An inconvenient reality: nuclear power is needed
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/VP-An-inconvenient-reality-nuclear-power-is-needed-to-achieve-climate-goals-2710171.html
Lol myth
Quote from: TVA on Oct 27, 2017, 11:39
Lol myth
(http://www.freesmileyfaces.com/files/day-by-day/hobbies-smiley-faces/193.gif)
Climate goals? The only "climate goal" that concerns me is my HVAC unit and my utility's ability to keep it running. Any other climate goals are God's purview.
The point isn't climate change. That horse has been beaten to death for decades. The underlying issue is there are 2 things wanted on that "side" of the street. No nuclear power AND carbon free power. They are at odds with each other right now, and it is interesting to watch. Kinda like wanting security of a nation but not wanting an army.
The problem I have with the debate is that in science and politics today we seem to be playing dodge ball not chess. Hit the other side as hard as you can so they won't strike back. I am an anthropomorphic anthropogenic climate change skeptic denier and on top of that CO2 is not the primary man made greenhouse gas, water vapor is. In addition to that while CO2 has continued to climb there has been no corresponding rise in global average temperature for two decades. The debate around CO2 does not carry much weight with me but there is a lot more than CO2 coming out of the stacks of fossil fuel plants such as heavy metals like mercury. Stable baseline power, intermittancy of renewables, and market stability are all part of the power mix while CO2 is the ball in these debates that leaves welts but no lasting sustainable results. Trump is removing a lot of CO2 regulations and I expect that his appointees will continue to do so probably making the CO2 debate moot in regard to nuclear power.
Good post but there is not man induced CO2 issue
stories like this make me want too invest moor money in batteries.