Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

Think. Again.

(18,662 posts)

1. I agree with you about our excessive lifestyle...

Reply to SarahD (Original post)

Sat Jun 22, 2024, 01:49 PM

Jun 2024

...and I strongly believe the priority effort toward reducing CO2 emissions should be on reducing energy USE across the board.

That being said, if we're NOT going to reduce use (by choice), we must reduce emissions somehow, and nuclear power wil have to be in the mix of non-CO2 energy sources if w have any hope of that.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Salviati

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Nuke promotional puff pieces swamping the "news." [View all] SarahD Jun 2024 OP

I agree with you about our excessive lifestyle... Think. Again. Jun 2024 #1

Exactly right. SarahD Jun 2024 #2

I agree with your sarcasm! Think. Again. Jun 2024 #3

Here in SC we have a clean, one owner, 1980 nuclear plant that's never been driven. LastDemocratInSC Jun 2024 #4

What about the V.C. Summer #2 and #3 in S.C.? progree Jun 2024 #5

I found one today on taxpayers picking up some of the cost ... progree Jun 2024 #6

Compare the price of electricity in nuclear France to that in anti-nuclear Germany. hunter Jun 2024 #7

This isn't very "puffy" - World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2023 (Dec 2023) progree Jun 2024 #8