A person who approved the Willow project is the one who is “not serious” - about his own professed recognition that climate change is a threat to our existence. A person who won’t mention the public option & says he would veto a Medicare4All bill is the one who is “not serious” - about 1 in 4 Americans living with medical debt and people rationing their insulin. A person who won’t fight for a raise in the middle minimum wage is the one who is “not serious” - when 1/3 of workers live on less than $15 an hour and half of them can’t afford a one bedroom apartment. A person who IS serious is the one pointing out that our elite political establishment is an entrenched alliance of corporate power that guarantees the continuance of an American underclass. (And damn right that would defeat Trump.)
42
127
6
481
Replying to @BustosWill
I understand the technology is evolved enough to accomplish this. It’s the state of humanity that I fear is not evolved enough to handle the responsibility. (Plus the precarious nature of climate catastrophes.) If we invest enough in green energy sources, and in the development of new ones, we can do it without nuclear.

Jul 22, 2023 · 11:14 AM UTC

7
6
1
36
The truth is there is no “green transition” that will get us out of this mess. The #ClimateCrisis is only one issue. It’s CONSUMPTION & growth that are the drivers of CO2 emissions, species loss, pollution, deforestation, soil degradation, etc We must #ConsumeLESS. Much less.
1
Replying to @marwilliamson
Thanks for taking the time to reply to my tweet 🙂
1
Nuclear is the answer. It is safe enough. Your points of opposition are vague. This should not be a divisive issue. Talk to the experts. Fukushima will not happen again.
3
2
Industrialist Quietly already buying up shares of #FusionEnergy First power plant online Jesus knows yr 2028 check it out
1
1
1
Wrong. In the real world, wind & solar are both insufficiently energy dense in addition to being intermittent. This isn't even about politics, it's about MATH.
3
2
That's relying too heavily on new tech being developed that solves the problem. Nuclear is what we have access to now so it should factor in our immediate plans, not some hope of future tech. If it becomes unnecessary with new developments, that's fine, but its necessary now
1
1