This story is unavailable.

It’s good news that the grid can cope with fairly high wind contributions. It’s good news that coal is at a cost disadvantage even without taking into account its negative externalities. But what is good about the fact that the way we do nuclear energy, much of it too is at a cost disadvantage? Nuclear power isn’t “renewable” but neither does it contribute to greenhouse gases.

The problem is greenhouse effects. Renewables give us energy to run an industrial civilization with less greenhouse gas emissions. So renewables are good. Burning coal releases CO2. That’s bad. Coal is not renewable. Likewise oil and natural gas. Bad and sort-of-bad. Non-renewables, in general, by extension, come to be seen as bad.

And by a process of word association that has no link to reality, nuclear is felt to be part of the greenhouse gas problem. That’s backward. If it’s expensive, that’s unfortunate because it thwarts part of the solution. And nuclear isn’t inherently so expensive. France has made it work. We’re just not doing it right.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.