Cethin

I believe this would be a state issue though, so some of that doesn’t apply.

If anyone wants to actually read this: https://web.archive.org/web/20240924204019/https://theintercept.com/2024/09/24/cnn-rashida-tlaib-dana-nessel-antisemitism/

TLDR: She implied the AG’s opinion to go after Palestinian protesters and not other protesters indicated a bias, which it certainly seems that way. The AG then says that calling this out is anti-semetic, as they always do. They can’t defend their actions, so they instead call into question the integrity of the other party.

She only recommended her! Everything she does after she doesn’t get credit for, right! /s

You can’t stay consistent, can you? “Biden bad” is the only difference between Warren getting credit for recommending her and Biden getting credit for choosing that recommendation because it was the best choice for what he wanted to accomplish.

Your English is bad or you type poorly. I assume you meant that the comment implied every artifact was stolen, which it never did. The stolen artifacts are stolen, and make up most of the largest exhibit.

Equally then, the nuclear disasters shouldn’t count, right? No, we count everything, including the accidents, even if measures have been put in place to prevent them from happening again. The dam was made to produce electricity. The construction of that is still a factor in the deaths. Same with solar, coal, wind, nuclear, and everything else. If the deaths wouldn’t have happened otherwise then they are to blame.

How do you assume it’s ignoring their increased mortality?

OK, I’m don’t arguing with you. If your job is to select people who do a particular job well, and then they do that job well, then your job was done well also. If you somehow don’t agree then I don’t know what’s wrong with you.

Even if you call it conventional (I don’t think anyone would, but sure) it isn’t dirty. Dirty energy is stuff that releases pollution that isn’t contained. Nuclear releases water vapor and that’s all.

Nuclear is also anything but clean. People love to call nuclear ‘clean’ because its low in emissions, but that’s ignoring the requirement for either safe storage of radioactive material or reprocessing thereof, as well as the emission of radioactivity in the water cycled through the reactor.

It is very clean. The radioactive material it produces that must be contained is very easy to contain safely. It really isn’t an issue. Check these videos out if you want to learn more about it. (The second video is another plant owned and operated by the same company that is being contracted here.)

https://youtu.be/4aUODXeAM-k?si=VhZ6LZJcA0HJsz2z

https://youtu.be/lhHHbgIy9jU?si=6Wn_1t-vNwSFYCMP

Edit: It’s also the cleanest and nearly the safest source of energy, including the disasters. https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy

The president doesn’t do much of anything themselves ever. Their job is to pick people who will handle their jobs well. A good leader is one who is capable of picking good advisors. In what way does he not deserve credit? Sure, she does also. It doesn’t take anything away from her. You just literally cannot admit that you appreciate something Biden has done for some reason.

I didn’t say for not being Trump. I said he deserves credit for what his administration has chosen to do. Regardless of who’s idea it is, his administration chose to listen to them, if it wasn’t from them. They deserve credit for that.

You aren’t even setting the bar too high. You’re not even setting it, and then saying they came in short. You’re saying they don’t deserve credit for something they literally did. How dumb is that?

Doesn’t he, and his administration, deserve credit, even if it’s just for listening to other people? If it were a particular other president it wouldn’t happen, so his administration deserves to be praised for it. Criticize where it needs to be done, but also praise where it’s deserved. If you only criticize then you’re unable to be won and aren’t worth trying to win.

How so? It’s easy to say things so bold, but I’d like to hear your reasoning.

That’s the justification, and maybe the catalyst, but prices have stayed higher than they were due to price gouging. It’s not Biden/Harris fault, but rather capitalism. They saw they could still make more profit while selling less at a higher price, so they kept doing so.

It is, yeah. It was in operation until 2019.

That’s true, but this reactor had been operating for decades, until 2019. Methane was too cheap (and didn’t have to pay for its waste) and made it unprofitable, so they stopped. Presumably the price MS is willing to lock in at makes it profitable for them again. I assume they predict prices going up or they’re getting it cheap.

Keep in mind, MS has only signed an agreement to buy 100% of the output, not the reactor itself.

Carl Beijer is a blogger. As far as I can tell, he’s not an academic. I’ve never heard of an academic use a pen name, but it’s hard to know anything about him if he’s hiding his identity.

Just because he says there’s an academic concensus doesn’t mean there is one. He has to prove it. I haven’t finished reading this yet, but I’ll probably post a new reply when I do.

deleted by creator

Mining isn’t particularly safe, then refining and construction.

It must have shifted at some point, because the data I see now shows solar as 0.01 death per twh less than nuclear, which is effectively equal because that’s the smallest unit of increment they have. Nuclear still produces the lowest CO2 per twh.

https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy

They are only buying 100% of the output. The old owners are still owning and operating it.

I’m not saying they should not contain it. I’m saying other sources should have to. We only force one energy source has to pay for the cost of all of its waste. Why is that? It’s only to the benefit of dirty energy.

They were actually designed to be very safe. It was thought that they literally couldn’t fail dangerously. Chernobyl was a huge fluke (that had preventions put in place to ensure it never happened again) that was just a lot of weird things combining at once. The other reactors at Chernobyl continued operating for decades safely, similarly to three mile island which only stopped on 2019 because it wasn’t profitable, but now it appears it is again. Both of these nations (and child nations/successors) continued to operate many more nuclear plants without issues. Nuclear is, by far, the safest energy source, including green energy like solar.