Radiant Energy Group recently published a massive international survey of opinions on nuclear energy.
It's full of some things you might already know, but it also contains some surprisesđź§µ
For example, did you know French and German nuclear support isn't that different?
Nuclear does have less support than other green technologies, but in most places, it still receives net support.
This apparently low level of support looks higher when survey participants are asked about their ranked supported for different energy sources.
This support increases further if you subset to people who are techno-optimists or tech-neutral when it comes to fighting against climate change.
Unfortunately, most people aren't aware about nuclear is exceptionally clean. Even larger numbers think nuclear waste is a major point of worry.
The Simpsons has done incredible damage to the reputation of our best energy source.
Onto the demographics!
In some countries, the old are the most supportive of nuclear. In others, it's the young.
If you've seen other surveys on the demographics of nuclear support this one won't surprise you: men are universally more supportive of nuclear.
If you've seen other surveys on the relationship between science knowledge and nuclear support, this won't surprise you either: the most knowledgeable are (almost) universally the most supportive of nuclear.
Despite being the current best option for providing reliable, low-cost, and clean energy, being concerned about the climate generally predicts less support for nuclear.
When climate concern is represented by nonprofit membership, there's a similar result.
Despite the nuclear industry being aligned with numerous (typically) left-wing goals from protecting the environment to supporting labor unionization and high employee safety standards, it's the economically right wing that's more supportive of nuclear.
There's more in the report, but I'll end this thread on a happy note: globally, there's more support for additional nuclear builds than for additional nuclear shutdowns.
Pit bull breeders often have Instagram accounts where they post stuff like this, showing the creations they've made through having dogs from the same litter rape each other.
For example, "2x Pimpy 3x Bape" means this one was inbred 2x from a dog named "Pimpy" and 3x from "Bape".
The whole "nanny dog" thing is made up. There is no historical evidence that pit bulls were ever bred to be stewards or friends to children.
The evidence for that myth is basically 'someone said it on Facebook'đź§µ
Even many sources that are favorable towards pit bulls or active promoters of them will occasionally admit there's no real basis for the "nanny dog" claim.
Example:
Another example (and yes, I know "loyal and loving demeanor" is a lie; this is posted for the admission of myth):
I was randomly attacked for the high crime of being in the pit bull's vicinity.
This dog had been wandering around everyone all night and seemed friendly, until it decided to jump up and bite my face at the end of the night for no apparent reason.
This entire breed needs to be exterminated.
Dogs that randomly lash out should not exist.
I actually didn't realize *just how* insane they were until this happened.
I always assumed there had to be *something* that set them off and the issue was that they're set off too easily.
But I was wrong! They just randomly maul you for no reason.