I find it significant that such steps are being ignored while vastly more difficult and expensive ones such as
building new nukes are being promoted.
Not exact matches
They track this last one to Bosnia, where they learn that Gavrich (Marcel Iures) a Bosnian politician disgusted with the West's lack of aid in their war, intends to detonate a single
nuke at the U.N.
building in
New York.
If the USA had taken Hansen's advice back in the late 1980's and gone on a crash program of
building next generation
nukes there was probably a chance we could be exporting that technology now to China and India and it might have prevented the commissioning of many of the
new coal power plants they are
building.
«The government is continuing to deliver on its promise to support renewable energy as part of its overall plan to
build a sustainable energy future for Ontario,» She didn't mention $ 70 Billion that the Ontario Power Authority wants to spend on
new nukes.
You seem to agree with me that we should be
building new, safe
nukes that can burn old waste as fuel, but you need to give your fellow lefties a kick up the backside and tell them to wake up ASAP.
So, nothing bad so far, nothing bad for a long, long time means the prudent thing to do is to stop deploying and subsidizing wind and solar (Europe is scaling back now), no
new carbon taxes and even repeal recent ones (Australia, Canada and soon to be Europe), allow more exploration for natural gas (the US and soon to be Europe and more),
build nukes (the rational).
There's a slim chance that if our nation pulled in one direction that we could get a decent portion of our electric generation out of
new nuke plants 6 - 10 years from now if we start
building like crazy now.
Avoiding looking at it completely is, in my opinion, analogous to strident opposition to nuclear power plants, hoping for some (physically unlikely) breakthrough in completely clean energy which can substitute for
nukes and coal in scale and continuity, all the while
new coal plants get
built.