The closure of Fessenheim, an ecological fault

[realistic ecology]

In fact, it would not be the green lobby that would have won one more time ?

Remind me the other times? Do you have a list? Any info?

It is indeed a victory of the green lobby, once again.
The other times?

- The ban on GM crops in France. But an incomplete victory, we import millions of tonnes of GMO products.
- The ban on the exploration and exploitation of shale gas in France. But an incomplete victory, France imports LNG liquefied natural gas ... in which there is or may be shale gas.
- The green lobby succeeded in convincing the people that they had to pay billions of euros to develop renewable energies in France, which are low carbon, to replace French electricity - which is already low carbon! And as this general said "I am their leader, I am obliged to follow them" - elected officials are obliged to follow the people.
- The green lobby has succeeded in persuading the people that synthetic pesticides - which kill plagues - present more risks than organic pesticides - which kill plagues.
- The green lobby is also active to ban glyphosate. He has not yet won, but he is getting close to it.

In this post I list some of the victories of the green lobby, without saying here if I welcome it or not. Each topic has its threads elsewhere. But it is important not to forget the power of the green lobby, which has invaded the media.
Lobbying for suitcases of dollars, gifts, bribes, that may be there, no doubt. But the main lobbying tool is speech. This is why green ideological lobbying is all-powerful, because it has the right key that of the media.

[Paul72]

Here we turn the oxen without having a replacement to pull the plow ... Uh bad example because it is the plow that had to be turned.

Humans continue to do things in reverse.

that's right ... lack of vision, we do everything in a hurry as and when the voters want, and not according to scientific common sense (who continue to preach almost in a vacuum). We barely invest half the need in nuclear if we really wanted to develop a new generation sector (it is not profitable if we develop one or two units, it is only after making mistakes on the first, then we save time and cost), barely half the need in renewable, largely not enough in renovation and efficiency etc ...

PS: do not forget that most of the French pollution comes from oil on which we are still very dependent, and also from gas (and gases for animal husbandry ). it is not by lowering electricity production that we will be able to suppress imports of fossil fuels

[Janic]

In this post I list some of the victories of the green lobby, without saying here if I welcome it or not. Each topic has its threads elsewhere. But it is important not to forget the power of the green lobby, which has invaded the media.

Yes ! We could also say each turn ! The nuclear lobbies have, with the agreement of the government of the great Charles, imposed their presence wherever they had decided without the authorization of the prefects, mayors and other local authorities because it was necessary to enrich uranium for our bombs, not for make electricity that was only the transformation of thermal waste cheaply and atomic waste dumped in the ocean, them! And as luck would have it, no power plant in the Paris region (shit was just good for the cul-téreux, the illiterate bouseux!)
So between two possible bad solutions, it is always the lesser that must prevail and it's no more the best placed nuclear lobby, currently after Chernobyl first!

Lobbying for suitcases of dollars, gifts, bribes, that may be there, no doubt. But the main lobbying tool is speech.

Hence the multitude of industrial lobbies in front of the Brussels parliament.

This is why green ideological lobbying is all-powerful, because it has the right key that of the media.

After censorship, speech is still free! Until the next censorship ... !!!
It has changed since consciousness awakened to what ecology is, that is to say how to manage to survive on a planet which is degraded more and more by its various pollutions, including the worst of all because silent, least visible: the industrial atom!

[Paul72]

the pollution by the atom is objectively rather insignificant ... except for Chernobyl which is objectively a catastrophe which will leave traces for very long still.

As for the choice that was made of uranium as a fissile fuel, it was in fact probably made for reasons of military strategy. Otherwise, Thorium was then in the race, and could have been an interesting alternative (and even complementary to recycle part of the byproducts of cracked uranium). But research investments in France have been abandoned for this sector ... no Astrid !!

[Janic]

Paul72 »23/02/20, 15:59

the pollution by the atom is objectively rather insignificant ... except for Chernobyl which is objectively a catastrophe which will leave traces for very long still.

