Crash Test Dummies "God Shuffled His Feet"
David Friedman is writing some important stuff (IMO) about uncertainty and humility. For example, here is an excerpt from a recent post about the cost of carbon:
[A]n article whose calculation of cost assumed no relation between income and vulnerability to temperature and no change in medical technology for three centuries ought not to have been published, even written. The fact that it was written by serious scholars in the field, accepted by a top scientific journal, considered by the EPA as a possible basis for regulatory decisions, implies that the mechanisms for discovering what is true in this part of climate science, the subfield of estimating the cost of climate change, are badly broken.
PS: If you want to get into the weeds, this is a very interesting analysis of how we can power the future world.
PPS: I was having a discussion with someone who disagrees with me about the importance of nuclear power in dealing with climate change. His "slam-dunk" argument against it is that it creates long-term nuclear waste.
We already have lots of long-term nuclear waste, and we know how we can dispose of it. But if you think that some more nuclear waste is more important than taking coal and gas plants offline, then you must not think climate change is really serious. You are simply pushing your personal dogma regardless of the consequences.
4 comments:
I suspect you are referring to me. I did not bring up high-level waste disposal as a ‘slam-dunk argument against nuclear power’, though I could have been clearer about my intent: I mentioned it as an example of a sound technical solution stymied by public opposition. I am not personally opposed to nuclear power, but I don’t believe it can be a solution for the problem of climate change. The opposition causes delay through court challenges and repeated environmental evaluations, such that a sufficient number of units could not be added in time to mitigate the increase of GHG.
>I don’t believe it can be a solution for the problem of climate change.
Ah, this might be the main place we differ. There isn't any "solution" to climate change. There is climate change, and various ways we can deal with it -- try to lessen it, adapt to it, mitigate it.
That the loons oppose nuclear and use the courts to hold it up - that's no reason not to push for it. A similar situation:
Whenever gas prices go up, people freak out and vote Republican (all things equal). But if we want to lower emissions further, we need gas prices to be higher. Given public opposition, should we just give up? No.
I noted last year that Greta T finally came to the realization that nuclear power isn't the enemy and is preferable to burning more coal (which is the alternative). But the "greens" [sic] were already successful in helping to shut down nuclear power plants in Japan, Germany, and the US (even Bill McKibbon regrets his role in the latter).
Arguing for keeping around all nuclear power plants, bringing old ones back, and changing regulations for new ones -- this is all important if we really want to cut emissions as much as possible. (Changing regulations is also important to get more wind and solar online.)
Yes, reducing emissions, mitigation, adaptation - better framing than ‘solution’, I must agree.
We will probably see additional nuclear power generation in China, where public opinion is more concerned (properly so!) with chemical and particulate pollution that is not a theoretical risk, but is shortening people’s lives today. In any case, the Chinese government is less susceptible to whatever public anti-nuclear sentiment might arise.
India: units under construction would double its nuclear supply, but anti-nuclear sentiment is rising, apparently.
The most likely outcome, it seems to me, is that nuclear generation will increase without displacing existing fossil, but will at least reduce construction of new fossil in developing nations.
Thanks. Don't know if you saw this
https://www.mattball.org/2022/11/is-west-saying-africa-should-remain.html
Take care.
Post a Comment