Comments

1

Looks like those hazy skies we get from forest fires won't be limited to only August for much longer. Oh well, people come here to get away from the sun.

2

Bone-spur is doing exactly what a desperate boor with zero ideas would do: the stupidest thing anyone can think of.
With his lapdog House vanished he can see himself getting flayed, so he is trying to "exploit the lame duck session". Which is probably advice he got from his highly qualified staff.

3

RE: RBG back at work. If you have worked for an established law firm of any size you would not be surprised. All firms like this have at least one 80+ year old attorney still at it. As long as your mind is sharp, lawyering and judging are not terribly physical. I have no data at hand but I would not be surprised if lawyers/judges had the highest % of people dying at their jobs of natural causes.

4

"You know what makes these fires worse? Climate change."

Well, when things are burning and peoples' homes and livelihoods are lost - climate change isn't going to make the experience worse.

Maybe be less preachy of what we already know and you climate change ilk will have better messaging than your PETA cousins.

5

Within our lifetimes expect that zoos will be the only place where large mammals still exist - tigers, elephants, gorillas, etc.

6

@3: Yeah, but we'll see if those ribs hold up when she has to hit those tight holes and pick up that tough yardage up the middle.

7

@4:

You-all just keep on sticking your heads in the sand or your fingers in your ears, and using "stop being so PREACHY!" as your excuse for doing nothing. Well now the planet is telling you in no uncertain terms, so continue to ignore it at your own peril.

8

@4 "What we already know" is unfortunately not excepted by a large minority of people in this country, and informing people about what is causing an increase in major natural disasters is one way to gain understanding of the issue. For many people, their view of climate change is not that it isn't real, but that it will happen in the future to other people. People with that view need to understand that it is happening now, and that is reinforced by a connection to something they are actively experiencing.

To relate the mission of a fringe group like PETA to an almost universally excepted position on human-created, disaster-causing climate change is laughable.

9

@4 By any measure, denying the reality of climate change is still denial.

10

@3: I have a similar experience working with Sisters. They are an aging demographic, but that doesn't stop them. Today is the funeral for one of my favorites. She was 81, and only this summer was protesting the death penalty in DC. Seeing it done away with in Washington State, after having retired as a prison chaplain, was her life's work, and living to see that happen was a great blessing. Her last act before slipping into a coma in the hospital was to fill out her ballot. I'll miss her.

11

TPM:

“Democrats flipped more than 350 seats nationwide and seized control of seven legislative chambers. They gained six new trifectas, meaning Democrats control the governor’s mansion and both houses of the legislature. Democrats also picked up seven new governorships and now hold a majority of the nation’s attorney general offices.”

This is a massive win, and it’s only the beginning.

AZ, FL, and GA are still in play!

12

Jeezus, that video of Trump sounds exactly like WWE pre-fight hype.

14

Whitaker looks like what you'd get for an AG after Paulie Walnuts turned down the job with a shudder of polite disgust.

15

Climate Change and Extreme Summer Weather Events – The Future is still in Our Hands
by Michael Mann, 31 October 2018

Summer 2018 saw an unprecedented spate of extreme weather events, from the floods in Japan, to the record heat waves across North America, Europe and Asia, to wildfires that threatened Greece and even parts of the Arctic. The heat and drought in the western U.S. culminated in the worst California wildfire on record. This is the face of climate change[...]

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2018/10/climate-change-and-extreme-summer-weather-events-the-future-is-still-in-our-hands/

16

Voters are smart - they analyze all these initiatives and vote based on their analysis. There was not good planning on what the money raised would be spent on to reduce greenhouse gases. If the writers had done their homework and written a good initiative it would have passed.

17

I hope that b*tch gets tetanus

18

@15 The WP shortened version:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-not-rocket-science-climate-change-was-behind-this-summers-extreme-weather/2018/11/02/b8852584-dea9-11e8-b3f0-62607289efee_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.40b7aa7fcb6b

19

@13 Agreed. Climate change activists should look into nuclear energy as a alternative to fossil fuels. Its clean and very cheap.

