The road we were told not to take

actionfromafar

So dramatic "The math fits on a cocktail napkin. Keep all the efficiency and solar. Change one thing."

mrmarket

this essay makes a very important point - that embracing nuclear power could have given us so much more runway on climate change, and the campaign to fearmonger on nuclear power was bad - but it's hard to take in his point because it's nearly incomprehensible at times. "RMI’s Basalt headquarters makes 114,000 kilowatt-hours of rooftop solar a year, sparing about 40 tons of CO2 (net-zero premium for the building: $1.34 million). At that pace, 115 billion tons takes 2.7 billion years. Or every building on Earth, all 2.75 billion, matching RMI’s best work (built in 2015, not 1976) for a year, spending a mere extra $3.7 quadrillion. To pay for one essay." What the hell does this mean? It's a bunch of numbers in a row seemingly measuring stats of different units against each other? And then this disconnected rhetorical flourish, 'to pay for one essay?' what?

mangecoeur

Something people forget is that France went all in on nuclear also to produce enough weapons grade plutonium for its independent atomic bomb program. Plutonium production was considered a feature rather than a bug of the reactor program.

ChrisArchitect

cleaned up url: https://www.aspendailynews.com/opinion/whiting-the-road-we-w...