7 Comments
User's avatar
Matt Ball's avatar

Thanks for continuing to push this. IMO, you are doing more to potentially mitigate global warming than just about anyone.

Expand full comment
environMENTAL's avatar

Amazing to us that people don’t understand the tools we have or the monkey wrenching of over regulation fighting one of those tools (which happens to be the best for purpose).

Good piece, Jack!

Expand full comment
Russell W. Shurts's avatar

Keep spelling out in great, fact-based detail why these continuing policies and regulations are injurious to the improvement of all of our lives

Expand full comment
Scott Doubet's avatar

Cartels, mafiosi, and governments get their cut or you get hurt, or maybe just for fun they hurt you anyway. Sigh.

Expand full comment
LJ's avatar

This is my new favorite substack - thanks Jack!

Why not an option 4) a congressionally reformed NRC with a dual mandate that promulgates regulation based on the sigmoid threshold model you proposed?

Expand full comment
Jack Devanney's avatar

LJ,

Does this reformed NRC still get to change the rules on the fly?

Does this reasonable NRC bear any penalty for increasing the cost of nuclear power?

How does this dual mandate incentivize the regulator to compare nuclear versus the alternatives?

But I'm sure many people are thinking about your option 4.

The response is worth a post which I'm working on now.

Expand full comment
LJ's avatar

thanks for the reply, Jack! I'm looking forward to the new post. :)

Expand full comment