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

Cirsium

(4,089 posts)
16. No, it wouldn't
Tue Apr 21, 2026, 06:18 PM
Apr 21

This is not a situation where a little bit helps. The perfect is not the enemy of the good in this case, since the so-called "perfect" means the survival of human civilization. The green washing just kicks the can down the road (and the road is getting shorter and shorter) and let's people stay in denial.

If we are going to insist on the productivist growth economic model when discussing energy policy, then the only sane alternative is nuclear power. If not that, then the choices are A) cook the planet, B) a dramatic reduction in the demand for energy.

But it is just magical thinking to imagine that we can continue on this path of an ever-expanding economy and an ever-growing demand for energy without serious consequences and/or hard choices, and no amount of reduction of carbon footprints or development of alternatives is going to help. We are decades down the path of the "reducing emissions" and "energy efficiency" illusions, and the problem gets worse and worse. You can't solve the problem with the same thinking that caused the problem in the first place.

Recommendations

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

Wind Powered Cargo Ships [View all] thought crime Apr 21 OP
Oh goody. The 19th century was so wonderful NNadir Apr 21 #1
But... Cirsium Apr 21 #2
It really is unbelievable. One thinks they couldn't possibly be... NNadir Apr 21 #3
It's still an 8% reduction over the entire fleet, which is certainly worth pursuing. cloudbase Apr 21 #5
I was joking n/t Cirsium Apr 21 #15
It wouldn't end the global warming problem but it would help. thought crime Apr 21 #8
No, it wouldn't Cirsium Apr 21 #16
Reacting to a need for lower emissions and fuel costs thought crime Apr 21 #9
Used for "one thing?" Would that "one thing" be reliable propulsion or something else? NNadir Apr 21 #11
Most ships with nuclear reactors are used for War. thought crime Apr 21 #12
So let me understand. The nine nuclear powered Russian ice breakers should be wind powered? NNadir Apr 21 #14
A large proportion of nuclear reactors are militarized. thought crime Apr 21 #18
Yeah, and your point is what? You'd rather they be powered by diesel? Wind? NNadir Apr 21 #20
The point seems to be that nuclear power for cargo ships is not economically feasible thought crime Apr 22 #22
Another "I'm not an antinuke" antinuke, this one at least with a clear... NNadir Apr 22 #23
Yeah, but when the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) and the North Atlantic Current shut down ChicagoTeamster Apr 21 #4
I like your avatar. NNadir Apr 21 #6
People tell me I'm toxic ChicagoTeamster Apr 21 #13
The correct reply would be to ask them to compare the death toll from radiation exposure to deaths from air pollution. NNadir Apr 21 #17
Likewise, Trade Winds in the Pacific may be affected. thought crime Apr 21 #7
Moving cargo by ocean will get interesting in the next 50 years or so.. Global supplies of oil will reach mitch96 Apr 21 #10
Fusion reactors could change everything thought crime Apr 21 #19
"Fusion reactors " One of those technology's that are always 5 or 10 years in the future...I'd love to see it happen mitch96 Apr 22 #21
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Wind Powered Cargo Ships»Reply #16