Financial World War Three has begun

[HI54UNI]

On a related note, Germany had 3 choices to focus their future energy needs
1. Coal (I didn’t know they had one of largest coal reserves in the world- Apparently 7th in world, and highest in Europe (US #1 by far).
2. Nuclear
3. Russia (+ Windmills and solar)
Obvioulsy chose wrong. Trump was right.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/putin-se ... 05591.html

It's shitty lignite coal but they have a lot of it.

[GannonFan]

On a related note, Germany had 3 choices to focus their future energy needs
1. Coal (I didn’t know they had one of largest coal reserves in the world- Apparently 7th in world, and highest in Europe (US #1 by far).
2. Nuclear
3. Russia (+ Windmills and solar)
Obvioulsy chose wrong. Trump was right.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/putin-se ... 05591.html

It's shitty lignite coal but they have a lot of it.

Their abrupt turn away from nuclear (again, took the wrong lesson from Fukishima - Germany was not likely to be swamped by a tidal wave) will long be remembered as one of the most idiotic policy decisions a government has taken in the past 50 years or so. Merkel did a lot of good things for Germany, but her championing of shuttering the nuclear industry there will always tarnish her record.

[HI54UNI]

It's shitty lignite coal but they have a lot of it.

Their abrupt turn away from nuclear (again, took the wrong lesson from Fukishima - Germany was not likely to be swamped by a tidal wave) will long be remembered as one of the most idiotic policy decisions a government has taken in the past 50 years or so. Merkel did a lot of good things for Germany, but her championing of shuttering the nuclear industry there will always tarnish her record.

Agreed. You could say the same thing here after 3 Mile Island.

[GannonFan]

Their abrupt turn away from nuclear (again, took the wrong lesson from Fukishima - Germany was not likely to be swamped by a tidal wave) will long be remembered as one of the most idiotic policy decisions a government has taken in the past 50 years or so. Merkel did a lot of good things for Germany, but her championing of shuttering the nuclear industry there will always tarnish her record.

Agreed. You could say the same thing here after 3 Mile Island.

But they went even further. But yes, our sad history with shunning nuclear energy while pumping greenhouse gases in the air is an ironic outcome of so much environmental activism against nuclear power.

[houndawg]

Agreed. You could say the same thing here after 3 Mile Island.

But they went even further. But yes, our sad history with shunning nuclear energy while pumping greenhouse gases in the air is an ironic outcome of so much environmental activism against nuclear power.

This is true, but I suspect you weren't around back when the nuclear folk were fucking up by the numbers every time they started to build a plant...reversed blueprints not discovered until acre-feet of concrete had been poured... siting the plant on top of an earthquake fault in CA... .Things are different now with reactors that don't produce weaponizable waste and we no longer need small numbers of huge plants for security. Small decentralized nuclear ain't gonna happen, Greens and Con Ed agree, but it should.

[GannonFan]

But they went even further. But yes, our sad history with shunning nuclear energy while pumping greenhouse gases in the air is an ironic outcome of so much environmental activism against nuclear power.

This is true, but I suspect you weren't around back when the nuclear folk were fucking up by the numbers every time they started to build a plant...reversed blueprints not discovered until acre-feet of concrete had been poured... siting the plant on top of an earthquake fault in CA... .Things are different now with reactors that don't produce weaponizable waste and we no longer need small numbers of huge plants for security. Small decentralized nuclear ain't gonna happen, Greens and Con Ed agree, but it should.

I was around, I'm not that young (but not that old either). We've been able to build good, safe nuclear plants for at least the past 40 years if we hadn't demonized it so much. Like I said, we had a source of zero emissions that we could've saved a tremendous amount of greenhouse emissions for those past 40 years and we didn't do it because of organized fear-mongering by the very people who should've wanted a cleaner environment.

[houndawg]

This is true, but I suspect you weren't around back when the nuclear folk were fucking up by the numbers every time they started to build a plant...reversed blueprints not discovered until acre-feet of concrete had been poured... siting the plant on top of an earthquake fault in CA... .Things are different now with reactors that don't produce weaponizable waste and we no longer need small numbers of huge plants for security. Small decentralized nuclear ain't gonna happen, Greens and Con Ed agree, but it should.

I was around, I'm not that young (but not that old either). We've been able to build good, safe nuclear plants for at least the past 40 years if we hadn't demonized it so much. Like I said, we had a source of zero emissions that we could've saved a tremendous amount of greenhouse emissions for those past 40 years and we didn't do it because of organized fear-mongering by the very people who should've wanted a cleaner environment.

I agree, but waste is still a very big issue for a very, very, long time, far beyond our grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren - I'm willing to make that trade for zero emissions since at can be physically constrained to a space much smaller than our atmosphere.

[GannonFan]

I was around, I'm not that young (but not that old either). We've been able to build good, safe nuclear plants for at least the past 40 years if we hadn't demonized it so much. Like I said, we had a source of zero emissions that we could've saved a tremendous amount of greenhouse emissions for those past 40 years and we didn't do it because of organized fear-mongering by the very people who should've wanted a cleaner environment.

I agree, but waste is still a very big issue for a very, very, long time, far beyond our grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren - I'm willing to make that trade for zero emissions since at can be physically constrained to a space much smaller than our atmosphere.

Could've spent the last 40 years dealing with that issue and working to a solution while living in an emission-free (or tremendously less so) world than we did.

[houndawg]

I agree, but waste is still a very big issue for a very, very, long time, far beyond our grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren - I'm willing to make that trade for zero emissions since at can be physically constrained to a space much smaller than our atmosphere.

Could've spent the last 40 years dealing with that issue and working to a solution while living in an emission-free (or tremendously less so) world than we did.

sounds great on paper...but shareholders gains would have suffered....

[GannonFan]

Could've spent the last 40 years dealing with that issue and working to a solution while living in an emission-free (or tremendously less so) world than we did.

sounds great on paper...but shareholders gains would have suffered....

So? Shareholder gains suffered with environmental restrictions on fossil fuels over the past 40 years but shareholders accounted for those losses and still made a lot of money. Not sure why this would've been any different, other than being better for the environment in the long term. Why do you hate the environment so much?

[houndawg]

sounds great on paper...but shareholders gains would have suffered....

So? Shareholder gains suffered with environmental restrictions on fossil fuels over the past 40 years but shareholders accounted for those losses and still made a lot of money. Not sure why this would've been any different, other than being better for the environment in the long term.Why do you hate the environment so much?

Nobody this side of BD can miss a point like you can..


...the point being that shareholder value trumps environmental concerns every time.....

[GannonFan]

So? Shareholder gains suffered with environmental restrictions on fossil fuels over the past 40 years but shareholders accounted for those losses and still made a lot of money. Not sure why this would've been any different, other than being better for the environment in the long term.Why do you hate the environment so much?

Nobody this side of BD can miss a point like you can..


...the point being that shareholder value trumps environmental concerns every time.....

I know you like to think that's true, but in practice that almost never happens. It sounds great on message boards but in the real world those concerns get baked into the cost of doing business. Do some people cheat? Absolutely, human nature, some people are bad people. But the majority of folks out there are following the law and doing right, and the cost to do business factors that in.