Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Fred Bartlett's avatar

If the bill does not include significant investment in nuclear power, it should be rejected.

The climate is in such a crisis that we

apparently need to reach "net zero" by 2050. So we need 3 new nuclear plants every 2 days for the next 29 years.

Or the equivalent in wind and sun – which sounds more likely?

Expand full comment

No posts