Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
1–10 of 731 posts
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#2It is always interesting when the NYT and WSJ agree: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power...
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#3It is always interesting when the NYT and WSJ agree: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power...
Even more so when both titles are not clickbaiting
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#4If you want to see if an environmentalist really believes that climate change is as bad as scientists say it will be, look at their stance on nuclear power. If they are against it, they are basically denying the seriousness did climate change.
There is no way you are going to convince voters that they need to cut their energy usage, especially before the worst of the climate change effects are felt. You need to provide steady, stable carbon free power. Nuclear power is the only current technology that can provide it. If you really care about slowing down climate change, you need to be all in on nuclear power.
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#5>Germany’s rate of adding clean energy relative to gross domestic product, it would take the world more than a century to decarbonize, even if the country wasn’t also retiring nuclear plants early.
Why doesn't the article explain why the Germans are retiring their plants? I think these articles should go more in-depth regarding the pro's and con's. From what I read and hear Nuclear power is a great source of energy but I feel when convincing other people of this you need to portray the good and the bad.
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#6If you want to see if an environmentalist really believes that climate change is as bad as scientists say it will be, look at their stance on nuclear power. If they are against it, they are basically denying the seriousness did climate change. There is no way you are going to convince voters that they need to cut their energy usage, especially before the worst of the climate change effects are felt. You need to provi…
> If you really care about slowing down climate change, you need to be all in on nuclear power.
and the opposite is happening...
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#7The problem isn't cost of power generated, its the ability to respond to rapid volatility - when clouds obscure solar panels, and when the wind stops blowing.
Nuclear cannot do this so it is useless. Batteries and gas power plants can which is why they are being rolled out.
Wind, Solar, Gas, Batteries and Electric Vehicles are existing solutions to the climate problem. The market will implement them slowly, since they are cheaper and superior to legacy solutions, but we need political effort to do it more quickly.
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#8>Germany’s rate of adding clean energy relative to gross domestic product, it would take the world more than a century to decarbonize, even if the country wasn’t also retiring nuclear plants early. Why doesn't the article explain why the Germans are retiring their plants? I think these articles should go more in-depth regarding the pro's and con's. From what I read and hear Nuclear power is a great source of energy b…
> why the Germans are retiring their plants
Politicians bowing to the wishes of an ill-informed public.
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#9>Germany’s rate of adding clean energy relative to gross domestic product, it would take the world more than a century to decarbonize, even if the country wasn’t also retiring nuclear plants early. Why doesn't the article explain why the Germans are retiring their plants? I think these articles should go more in-depth regarding the pro's and con's. From what I read and hear Nuclear power is a great source of energy b…
> Why doesn't the article explain why the Germans are retiring their plants?
It does, although it doesn't draw the connection directly.
> I think these articles should go more in-depth regarding the pro's and con's.
The con's (both for Germany, and the US) are (quotes below from the article):
> irrational dread among the public and many activists
> ...
> people estimate risk according to how readily anecdotes like well-publicized nuclear accidents pop into mind.
For Germany in particular:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_phase-out#German...
Tl;dr, Germany politic interest in nuclear phase-out began around 2000 as misdirected "green" activism and was escalated by irrational public fears in response to Fukushima in 2011.
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#10>Germany’s rate of adding clean energy relative to gross domestic product, it would take the world more than a century to decarbonize, even if the country wasn’t also retiring nuclear plants early. Why doesn't the article explain why the Germans are retiring their plants? I think these articles should go more in-depth regarding the pro's and con's. From what I read and hear Nuclear power is a great source of energy b…
Pretty much because Merkel decided so in the days following Fukushima. Not exactly the result of long term strategy.