In response to a pro-nuker feigning support for solar at first, and then bringing out his real party line
“Splendid....kudos for your conservation but how realistic is solar? Last I checked the technology was still well behind making it a cost effective, "viable" alternative for the average user. Granted the technology has been in place to do conversions for decades, but not for what the average user could consider a reasonable cost.
Its extremely realistic, there has been a sea change in the last 2 years.
Solar at 3 cents per kWH, fixed price for 30 years. You could imagine paying $1.50 for a utility kWH in 30 years? Sheesh, its 35 cents per kWH in Hawaii now.
Nukers are stuck in a rut, they have a very high cost of departure, so instead they keep running the clunker plants and they refuse to get new occupations
You heard of high cost to entry in a business model? Nuke is HIGH COST OF DEPARTURE.
- Troll Jousting
- Radiation Preparation Resources
- Radiation Decorporation Resources
- Carrington Event and Astronomy
- Largest Lies of Nuke
- Nuke Accidents Civilian and Military 99 since 195...
- Videos, Moderated Prompt Criticality, real test by...
- Gundersen Email and Theories
- Conversions and Safety Limits
- Links Including Rad Maps
- Manifesto - Action Plan
- List of Reactors
- Pictures - High Quality
- Manifesto - Why Shut Them Down
- Renewable and Energy Efficiency
- Prepper/Survival Resources
- Uranium Aerosolized Into Atmosphere
- Chernobyl, How Real Men Fight a Nuke Diasaster
- Hormesis Is a Lie, Radiation that does not kill yo...
- Baseline is Just One Of The Lies