"allowing ourselves to be talked out of nuclear and, in essence, back IN to coal, gas, etc. - ranks as one of the largest boondoggles in modern science."
I'm of the whatever gets us away from using fossil fuels camp. I've no great problem against nuclear other than the cost and the ecological messes it creates. Personally I think we should be moving forward with the "wind, solar, water, nuclear' bag but some dont think that. Whats the problem with "wind, solar, water", it need fast ramping power plants for when its not productive, so far gas provides the most of that. Can Nuclear not provide that? Can future forms of Nuclear not provide that? Whats the problem with Nuclear? It costs a lot more and takes a lot more time and creates wastes that are far more problematic that even the lowest points biggest windmill solar. I'm certainly not talking anyone out of nuclear. Thing is, Nuclear can do that fast ramping already. The fact is that nuclear produces waste that is far more toxic than renewables, is very expensive and takes a lot of time to build. Using them as the backup rather than the gas plants and using more renewables that emit less toxic waste than either just makes sense.
= new reply since forum marked as read