areas. Solar and wind is great for localized systems, but we need nuclear for mass power. We need to be investing in nuclear research to make molten salt reactors a reality. We need to invest more in fusion research.
As you correctly point out, the resolution does not mention nuclear power, it does not mention carbon capture and sequestration, it does not mention banning air travel, it does not mention banning beef in the United States. It does not mention any of those things.
The Republicans are doing what they did to the Affordable Care Act in 2009 by saying that there were death panels. They're very good at telling the big lie. That's what we're confronted with here.
But the more people learn about [the Green New Deal], the more people understand that none of those things are, in fact, excluded. Nuclear power is not excluded, but it must compete with renewables. They are cheaper, but that's the marketplace at work. We're not excluding it.
Has she backtracked on her anti-nuclear power stance? Her Green New Deal is a bandaid on a bullet wound without nuclear power.
Good luck getting enough nuclear power deployed in a decades time.
That's the thing, we need to be expanding nuclear. Building more plants in geologically stable areas. Solar and wind is great for localized systems, but we need nuclear for mass power. We need to be investing in nuclear research to make molten salt reactors a reality. We need to invest more in fusion research.
considering most ongoing EPRs have construction times close to 10 years that's a given...
Thanks for this, it's a good read.Markey gave an interview with Vox where he teared down a lot of the criticisms aimed toward the GND, including it being anti-nuclear.
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-envi...06596/green-new-deal-climate-change-ed-markey
That was great. I don't understand how the other side disagrees with these ideals that are focused on helping people and making the world better for everyone.