Do you think that the way Biden has governed in his first 100 days lends itself to your goal of promoting Nuclear power?
Link: The Indian Point Closure Means More Emissions — And More Cynicism About Climate Action
100 days...from either a practical or political standpoint. The closure process was a long one and just reached conclusion now...would have been nice if the previous administration had tried harder, while it had four years available.
From the "Big Picture" perspective, developing a new energy policy that includes Nuclear Power as a "grid level" source will be challenging...as for myself, I've met with my Congressman a few times already and he's put me in contact with his D.C. staffer responsible for energy, with whom I've dialogued several times...additionally, I'm in the process of setting up a meeting with another Congressman who is on the House Energy Committee to pursue this matter further...while I'm just one citizen's voice, I'm exercising it...I'd encourage everyone else on this board to do the same...hopefully for the same objective, but nonetheless, get involved.
Fortunately, there are prominent Democrats who support Nuclear Power...e.g. Sen. Corey Booker, who commented during the run-up to the 2020 election that "Nuclear Power must be in any serious climate plan", and by the reports I've seen (and posted here), Joe Biden leans in the same direction. Again, this will take a little while to sort out, but time is getting shorter, so I'm expecting a lot more discussion on this topic before too long.
change the course of Indian Point specifically. If I had thought that...I would have said it. You open by responding as if I don't understand something which was implicit. This is, in part, why you grate on people here.
You do understand that the final decision to close Indian Point came in 2017 from NY State. The closure was Cuomo's baby. Not sure what you expected the prior administration to do about that...but you toss in a shot anyway. You do also understand that Hillary Clinton was fully on board with closing down Indian Point. So you didn't really expect the administration that you wanted in power to do anything about it anyway...but now you wish somebody had done something.
You end by saying "Joe Biden leans in the same direction". The point was that the angle of Biden's lean has changed significantly from what was advertised pre-election.
As Biden leans further left, as evidenced by his first 100 days, he leans further away from any likely support for your issue. You know this...but nothing about Biden seems to concern you much at all, even as someone who "used to vote for Republicans" .
Just curious how you would respond given that you came on this board championing this issue as a very critical concern of yours. As Biden now veers ever more "Progressive"...you're going to be increasingly literally tilting at windmills...
(no message)
As for your other less obtuse comments...
"You do understand that the final decision to close Indian Point came in 2017 from NY State. The closure was Cuomo's baby. Not sure what you expected the prior administration to do about that...but you toss in a shot anyway. You do also understand that Hillary Clinton was fully on board with closing down Indian Point. So you didn't really expect the administration that you wanted in power to do anything about it anyway...but now you wish somebody had done something."
Maybe I wasn't clear enough to you with my recognition of a long process just finishing now, but I do understand more could have been done earlier...care to explain to me why the Trump administration never raised a peep about it? As for the Dems, they currently have the most active anti-nuke segment and as I tried to convey, I'm working on it with a couple of Congressmen....on the other side of the aisle it's more a case of the GOP being firmly in the hands of the Fossil Fuel industry...a bunch of states that don't want their "Ox Gored" by Nuclear...you can sense the frustration, I hope...but we soldier on.
"You end by saying "Joe Biden leans in the same direction". The point was that the angle of Biden's lean has changed significantly from what was advertised pre-election."
Again, I'm encouraged to some degree by what I've heard from the Biden/Booker camps...but I still repeat my mantra "In God we trust...all others bring data", or "I'll believe it when I see it"...hence the continued "lobbying" on my part...you, however, seem to have given up entirely...to each their own.
"As Biden leans further left, as evidenced by his first 100 days, he leans further away from any likely support for your issue. You know this...but nothing about Biden seems to concern you much at all, even as someone who "used to vote for Republicans" ."
Kind of a repeat from the previous paragraph, but as regards the "used to vote for Republicans" comment, please don't be calling me the "L" word...I'm a moderate who has indeed voted that way and if you'd like I'll vent some more as to why I believe the current instantiation of that Party has been veering off track with their lack of conservative fundamentals for quite some time...just ask me.
"Just curious how you would respond given that you came on this board championing this issue as a very critical concern of yours. As Biden now veers ever more "Progressive"...you're going to be increasingly literally tilting at windmills..."
Good question...Since reliable, available and affordable energy allows us to play computer games, etc. instead of breaking our backs every day just to survive, it's a very big issue,..I'm not being snarky here...I know you share the concern...but fundamentally I believe in "Numbers" and "Facts"...we'll end up where we need to be...hopefully ASAP, with the least amount of "pain", so while the "Progressive Wing" of the DNC leans away from Nuclear, I sense that Biden is more of a "Pragmatist" than a "Progressive"...there are social issues that demand Progressive attention, but hard fundamentals, such as the need for energy aren't all that "squishy"...I'm betting he makes the right call. (Fingers crossed while I arrange another Congressional call).
BTW, I hope you don't think that this is a 'Windmill' not worth "tilting" at.
first 100 days lent itself to your goal. It said nothing at all about whether Biden should or could affect Indian Point...but of course you knew that.
You're being purposefully disingenuous...and I no longer have time to read your tripe until you admit that you do this deliberately and apologize profusely for it. (Your tactic.)
immediately you follow up with a reference to Biden's first 100 days and ask if those two events align with my goal of promoting the use of Nuclear Power...am I not supposed to draw a link between the two?...are they actually two totally different subjects? How does any reasonable reader not interpret this as throwing 'shade' on Joe Biden' for "allowing", or not speaking out about the closure of Indian Point?...to which I replied I see no way in which he could make a difference...and as we both know this recent event was simply the last nail in the coffin of that plant...what possible gain could a moderate like Biden accrue from jumping in and raising a stink about it?
I like debating with you and hope you don't dis-engage...also, I don't hold it against you for calling my initial reply "Silly" and feel no need for either of us to apologize...let's just keep talking. I've seen a lot worse back-and-forth on this board...btw, I don't think we're even close to getting "Locked".
on you already here today.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Oh, and TY, read the book Unsettled by NYU professor Steven E. Koonin and have a report back to me no later than next Wednesday.
If you supplicate for forgiveness sufficiently and apologize profusely enough, I might even deign to read it...
substance of the matter...unless you're not really interested in that sort of thing.
Edit #2:...the Steve Koonin book..."Unsettled"...I took a quick look at a "synopsis" if you will...we've got something to talk about here...and it's not what you think...the attached "Ted Talk" by the late David J.C. MacKay (PhD Physicist from the famous Cavendish Lab at Cambridge) will give you a hint...the concerns about Climate Change are mentioned, but they are secondary in Dr. MacKay's presentation...Let's keep talking...substantively.
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0W1ZZYIV8o
that lead to locked threads
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)