# What anti-nuclear power groups in the US have any political power? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 27, 2019, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-anti-nuclear-power-groups-in-the-us-have-any-political-power/833123 "2019-04-27T11:53:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-anti-nuclear-power-groups-in-the-us-have-any-political-power/833123/41 "2019-04-29T18:20:47Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > President Obama was the actual president of the United States and issued a statement specifically in favor of nuclear power. And he demonstrated his commitment to nuclear power by shutting down Yucca Mountain, and not following up on his supposed commitment. He and the Democrats had control of Congress and the White House for a couple years - how many nuclear power plants did he and they push to get started? He apparently thought Obamacare was more important. > [@](#): > > My point was not saying that anti-nuke groups would support it if there were a carbon tax, and I have no idea how you would get that from my post. I said that anti-carbon tax groups are making nuclear power less competitive compared to carbon intensive energy sources. This makes little sense. If nuclear power is a good idea, shouldn’t the Dems make the case no matter if there is a carbon tax, or not? Why is “it emits GHG” not an argument to use against Bernie Sanders? Although you are partially correct - anti-nuke groups will not support nuclear power even if there is a carbon tax. Those groups are going to oppose it no matter what. That’s what tends to happen with an anti-science agenda - it is faith-based, and not subject to rational thought. > [@GIGObuster](#): > > Again, you are only avoiding the fact that free enterprise is not delivering the goods on this one. You are also ignoring again that greens or liberals did not close nuclear plants recently, cheaper Natural gas did. I am not ignoring anything. Greens and other liberal extremists oppose nuclear energy no matter what. And they have been successful in over-burdening the continued operation, and the opening of new, nuclear power plants, and thereby preventing any new nuclear construction. Thereby virtually insuring that we will not switch to a form of energy that doesn’t emit GHG. Chutzpah is killing your parents and then asking the judge for mercy because you’re an orphan. It’s also stalling and protesting and filing lawsuits and doing everything in your power to stop nuclear power, and then claiming it is stalled because of economics. Or more likely because it is easier and more fun to point fingers and change the subject than do anything worthwhile. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-anti-nuclear-power-groups-in-the-us-have-any-political-power/833123/42 "2019-04-29T19:42:49Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I am not ignoring anything. Greens and other liberal extremists oppose nuclear energy no matter what. And they have been successful in over-burdening the continued operation, and the opening of new, nuclear power plants, and thereby preventing any new nuclear construction. > > Thereby virtually insuring that we will not switch to a form of energy that doesn’t emit GHG. > > Chutzpah is killing your parents and then asking the judge for mercy because you’re an orphan. It’s also stalling and protesting and filing lawsuits and doing everything in your power to stop nuclear power, and then claiming it is stalled because of economics. Or more likely because it is easier and more fun to point fingers and change the subject than do anything worthwhile. Yep, more fun to point fingers… of course that is what you are doing. And still ignoring the point. Yes, there are some groups that do oppose it no matter what, but it is really reckless to point at all greens or liberal as that. Even Mother Jones pointed at how silly that finger pointing is. As for over-burdening, I have to point again that it was thanks to your cite in a previous discussion that made me notice what is the burden really. Bad planning and economics that missed how natural gas would become cheaper. [Outfits like The Sierra Club were mostly busy with lawsuits to get information about the funding of coal plants and Nuclear ones](http://climatecasechart.com/search/?fwp_search=nuclear), hardly a burden. And reports I read make no mention about blaming greens or liberal extremists for recent closures. > **[South Carolina Spent $9 Billion to Dig a Hole in the Ground and Then Fill It...](https://theintercept.com/2019/02/06/south-caroline-green-new-deal-south-carolina-nuclear-energy/)** > > Cost is often raised as a critical objection to combating climate change. But South Carolina shows what's possible. Even if that is not the case, I still think they are loopy for opposing nuclear power.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-anti-nuclear-power-groups-in-the-us-have-any-political-power/833123.md?page=2)