Fear monger since 1979 by mining, oil, and gas industries have effectively persuaded Muricans to resist going back to other forms of energy generation or even research.
Not in the hysterical US right-winger "paying road tax is communism" sense but in the explicit "the Messmer plan made Five Year plans look like a shopping list".
I don't personally have feelings about economic model, but I find it ceaseless astounding that in a world where so many things that don't remotely fit an economic frame get forced into one, this debate that's *so overtly* State Planning Y/N has been projected into some other space.
France wasn’t particularly more socialist in policies in 2000 than in 1970, and the policies are unlikely to have affected CO2 output except by finding an alternative to fossil fuels, which is mainly nuclear in France since 1980. It might be easier to do that with nationalised power, yes.
By comparison, Germany - which isn’t any less socialist than France - shows much less CO2 reduction over that time due to the deep cultural aversion to nuclear power (and the importance of the Green party in ruling coalitions).
I was responding to the idea that the key ingredient is socialism, when as noted the key ingredient is nuclear power. You can have socialism without going nuclear, is the point.
Comments
Not in the hysterical US right-winger "paying road tax is communism" sense but in the explicit "the Messmer plan made Five Year plans look like a shopping list".
What? Of course Germany is substantially less socialist than France!
For a great many reasons, but the most obvious is that there's nothing close to a Messmer Plan.
Are you maybe lacking some key background? I'm referring to the Messmer plan whose impact is clear in the OP chart:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France#Messmer_Plan
Sure, but that was not the point I was making - massive nuclear rollouts are the most concrete example of state planning you get.
You don't get that if your society isn't sold on some level of socialist state planning.