Context matters. Context here is the man was murdered so yeah, I think it's fine for CNN to frame this as murder being bad and tragic. CNN should also do more stories about folks getting denied care. That is an everyday tragedy, but not the story to focus on after a guy gets murdered.

This is a reference to permitting reform. It's small, but there is a path to permitting reform that helps clean energy and transmission in addition to fossil fuels.

The most important thing for clean energy in the US for next 4 years is defending the IRA. No Republicans voted for it, but over a dozen seem willing to defend it: garbarino.house.gov/sites/evo-su.... Working with them is important

Nonsense, I think we have lots of evidence that many will blame capitalism and push for a complete restructure of society.

Of course, I made inroads because I tried to read the 700+ pages of regulations the NRC published. But I wish that more of the folks working on new nuclear showed up to these prepared. The biggest impact you can have is introducing a new perspective NRC hadn't considered.

There is more to be done for microreactors in particular, and the ADVANCE Act helps, but I am far more optimistic today that Part 53 will be used, and innovative reactors will be licensed. I'm glad I get to submit public comments that help make that happen

There will be another public meeting in January. It's a real problem that Regulation is a barrier to licensing anything other than a large, light-water reactor. Part 53, due no later than 2027, will fix this, allowing appropriate flexibility in design, and staffing for SMRs and non-LWRs. #nukesky

Xkcd has this fun chart for context. xkcd.com/radiation/ Check out the lowest dose linked to increase cancer risk in red and compare it to accidents like Fukushima that resulted in billions of dollars in safety improvements to plants.

Our regulations are based on the linear no threshold (LNT) model which says no level of radiation is safe so we strive for As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA). Calabrese argues a hormesis model that below a certain threshold radiation may damage some cells, but the body will recover and adapt.

For researchers, Ed Calabrese is maybe the biggest advocate that we are drastically overregulating radiation. www.umass.edu/public-healt.... Ed Lyman at Union of concerned scientists is anti nuke but reasonable. The argument comes down to whether or not there is any safe dose of radiation.

This is how a lot of the Nuclear industry feels. High level waste is scary and worth the cost and regulations, but even that you can walk by if it's covered in a few feet of water or sealed in concrete casks. Pro nuke activists like Madi Hilly have made memes of hugging nuclear waste casks.

I'd recommend reaching out to the folks at good energy collective like Jackie Toth or Jessica Lovering. They are pronuclear but progressive, and they take EJ, waste, and fuel cycle very seriously. Katy Huff at DOE also recently put out a video on Twitter talking nuclear waste.

Aviation worries me the most, plus the high temp chemical processes, because I still have my doubts about hydrogen. Given the nuclear navy has operated well for decades, it seems like an obvious shipping solution. I understand how big a political lift that would be be its technologically solved.

I'm arguing that ability to cause a reactor trip is a bad criterion if we want to decarbonize industrial processes. Terrapower in an LTR and EPRI in a report here describe what I believe to be a better alternative www.epri.com/research/pro....

I have in the past, but not recently. My oldest is 3.5 years old, and my activism and a bunch of stuff has become mostly virtual since he was born.