Skip to main content

View Diary: Troll Rating Fritz Haber, Jimmy Kunstler and the Oracle at Snowmass, Part 2 (155 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Its a terrible low question , (0+ / 0-)

      "6.   If (hypothetically) you had to choose between shutting a coal plant and shutting a nuclear plant, which would you choose?  Hypothetical are the devil, but I would really like to know."

    Asking such a question without providing any of the necessary facts surrounding the need to make that incredibly complex and difficult decision , makes it just a game . All plants have less than infinite lifetimes , they will be closed or refitted at some point . If you are asking me to shut down a plant before its "done" , your going to have to give me data showing me a cost/benni , needs , replacement source/cost etc etc etc . Until all the data is in hand , studied , debated etc etc etc , making the right choice of what plant to shut down would just be a game of coin flip .

    You would also need to pay me some very big bucks to get that question , real world , answered .

    If you want to spin out hypotheticals , I can make the case for neither being shut , both being shut , one or the other being shut , and or any combo , given the chance .

    l'essentiel est invisible

    by indycam on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 10:37:03 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The other questions are not hypotheticals (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I did not expect you to answer question 6, (as I said, hypotheticals are the devil) but I did hope you would think about it, because it's the most important question in the list IMO.

      The other questins are not hypotheticals, so I did hope you'd answer them.

      •  Are you going to (0+ / 0-)

        answer my questions ?
        Or is this just a one way street ?
        Shall I round up all the questions I have asked that have not been truly addressed ?

        "I did not expect you to answer question 6, (as I said, hypotheticals are the devil) but I did hope you would think about it, because it's the most important question in the list IMO."

        Its not a new question , its just the same old question reworded . The real world question is far far more complex that an , A or B .

        I have put down for you to see my answer to #6 .
        where is yours ?

        Did you read the article about nukes , coal etc
        from one of the founders of greenpeace ?
        I posted a link to it above .

        l'essentiel est invisible

        by indycam on Thu Sep 27, 2007 at 08:45:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Greenpeace article (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          no I didn't recall reading it, particularly.

          On question 6, if you want me to answer my own question, I will.    There is no nuclear plant currently active in the US that I would shut down if I could shut down a coal plant instead.  There are areas where I would not choose to build a nuclear plant however, if hypothetically, if I got to chose the site.

          If you look down further, you see that I tried to answer all the questions I found.

          •  Coal plants are exempt from Environmental Impact (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Statements.  A coal-fired plant does not have to demonstrate that it will have a low environmental impact.  Nuclear plants do.

            Deadly coal waste, containing toxic heavy metals like arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury, is exempt from the being classified as hazardous.

            Odd, when you think about the 2000 people per month that die from toxic coal waste--small particulates, mainly.

            Most people, once they understand the terrible health risks from coal and how the safety record of coal-fired plants compares with that of nuclear plants, do not have a problem deciding which baseload energy resouce is superior.

            The IPCC predicts average global temperatures to rise enough by 2050 to put 20-30% of all species at risk for extinction.

            by Plan9 on Fri Sep 28, 2007 at 10:41:01 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  "Coal plants are exempt from EIS" (0+ / 0-)

              They should not be exempt in any way shape or form .
              I can't imagine a mom and pop store can be built without an EIS , let alone a coal burner .

              If they never have to account for the real world externalities , they are getting away with murder .

              l'essentiel est invisible

              by indycam on Fri Sep 28, 2007 at 12:06:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You are exactly right (0+ / 0-)

                The coal plants are getting away with murder.

                The murder of approximately 24,000 people a year.

                And yes, they don't have to file EIS.

                Heck, under Bush, CO2 isn't even counted as a polluting gas.  

              •  It is all about cold hard reality (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                Americans won't accept returning to a cave man lifestyle.

                Forcing coal overnight to live by the rules everyone else does would send us to that lifestyle.

                Hence nothing is done.

                Natural Gas can't replace coal - there isn't enough to do that.  We're constrained by supply already.

                Wind is adding as fast as it can.

                That leaves nuclear.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (124)
  • Community (60)
  • Elections (31)
  • Media (31)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (30)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Environment (27)
  • Law (26)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Culture (23)
  • Hillary Clinton (23)
  • Science (21)
  • Climate Change (21)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Economy (19)
  • Labor (19)
  • Jeb Bush (18)
  • Josh Duggar (18)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site