Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: Joe Romm: Why James Hansen Is Wrong About Nuclear Power [View all]kristopher
(29,798 posts)37. Since, at 440 reactors nuclear only supplied about 2% of global final energy supply...
...that sounds about right if you don't consider the future needs of the developing global population.
The economics of centralized generation drive inefficiency and should we pursue that solution to climate change, future demand would almost certainly far exceed the demand of a comfortable society built on distributed renewables. Why, you ask? Because, distributed renewables closely link the production and consumption of energy in a way that promotes the full value of striving for efficiency.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
53 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Then we pass like every other "innovative" exponentially growing population that has gone before us.
hunter
Jan 2016
#34
You claim I “have been an unambiguous promoter of nuclear power for years.”
OKIsItJustMe
Jan 2016
#18
Riiiight.... " Regulators question CO2 plan for $19.3 billion Virginia nuclear reactor"
kristopher
Jan 2016
#25
Since, at 440 reactors nuclear only supplied about 2% of global final energy supply...
kristopher
Jan 2016
#37