"Walkaway: A Novel" by Cory Doctorow
https://www.amazon.com/Walkaway-Novel-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765392771/

A standalone science fiction novel of the near future. I read the well
printed and well bound 500 page trade paperback published by Tor Books
in 2018 that I purchased new from Amazon in 2023. I was very proud of
myself, I never threw the book against the wall even though I was
tempted at least a half dozen times. I do not agree the premise of the
book but I do see the possibility of the events in it occurring.

The novel approximately starts in the year 2100 and ends up roughly 30
years later. The primary focus of the book is the struggle between the
haves and the have-nots of the future. There is no middle class in the
future. The haves are billionaires and trillionaires after the
tremendous inflation caused by the semi failure of the USA Dollar in
2029 as documented by Lionel Shriver's masterpiece novel "The Mandibles:
A Family, 2029-2047". The haves are nicknamed the zottas by the have-nots.
https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

The have-nots are split into two groups, the wage slaves and walkaways.
The wage slaves are tremendously burdened by debt due to failures of
Social Security, Medicare, WIC, SNAP, and many other federal social
programs. The walkaways have literally walked away from society and
live individually or gathered together in communes, choosing not to
participate in the cities. The walkaways are not highly regarded by
society and are severely persecuted by the zottas, to the point of mass
deaths. More and more have-nots are becoming walkaways over time which
has the zottas extremely concerned.

My rating: 4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating: 4.3 out of 5 stars (1,947 reviews)

Lynn

Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:

> "Walkaway: A Novel" by Cory Doctorow
> https://www.amazon.com/Walkaway-Novel-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765392771/
>
> A standalone science fiction novel of the near future. I read the
> well printed and well bound 500 page trade paperback published by Tor
> Books in 2018 that I purchased new from Amazon in 2023. I was very
> proud of myself, I never threw the book against the wall even though I
> was tempted at least a half dozen times. I do not agree the premise
> of the book but I do see the possibility of the events in it
> occurring.
>
> The novel approximately starts in the year 2100 and ends up roughly 30
> years later. The primary focus of the book is the struggle between
> the haves and the have-nots of the future. There is no middle class
> in the future. The haves are billionaires and trillionaires after the
> tremendous inflation caused by the semi failure of the USA Dollar in
> 2029 as documented by Lionel Shriver's masterpiece novel "The
> Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047". The haves are nicknamed the zottas
> by the have-nots.
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/
>
> The have-nots are split into two groups, the wage slaves and
> walkaways. The wage slaves are tremendously burdened by debt due to
> failures of Social Security, Medicare, WIC, SNAP, and many other
> federal social programs. The walkaways have literally walked away
> from society and live individually or gathered together in communes,
> choosing not to participate in the cities. The walkaways are not
> highly regarded by society and are severely persecuted by the zottas,
> to the point of mass deaths. More and more have-nots are becoming
> walkaways over time which has the zottas extremely concerned.
>
> My rating: 4 out of 5 stars
> Amazon rating: 4.3 out of 5 stars (1,947 reviews)
>
> Lynn

It sounds exactly as subtle as most of Doctorow's work so I'll commend
him on his consistency.

john

On Tuesday, January 30, 2024 at 10:09:07 AM UTC+11, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> "Walkaway: A Novel" by Cory Doctorow
> The haves are billionaires and trillionaires after the
> tremendous inflation caused by the semi failure of the USA Dollar in
> 2029 as documented by Lionel Shriver's masterpiece novel "The Mandibles:
> A Family, 2029-2047".

Documented has a meaning, that's not it

On 1/29/2024 8:43 PM, Hamish Laws wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 30, 2024 at 10:09:07 AM UTC+11, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> "Walkaway: A Novel" by Cory Doctorow
>> The haves are billionaires and trillionaires after the
>> tremendous inflation caused by the semi failure of the USA Dollar in
>> 2029 as documented by Lionel Shriver's masterpiece novel "The Mandibles:
>> A Family, 2029-2047".
>
> Documented has a meaning, that's not it

I was wondering if anyone would catch that.

Lynn

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> "Walkaway: A Novel" by Cory Doctorow
> https://www.amazon.com/Walkaway-Novel-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765392771/
>
> A standalone science fiction novel of the near future. I read the well
> printed and well bound 500 page trade paperback published by Tor Books in
> 2018 that I purchased new from Amazon in 2023. I was very proud of myself, I
> never threw the book against the wall even though I was tempted at least a
> half dozen times. I do not agree the premise of the book but I do see the
> possibility of the events in it occurring.
>
> The novel approximately starts in the year 2100 and ends up roughly 30 years
> later. The primary focus of the book is the struggle between the haves and
> the have-nots of the future. There is no middle class in the future. The
> haves are billionaires and trillionaires after the tremendous inflation
> caused by the semi failure of the USA Dollar in 2029 as documented by Lionel
> Shriver's masterpiece novel "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047". The haves
> are nicknamed the zottas by the have-nots.
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/
>
> The have-nots are split into two groups, the wage slaves and walkaways. The
> wage slaves are tremendously burdened by debt due to failures of Social
> Security, Medicare, WIC, SNAP, and many other federal social programs. The
> walkaways have literally walked away from society and live individually or
> gathered together in communes, choosing not to participate in the cities.
> The walkaways are not highly regarded by society and are severely persecuted
> by the zottas, to the point of mass deaths. More and more have-nots are
> becoming walkaways over time which has the zottas extremely concerned.
>
> My rating: 4 out of 5 stars
> Amazon rating: 4.3 out of 5 stars (1,947 reviews)
>
> Lynn
>

Thank you Lynn, might give it a go. However, I don't like overly
politicized books that lean heavily on feminism, libertarianism or in
fact, what ever "ism" the author enjoys. Would you say that this is one
where the "ism" sits in the front seat and the story in the back seat?

