Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NNadir

(38,788 posts)
6. This bit of dishonesty is a regular feature of the antinuke scam to destroy the planetary atmosphere.
Sun Jun 7, 2026, 07:24 AM
Jun 7

For decades now, antinukes isolate a short period of time that a fossil fuel dependent grid run on so called "renewable energy" and pretend it matters. It doesn't, and all the giggly nonsense about "100% renewable energy" for a few minutes of the day doesn't transform the lie into reality.

The California Energy Commission maintains a database of their sources of electricity, over a period of decades..

I access it all the time, because data can easily dismiss a lie, the lie in this case being that so called "renewable energy" is a clean and reliable source of energy.

It, the data, here:

California Electrical Energy Generation Data.

The largest source of electrical generation in California has long been, is, and will remain so until it returns to nuclear power, dangerous natural gas.

Apologists for so called "renewable energy" couldn't care less.

So called "renewable energy," despite the vast destruction it's caused to wilderness, so much so that even the antinuke asshole little Benny Sovacool complained about it, is lipstick on the gas dependency of that State.

Of course, to be absolutely clear, antinukes and "I'm not an antinuke" antinukes have never, do not now, and never will care about the destruction of wilderness nor have they ever, nor do they do, nor will they ever care about fossil fuels.

They are only interested in attacking nuclear energy, about which they complain insipidly about "waste," "cost," and timelines, areas in which nuclear energy is vastly superior to all the other garbage they hype and excuse.

So called "renewable energy" always has been, is, and always will be a cover for the use of fossil fuels, about which antinukes and "I'm not an antinuke" antinukes couldn't care less.

Jacobson, the author of the idiotic tweet along these lines is the "I'll sue you if you question my cant" pal of Sovacool's who Jim Hansen was pleased to trash in EST many years ago after as usual, with his indifference to fossil fuels and the destruction of the planetary atmosphere, he did the only thing "renewables will save us" types do, attack clean and sustainable nuclear energy.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»A floating solar plant us...»Reply #6