It is only a view of the mind which is more attentive to what it sees, feels, than what it does not see, does not feel immediately. The defenders of the industrial atom took advantage of a total political omerta to minimize the impact of their action. Tchenobyl is only the big drop that made the already full vase overflow.

As for the choice that was made of uranium as a fissile fuel, it was in fact probably made for reasons of military strategy. Otherwise, Thorium was then in the race, and could have been an interesting alternative (and even complementary to recycle part of the byproducts of cracked uranium). But research investments in France have been abandoned for this sector ... no Astrid !!

Investments stopped when the policy of military denuclearization began (not been abandoned) in favor of computer models. But all the shit produced remains on our arms and continues to stink even into submarines and nuclear aircraft carriers. We must stop this hypocrisy which consists in saying that it is good to pollute because we will recycle our waste.

[sicetaitsimple]

Investments stopped when the policy of military denuclearization began (not been abandoned) in favor of computer models. But all the shit produced remains on our arms and continues to stink even into submarines and nuclear aircraft carriers. We must stop this hypocrisy which consists in saying that it is good to pollute because we will recycle our waste.

Well we will return your usual compliment ...
When you know nothing about it, you shut your mouth. Or we talk to real practicing specialists, who know them. Like homeopathy, for example, right ?.

[Janic]

Well we will return your usual compliment ...

but these are not just compliments!

When you know nothing about it, you shut your mouth. Or we talk to real practicing specialists, who know them. Like homeopathy, for example, right ?.

and you are a real practicing specialist, then? What are your qualifications for example?
and anecdotally your qualifications in Homeopathy too!
However as a non-specialist, I followed the news like all the other French and, it's weird, that's what stood out from this one! Heck, we can't trust anyone!

[sicetaitsimple]

and anecdotally your qualifications in Homeopathy too!

No, that's why I close my mouth on one of your favorite subjects, although you repeat as you wish (Thank you Remundo!) That you are not a specialist either!

[realistic ecology]

We must stop this hypocrisy which consists in saying that it is good to pollute because we will recycle our waste.

Who said it's good to pollute?

But there is indeed a hypocrisy, that of diverting attention to nuclear waste, by putting under the carpet the worst of waste, CO2 waste. Nobody knows how to control it, it slips through my fingers, elusive, and pours into the CO2 sewer that is our atmosphere. We leave this sewer to future generations

Is radioactive waste dangerous? Yes.
Do we know how to treat and store them in such a way that they do not present any risks? Yes.
Is CO2 waste dangerous? Yes.
Do we know how to treat CO2 waste so that it does not harm? No !
What nuisances due to nuclear waste do we suffer?
Any.
What nuisances due to CO2 waste do we suffer?
Global warming and its procession of hurricanes, droughts, floods ....

► The worst waste, public enemy N ° 1, is CO2 waste.

Energy pollution and dangers - http://ecologie-illusion.fr/dangers-ene ... leaire.htm

[Janic]

Is radioactive waste dangerous? Yes.
Can we treat and store them in such a way that they do not present risks? Yes.

No! Getting rid of waste by storing it deep, this is not called treating, but screwing up in the dump so that the next generations will benefit from it for a long time while waiting for it to jump in their face.

Is CO2 waste dangerous? Yes.
Can we treat CO2 waste so that it does not harm? No !

Yes, it is just a question of policy and resources available financially and in good will, for what we are currently issuing. But the damage of CO2 (and the rest) is already irreversible on the climate, we can just avoid adding an extra layer, which will not change anything at the global level. on industrial thermal and nuclear pollution were issued, but everyone did not care and even currently with their COPs.

What nuisances due to nuclear waste do we suffer?
Any.

who we? We, selfishly, or humanity for centuries to come

What nuisances due to CO2 waste do we suffer?
Global warming and its procession of hurricanes, droughts, floods ...

Precisely, it was necessary to act Much sooner, not anymore when it is too late.

► The worst waste, public enemy N ° 1, is CO2 waste.

The worst waste is humans who are their own enemy, whether with CO2 or nuclear power and all the rest, by commercialism.