Will the Green New Deal work in Sweden? | We The Internet TV

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 1 чер 2024
  • Can a country like Sweden become climate neutral without nuclear power? Follow Lou as he investigates Sweden's economic model and finds "5 Reasons Why We Need Sweden's Democratic Socialism." • 5 Reasons Why We Need ...
    What do you think of Sweden's economic model? Let us know in the comment section! And don't forget to like the video, share it with your friends, and subscribe to our channel! And click the bell to turn on notifications from us, so you don't miss any of our new videos.
    Follow us on social media for more videos, memes and other political comedy that makes fun of everyone!
    Support us and get more info at our website: www.wetheinternet.tv/support
    Facebook: / wetheinternettv
    Twitter: / wetheinternettv
    Instagram: / wetheinternettv
    Starring, Written and Produced by: Lou Perez
    Directed and Produced by: Carolyn McCulley
    Director of Photography/Sound Recordist: David Ehrenberg
    Second Camera/Assistant Camera: Jeremy Hall
    Edited by: Carolyn McCulley
    Featuring:
    Johan Norberg
    Andreas Bergh
    Anders Manell
    Mikaela Almerud
    Linda Flink
    Maria Sunér Fleming
    Second Unit:
    Directed by: Greg Burke
    Director of Photography: Paul Rondeau
    Assistant Camera/Gaffer: Saif al-Sobaihi
    Sound: Fernando Castillo
    Additional Editing by: Greg Burke
    Graphics and Animation by: Eli Bock
    Score by: Scott Hampton
    Color Correction by: AJ Ferrer
    Post-Production Audio by: Fernando Castillo
    Producer & Head Writer: Lou Perez
    Executive Producers: Rob Pfaltzgraff & Nick Reid
    Creative Producer: Lana Link
    Associate Producer: Jordan Best
    Marketing Director: Allison Ryan
    Special Thanks To:
    Frayda Levin
    The Conru Foundation
    The Rodney Fund
    The Richard E. Fox Charitable Foundation
    Charles and Marie Robertson Foundation
  • Комедії

КОМЕНТАРІ • 64

  • @RestingBitchface7
    @RestingBitchface7 4 роки тому +44

    I am ALL for nuclear in the US, and have been since I was a girl in the 70s-80s growing up with my dad working as an architectural engineer at the power company. And I say this as a lifelong anti-war activist and charter member of Greenpeace Youth back in the day. Nuclear energy is the safest, most effective, most cost efficient way we have to recycle and burn up all of our nuclear waste, our expired nuclear armaments, and dispose of kilotons of stockpiled plutonium and uranium at the Nevada nuclear test site and elsewhere.
    #NuclearIsTheFuture

    • @hansmeiser32
      @hansmeiser32 4 роки тому +3

      Nuclear Fusion is the future but I'm probably too old to ever see a Fusion Reactor.

    • @RestingBitchface7
      @RestingBitchface7 4 роки тому +2

      Hans Meiser I hope you’re wrong about that. I want to see that, too.

    • @hansmeiser32
      @hansmeiser32 4 роки тому +1

      @@RestingBitchface7 Guess your chances are higher because I'm older than you (born in the late 60s).

    • @DeconvertedMan
      @DeconvertedMan 4 роки тому +2

      the 80s were a blast :D

    • @RestingBitchface7
      @RestingBitchface7 4 роки тому

      Hans Meiser me, too!!! 1968. Graduated ‘86. 👍🏼😉

  • @GamaSennin82
    @GamaSennin82 4 роки тому +24

    I'm not against renewables, but energy storage technologies haven't progressed as much as was hoped for in the 90s, and both solar and wind require a high percentage of conventional backup power because they're so intermittent. This makes it virtually impossible to fully decarbonize the grid without nuclear. Anyone who rants about climate change yet opposes nuclear power (along with research into mitigation technologies like CCS, etc.) is either (a) misinformed or (b) cares about economic control, not the environment.
    The Greens can't have it both ways: if climate change is an "existential" threat, then opposing nuclear is like a person saying "I'm literally starving," then refusing a Snickers because too many empty carbs bruh.

    • @nathancamara6285
      @nathancamara6285 4 роки тому +1

      I believe nuclear is green as long as we take the proper precautions

    • @t.c.8697
      @t.c.8697 4 роки тому

      Well said!! Best wishes

  • @matthewzimmers1097
    @matthewzimmers1097 4 роки тому +11

    This needs way more views

  • @t.c.8697
    @t.c.8697 4 роки тому +1

    Great information! I am worried Lou is moving to Sweden?? Don't go Lou, we need you to make us laugh!! Best wishes

  • @mchsnyder
    @mchsnyder 4 роки тому +1

    Are you telling me that my train to Hawaii isn't happening anytime soon?

