I've long wondered why climate deniers promote #nuclearpower. Today I figured it out: nuclear is lousy & expensive & American people don't like it. Deniers want us to think there is no good alternative to fossil fuels. @amywestervelt @dwallacewells @billmckibben @NaomiAKlein
-
-
Replying to @NaomiOreskes @amywestervelt and
Your understanding of nuclear seems dated. Even Booker, Yang and Biden know nuclear is the future.
13 replies 9 retweets 76 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @NaomiOreskes and
Too stupid to meter.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_parity …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Merz @ScottAdamsSays and
(I do support using existing nuclear power plants as a transitional energy source; but in the long run wind and solar are vastly cheaper.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Merz @NaomiOreskes and
The causes of high nuclear expenses are well understood and solvable. Standardize and shrink, produce in volume, cut red tape, use Gen 4 tech to eat existing waste, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @NaomiOreskes and
Even if so, Nuclear is stupidly capital-intensive and has already lost its first mover advantage. Wind and solar are already far cheaper that coal and there are few reasons to think those trend lines will reverse. And we've already passed peak internal combustion engine.pic.twitter.com/Q4p5n3Fiul
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Including battery storage?
-
-
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @NaomiOreskes and
No, but as California is learning the costs of maintaining a grid over vast spatial scales also needs to be accounted for. And battery costs are falling faster than PV is.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.