Nuclear v. fossils isn’t like shopping for the most efficient light bulb. Everyone has deontology, refuses some tech that would solve a problem but violate a deeply held principle. Assuming that opposition to nuclear power must be merely tribal or emotional will just entrench it.
(I say, I hasten to add, as someone who thinks that there’s little hope of making a dent in climate change without dramatically scaling up nuclear.)
If the problem with nuclear power opponents is that they simply can’t read charts, and decades of calling them dummies hasn’t changed their minds, what does continuing that approach year after year aim to achieve?
Y’all better fave my #realthoughts or it’s back to Neil deGrasse Tyson tweets (same thing actually)
