0
15

[–] lemon11 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago 

“The world needs to be working on lots of solutions to stop climate change,”

“We had hoped to build a pilot project in China

Globalists don't give a shit about independence or survival. Their Gaia cult just wants to pit nations against each other so they stop smashing rocks so much. Expect Gates's watermelon followers to sabotage it on purpose in retaliation.

They hate human life.

0
11

[–] Guardbuddy 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

To be fair, China shits out CO2 like no one's business.

Y'know, because there's like a billion of those Han fuckers.

0
14

[–] Gamio 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

Australia had a coal powered electricity station that needed to be upgraded, dismantled, or replaced. All in the name of monitoring their carbon output. It took them about 10 years to decide what to do with it (I think they went with replace) and in that time China built about 12 coal powered electricity stations on one gigantic coal seam.

Who was pissing money into the environmental groups that stalled the Australians? China. Who was throwing money at political figures interested in dealing with the problem as well as not dealing with the problem? China. Who was working hard to have the bid to build, replace, or dismantle the power station? China of course.

Whatever harms everyone else is good for China as far as Beijing cares.

0
4

[–] lemon11 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

oh no what will we do the plants might breath it and grow

0
7

[–] NotMyFaultYourWrong 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

His cult is pure evil, Nothing good comes from that man

1
2

[–] RoundWheel 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I completely agree but he is right, we need more nuke plants. We need more r&d into the newer, safer, nuke technologies.

0
2

[–] Schlomo-KikesDid9-11 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Globalist = Kike

0
1

[–] lemon11 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

To be fair, I'd use "globalist" as an umbrella term to also include goyim useful idiots. But that might not be a distinction worth making.

0
0

[–] Animals9 ago 

You realize gates is a kike right?

1
0

[–] TheAntiZealot 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago  (edited ago)

watermelon followers

Fancy niggers; it's like fancy ketchup. Nice phrase.

0
6

[–] CulturalImperialist 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

It doesn't mean niggers. It's something Molyneux says "Environmentalists are like watermelons; green on the outside, red (commie) on the inside."

1
11

[–] 15850555? 1 point 11 points (+12|-1) ago 

We should have never stopped building them. We could be near 0 emissions in power generation by now.

3
0

[–] Cat-hax 3 points 0 points (+3|-3) ago 

They can't be trusted

0
0

[–] spaceman84 ago 

Newer gen reactor designs are pretty safe but require periodic reenrichment of the fuel, which is not something done in the United States. The French do it all the time and have far less nuclear waste as a result.

1
0

[–] glassuser 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Newer ones are better than older ones. They're not making any more coal. And even "clean coal" plants are pretty dirty. There are lots of good reasons to invest in nuclear and tidal/hydroelectric power sources for the future that have nothing to do with the climate red herrings.

1
7

[–] dawnbandit1 1 point 7 points (+8|-1) ago 

We do need more nuclear power plants, though.

1
7

[–] Gary1954 1 point 7 points (+8|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Bill Gates should be hung for treason and child trafficking - a complete sellout. I hope there's a sealed indictment with his name on it. Seize his assets and pay down the debt.

0
7

[–] heygeorge 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Bill Gates in the article:

may be able to build it in the United States” if regulations are updated and the investment climate for nuclear power improves.

It can’t be built in the US because the reactor doesn’t meet current US regulations and ignoramuses in the US frear nuclear power.

You:

I'm glad to see that Bill thinks that building his nuclear power plants in the USA is a better idea than building them for the Chi-coms.

I think he wants to get a pilot reactor built sooner than later. He seems passionate about changing the world, after all.

3
5

[–] insectacide 3 points 5 points (+8|-3) ago 

Fuck bill gates.

0
11

[–] onikage 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

Agreed. But the US should have a modern nuke power grid.

3
3

[–] insectacide 3 points 3 points (+6|-3) ago 

this is true. I agree with that. nuke power is very clean and efficient

0
2

[–] totes_magotes 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Once knew a guy, nuclear chemist. Helped design the first nuclear power plants. There isn't supposed to be any waste from the plants. At all. The reason there are waste products (esp. radioactive waste): Fucking cheap as money-grabbing motherfuckers says it's cheaper to just dispose of it at a certain point instead of properly processing it the way it was designed to.

0
0

[–] spaceman84 ago 

It's not cost. France does re enrichment of nuclear fuel. US considers it a security risk.

0
2

[–] novictim 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Carbon Emissions = Population x Carbon Pollution per person.

The average consumer in the West consumes an order of magnitude more carbon than the average non-Western citizen. So if you want to reduce green house gas emissions and lower CO2 generation then you want fewer, not more, Western consumers.

That is obvious, right?

Look at what the Left does, not what they say.

The Left wants the First World populations to increase through unlimited migration. They want to replace the K-Selected small family-size Europeans with r-Selected Muslims who have multiple wives and large numbers of children expressly for the purpose of eventual Jihad.

More people = more carbon pollution. Islam does not give a damn about Western science or Carbon emissions. So the Left who has created alliances with Islam does not actually care about Carbon Pollution. Climate change is just a way for them to virtue signal and rally against "Western" Capitalism otherwise known as just "capitalism" or "Let people do their own business in peace!".

Further, if the Left wanted less carbon pollution then they would be pushing for nuclear power plant sourced energy. But the Left is in opposion to Nuclear Power even though it is obviously the most effective means of generating non-carbon polluting energy for the electricity needs of society.

Don't like nuclear because it is dirty? Why not push for Solar which also democratizes energy to the individual family? Solar is very low carbon as the photo-voltaic panels, once produced, last for decades. The Left now runs California as of 2019. If the Left wanted Solar Energy as a larger portion of energy production, then California would already have a plan to retrofit all the homes to have solar panels on them.

Will we see the Left in California push a plan that would allow consumers to be in charge of their own energy? Hell no.

The Left is about power over other and power for themselves, not clean power. Climate Change is just one of the more successful ways of conning the population into supporting them.

0
1

[–] burnthegoyimhaters 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I like everything you said, except worshiping the "science" around CO2 and it's effects on climate like a religion, and solar panels are manufactured in china with zero regulations. The rare earth materials all reside in china and are being mined, and refined with no oversite. Streams of pure arsenic flowing, stagnating earths wind patterns around the refineries. Solar panels and wind turbines are a total net loss for the earth currently. Especially wind turbines, dumbest thing ever.

0
0

[–] novictim ago  (edited ago)

We are in agreement on most of this. Exception->

The rare earth materials all reside in china

No. Look into that. China has some and some REM are in the USA and the Western Hemisphere and Africa. And all of that is sold in the open market so it really does not equate to monopolized ingredients to make solar panels.

CO2 is increasing. That is measurable pretty much anywhere. I do not say that Man did it. Man contributes but I don't buy into the climate change claims. I also think the 405PPM or so of CO2 is at a level that would lead to significant heating. Nor do I accept that the planet is heating up. In fact, I suggest that the output cycles of the sun in terms of solar intensity make more of an impact and we may be in a cooling state. Nor do I accept that spending money on nonmarket based solutions to CO2 emissions will be good -or- successful. Nor is there an emergency going on.

I like solar for purely political and economic reasons. I like the idea that people be more in control of their lives including where they get their energy from.

load more comments ▼ (15 remaining)