Mark J. Perry, opines that listening to environmentalists ...more appropriately called Adversaries, talk about the threat of climate change is like hearing some lost passage of the Book of Revelation with predictions of flooded cities, wildfires, hurricanes, failing crops and swarms of disease-bearing mosquitoes, etc. Given these warnings of catastrophe, one would reasonably assume that these adversaries (aka environmental community) would be doing everything in its power to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. That would be a reasonable assumption. But it is wrong.
Unfortunately, so-called environmentalists are far more interested in promoting renewable energy (a Liberal hysteria) than they are in holding down emissions. Their stance on the early closure of more than a dozen nuclear power plants has made that abundantly clear.
Climate change appears to be no more than a tool of convenience to promote their true agenda. If these groups, such as the commercial adversaries such as the Sierra Club, Green Peace or the Bill McKibben 350.org, were really focused on cutting greenhouse gases, they would surely support our most effective tool in providing emissions-free power. Nuclear energy provides more than 60% of the U.S. emissions-free electricity. It is without question our zero-carbon workhorse and yet there is hardly an environmental group willing to speak in support of it, but there are a few who have come to their senses.
Caught between remarkably low natural gas prices, a product of the shale revolution created by U.S. geoscientists who made it possible and the engineers who developed the technology to recover it, and subsidies and mandates for the use of wind and solar power, many of the U.S. existing nuclear plants are now operating at a loss. Since 2013, utilities have announced the closure of 14 nuclear reactors. Perhaps 20 more are in jeopardy of early closure as well. And yet, many environmentalists are cheering the news.