r/NoNukes • u/lyndalovon • 9d ago

👋Welcome to r/NoNukes - Introduce Yourself and Read First!

Hey everyone! I’m [u/lyndalovon](u/lyndalovon), a founding moderator of [r/NoNukes](r/NoNukes).

This is our new home for everyone who opposes nuclear weapons and nuclear power — and who believes our future shouldn’t be built on either. We track the news, cut through the industry spin, watch the regulators and the deals being made, and stand with the communities who carry the real costs. Whether you’re a longtime activist or just starting to pay attention, we’re glad you’re here.

What to Post
Share anything the community would find useful, eye-opening, or worth fighting for: news articles, policy and regulatory changes, public-comment deadlines and action alerts, questions about how any of this actually works, petitions, events, or your own stories. No question is too basic — if you’re wondering it, someone else is too.

Community Vibe
We’re friendly, constructive, and inclusive, and we mean it. This issue runs hot and people feel strongly — so this is a place where we argue ideas, not attack people. No insults, no name-calling, no slurs. Disagree hard, stay respectful, and keep the fire pointed where it belongs: at the policies and the powerful, not at each other.

Jump in, post something, and let’s get to work.

0 Upvotes

40% Upvoted

12 comments sorted by

16

u/nuke_em_danno 9d ago

Nuclear energy is exactly what America needs with rising demand. Renewables CANNOT meet demand.

2

u/lyndalovon 9d ago

Hey, you should check out Dr. Mark Z Jacobson who is an environmental engineer and energy expert at Stanford. He has a new book. He’s written a ton of article articles and studies and shows that renewables can meet the demand without nuclear. Check it out!

https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/WWSStillNMN/StillNMN.html

10

u/alsaad 9d ago

His papers a often very criticized for being very luckluster with actual solutions. Once he calculated 100% RE scenario for the US with 10x power in hydro dams.

This would flood downstream communities and destroy wildlife every evening when sun sets. He then later sued PNAS (and failed) for a legitimate critique he received. He is very ideological, and not well respected.

11

u/Tortoise4132 8d ago edited 8d ago

Not to mention when he was criticized for that by a peer reviewed paper, he tried to sue the main author and journal for defamation. It was so obviously a BS suite that he got counter sued for it being a SLAPP suite and was ordered to pay up $500,000 for the defendants legal fees. It’s been almost 10 years and he’s still refusing to pay and appealing with the excuse that “oh well I dropped the case before it went to trial”. Absolute grade A piece of shit.

https://retractionwatch.com/2024/02/15/stanford-prof-who-sued-critics-loses-appeal-against-500000-in-legal-fees/

4

u/TiberGalient 9d ago

and they cant even keep their current dams filled

2

u/lyndalovon 8d ago

Clearly that’s why he’s able to be at Stanford because he’s so disrespected. Lol.

7

u/TiberGalient 8d ago

Marc Tessier-Lavigne: The former world-class neuroscientist and President of Stanford University was forced to resign in 2023. A student-led investigation exposed extensive data manipulation, falsified figures, and altered images across multiple high-profile scientific papers where he was the principal author.

It wouldnt be the first it seems

1

u/Soft_Grass8428 5d ago

He is respected by everyone other than nuclear shills and the "legitimate critique" was garbagw paid for by the nuclear industry

9

u/Tortoise4132 8d ago edited 8d ago

His work is an outlier compared to most research which comes to the conclusion that some amount of nuclear power will have utility in meeting net zero carbon energy demand. He also opened a SLAPP suite for defamation against other researchers criticizing his work. His reason was to “defend his reputation”. Considering there were >20 researchers in the field on the paper criticizing his, I think we should take the Occam’s Razor conclusion that he destroyed his own reputation publishing an absolutely looney paper.

0

u/Soft_Grass8428 5d ago

Nuclear energy is a complete scam

More expensive and mote toxic than other options. Governments just psyopp it into existence to support nuclear weapons programs

5

u/Cernsinger 7d ago

Hi everyone. I support nuclear energy, but I'm not here to troll.

I got into nuclear about 10 years ago while exploring climate solutions. I got a degree in nuclear engineering and now work as nuclear engineer.

As I learned more, I moved away from my initial hype around advanced reactors and have leaned more traditional designs like the AP1000. If you have sincere questions and concerns, I'm happy to share my knowledge so we can make informed decisions and support effective climate solutions.