Quoting John Baez tweet https://twitter.com/johncarlosbaez/status/1476608624936259589?s=20, I wrote this thread:
Supporting both is the best strategy for an important influencer like Dr Baez. I'm not an influencer and I think people should be aware of a few issues:
1. Voters with concerns for the environment support wind+solar. But the resulting RE industry is doing it for profit, not for the environment. For them nuclear is the enemy, just as it is for the fossil fuel industry.
2. The RE industry needs gas just as the gas industry needs RE. They are in an unholy anti-nuclear alliance. A lot of money goes from that alliance to supposedly environmental organisations which are then faced with perverse incentive in opposition to their claimed mission.
3. Nuclear done right avoids the environmentally destructive industrialisation of the landscape that is shown in the linked news item. We can also have less dams which are even worse for the environment (unless built by beavers).
Also somebody asked how to address fears about nuclear and I wrote:
(1) Address the exaggerated concerns about radiation. Veritasium's video is a good place to start: https://youtu.be/TRL7o2kPqw0. (2) Point out that Chernobyl didn't have containment and didn't cause the predicted cancer spike. (3) modern reactors have to be walk-away safe.
