[bilbo0s]

Taking a decision to build a nuclear power plant on a fault line always is.

Better plan would probably be to build a nuclear plant in Arizona and export the power to California. Use some of it for desalination. Then export water to Arizona.

But nowadays calling people hippies or conservitards is what passes for analysis, civic discourse, and problem solving.

[h335ian]

When hyperbolic reactions rule the day, particularly when they are contradictory to one’s stated goals (provide clean, low prices energy and potable water) - dismissive labels are readily handed out. Both sides of the aisle are guilty so these labels go along with the hand waving dismissal of basic common sense & standing local rulings. The analysis, civic discourse and problem solving was performed, but disregarded for performative ideals - that continue to be a direct contradiction to the research & solutions presented. It just sucks. Especially when the state can leverage authority from Sacramento, overruling local resolutions and ordinances that were based on the research, analysis and civic discourse.

[ExoticPearTree]

Well, Japan has a lot of them that don't have issues. And since California doesn't get tsunamis, it is perfectly fine to build a nuclear power plant on a fault line. Less riskier than Japan.

[h335ian]

Turns out it’s actually harder to decommission… :shrug: