It's simple, really. Fracking has offsetting pro-social benefits in a way that NK possessing nuclear weapons does not.

FireHorseAutumn 8 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

It's worse than people think. The fact that North Korea-traditionally nuttier than all the Middle Eastern governments combined-gets mean Hollywood movies made about them while Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad got regime changed sent a certain kind of message, you know? Not to mention, the Iranians, Syrians, Pakistanis, et all could have never got off the ground without massive North Korean help.

I'm saying this as someone who is on the whole deeply cynical about Boomer pearl clutching when it comes to atomic proliferation.

▲

antonvs 27 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

“Pro-social” is a strange way to describe something that’s actively contributing to the death of our civilization.

▲

ch4s3 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Looked at another way, shale natural gas has largely displaced coal which emits more CO2 and can be burned in the same power plants. This base load allows for more wind and solar. Natural gas is a great bridge fuel.

▲

loeg 12 minutes ago | parent [-]

> and can be burned in the same power plants

I don't believe nat gas is burned in the same plants as coal.

	▲	horsawlarway 3 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Most "closed coal plants" in the US are really plants that retrofitted to use nat gas. here's a decent recap (now a couple years out of date) https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=44636

▲

loeg 12 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

This is some rhetorical thing people say, but you don't actually believe it, right? You're not that wildly delusional? You think that if the air is 4C warmer, we won't have laws, people, culture, or whatever else makes a civilization? And that in the mean time, people being able to heat their homes in winter and not freeze to death, and otherwise afford electricity, are not offsetting pro-social benefits?