20

@19 lol, we can't even deal with Hanford...

21

@17 Who? Do you mean the Audi driver/sign thief? If so, harsh but fair.

22

@19 Don't forget to factor in the cost of nuclear waste cleanup, storage, public health, and disaster repair...

Fukushima - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38131248
Chernobyl - http://time.com/5255663/chernobyl-disaster-book-anniversary/
Nuclear Weapons Waste - https://www.newsweek.com/cost-cleaning-our-nuke-weapons-waste-soaring-767006

To name a few...

23

@21
Yes.
@22
No, no, silly; those costs get externalized. Get with The Programming.

24

The United States doesn't pivot on a dime. It moves slowly, ploddingly along with itsy bittsy course corrections.... sometimes to the right, sometimes to the left, but regressing around the mean, which is center-right. Impatient young folks who grew up with instant gratification are having a tough time just being patient right now. Shit takes time.

25

@22 Do you know how many nuclear reactors are in Washington State?

26

@19 nuclear is anything but cheap after accounting for the massive subsidies the industry has been receiving for over half a century and several bailouts. In fact, the entire industry has very little future because it is too expensive to finance.
https://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-power/cost-nuclear-power

27

It's funny how Christians who talk about "Biblical justice" are always referring to the Old Testament, never to the words of Christ.

28

@26 Construction costs are high in the US. But if you look at France and South Korea they are cheap. The article link below explains why.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/06/21/if-innovation-makes-everything-cheaper-why-does-it-make-nuclear-power-more-expensive/#703d86c02d7d

TLDR? Basically, innovation is great for a lot of things, but for nuclear power plants standardization is key. Build several of the same type of power plants with the same construction managers.

29

@9: Nothing about @4 is about denial. As long as everyone dwells and ruminates over climate change at least one day a week I think you should be fine with that.

30

@Drid,

Nuclear power plants require too many exotic and rare materials (and not just the fuel) to be able to build them on a scale massive enough to fully replace fossil fuel plants.

https://phys.org/news/2011-05-nuclear-power-world-energy.html

31

@24:

Time is rapidly running out, so maybe the Youth Of Today are impatient because they already know that.

32

Michael Bell is the one who doesn't "get it." People don't care about endorsements. It's laughable to suggest that the Times ed board decides the outcome of elections. I guess it feels good to have a scapegoat though, eh?

33

@28 more promises from the nuclear industry after 70 odd years of massive subsidy that don't even account for decommissioning. How come self-proclaimed "small gov types" push industries that have always "hung from the taxpayers' teat" and demand a huge security infrastructure to regulate safely. It's just not very coherent.

@29 as if your continual attempts to minimize the urgent threat of climate change weren't a form of denial. The IPCC is giving us 12 odd years to get our shit together. I shouldn't have to tell you how little it is if you were genuine about wanting to do something about it.

34

@30: I don't think anyone is clamoring to completely replace all fossil fuel plants with nuclear power.

Advocates for nuclear power want it used as a way to mitigate fossil fuel use until it becomes possible for renewable sources to meet most of the nation's power needs.

Nuclear power is very clean, safe and cheap if you follow the example of nations like Japan and France.

35

@30 Nuclear won't completely replace fossil fuels but neither will wind or solar.

@33 Why don't you look at other countries Nuclear programs? France, South Korea, etc. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/09/11/had-they-bet-on-nuclear-not-renewables-germany-california-would-already-have-100-clean-power/#3abdaae1e0d4

@22 Since you didnt answer the question, there are about 10 nuclear power plants in Washington.

36

@34,
And that's fine, so long as people also realize nuclear power is merely a temporary band-aid.

37

@35,
Right, wind OR solar won't completely replace fossil fuels, but wind AND solar, and hydro, and geothermal, etc., can and should eventually replace fossil fuels. And by eventually, I don't mean in a thousand years, more like a few decades. I could be done if people didn't let greed and selfishness guide them.

