Basing on the US since that is where my MS studies in environment policy were focused. Conservative republicanans poll highest in believing climate change is fake or not caused by human activity
From the same article, you can see that support for expanding nuclear energy is stronger among liberal republicans and strongest with conservative republicans.
*Pew research is not a scholarly source on its own, but scores center for media bias making it optimal for readers without academic library access
Oil and gas companies being in an ‘alliance’ with climate change activists is a pretty made up notion, even in the context of constraining the entire scope to just a stance on nuclear energy.
There may be opposition to nuclear but to make the bridge over to being an ally of oil and coal would be… well, stonetoss level of improper framing of an issue.
Hell, anecdotally speaking for my own experiences on the topic: nuclear energy has been the most consistent common ground between climate change activists and deniers that I’ve seen. Far more than the precise zero climate change activists ive seen actively supporting oil, gas, or coal interests. There is support renewables, not obliquely opposing nuclear.
Ah, okay. Absolutely valid point. ‘Alliance’ is not a good choice of words here. Germany’s green anti-nuclear party inadvertently jumping into bed with coal and natural gas was not an alliance, just a circumstance.
I think the alliance refers to advocates replacing nuclear power with fossil fuels. A situation where the results are less important than the opposition to nuclear power.
Made up alliances?
Basing on the US since that is where my MS studies in environment policy were focused. Conservative republicanans poll highest in believing climate change is fake or not caused by human activity
From the same article, you can see that support for expanding nuclear energy is stronger among liberal republicans and strongest with conservative republicans.
*Pew research is not a scholarly source on its own, but scores center for media bias making it optimal for readers without academic library access
Oil and gas companies being in an ‘alliance’ with climate change activists is a pretty made up notion, even in the context of constraining the entire scope to just a stance on nuclear energy.
There may be opposition to nuclear but to make the bridge over to being an ally of oil and coal would be… well, stonetoss level of improper framing of an issue.
Hell, anecdotally speaking for my own experiences on the topic: nuclear energy has been the most consistent common ground between climate change activists and deniers that I’ve seen. Far more than the precise zero climate change activists ive seen actively supporting oil, gas, or coal interests. There is support renewables, not obliquely opposing nuclear.
Ah, okay. Absolutely valid point. ‘Alliance’ is not a good choice of words here. Germany’s green anti-nuclear party inadvertently jumping into bed with coal and natural gas was not an alliance, just a circumstance.
I think the alliance refers to advocates replacing nuclear power with fossil fuels. A situation where the results are less important than the opposition to nuclear power.