  • @smicksmookety
    @smicksmookety 4 роки тому +4

    OMGosh another cutout from your other video!!! I'm losing my mind.

  • @nicholasbeeson4999
    @nicholasbeeson4999 4 роки тому +2

    People need to look into the life span of the windmills going up all over the place and the life of solar panels. The issues being made are not being discussed and will be worse than the current situation.

    • @t.c.8697
      @t.c.8697 4 роки тому

      Good points! They are very expensive to make, depending on the source & then depending on the material they are made of they can be good for 10yrs to 20yrs. It's hard to know because you have to know what's being used to make them. Best wishes

  • @umidus1653
    @umidus1653 4 роки тому +3

    Maybe in 50 years. Not sooner.

  • @rikiishitoru8885
    @rikiishitoru8885 4 роки тому +3

    The ending is sort of abrupt - why not have it fade out and have the outro promote the longer documentary?

  • @mikoyan2006
    @mikoyan2006 4 роки тому +1

    Great information I hope AOC see this video, although she's not going to change her mind even if she sees it,,,, I won't hold my breath
    Thanks

  • @nathancamara6285
    @nathancamara6285 4 роки тому +2

    Here's my take:
    Increase public transport
    Increase nuclear power
    Increase hydroelectric energy
    Research fusion -if it works, oil will be put to shame
    Plant more trees - done through public works FDR style to increase jobs
    Eliminating CO2 would be ideal but as long as we reach major reductions, the Earth will be fine
    Reduce plastic production
    Tighten regulations
    All of this can be done with modern tech

    • @karozans
      @karozans 3 роки тому

      Increase public transport
      - Public transportation only works in highly densely populated areas. Americans love their freedom too much and choose to drive their own person cars. High speed rail will never work in the USA unless we have about 10 times more population density than we have now. There are only 2 high speed rail lines on planet earth that are self sustaining. One in France, and one in Japan. I would imagine that a lot of electric self driving cars might replace a lot of personal cars in big cities in the USA in the next 50 years, but not all.
      Increase hydroelectric energy - Hydro electric power is a bit of a unicorn. You have to have perfect conditions to get it. It's just not a major viable option.

      Research fusion - This is a big "if". And oil is not going to go anywhere. Millions of products in the world need oil.
      Plant more trees - This can only be accomplished if the government is mostly out of it. The government is simply too big and bureaucratic for it to do anything effectively these days. This needs to be a grassroots major movement by people.
      Reduce plastic production - Plastic is cheap and uses much less energy than other things. Plastics are vital.
      Tighten regulations - Regulations destroy nations. Regulations are the biggest cost to the economy and they rarely ever help anyone except lawyers and politicians. They kill the free market. The best way to reduce pollution is to allow the free market to work.

    • @nathancamara6285
      @nathancamara6285 3 роки тому

      @@karozans I noticed you didn't bash nuclear power

    • @karozans
      @karozans 3 роки тому

      @@nathancamara6285 I bashed the nuclear fusion, but not nuclear fission, but I should have a little. Nuclear power is among the most viable options for energy, but it ain't spectacular. Nuclear power plants are so costly, no one will build them without billions of dollars in subsidies and loan guarantees by the federal government.
      There are some theories that the new 5th generation nuclear power plants are supposed to be better and thorium is supposed to be cool too, but we will just have to wait to see if it's going to be as amazing as they say. It rarely ever is.
      My nephew worked on a new type of coal power plant down in Mississippi. This new power planet crushes coal under tons of pressure and heat, and extracts all the gasses from the coal. The gasses are the main thing they want and electricity is kinda a byproduct that they sell. It was supposed to operate and create virtually zero pollution. So this new technology was supposed to be amazing. However, the project ended up costing several billion more dollars they thought and they project was canceled. Of course it was a government project.
      If the technology to build this new type of coal power plant was so amazing and it was supposed to generate tons of gas and electricity virtually pollution free, then the free-market would jump on it faster than the twirling blades of a wind generator. But no one ever does because they know it's not profitable and doesn't deliver what's promised.

  • @moviemanreviews5577
    @moviemanreviews5577 4 роки тому +1

    Why are ppl afraid of nuclear power again? I ask out of genuine ignorance.

  • @fearthehoneybadger
    @fearthehoneybadger 4 роки тому +2

    Radioactive waste is better than CO2?

