/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12659810
The problem is that both red team and blue team politicians argue their positions on environmentalism, nuclear power, etc. as post-hoc rationalizations of what their paymasters want rather than genuine belief so it's impossible to have a real discussion. The fight over Keystone XL is because Warren Buffett only paid off one side to keep his oil trains in business instead of both sides.

Sane policy:
>nuclear everyfucking where from replacing coal-fired plants to replacing solar panels and RTGs in space
>protection for endangered species
>sinking foreign-flagged fishing boats on sight so they don't deplete our waters
>encourage gun ownership and sustainable hunting - no meat is lower impact than something that lives in the wild until you kill and butcher it yourself
>focus on reducing POLLUTION rather than autistic focus on muh CO2
>direct removal of CO2 from the atmosphere via Sabatier Process
>EVs where they make sense, ICEs where they don't (super long range, wilderness, aircraft, etc.)
>more focus on closed-ish-loop soilless agriculture to protect soil, reduce runoff, and practice for space colonies

Instead we get two sides autistically screeching and flapping at each other using policy positions that haven't meaningfully shifted since 1975. Gas the Boomers, age war now.

>>12417156
booooooooo