Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Coal will go off shore to those nations who aren't ready for the alternatives. I don't see this being permanent.
Coal going off-shore isn't relevant in the context that it's a bridge to have energy while they transition to better sources.
Funds are doled out as Congress allocates them in the appropriation process. There are about 5000 political appointees in DC running the agencies for which there should be oversight to assure we get what we pay for. I reject knee jerk rants that all government spending is a waste or boondoggle (like Sen Ted Stevens, R. Alaska and his bridge to nowhere that got lined out of the budget).
Thanks for the links. These are pie in the sky articles where a few people posit we should consume in a sustainable manner and end our profligate waste. I can agree to the extent that we are a wasteful nation. They want to lessen the status quo of 'growth' which is the mantra of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (USCoC) who seek 3% annual growth to keep profits humming along. I say phooey to the USCoC; growth (or shrinkage) should generally mirror population. Talk of de-industrialization will not get very far, we want our stuff and we want it now. I only see it in the context that more efficient means of production are found to provide the goods that are needed. No government on earth is going to shutter factories and deny people food, clothing, shelter, water, energy, etc. No consumer on earth is going to go without just to satisfy some pie in the sky wishes of dreamers. I saw de-industrialization in my father's steam railroading industry in the 1950s where the arrival of diesel locomotives after WW-2 put huge labor forces out of work as diesels are easily a thousand times more efficient than steam engines, especially labor costs but also the fuel costs.
Yes, nuclear is too hard because of all the enviros who stir up the NIMBYs. I recall them coming to my door to seek funds to "fight the good fight" so we don't glow in the dark. I suspect the coal dudes were backing them, as always I try to follow the money since banning nukes keeps miners mining.
I see no problem with the C40 group of 96 cities who are trying to get at the problem. They're tired of inaction and I can't blame our cities for getting on board since our congress is so grid-locked it's unable to pass anything but the buck as they kick the can down the road -- while taking huge campaign "contributions" from fossil fuels firms and billionaires. We all know a bribe when we see one.
There's nothing wrong with lessening the carbon footprint. I've no doubt the fossil fuel propagandists took the articles you provided and raised them to the level of conspiracy theories to end our way of life blah blah blah. I won't fall for their sky is falling tantrums.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Last edited by Mike from back east; 02-12-2024 at 03:19 PM..
Impending disaster for one 80 degree day? LOL You fail to mention record cool temps in areas, record rainfall, and record snowfall. Remember back in the 80s when they said we were on the verge of another Ice Age? Hell, I bet you believed Al Gore back in 1991 when he said the world would be under water by 2001. LOL Then again in 2010. And 2020. Unreal.
Sure I'll answer your question: pollution is bad and should be curbed at every turn (air, water and land). But the current push for wind, solar and EVs just pushes the pollution out of sight. 90% of the rare Earth minerals used in renewables are refined in China and as we've all heard many times over, they are constantly opening new coal fired power plants because refining takes a lot of energy. India's use of coal has also gone way up making those 2 countries 1 and 2 in production and use of coal. Our use of coal has gone down over the last decade or so BUT, 22 and 23 were record years for coal exports.
So the current policy in the US is an out of sight out of mind feel good boondoggle that does nothing to tackle a global problem. If they (those pushing mandates) were serious they would regulate private jets, limit the size of houses using building permits, put huge taxes on big gas guzzlers and do something about bunker fuel used in shipping, etc, etc.). But we all know why that's not how things work.
Of course the ultimate goal of the climate change hawks could to de-industrialize the world (finishing off what started here in the US decades ago) and drastically reduce the global population.
Ever notice the climate Czars never talk about nuclear? It's because they don't want you to have abundant energy.
No sane person talks about "de-industrializing" the world or drastically reducing the global population.
You really don't know about the potential issues with nuclear. Try Three Mile Island and Fukushima Daiichi.
No sane person talks about "de-industrializing" the world or drastically reducing the global population.
You really don't know about the potential issues with nuclear. Try Three Mile Island and Fukushima Daiichi.
1970 POS-designed cars used to kill and hurt a lot of people before seatbelts, ABS, headrests, crash testing, cameras, etc.
The same thing has happened with nuclear. Read all about them here https://world-nuclear.org/informatio...0human%20error. . Nearly all of the safety problems to date have been with POS, archaic nuclear plants. Let's shut them down and build new ones. All with the same design (economy of scale).
Plus, you can now reuse spent nuclear rods with the new designs. read about it here https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5...t-nuclear-fuel The problem is that non-technical people are still worried. And, we are where we are. I had a fascinating 4-hour conversation with a Lawrence Livermore nuclear scientist about this topic. We are where we are because of tree huggers at work. Plus, we would have a lot less wars over oil. And not line the pockets of a certain religion that wants to kill us (and die with a bunch of virgins') For people with a brain, it's a no-brainer.
Remember back in the 80s when they said we were on the verge of another Ice Age? Hell, I bet you believed Al Gore back in 1991 when he said the world would be under water by 2001. LOL Then again in 2010. And 2020. Unreal.
Just let the Earth be the Earth and do its thing.
No judgement on the poster.. just want to point out a pattern with a bunch of post here.
Bringing up the ice age thing in the 70's or 80's or mentioning Al Gore and that current prediction's are always wrong I think all have a correlation in that the posters get their news and climate science from Fox, Newmax or conservative AM radio.
Am I wrong? Here is a little challenge to anyone who has bought off something similar. You would think there would be a scientific article that proves all of this.. Wouldn't you think there would be a scientific article that showed that the current global warming is perfectly normal?
