Why is it a fool’s errand? At the same meeting the US pledged* to triple it’s nuclear energy production.
*of course, take all pledges with a grain of salt
And your libberizing irritates me.
Tough crap if you don’t like me calling out the libberations of libs. Expect that not to change.
Hope that helps!
That’s just a lib practice. Physician, heal thyself.
1 Like
Shut down the coal plants (while China accelerates their use of coal, and construction of nee coal plants.)
Shut them down by 2030. No problem. They’ll be replaced by nuclear facilities… except it takes more than 10 years (and sometimes decades) to approve, construct, and start up a new nuclear plant. Do we even have ANY starting up the process now? Enough to fill the gap?
Oh, and while we’re shutting down those coal plants, we’re also tearing down hydro dams (which are pretty much the cleanest renewable sources out there.) 
1 Like
Takes a real nutso to do all that at once if at all.
Here in Fairbanks, it’s tantamount to a death sentence, at least figuratively. There are four coal power plants within 25 miles of my house … one barely a mile away. That one not only provides electricity to the grid, it also heats the entire University of Alaska campus. The next closest to me is about 5 miles away and the waste heat is used to heat a large portion of the downtown area including several government buildings, the library, schools and the hospital. The two others serve the local Army and Airforce post/base and supplement heating there too. Without coal, this community would be hard pressed to exist. It absolutely could not exist only on solar and wind energy.
Didn’t the article say there was no date as to when the existing plants would be shut down? I’m assuming they’ll wait for a viable alternative.
It’s not like California saying they expect 51% of all cars sold to be electric by 2026. That isn’t going to happen. I think NJ wants to do that too. Never going to happen. Especially in NJ.
They are ignorant politicians … why would you assume that?
Because there is no deadline. That could drag out for decades. Now if at any point they make a deadline, then start to worry. But as of right now, it’s the easiest promise to make for a politician. One that has no deadline.
1 Like
The only reason there is no deadline is because then nobody can hold their feet to the fire. It has nothing to do with developing alternatives before shutting down coal.
…talk about hyprocrisy mixed with irony.
2 Likes
of course they’ll say this is all because of climate change
they really need you to be stupid.
should we assume you agree with all that?
I’m making no such assumption with the people we have running things at the moment.
Getting you to comply was all that mattered there.
No, I don’t agree with any of it. But I do appreciate you taking the time.
1 Like
if youre not interested in the response why did you ask?
Exactly why politicians love no deadlines. They don’t have to develop an alternative. They can wait indefinitely.
I’m not 100%, but I lean heavily towards believing it. Their might be some good intentioned people out there, But I lean more towards most of them wanting to have some control over the population. What better way to attempt this than to use climate change as the excuse? Hell, some could see it as killing two birds with one stone. Because climate change can be used indefinitely.
I was interested in the response, I just don’t agree.