Sometimes equal opportunity with unequal outcomes works best.
Of course. Almost all times, actually - the best level of inequality is not zero.
Just keep the inequality from building to damage levels, and keep the opportunity equal Govern well, in other words. Don't let things deteriorate as they have in the US.
We no longer have the luxury of waiting.
Tell it to the people who have shorted the money and delayed the response.
We don't have enough money to waste any of it on expensive nukes, any more than we have enough time to bring them on line.
Absolutely not. No way, no how. Solar thermal isn't even economical for electrical production, much less the much more difficult/expensive solar thermal dissociation process.
It's cheaper than nuclear power - even before the risk premiums, and even before any comparable investment in development.
And quicker to set up.
There's no reason why we can't do nuclear and renewables.
Expense. Inefficiency. Risk. Centralization. Lead time.
But sure, we could do both - with good government. Until then, we should use the limited response resources available as efficiently as possible - which means nothing for nukes, essentially. We are already seriously over-invested in them.
Understandably, there's also quite a lot of fear, but that tends to be a result of past nuclear accidents that were caused by poor management and/or planning.
And the coverups, lying, etc.
The next ones will also be caused by poor management and/or planning - beginning with the building of nukes when and where and how they should not be built. It's an unforgiving technology.
Imagine QQ,Ice, Rainbow and Jeaves sitting around in their Worker's Paradise
I'm going with stupid, rather than dishonest, with this guy.
But he has powerful representation in the US government - the obstacles to AGW response are not, primarily, economic. They are political.
)
