My photo kissing a nuclear waste cask went viral and people had… opinions about it. There was outrage, with many claiming it was dangerous and that I was hurting my future children (lol). Here’s why kissing a nuclear waste cask is actually fine🧵

Get a copy for anyone in your life: isodope.com/rad-future/

Best compliments I’ve gotten on RAD FUTURE recently: - A friend sat next to a random guy at a bar in Puerto Rico who was raving about it. - A friend’s mother in law loved it. - Another friend gave it to her 11 year old daughter who loves nuclear.

I interviewed with a journalist who had this exact expression on her face the entire time. She was overly nice and seemed to be a fan of my work. Of course she went on to write the most condescending, shitty piece. If you ever see this facial expression, run!

TIME100 Climate 2025 🩵

Big reactor maxxing

Cue in folks saying real socialism has never been tried.

“It seems like Germany is hell-bent on being consistently on the wrong side of history.”

The low hanging fruit of nuclear in the U.S. are: - Keeping existing plants open for as long as possible - Restarting recently shut down plants (Indian Point, Palisades) - Uprating existing reactors to get around 10GW extra electricity in the next five years - Finish building V.C. Summer 2 and 3.

I will never understand why someone willingly immigrates to a country they consider evil.

Read this fascinating book about nuclear energy and how it isn't as bad as it was once portrayed during chernobyl, ect. Recommended by @nlyonne and written by Isabelle Boemeke. @isabelleboemeke ♻️♻️⚛️⚛️💧💧

Judging by the responses, seems like people are cool with the machines taking jobs like these away

Excited for this book 📕 The tide has definitely turned!

A collection of choice quotes from Rad Future ☢ “In a single year, the pollution from burning fossil fuels causes at least four million deaths” (p.11) “Nuclear is one million times more energy dense than fossil fuels like coal or oil.” (41) “Nuclear has the lowest impact on ecosystems of all energy sources.” (56) “Avoiding nuclear because of Chernobyl makes as much sense as avoiding cruise ships because of the Titanic. No one makes reactors that way anymore.” (65) “Exaggerated fear is killing us. After Germany shut down its nuclear plants in response to Fukushima, coal was used to replace lost power. A study found that this shift resulted in at least 1,100 premature deaths every year due to the increase in air pollution.” (68) “There’s even a specific word for this specific brand of terror: ‘radiophobia.’ This fear can be a lot deadlier than radiation itself.” (69) “A coal power plant producing the same amount of electricity as a nuclear power plant will release at least ten times more radiation into the environment” (72) “There’s absolutely zero evidence of Chernobyl causing birth defects. Up to two hundred thousand wanted pregnancies were ended in Western Europe because doctors told patients that radiation from Chernobyl posed a risk to the fetus.” (73) “Walt Disney thought nuclear electricity was the future and wanted his amusement part to be powered by it. To this day, Disney World in Florida has a license to build and operate a nuclear power plant.” (140) “Greenpeace started as an anti-nuclear weapons group, but its opposition expanded to include nuclear electricity. Greenpeace and other organizations overstated the dangers of radiation to get people to push back” (146) “It seems that Germany is hell bent on being consistently on the wrong side of history. Germany chose to rely on coal and imported gas, making its electricity nearly ten times dirtier than France’s. By the start of the Ukraine conflict, Germany was paying Russia about $220 million a day for gas to keep its ‘nuclear free’ dream alive.” (158) “Research shows that if you live next to a nuclear power plant, you are probably in favor of it. A survey found that 91% of people living near U.S. nuclear plants have a favorable impression of them.” (181) “According to the World Nuclear Association, China plans to build 150 reactors in 15 years and 30 reactors in other countries by 2030. China is casually popping out reactors in about four years and for $3 billion each.” (188) SMRs: “Despite all the buzz, in 2024 there were only four operating small modular reactors in the world. Two high temperature gas-cooled reactors in China and two floating units in Russia. The bad news is that we already know they’re expensive.” (196) AI data center demand: “the robots might save us. Not by overthrowing humanity, but by finally giving us a reason to stop being weird about nuclear electricity.” (198) “Nuclear energy now ranks as one of the safest forms of energy, thanks in part to those vocal hippies. But it’s time for them, and the ones who followed in their footsteps update their world view based on facts. The data doesn’t just say nuclear is safe, it proves it is the energy source with the smallest environmental footprint.” (201) “Nuclear waste in dry casks has never hurt anyone or contaminated the environment, while burning fossil fuels creates loads of deadly toxic waste.” (203) “Nuclear is the largest source of clean energy in the U.S.” (204) “Two billion years ago, there were natural nuclear reactors on Earth.” (204) “A few environmental non-profits take a very loud antinuclear stance, Greenpeace being the biggest offender.” (206)

