NASA climatologist James Hansen testified to Congress in 1988 that climate change was a risk and that we should continue building more nuclear power despite Chernobyl having happened the year before.
If we had done that, we would have solved climate change in the 90s.
We had sufficient time. We had sufficient technology.
But instead of fighting for the environment, the environmentalists fought against it.
This provided the first Bush cover to kill nuclear so that his fossil fuel sponsors could make more profits.
Environmentalists had virtually nothing to do with it. Yes, many people started opposing nuclear power, but please dont believe that had any impact on the matter. Its been the coal and oil industry from the very beginning and even people considering themselves educated on the matter being fooled shows how well they are covering it up.
There are exponentially more environmentalists now that in the 80s so how come they ‘succeeded’ in cranking down on nuclear power back then but cant even remotely stop coal from expanding even further?
Seriously, please try to break free from your brainwashing.
Environmentalists wanted to stop nuclear power. They also wanted many other things. They wanted to stop coal and replace it by renewable energies. I am sure you know very well which of the two was way more important to them and which ‘succeeded’ in the end.
Environmentalists did what they could, what they were allowed to influence. Yes, in hindsight the order was wrong, but not because they wanted it that way but because there was no chance at all for it going otherwise.
It’s been almost 40 years since we were told we had 20 years.
No one did a fucking thing.
We were also told that by the time we notice the changes, it’s too late.
Well guess what we’re noticing?
Customer service ruined my faith in humanity but the climate crisis killed it completely…
I will repeat this ad nauseam.
NASA climatologist James Hansen testified to Congress in 1988 that climate change was a risk and that we should continue building more nuclear power despite Chernobyl having happened the year before.
If we had done that, we would have solved climate change in the 90s.
We had sufficient time. We had sufficient technology.
But instead of fighting for the environment, the environmentalists fought against it.
This provided the first Bush cover to kill nuclear so that his fossil fuel sponsors could make more profits.
Environmentalists had virtually nothing to do with it. Yes, many people started opposing nuclear power, but please dont believe that had any impact on the matter. Its been the coal and oil industry from the very beginning and even people considering themselves educated on the matter being fooled shows how well they are covering it up.
There are exponentially more environmentalists now that in the 80s so how come they ‘succeeded’ in cranking down on nuclear power back then but cant even remotely stop coal from expanding even further?
Environmentalists back then succeeded in stopping Freon through the Montreal Protocol. They had major clout.
They absolutely are to blame. They don’t get a free pass for destroying our climate while being hypocrites.
The coal and oil lobby also deserve blame, but they were not hypocrites.
Seriously, please try to break free from your brainwashing. Environmentalists wanted to stop nuclear power. They also wanted many other things. They wanted to stop coal and replace it by renewable energies. I am sure you know very well which of the two was way more important to them and which ‘succeeded’ in the end. Environmentalists did what they could, what they were allowed to influence. Yes, in hindsight the order was wrong, but not because they wanted it that way but because there was no chance at all for it going otherwise.
Lol, I am old enough to have seen it with my own eyes.
And even today they are opposing nuclear.
With nuclear we wouldn’t have never exceeded 1 degrees warming or 400 ppm CO2.
History will not be kind to the environmentalists.
Does it feel good to be this ignorant? Makes me sad that those who oppose change dont even seem to realize its them.
You’re just projecting.
Me: in favour of all low carbon technologies that get us to net zero.
You and other environmentalists: opposed to the one technology that actually can do the heavy lifting
Oh yes thank you so much for your ‘superior’ environmentalism, you are so smart