Frankly, we primarily stopped writing about nuclear since everyone in the industry should know by now it is an industry entering its retirement stage.
...so says Zachary Shahan in
yet another antinuclear article. Interestingly enough, I wrote an article earlier this year critiquing yet another of their antinuclear energy articles.
However, because of the interest (and
backlash) the Before the Flood article raised, I decided it was worth
communicating this point one more time [emphasis mine].
If CleanTechnica really believed that nuclear energy is “entering its retirement stage” they wouldn’t still be writing antinuclear articles.
Using Bill McKibben’s climate change war analogy, Figure 1
below lists our four main weapons against climate change in descending order of
deployment:
Pronuclear comment is not welcome at CleanTechnica. From their original comment policy page:
This site is not the place to discuss
future nuclear designs that might make nuclear affordable, the unproven GenIV
type stuff that might or might not work. If there’s a clear demonstration of
affordable nuclear sometime in the future [China
will begin replacing the furnaces in many of its coal plants with Gen IV,
gas cooled, pebble bead reactors as soon as 2018 and Russia just put a breeder reactor into
commercial operation last month], then we can open up the discussion
about the role nuclear could play in replacing fossil fuels.
In the meantime, there are several sites where they love to discuss nuclear ideas. Feel free to take your speculations to one or more of those sites. We’re going to stick with stuff that is affordable and practical.
In the meantime, there are several sites where they love to discuss nuclear ideas. Feel free to take your speculations to one or more of those sites. We’re going to stick with stuff that is affordable and practical.
[Aside]
Shahan began his article with praise of another antinuclear
article.