38

@37 It wont happen in a few decades. Just add nuclear to your list wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, AND nuclear.

39

@31 No, I just think it's an age/perception of time thing. Young people are impatient, old people aren't (a generalization, I know). It really should be the other way around, if you think about it. Sort of like the saying 'youth is wasted on the young'

40

I don't think nuclear is the way to go until you figure out what to do with the radioactive waste that has a half life of 10,000 years. I hear there is a big piece of rock in the middle of Nevada that has been hollowed out to store the stuff but for some reason it never gets finished.

41

@39:

That's because most old people know they'll be dead before things finally go completely to hell in a hand basket, and so they don't really have to care about the long-term consequences of their actions - or in this case, inaction.

42

@40 Here's a good article about the ridiculous fears about nuclear waste:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/06/19/stop-letting-your-ridiculous-fears-of-nuclear-waste-kill-the-planet/#1eff0ec2562e

43

@36: I like to think of it as a bridge.

@40: There is ample land to store all the nuclear waste from power generation (and numerous sites which are being prepped/ready), for thousands of years, the issue is that nuclear power is a political mess due to widespread ignorance about the realities of it, such as thinking there is nowhere to store the waste, or that the waste is harmful for 10,000 years.

Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 only have a half life of about 30 years, the heavier atoms produced such as plutonium have a half life of about 1,000 years.

44

"We can’t give exact times, but before long you’ll be able to see him [Kwame] with Yola, Akenji, Uzumma and Nadiri." Wait -- is this another plug for Humpfeast?

45

@43 Is Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 used for power plants while plutonium is used for nuclear weapons?

46

@43:

Ample land - where exactly? None of the states with surplus unoccupied land seem to be jostling to get to the head of the "who wants tons and tons of nuclear waste?" line. The Yucca Mountain repository has been in the planning stages for some 30-odd years and still isn't finished - and given the abject lack of interest from the current administration may be years, even decades away from completion - if ever.

47

@33: Please don't conflate multitasking daily life with awareness of climate change as denial of climate change or making it less important. You are no more alleviating the effects of climate change than anyone who is less concerned about it or even in denial of it.

48

-#35- now, as to your assertion that there are 10 nuclear power plants in Washington State, could you enlighten us as to their location?
Perhaps you are being glib and including a portion of the naval vessels at Bangor and Everett as being 'nuclear power plants'.
We currently have only one nuclear plant in this state using the commonly understood definition of a 'nuclear power plant'.
And there is a very good reason for this.
Perhaps you should review your local history and don't skip the chapter entitled WPPSS (or, 'Whoops!' as it was known at the time)

49

@48 :-P yep. The Subs and aircraft carriers are all powered by Nuclear reactors. I believe carriers have 2.

50

Having chatted with a number of the folks who worked on the budgets for decommissioning of nuclear power plants, I can assure you they are no bargain, and all of that cost is born by taxpayers. The DOE has failed to provide the required report of annual costs for cleanup at Hanford for 2 years running. But previous years have run in the ballpark of $2 BILLION annually.
The typical 5KW home solar installation costs $25k.

51

@50 Hanford was used to produce nuclear weapons and it is not the same thing as a power plant.

52

"After agreeing that if a judge has a "New Testament" view of justice, they'll be a good judge, acting AG Matthew Whitaker continued, "If they have a secular worldview, that ‘this is all we have here on Earth,’ then I’m going to be very concerned about how they judge.""

The Founding Father's are rolling in their graves. They specifically attempted to prevent this.

53

@45: Nuclear power generation does make some heavier plutonium atoms as a waste product, but nuclear weapon generation uses far more enriched materials, and so creates much more dangerous waste, to put it simply.

@46: Yes, there is ample land, but the politics of it are a mess due to widespread ignorance, just like I said earlier.


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.