Comments

1

herzog sucks

2

Both Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren are correct: nuclear fission power plants are too expensive to build. But those in operation shouldn't be shut down yet, while we transition.

For the price of two nuke plants, you could build enough solar and wind to power the entirety of America.

Do that.

And, as both candidates said, end all fossil fuel subsidies, depreciation, and deductions.

3

Nice work Jay Inslee. You had one job, and you did it.

4

@2 nails it, plus: building new nuclear, besides being too expensive, is far too slow. It's a complete non-entity on the relevant timescale. Spend that on renewable supply and storage.

(And no, fission fans, don't pitch me on experimental never-productionized design ideas. That's going to be even slower to come online.)

But don't prematurely tear down existing capacity unless we've gotten ahead of where we need to be on CO2, which is probably never.

5

Uncle Grandpappy Joe, bleeding from his eyeballs, 'd surely put the Scare into trumpfy. And the Voters, too. Sorry, Grandpa Uncle Joe -- your pull-date's done come and's long gone.

6

Katie, you are the only liberal with balls to acknowledge that getting to carbon zero is only possible currently with Nuclear in the mix. Also, you've been fired. An effigy in your likeness is currently being burned in front of the Stalin statue and you are a Trumpian misogynist who hates the environment. That is all.

7

@3 "Nice work Jay Inslee. You had one job, and you did it." If by one job you mean spending a buttload of WA tax dollars on a never gonna happen Presidential campaign, failing miserably (just like he failed to get actual climate legislation passed in WA not the watered down version he got through after 2 failed public votes) then yes he did that job.
Also, liberals fighting over climate change for the primary is basically what one would expect. Get back to me when climate change is ever discussed during the actual election. (hint, it won't be because it doesn't get you independent votes)

8

Test

9

I'm hearing second-hand that Mayor Pete talked up a revenue-neutral carbon tax in this forum. Not that I should be surprised about that. A "carbon fee and dividend" proposal is part of his climate plan.

I'm hearing too that he talked about high-speed rail! Music to my ears.

Katie Herzog has the right perspective when she writes: "CNN moderators kept asking candidates what individuals should do to combat climate change, which, frankly, is just not the right question. Amy Klobuchar mentioned washing clothes in cold water instead of hot to save energy." Assuming Herzog got the context right here, Klobuchar's answer is positively cringe-worthy and doesn't exactly speak to her being up to the task. But frankly, I can't recall her ever having said anything that impressed me much, to paraphrase Shania Twain.

10

Taylor Wilson has a solution
https://www.ted.com/talks/taylor_wilson_yup_i_built_a_nuclear_fusion_reactor?language=en

11

Yeah, I'm also of the opinion that current nuclear plants should go ahead and continue but let's not pin all our hopes on nuclear energy. Sure, build some new ones if we can get them up and running quickly, but nuclear energy is not the future.

12

Great article, Herzog. The only way to get off of fossil fuels is to embrace nuclear power as a baseline source. Look at Germany: they pushed hard to increase renewable energy and shut down nuclear power plants. When wind and solar couldn't provide enough, they had to build new coal fired power plants.

We're probably still a 100 years away from wind and solar being able to provide residential energy needs, let alone industrial needs. Solar panels are still too inefficient and don't last long enough, wind is too inconsistent, and there still is no viable grid storage technology that can level out the peaks and valleys of demand.

While the left usually is on the same side as science, they've let ideology blind them to facts when it comes to nuclear power, GMOs, and alternative medicine.

13

@12,

I'm as left as left goes, but I'm in favor of nuclear energy and GMOs. Alternative medicine can mean a LOT of things. I try to let the research speak for it. So... homeopathy? garbage. acupuncture? worth investing in. And I didn't even address 1% of alternative meds out there currently. Needs looking into...

Still, nuclear energy is NOT the future. It's just a good temporary add-on to what we've got now. Don't hate on it but also don't count on it.

14

@7 SirMAGAdumbfuck: Get a lobotomy and lie down. Repeat until you and all your fellow MAGA tools finally see reason.

15

@12 Mike Shellenberger has a lot of great articles on nuclear energy. The one (link below) talks about how to save costs on building power plants. TLDR: build simple identical power plants over and over and don't try to reinvent the wheel every time. Nuclear is not the long term solution, but it definitely can bridge the technological gap we have with other renewables. It should definitely be the main source of energy for zone 0-1 seismic zones which is half of the US.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/06/21/if-innovation-makes-everything-cheaper-why-does-it-make-nuclear-power-more-expensive/#4aeeef882d7d

16

@14 Aunti Grizeldumbshitmotherfucker... what makes you even think I am MAGA? Because I said something negative about Inslee, something that was true? I voted for Clinton. I am definitely not MAGA. But I realize anyone that doesn't toe the party line on fucking everything is subject to piece of fucking shit like you telling them to get a lobotomy without actually even mentioning anything I fucking said or why you think it was wrong.
I'm sorry for having a fucking opinion, go alienate some independent voters and lose another national election you worthless fuck. You're great at it.

17

Sigh... Why would I read an article written about the climate town halls by Herzog? Just... Why?

She's not inciteful, she isn't knowledgable about climate science and green energy, and everything she writes has the same boring slant. Hence why she hasn't gotten a gig outside of The Stranger despite some local notoriety that has since died down (only ten comments on her Williamson trolling article?).

I might visit Slog once every two weeks. A year ago I was a daily visitor. Honestly, maybe it's time to shut it down and focus on the paper. Or, better yet, find better writers. All around.


Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.