The “right” aren’t right though, they’re wrong. They should be called “far-wrong” instead of “far-right”, imo, as their stances on many things show.
Does the right like nuclear? I thought they didn’t. It’s pretty clean efficient energy, though it has been overtaken in recent years by wind and solar for cost.
I’m not too big a fan of nuclear due to the cost. I imagine the right salivating at the opportunity to extract billions of dollars per project
The right likes nuclear when they can drop it on someone.
In the US I thought nuclear was one of the few bipartisan issues they can agree on.
Yeah, they love it and are constantly criticizing the left for chasing renewables as a solution to our energy needs and (for the less extreme ones who accept it’s real) climate change.
In what world does a 51% approval rating count as loving it? 67% feels like a stretch to even call a consensus.
Well they don’t seem to love it as much as they love coal and oil, that’s for sure, but they have been very loud about their support of nuclear in recent history.
It’s become much more bipartisan too.
At least that’s pretty close, only a 17% difference.
Yeah, attitudes have really cooled about nuclear power over the years. We might be in a different climate position right now if we hadn’t shied away from it decades ago.
Climate, and geopolitical too. Look at France vs Germany in the last few years.
It’s interesting to see people are starting to like the idea of it more, but to me it’s useless lip service until they start building new plants. I’d imagine they’d like it a lot less if they started building a nuclear power plant within 20 miles of their house.
They like nuclear and hate regulation, so that’s a match made in heaven for disasters.
free market safe nuclear energy!
Maggie Thatcher was one of the earliest politicians to talk about global warming. She did it to prop up nuclear, which was losing the narrative at the time to Greenpeace and the like.
They like nuclear in so far as they can use it to beat certain elements of the environmental left over the head. Conservative governments have come in gone in both the US and UK, and they’ve done very little to actually build out nuclear power.
They don’t like nuclear either. Too green. You only need a little drilling and everyone can do it.
They only like things they can regularly drill or mine for so it’s tied to owning special land.
Anyone can set up nuclear, solar, and wind power. They’re not getting rich off those.
I used to challenge conservatives on their nationalism and patriotism whenever it came to infrastructure and renewable energy. The idea was they should get behind efforts to beat, say, China at building rail and ports. We should be the standard bearer for solar, wind, and nuclear!
Turns out they aren’t patriots and they’re bad at nationalism. They’re just lazy and racist.
Gotta love the hoax that Windmills and Solar “Aren’t feasible”
Raw air and bleach ray collector.
Bunch of NIMSS types on the right. Doubt they’d go for “far-field nuclear”
Now, something like “Ultra far east super nuclear warhead”…that might work.
What if the left “cancels” solar because its power source causes cancer? Also, something something starts fires in blue states.
I heard that sunlight causes rainbows.
Gimme some of that refraction parade action
Woke DEI bs is everywhere!
Yeah, I experience a bit of cognitive dissonance whenever I remember conservatism and conservation have very little overlap.
It’s almost like most conservatives are after something else…
In conservation, you want to protect and restore the natural world.
In conservatism, you want to protect and restore the social hierarchy.
Seems to fit?
Get the left to protest and Pickett against solar and wind. Say it’s fascist nonsense. The right will jump on it
That’s why we couldn’t end dst, calling it the sunshine protection act.
Supporters likes kickback from oil subsidies, fossil fuel deregulation, and supression of competitive technology. That’s the angle.
…Maybe solar/wind companies should name themselves things like “Exon”
If you’re falling to the myth of being a strong independent … person …. Pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps, solar and wind are local energy sources without foreign dependencies, and scale both up and down. This should be right up their ally.
I don’t want to be on the Texas electrical grid because of all their blackouts: Deisel generators are noisy and I have to depend on someone to fill the tanks, but I can put solar on my roof and batteries on the side of the garage and be independent. Zero fuel costs. zero have to depend on anyone. —— why isn’t this their line?
Texas conservatives making rational decisions based on real properties of the physical world?
At least Texas can still give us great comedians too!
I work in municipal development and permitting.
Texas has had a HUGE surge in solar panel and backup generator installation over the past 4 years.
But the power companies have taken notice. The biggest part of a lot of power bills now isn’t usage, but fees for being connected to the grid at all. And connection to the grid is required for a Certificate of Occupancy if you’re in a city, and to get insurance or a mortgage even if you’re in the county where permits aren’t required.
You can’t even create a legal lot in Texas without having electrical service to the lot.
Freedumb!
I’m not sure if there is a word for fundamentalist in the context of economics the way there is for religion. What ever it is that is the answer to:
—— why isn’t this their line?
A fundamentalist needs certain axioms and won’t come back to check if they line up with reality. This makes it nessesary for certain things to just be false no matter what.
Because it is change and visibility they are concerned with. Not the things they claim.
Tell them that they need to stop using wind and solar or else in 100 yesrs we’ll run out of wind and sunshine. We’re talking about “adults” who have the toddler mentality of “DON’T TELL ME NO 😡”.
