Gov. Jerry Brown of California, scientifically bewildered hypocrite of the year, has said President Donald Trump is “insane” and “deviant” because he is withdrawing from the Paris climate accord. Trump will thereby give global warming an earth-threatening boost, Brown tells us by way of alarmist, loose-tongued frenzy joining up with leftist supremacy.
Sorry, but expert studies show the non-binding accord will accomplish next to nothing at incredible, devastating expense, and the self-contradiction is this: Brown, for all his climate jabber, an environmentally correct trip to China and an effort to organize states against carbon dioxide, is himself a CO2 kind of guy.
His California war with non-emitting nuclear power has already led to far more CO2 emissions than there would have been otherwise, and his dirty deeds are not finished yet.
It is not that Brown does not talk a good fight, or even get things done. He has been near rabid about wind and solar power playing an ever bigger role in the state and has had emission successes that he has then worked to undo. His method has been to call a halt to the building of new nuclear reactors and to disallow renewal efforts for others.
With those projects left alone, the state would have 73 percent of its electricity generated by clean methods, it has been estimated. Instead, the figure is 34 percent. According to one group, Energy Collective Emissions, the CO2 emissions in California are 2 1/2 times what they would have been if Brown had permitted the new plants to be built and others to keep working. And he is not through yet.
Brown, wanting us to know that he is “on the side of the angels,” is contrarily devilish in plans to shut down the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. It is the last of the state’s nuclear plants, and by 2025 it will be gone along with 1,500 jobs. Gaining ground, however, will be electricity prices and CO2 emissions, according to a report that tells us how James Hansen and other well-known anti-warming scientists wrote Brown a letter pleading that he give nuclear power a chance.
“The loss of one-fifth of California’s clean electricity is of such significance as to merit the direct attention of the state legislature,” Hansen and the others wrote, saying the decision by Brown and cohorts was disgracefully made in secret despite harm to the state’s economy and environment. The plant is in fact near earthquake fault lines but was built and then upgraded to withstand a whole lot of shaking going on.
Hansen, whose own unverified alarmism has made skeptics more skeptical, is nevertheless on target when the letter refers to the irrational fear about nuclear power. Maybe Brown will learn something about that during his trip to China. He went over there to reassure those folks about our love of their love of the Paris accord, which they won’t start heeding until 2030. Meanwhile, despite their plethora of coal plants, they are moving in some healthy directions. They’ve got 37 nuclear reactors, while another 20 are being built, and not because they seek harm.
It is because of the fact that they can thus clean up their air while helping their economy thrive, that modern technologies make waste recyclable and that these plants are as safe as anything. Yes, Communist incompetence once caused a major nuclear accident in the Soviet Union, but no one can pinpoint a single radiation death in the United States at a nuclear plant. At Fukushima, radiation was released after a tsunami hit and rules were not followed, but no one has died from the radiation yet.
Brown, who is identified in one assessment I ran across as the most anti-nuclear politician in the country, is trying right now to set up an organization of states to plot out their own climate agendas, and that’s fine. But what might nto be so fine is if they follow the leader Brown into misapprehensions modeling the Paris accords and rejecting the nuclear answer.
Contact Mr. Ambrose at firstname.lastname@example.org.