Give it a shot. You will have to ignore tons of peer reviewed information that doesn't say what you want to hear. There is a web site somewhere with just a bunch of headlines (nothing more than headlines), most of them are decades old and you cant even tell if the stuff was made up. I have to say you would be gullible if that is all the proof you need.
The fossil fuel misinformation machine has also turned to on line video's because these cant be peer reviewed. If you find some video, please show the time in the video of where you want to make a point.
I will add that anyone posting that the Government is anything other than mainly attempting to reduce fossil fuel emissions also gets all of their news from the conservative sources above.
You folks could not possibly be getting played could you.. and at this point just wont listen to anything that doesnt go along with what you "know".
Nuclear power is likely the only way we will meaningfully slow down the warming going on. If this ever really gets any traction on happening, this will also damage the fossil fuel industry. My prediction is that the same folks who think its a hoax that we are causing climate change will get taught that nuclear is bad. It will all be about the fossil fuel industry preserving itself and they have an effective machine in place already for doing this. This might be 10 to 20 away from happening.
The population reduction idea... LOL... Do we have unsustainable population growth creating a bubble that will be popped by climate change? Maybe this wont happen for 50 or 100 years?
1970 POS-designed cars used to kill and hurt a lot of people before seatbelts, ABS, headrests, crash testing, cameras, etc.
The same thing has happened with nuclear. Read all about them here https://world-nuclear.org/informatio...0human%20error. . Nearly all of the safety problems to date have been with POS, archaic nuclear plants. Let's shut them down and build new ones. All with the same design (economy of scale).
Plus, you can now reuse spent nuclear rods with the new designs. read about it here https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5...t-nuclear-fuel The problem is that non-technical people are still worried. And, we are where we are. I had a fascinating 4-hour conversation with a Lawrence Livermore nuclear scientist about this topic. We are where we are because of tree huggers at work. Plus, we would have a lot less wars over oil. And not line the pockets of a certain religion that wants to kill us (and die with a bunch of virgins') For people with a brain, it's a no-brainer.
Completely agree with expanding Nuclear power, especially with the advances in the industry. Out of the 413 reactors in the world, everyone points to 3 accidents (Chernobyl, Fukushima and Three Mile Island). Funny, Palo Verde has been online for almost 40 years and has been humming along just fine.
1970 POS-designed cars used to kill and hurt a lot of people before seatbelts, ABS, headrests, crash testing, cameras, etc.
The same thing has happened with nuclear. Read all about them here https://world-nuclear.org/informatio...0human%20error. . Nearly all of the safety problems to date have been with POS, archaic nuclear plants. Let's shut them down and build new ones. All with the same design (economy of scale).
Plus, you can now reuse spent nuclear rods with the new designs. read about it here https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5...t-nuclear-fuel The problem is that non-technical people are still worried. And, we are where we are. I had a fascinating 4-hour conversation with a Lawrence Livermore nuclear scientist about this topic. We are where we are because of tree huggers at work. Plus, we would have a lot less wars over oil. And not line the pockets of a certain religion that wants to kill us (and die with a bunch of virgins') For people with a brain, it's a no-brainer.
To me the lack of push for nuclear goes hand in hand with why we never hear those pushing the current policies talk about abundant clean energy, the ultimate goal is for everyone to reduce their carbon footprint (except those who are "special") by reducing EVERYTHING in their lives from food, to travel, to home size, etc.
Yes, it's my opinion and I've been called a conspiracy theorist in this thread (twice) but the simple question goes back to what I think you said in another thread: why hasn't there been a proposal to build 10 identical nuclear plants all over the country?
Completely agree with expanding Nuclear power, especially with the advances in the industry. Out of the 413 reactors in the world, everyone points to 3 accidents (Chernobyl, Fukushima and Three Mile Island). Funny, Palo Verde has been online for almost 40 years and has been humming along just fine.
The Japanese situation is especially interesting. They've had dozens of nuclear plants for decades (I think it was 33 at the peak) in an earthquake prone country and yet their biggest accident was because they took a natural sea wall from 35 meters down to 10. https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-N...-Facility.html
Yet somehow they manage to be at or near the top in life expectancy.
To me the lack of push for nuclear goes hand in hand with why we never hear those pushing the current policies talk about abundant clean energy, the ultimate goal is for everyone to reduce their carbon footprint (except those who are "special") by reducing EVERYTHING in their lives from food, to travel, to home size, etc.
Yes, it's my opinion and I've been called a conspiracy theorist in this thread (twice) but the simple question goes back to what I think you said in another thread: why hasn't there been a proposal to build 10 identical nuclear plants all over the country?
One of my friends co-owns hydropower plants. I asked him about why we are not building more nuclear plants. His answer was different than I thought. He explained that power companies don't like them because of the changing regulations. i.e. upgrades are expensive and filled with a massive amount of red tape. What's safe today might not be considered safe tomorrow. And that means all kinds of expensive modifications. Because of related topics, it costs 5X more to build a plant in the USA versus Japan. https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p...ion%20per%20MW.
The other piece of why power companies are not pushing for them is the cost per Megawatt. There are constant delays and overruns. And later, more and more regulation. Thereby, the cost per MW is much more for nuclear.
That's why the solution is to standardize on one versus many-sized plants. That's what is going on now (different size, designs, and brands). In my world, you make it safe out of the gate. And then, don't keep on tacking on more regulations. But no one has that wand. And there is no one leading the charge to change that regulation approach. So we are where we are. in the meantime, let's plant some trees for $10M.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For people with a brain, it's a no-brainer.
in the meantime, let's plant some trees for $10M. 
