Shortly after the elections I tweeted the following:
Below, David kicks off his article about bipartisan politics:
With
the possible exception of California’s
recent bill, it might be the most significant state energy legislation
passed in the US in decades.
Interestingly enough, the link he provides in that quote
goes to an article by Brad Plummer which had the following quote about
California's bill:
Few
countries have ever achieved cuts this sharp while enjoying robust economic
growth. (Two exceptions were France and
Sweden in the 1980s and ’90s, when they scaled up nuclear power).
Below are some examples of David doing his usual antinuclear
energy double-speak:
The
bill is somewhat misleadingly being
headlined by most journalists as a bailout for nuclear plants.
But
while the bailout is in there ...
Lots
of them are pushing for bailouts ...
So
that’s what Exelon wanted: a bailout
for its nuclear plants...
...many
enviros and consumer advocates remain deeply opposed to the bailout.
Government assistance for nuclear zero carbon energy is called
a bailout but for wind and solar
it's called a subsidy?
