re: #434 Political Atheist

I had only a bit of Google skill, all that was needed.

This is utterly untrue. I can’t believe that you think you can make such a massive risk/reward calculation by using Google.

Why did I say you are badgering these points? Because when I use phrases like proper repair, re-engineering you question them as if I were calling for the status quo. The words I used don’t fit that description.

You’re assuming that by calling for these things, that makes them happen. I’m asking you, for example, why you trust that Mitsubishi has accurately diagnosed the problem. You’re just confident they have.

To the extent you echo those “must replace with a better design” efforts that can not overcome opposition-you fly in the face of your own pro nuke position.

Nope. I just have a different position and a different standard. If ‘opposition is mounting’ then I have no fucking clue what we’re even talking about, nuclear is doomed. I don’t think it is, though, I think it can be overcome by a strong commitment to safe, reliable, standardized reactor design— and not by re-engaging in a project that’s had massive problems, allegations of coercion of workers, and still has Mitsubishi and the for-profit energy company at odds over the proposed fix.

That you can’t bring yourself to accept that this is a pro-nuke position is, yeah, again, depressing.