The Green New Deal Excludes Nuclear And Would Thus Increase Emissions -- Just Like It Did In Vermont My latest column — please share!
Any proposal to radically reduce US carbon emissions in the near term *while also* completely phasing out nuclear power is not a serious proposal
“Anti-nuclear campaigners managed to kill all but roughly 100 reactors. What got built in their place? Coal plants. Had just 400 of the 1000 reactors been built, the U.S. would today be producing nearly 100% of its electricity from zero-emission sources.”
Here's why my Alternative Green New Deal wouldn't close down nuclear plants. Nuclear is bad, but climate is more important.
Green New Deal Excludes Nuclear And Would Thus Increase Emissions -- Just Like It Did In Vermont
Just an example of why good intentions are not enough. It sounds like a great idea, but the devil is in the details. If we want to meet our goals, we have to be rational about things like recycling and clean energy.