I wonder if those MAGA folks in Nebraska will ever admit global warming is real. The highs tomorrow are supposed to be 98 degrees in parts of the state. That's June or July temps for a state that averages highs in the 50's in March.
We have too many water issues here in the US to rely on Nuclear. In order for Nuclear plants to be reliable and safe you need a steady flow of fresh water from a river or lake that can cool the reactors. I know people who worked on the STP plant down by Matagorda, and even that plant was made with some hesitancy about the reliability in the future of the Colorado River here in Texas. That plant is only possible because of that river, and keep in mind that if Lake Travis in Austin dries up, the Colorado River that cools the reactor down in Matagorda dries up and.... yeah. There is a reason why there are not more Nuclear energy plants here in the US, and it's not because of Tree huggers, or oil and greedy gas barons. Texas is already one of the largest wind energy producers in the world so it'll be a great idea soon to do some analysis on how productive those wind farms have been in North Central Texas so see about a massive expansion. Here in Texas we have ALOT of virtually unlivable spaces to double or triple the size of the production we have today. Right now we are at 29% of our entire power coming from wind with really only 7 major wind farms. IMO, that is a MUCH smarter and safer approach. One that adds a TON of high paying jobs. I'm all for Nuclear plants as long as they are located in safe places long term, but again... there is a reason why there aren't more already in the US, and it is usually because of the issue of reliable rivers for the next however many years.
1,200 Years of Cherry Blossoms Reveal What Climate Models Confirm | Orennia Japanese monks kept meticulous records of cherry blossom festivals for 1,200 years and accidentally created the longest climate dataset on Earth.
I read that a solar power plant + battery storage is on par with a gas power plant starting in 2030 to build. Of course, solar fuel is free. So economically, the answer is very clear there. It costs so much to start a large nuclear power plant (and takes a decade to build one). The cost means not many companies are willing. The government would have to incentivize. Not sure if those larger power plants make sense... even Microsoft didn't start a new one, but restarted an old one. Maybe there is room for a few new big ones in coastal regions with seawater cooling and smaller ones elsewhere. What is clear is we need more energy and we should be doing everything to get more energy. What we don't do is be ideologically stupid and take down energy sources, like wind. As many have said before, the country that leads the next energy revolution will win... and right now, that's China. This administration is going back to doubling down on "coal" and "oil" old tech while China is bringing online new tech. Dumb as f**k.
Trump doesn't give a damn, as long as he can keep taking bribes and donations from the fossil fuel industry. All he cares about is who will pay him the most.
