Lets go 100% renewable by,…

Lets go 100% renewable by, at the latest, 2050.

Lets get out of nuclear ASAP because the less toxic residue for future generations, the better. (Debt is a social fiction but radiation is a physical fact.  Debt is JUST ACCOUNTING but radiation is real.)

Since nuclear is the most expensive electricity to generate, we need to pay as much for a kilowatt hour of conservation as we do for a kilowatt hour of nuclear.  That is fair:  instead of fissioning uranium, we save the electricity consumption.  If we can consume for the same amount of money or less, this is a no-brainer (plus, the cost of nuclear goes on for generation upon generation so the accounting on that is skewed anyways).

One of my university physics professors told the class straight-up:  physicists believe that possibly UNIQUE EVENTS happen inside EVERY nuclear reactor.  Unique events can not be predicted or controlled.  So, all bets are off when you mess with the energy of the atom.  And for what:  to power growth in consumer electronics?  Please.  This is not the meaning of existence:  to play on an XBox.

Close Pickering.  The scientists who suggest that they know what they are talking about are ideologically blind and intellectually misguided.  Serious risks need to be evaluated not based upon their supposed probability but based upon their possible severity.  Statistical probability assumptions are twofold:  stats don't apply to individual events (let alone unique events) and only apply when conditions are infinitely repeatable in identical circumstances.  So, all probability is based upon assumptions that don't apply in real life.  The severity of nuclear disasters is so high that no insurer will touch it.  Quit covering up for the nuclear industry and shut it down because the risks are unjustifiably high for the supposed short term benefit of producing electrical energy at a HIGHER cost than other alternatives, e.g., hydro from Quebec.

Buy cheaper hydro from Quebec.  Sign a deal with them to ensure supply.

[Original Comment ID: 206807]