Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Live Sex ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Why the Left Should Embrace Nuclear Energy ft. Leigh Phillips (Patreon)

Published:
2022-07-03 16:57:00
Imported:
2023-01

Downloads

Content

In the first part of our conversation with Leigh Phillips (@Leigh_Phillips) on his book, " Austerity Ecology & the Collapse-Porn Addicts: A Defence Of Growth, Progress, Industry And Stuff," Leigh makes the case for nuclear energy as vital for climate change response and addresses the most common objections.

Comments

Anonymous

This guest was a bad communicator. He is clearly convinced of his own conclusions on nuclear, but either refused or was incapable of making the case. Just asserting over and over again that it is so, without meaningfully addressing most of the real issues, is extremely annoying. 1) Highlighting the metric of ‘number of human deaths’ as the key comparison is assinine. How about rendering large swaths of two countries uninhabitable for generations after biffs? 2) Hand waving away the toxic waste storage issue that lasts thousands of years, assuming no human error or other unexpected events. 3) Let’s talk about the life-cycle total environmental costs of nuclear, including the uranium mining and greenhouse emissions associated with the vast amounts of cement and other structural components. I agree that nuclear should be in the mix, but let’s really weigh the pros and cons

Anonymous

US-wise, best-case scenario we'd be waiting until like 2050 to have any new nuclear plants that are running; part of that is from the lengthy time it would get any to get up and running, but also is something as potentially catastrophically dangerous as this form of energy something we could trust any of the current US government structure to handle with the care it needs to not just irradiate and poison humongous swaths of land, water, and people? As things stand now, even if there is some level of true left-wing resurgence in the halls of power, we're looking at that probably taking at least a decade to hold enough power to function at a useful level (and that's IF things work out in the Left's favor at all); in the meantime, all there is will be either Biden-style Dem incompetence as they refuse to make even tiny adjustments to norms even if they actually want to at all, and an evermore powerful christofascist right wing that's capitalizing on their half-decade crusade for power even while Dems hold the presidency and both congressional bodies. Neither is capable of or interested in the sort of long-term planning, maintenance, and funding necessary to have even one new nuclear plant be created and function as intended without catastrophe being a distinct possibility from the moment haardous materials are brought into the mix. Hell, they'd both end up try to build these ticking time bombs right in areas that are either especially important to a regional ecosystem, around an area with a highly-concentrated & mostly working class + poor area, or both. Anyone looking at where things are in terms of power in this country should be able to see how easily this can and will end spectacularly badly. If nuclear were to be any sort of useful option it would've had to come back in like the 70s, 80s, or maybe 90s; since then, things have devolved far too much in terms of the untrustworthy callously murderous zealots getting at the levers of power and the portion of the public giving increasingly unhinged versions of those shitbags more power apparently being the only ones who are not just organized and determined enough to keep making sure their desires are fulfilled, but are the only ones given the full range of freedoms to really have any say in the matter as well. There is no foreseeable path for at least a decade (and probably A LOT more) where the people with power in this country could be given any semblence of trust or faith to not have something like nuclear energy end up being humanity-ending on either a regional or world level. NONE. We can't pretend our state of existence is something it isn't; even if nuclear was the singular alternative to maybe combat climate change to a significant degree, it is as certain as can be that there's only maybe a few dozen people across every level of local, state, and federal governments who would treat nuclear energy with the seriousness it would need to not itself induce catastophe on a level worse than even climate change--the very problem it is being put forward as a solution for. Leigh may be a decent person, but he's terribly wrong on this being a viable solution.