This is why it’s so funny when people are afraid of what could happen to buried nuclear waste in a post apocalyptic world. Somehow, in their minds, we’ll still have access to highly specialized machines to dig and open up waste casks.

People often ask me advice for those entering the nuclear electricity space: Whatever you do, for the love of God, please don’t start another reactor company.

Will the environmental activists opposing nuclear electricity ever admit mistake? If the goal is to protect the environment, it’s hard to name a movement that has achieved the opposite of its intent more spectacularly. If only they had been on the right side of history 50 years ago… If the world embraced nuclear electricity instead of burning fossil fuels for electricity, 60% of Earth’s greenhouse gases accumulating from human activity would not be there. We would not have a climate change crisis to worry about. But it’s worse than that. I just finished reading Boemeke’s book Rad Future last night: “In a single year, the pollution from burning fossil fuels causes at least four million deaths” (p.11) “Nuclear has the lowest impact on ecosystems of all energy sources.” (56) “Exaggerated fear is killing us. After Germany shut down its nuclear plants in response to Fukushima, coal was used to replace lost power. A study found that this shift resulted in at least 1,100 premature deaths every year due to the increase in air pollution. There’s even a specific word for this specific brand of terror: ‘radiophobia.’ This fear can be a lot deadlier than radiation itself.” (69) “It seems that Germany is hell bent on being consistently on the wrong side of history. Germany chose to rely on coal and imported gas, making its electricity nearly ten times dirtier than France’s. By the start of the Ukraine conflict, Germany was paying Russia about $220 million a day for gas to keep its ‘nuclear free’ dream alive.” (158) “Greenpeace started as an anti-nuclear weapons group, but its opposition expanded to include nuclear electricity. Greenpeace and other organizations overstated the dangers of radiation to get people to push back” (146) “A few environmental non-profits [still] take a very loud antinuclear stance, Greenpeace being the biggest offender.” (206) “Nuclear energy now ranks as one of the safest forms of energy, thanks in part to those vocal hippies. But it’s time for them, and the ones who followed in their footsteps update their world view based on facts. The data doesn’t just say nuclear is safe, it proves it is the energy source with the smallest environmental footprint.” (201) But will Greenpeace change their stance and admit they are protesting the cleanest and most environmentally benign alternative, as they have with nuclear electricity, GMO crops and deep seabed mining? Sadly, as I learned from a recently departed Greenpeace executive, protesting along a vein of fear has proven to be their best fundraising strategy. Even if it’s rank misinformation, fear of the "new thing" is more powerful than data-driven pragmatism. It is a tragedy writ large for the oceans and the planet. Enter WePlanet, a new "environmentalism of hope.” They are new to me, but I am delighted to see a pro-science, data-driven environmental activist organization arise. Meaningful change always comes from new entrants, and for the environmental movement, it is long overdue.

Maybe growing up in a third world country where crime was a constant gives you a different perspective.

Mamdani’s solution to crime is to redesign our society around criminals. Who’s dumb enough to believe this is a good idea?

Nuclear is hot 🔥