Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

SarahD

(1,732 posts)
Sat May 4, 2024, 10:03 PM May 2024

Nukes are tbe future. Suck it up, buttercup.

Looks like the big challenges to replacing fossil fuel generated electricity with nuclear generated electricity will be financial, not technical. We are going to do this, so we might as well accept that going carbonless is a social effort that requires spreading the cost across the whole of the population, rather than allowing individual utility companies to place the burden on rate payers.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/edwin-lyman/five-things-the-nuclear-bros-dont-want-you-to-know-about-small-modular-reactors/

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nukes are tbe future. Suck it up, buttercup. (Original Post) SarahD May 2024 OP
Ed Lyman has to be one of the worst of all members of the antinuke cult. NNadir May 2024 #1
Good and realistic article. Let's wait for our local nuke promoter to show up an see what he sez. NBachers May 2024 #2

NNadir

(34,661 posts)
1. Ed Lyman has to be one of the worst of all members of the antinuke cult.
Sat May 4, 2024, 11:03 PM
May 2024

The problem is that he's put together a swell marketing squad for subtly selling fossil fuels.

Like most antinukes, he has never given a shit about the hundreds of millions of air pollution deaths that took place during his disinformation spreading career.

In the 30 years he's been spinning bullshit at the badly named "Union of Concerned Scientists" - the death toll from air pollution has been somewhere around 200 to 300 million people that's from fossil fuel waste, about which he and his fellow shit talking antinukes couldn't care less.

Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (Lancet Volume 396, Issue 10258, 17–23 October 2020, Pages 1223-1249).

He never gave a shit about the financial cost of those deaths, anymore than he really gave a shit about the cost of climate change, but he wants to count pennies like a bourgeois fool because nuclear energy is "too expensive."

What an ass!

Because he lacks moral sense, he is disinterested in environmental justice for future generations, since building a nuclear plant is an investment in the future.

And like most antinuke airheads, he cannot produce, in his more than 40 years of handing out bullshit, any evidence that the nuclear industry, in its seventy year history, has produced as many deaths as will take place in the next ten hours from indifference to air pollution, between 8000 and 9000 people, not that this has ever stopped him from soothsaying that disaster fiction stories will someday be real.

There are few people with as little moral standing as Ed Lyman, a disaster of a human being.

You know what Eddie boy? People with serious knowledge of nuclear energy really, really, really aren't concerned with your concern. There isn't much time left to save what is left to save from your ignorance, and must less will be available to restore of what your ignorance has destroyed. They have work to do and they don't give a rat's ass what you think.

Have a nice day.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Nukes are tbe future. Suc...