Skip to main content

View Diary: So what do we do? (71 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Agree ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Muskegon Critic, Odysseus

    huge implications. And, the role of hydrothermal power sources merit attention. Retiring coal -- with the reduction of water use in mining/transport as well -- does a good amount for reducing that water use.  More important, on direct water issue, is better agricultural practices.

    With, of course, nightmarish amounts of water for fracking and other 'new' fossil foolish extraction practices that can pay more for water than farmers can.

    And ...

    I agree with you / the group about the need for systems-of-systems thinking/approaches, just questioning whether 2030 is an appropriate target for a no-nuke power sector. Much prefer to have that 20% of low/no carbon nuke running in 2030 and no coal than to have that nuclear power retired w/a good share of the coal plants still operating.

    Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

    by A Siegel on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 09:43:58 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site