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.
So people on the right are nuclear physicists? Got it.
Folks involved with 3 Mile Island were a bunch of cheapskated, corrupt, unsafe, selfish, dangerous idiots who had no business being in charge of that utility.
What exactly have we done since then to prove we can prevent the problems from the past, to put into the design the quality required to do it right, the checks to prove things are done right, and folks who are so accountable, they are willing to move their families right next door to said plants?
Nice 50 year reach back there. If you fly across the country do the planes still have propellers too or do you use blimps?
Pick your poison champ. Where are you going to get base load power? Nuke or fossil fuel?
Since you're banning fossil fuels, nevermind...you've narrowed down the choices.
Why? I'd say it's probably because refined nuclear fuel presents an existential risk that isn't found in other forms of energy generation. I can understand the concerns to some degree, but the opposition at times seems completely irrational about it.
as a generalization it is correct however. the things that make a person 'left' also preclude them from understanding things 'technical' and whoo ha, nuke power can be pretty technical. so therefore it is misunderstood and things that are misunderstood are therefore bad and bad things must be banned.
sometimes, the cigar is a cigar. or to put it as NASA does, from a sign inside 'mission control' for all to see..
"No rocket scientist would ever be liberal, no liberal COULD ever be a rocket scientist"
if I said yes, based on your question/answer...would you get it? prolly not huh
oh heck fire, no interest in 10 pages of cat mouse....he clearly said SCIENTIFICALLY illiterate. this is far different from functionally illiterate, or just plain illiterate.
so when you answered with a question that people on the left are illiterate? your failure to read what he actually wrote answers the question with.....yes.
So people on the right are nuclear physicists? Got it.
Folks involved with 3 Mile Island were a bunch of cheapskated, corrupt, unsafe, selfish, dangerous idiots who had no business being in charge of that utility.
What exactly have we done since then to prove we can prevent the problems from the past, to put into the design the quality required to do it right, the checks to prove things are done right, and folks who are so accountable, they are willing to move their families right next door to said plants?
I'll believe that rhetoric right the exact second rich folks sell their costal mansions, the folks like Barack Obama, the Clintons, Al Gore, the Bidens, etc. put even one solar panel up on their own properties, and they give up their private jets and start taking the electric busses, and they go after the emissions spewing from China, Russia, and India.
I prefer data over rhetoric. Just because someone is uber rich doesn't mean they know a damn thing. In fact, I think the more wealthy a person is, the less tuned into reality they actually are. I don't wait around for some famous zillionaire to tell me what to think or do. I read the science. Biden, Trump, Obama, etc. are NOT nuclear physicists (or climate scientists) either.
Anyone who continues to buy oceanfront property in Miami is living in la-la land. This is true no matter what their official political stance.
Scientifically illiterate. And a significant lack of common sense on the left.
My father was illiterate when it came to reading and writing in the FOUR countries he lived in thanks to Soviets. But he didn't lack for common sense.
He understood math. It is the universal language. Not to good on science, due to lack of ANY formal education.
The most dangerous people on the planet are those that do not understand science, economics, or human nature, but think they know how to solve the world's problems.
I know lots of science based professionals. Maybe out of a couple hundred...ONE liberal.
One thing a science education gives you is a BS detector. It is built in to any scientific field education.
There are some science based University professors that are liberal, BUT and this is important they disagree that conservative politicians can solve the problem, NOT that the science is incorrect.
Read carefully between the lines.
Remember a journalism major has taken EXACTLY ZERO science classes. They do not know what they write.
And yet we hear all the whining about liberal college professors. :wtf: ??
1) The left has swung back around on nuclear power in the last several months given both the Germany face-plant and California trying to reverse the shut down of its nuke plants (despite being warned a year ago) to avert gross power shortages next year.
2) The eco-left, still hates nuclear but is relatively small but vocal, well funded and sue like crazy. They're like the religious far-right, their beliefs are basically unattached to the real world and rely upon *faith*.
There's been a gradual slight shift from 38% of Ds supporting expanding nuclear to 43% in favor going from 2016 to 2021. For Rs you had a similar gradual shift from 51% to 60%. On the other hand contrast that with say mine more coal which less than 20% of Ds support and 70% of Rs support. Nuclear is definitely more popular than coal for the Ds. Partly that's that sort of tendency towards the idealistic wishy-washy. What you actually had happen two years ago was the D platform hitting a tipping point. Instead of nuclear being a big nasty about weapons, proliferations, nuclear energy was back on the books for consideration. Consideration for expansion, not just how quickly can we knock it all down.
2) Eco-left isn't really a thing. Yes, you have your PETA-Vegans cementing themselves in concrete blocks to protest soy upcharges at Starbucks. To that extent I guess it's a real thing but more to the point is aside from being fun to laugh at nobody cares. Take Al Gore for example. Back when he was running for POTUS/Veeping and generally nagging people to turn off their lights when they left the room his opposition to nuclear was cost and practical concerns that the current status quo of just scattering spent nuclear fuel rods across the country and stick them in a hole in the ground in NV weren't actually solutions. Mostly though it cost too damn much. Which it did. We still had cheap conventional energy and nobody wanted to talk about not using coal. Long after he was not POTUS/Veeping circa 2010 it was again no problem with nuclear but the new generation of reactors in development that were actually cost effective might be coming online by 2030. Well, here we are. It's 2022 and the new generation of pilot reactors are looking to be going online around 2028. It's not like he's omniscient. Bill Gate's TerraPower was founded in 2006, X-Energy in 2009, GE/Hitachi in 2007. Informed is not omniscient. Given I'm not expert on the matter at all, just mildly informed and aware that the actual environmentalist left has been much more pro-nuclear than the average Joe left for quite some time.
Last edited by Malloric; 09-19-2022 at 11:14 PM..
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.