    • @WeTheInternetTV
      @WeTheInternetTV  4 роки тому +6

      Research how radioactive waste is contained. Very safely.

    • @fearthehoneybadger
      @fearthehoneybadger 4 роки тому +1

      @@WeTheInternetTV I do know that radioactive waste is carefully handled and stored; and that Sweden has an excellent waste storage area.
      I wouldn't have a problem with this if that waste had a reasonable lifespan, but, this stuff has to be watched literally for millions of years.

    • @kurtjohansson1265
      @kurtjohansson1265 4 роки тому +1

      @@fearthehoneybadger nope. It's only dangerous for like 30 years.
      It's actually super easy.
      Please stop blocking progress.

    • @fearthehoneybadger
      @fearthehoneybadger 4 роки тому

      @@kurtjohansson1265 Don't know where you got those figures, Kurt.
      The half-life of some of these elements can be tens of thousands of years. And it takes many half-lives for them to be rendered safe.
      I do like progress, I just don't like the negative consequences of that progress. to be dumped on future generations.
      Stay safe and be well.

    • @kurtjohansson1265
      @kurtjohansson1265 4 роки тому

      @@fearthehoneybadger the new stuff can be recycled, just do sole googling

  • @mchsnyder
    @mchsnyder 4 роки тому +1

    How dare you!

  • @jessicacharlesson5198
    @jessicacharlesson5198 4 роки тому +1

    BJERESUND at the video picture, i see those towers everyday. And they are closed lol. But still, i’m #proud .

  • @willhiggins9563
    @willhiggins9563 4 роки тому +3

    Easy answer, include subsidies for nuclear energy in the GND.

    • @WeTheInternetTV
      @WeTheInternetTV  4 роки тому +6

      Easier answer: take away the other subsidies and give nuclear a chance to compete.

    • @itcamefromthedeep
      @itcamefromthedeep 4 роки тому +2

      But you see - nuclear has cooties.

    • @willhiggins9563
      @willhiggins9563 4 роки тому

      We the Internet TV If market forces already favor nuclear, why not just speed up the process?

    • @willhiggins9563
      @willhiggins9563 4 роки тому

      madwtube Who ever pays for fossil fuel subsidies.

  • @DeconvertedMan
    @DeconvertedMan 4 роки тому

    Nuclear is the way foward.

  • @JonathanAcademic
    @JonathanAcademic 2 роки тому

    There is NO LABORATORY needed to promote more GREEN POWER. The problem was that Sweden LAGGED terribly in promoting wind power and is catching up recently. The BIG MONEY needed for a nuclear power plant can be spent on more solar and wind power. You can use nuclear power when you transition, but at a certain point money for nuclear and green power is a zero sum game. This interviewer only talked to certain kinds of experts, but he could have diversified his portfolio. The original Green New Deal conference was in 2009 and what was done after? The issue is the lag of political forces not technological constraints.

  • @ty2010
    @ty2010 4 роки тому

    But they really, really want it.

  • @frontxxrunner
    @frontxxrunner 4 роки тому +5

    I respect that AOC wants to improve the health of the planet, but I've heard more realistic solutions from sixth graders.

  • @theshrimp1657
    @theshrimp1657 4 роки тому

    Can anybody explain to me how nuclear energy is produced? Also if possible explain it to me like I’m Homer Simpson because that’s my level of intelligence.

    • @frankegordon326
      @frankegordon326 4 роки тому

      By splitting apart atoms by shooting subatomic particles it causes a large amount of heat which boils water causing steam to power rotors. It's basically just steam powered with extra steps on a much larger scale

    • @theshrimp1657
      @theshrimp1657 4 роки тому

      Franke Gordon okay explain to me like I’m Homer Simpson or even dumber because I still don’t follow.

    • @thepracticalinvestor2386
      @thepracticalinvestor2386 2 роки тому

      @@theshrimp1657 uranium is an element that is used in nuclear power. This element is radioactive which means that it has energy inside of it. The rods made out of uranium are placed in the water and due to the atoms of the uranium splitting, heat is produced. The heat from the atoms splitting causes the water to boil which releases steam that then spins a large turbine which subsequently produces electricity. The rods have a life span and over time they are taken out of the water, cooled off, and placed into storage containment barrels which are later stored in safe locations.

  • @GhostNameless
    @GhostNameless 4 роки тому +1

    For Sweden, it's nuclear or population reduction.

  • @marlonmoncrieffe0728
    @marlonmoncrieffe0728 4 роки тому

    America, you need to invest much more in NASA!
    No, $25-30 billion a year is not enough!