Meanwhile the Dems are off cancelling all of the waste repository projects (yucca mountain) and then turning around and complaining about all of the dangerous radioactive waste sitting around the country.
This isn't a Burger King.
Adds billions in loan guarantees to build nuclear plants https://www.apnews.com/38189fb0550e401da6b339ad9870a007
Signs NEICA https://www.energy.gov/articles/president-trump-signs-bill-b...
Republican bill NELA https://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/3/murkow...
The remaining problems are local/social ones. We need the left to tell the Sierra club and their ilk not to sue every potential nuclear plant into oblivion. Hollywood largely owns the culture, we need them to make pro-nuclear media to help alleviate NIMBYism. The environment is not the GOP's issue. They GOP supports nuclear but without it they will happily keep burning coal. Nobody made the claim that nuclear power was a top priority for Republicans, the claim is that Republicans largely support nuclear and are going to keep burning coal while politely waiting for the Democrats to come around to the only real viable clean grid energy solution.
The billions in loan guarantees in your first link was additional funding for a nuclear reactor approved by the Government in 2012, during a Democratic administration.
The NEICA was co-sponsored by 4 Republicans and 3 Democrats in the Senate. [2] It passed both houses in a bi-partisan manner.
The "Republican bill NELA" has 11 Republican co-sponsors and 9 Democratic co-sponsors. [3]
This all seems pretty bi-partisan to me, not sure where you got the idea that Republicans are "politely waiting for Democrats to come around." If that were true, they wouldn't be co-sponsoring and voting for the legislation you mentioned.
[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/business/energy/10-states-run-nuclea...
[2] https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/97/...
[3] https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/903...
>Republicans (65%) are more likely than Democrats (42%) to favor the use of nuclear power throughout Gallup's trend dating back to 1994.
Democrats are now starting to come around. But Republicans have been in favor of nuclear since before you even heard of climate change.
It’s ok to admit that something isn’t R or D. Republicans support oil and coal most, Dems support wind and solar most, both support nuclear. The Gallup analysis itself talks about the cost of other energy sources playing a part in the perception. As solar, natural gas and oil have become cheaper, expensive nuclear plants have become less popular. Your link about the Georgia plant says it is years behind schedule and costs have doubled, maybe Democrats see that as fiscally irresponsible and that’s why they don’t support it as much. Either way, this simple poll can’t answer those questions and actual legislation tells its own story.
Also, legislation isn't the only part of the story, so are lawsuits. Do you think environmentalist groups like the Sierra club who have a history of burying efforts to build plants in lawsuits are more closely associated with Democrats or Republicans?
Trying to boil everything down to a yes/no or left/right issue leads to this type of back and forth. Issues have many sides and multiple nuances, it’s ok to admit that.
>Republicans (65%) are more likely than Democrats (42%) to favor the use of nuclear power. Republicans typically have been more supportive of nuclear energy throughout Gallup's trend dating back to 1994.
It's true Republicans aren't as hung up specifically on CO2, but Republicans have been largely in support of nuclear since before you ever heard the phrase "climate change." If we had listened to Republicans back when it was just "clean air" we'd be in a much better position.
Adds billions in loan guarantees to build nuclear plants https://www.apnews.com/38189fb0550e401da6b339ad9870a007
Signs NEICA https://www.energy.gov/articles/president-trump-signs-bill-b...
Republican bill NELA https://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/3/murkow...
But your post above very much makes it sound like the GOP is actively trying to fight climate change through nuclear power, and those darn Dems just won't let them. But since attaining power in 2016 the GOP environmental position looks to have mostly been gutting the EPA, rolling back regulations, and braying about bringing back coal ("clean air" indeed!). From here it looks like the GOP is just utterly indifferent towards climate change or the environment and extremely pro-fossil fuel; any interest in nuclear they might have doesn't appear to have much to do at all with it being a path towards clean energy.
I went out of my way to say that Republicans aren't all that concerned about CO2. So you are just reading something into my comment that isn't there. Honestly it just seems like you're unwilling or unable to see nuance. You couldn't see it in my post and you can't see it in the Republican position of simply having a different idea about how to balance strong economies and environmental concerns, both of which save human lives and improve quality of life. I mean, who do you think is digging up all that coal in Appalachia? Do you think it's a bunch of Democrats getting black lung to keep the power running? Do you really think you have anything to tell them about how dangerous it is?
But at the end of the day, none of that matters. The only thing that matters is that nuclear is the only viable solution for clean grid power and Republicans support it while Democrats don't. If you want to get into the weeds about why they support it or how they're wrong about other issues or even details on this issue, then have at it. I think it's a waste of time personally.
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/4/23/1850729...
https://news.gallup.com/poll/248048/years-three-mile-island-...
>Republicans (65%) are more likely than Democrats (42%) to favor the use of nuclear power.