Heinlein for me, strikes a good balance between exploring ism, while
having story and not letting the ism dictate too much.

D <nospam@example.net> writes:

> Thank you Lynn, might give it a go. However, I don't like overly
> politicized books that lean heavily on feminism, libertarianism or in
> fact, what ever "ism" the author enjoys. Would you say that this is
> one where the "ism" sits in the front seat and the story in the back
> seat?
>
> Heinlein for me, strikes a good balance between exploring ism, while
> having story and not letting the ism dictate too much.

Or perhaps Heinlein uses -isms that you find less objectionable and
therefore don't notice as much. As much as I enjoy his stories, I've
always found his characters' habit of stopping everything to lecture
about some topic or another for several pages a bit tiring, whether the
topic is libertarianism (early Heinlein) or
having-sex-with-your-kids-ism (late Heinlein).

john

On 1/30/2024 3:55 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>> "Walkaway: A Novel" by Cory Doctorow
>>   https://www.amazon.com/Walkaway-Novel-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765392771/
>>
>> A standalone science fiction novel of the near future.  I read the
>> well printed and well bound 500 page trade paperback published by Tor
>> Books in 2018 that I purchased new from Amazon in 2023.  I was very
>> proud of myself, I never threw the book against the wall even though I
>> was tempted at least a half dozen times.  I do not agree the premise
>> of the book but I do see the possibility of the events in it occurring.
>>
>> The novel approximately starts in the year 2100 and ends up roughly 30
>> years later.  The primary focus of the book is the struggle between
>> the haves and the have-nots of the future.  There is no middle class
>> in the future.  The haves are billionaires and trillionaires after the
>> tremendous inflation caused by the semi failure of the USA Dollar in
>> 2029 as documented by Lionel Shriver's masterpiece novel "The
>> Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047".  The haves are nicknamed the zottas
>> by the have-nots.
>>
>> https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/
>>
>> The have-nots are split into two groups, the wage slaves and
>> walkaways. The wage slaves are tremendously burdened by debt due to
>> failures of Social Security, Medicare, WIC, SNAP, and many other
>> federal social programs.  The walkaways have literally walked away
>> from society and live individually or gathered together in communes,
>> choosing not to participate in the cities. The walkaways are not
>> highly regarded by society and are severely persecuted by the zottas,
>> to the point of mass deaths.  More and more have-nots are becoming
>> walkaways over time which has the zottas extremely concerned.
>>
>> My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
>> Amazon rating:  4.3 out of 5 stars (1,947 reviews)
>>
>> Lynn
>>
>
> Thank you Lynn, might give it a go. However, I don't like overly
> politicized books that lean heavily on feminism, libertarianism or in
> fact, what ever "ism" the author enjoys. Would you say that this is one
> where the "ism" sits in the front seat and the story in the back seat?
>
> Heinlein for me, strikes a good balance between exploring ism, while
> having story and not letting the ism dictate too much.

Tough to say. The story is well woven between the isms. However, the
isms are you need to be self reliant, the government is bad, the rich
are bad, we need to stop trashing the planet, fossil fuels are bad,
hydrogen fuel is good, back to nature is good, hot and cold spas are
good, money is bad, ownership is bad, etc, etc, etc.

The problem that I had was the communes. Work is voluntary but eating
is necessary, nobody owned the commune so they had to shame people into
working, etc. It is a good story and one possible outlook over the next
hundred years that I find not likely just due to human nature.

Definitely not a Heinlein. Or a Scalzi. Or a Steven Gould. You have
my six star list, nothing from Cory Doctorow is on the list. But,
"Little Brother" was the closest.
https://www.amazon.com/Little-Brother-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765323117/

Lynn

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024, John wrote:

> D <nospam@example.net> writes:
>
>> Thank you Lynn, might give it a go. However, I don't like overly
>> politicized books that lean heavily on feminism, libertarianism or in
>> fact, what ever "ism" the author enjoys. Would you say that this is
>> one where the "ism" sits in the front seat and the story in the back
>> seat?
>>
>> Heinlein for me, strikes a good balance between exploring ism, while
>> having story and not letting the ism dictate too much.
>
>
> Or perhaps Heinlein uses -isms that you find less objectionable and
> therefore don't notice as much. As much as I enjoy his stories, I've
> always found his characters' habit of stopping everything to lecture
> about some topic or another for several pages a bit tiring, whether the
> topic is libertarianism (early Heinlein) or
> having-sex-with-your-kids-ism (late Heinlein).

No, that's not it. I found whithur we (or however its spelled) very
tedious despite it being heavily libertarian. But thank you for the
suggestion anyway.

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> On 1/30/2024 3:55 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> "Walkaway: A Novel" by Cory Doctorow
>>>   https://www.amazon.com/Walkaway-Novel-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765392771/
>>>
>>> A standalone science fiction novel of the near future.  I read the well
>>> printed and well bound 500 page trade paperback published by Tor Books in
>>> 2018 that I purchased new from Amazon in 2023.  I was very proud of
>>> myself, I never threw the book against the wall even though I was tempted
>>> at least a half dozen times.  I do not agree the premise of the book but I
>>> do see the possibility of the events in it occurring.
>>>
>>> The novel approximately starts in the year 2100 and ends up roughly 30
>>> years later.  The primary focus of the book is the struggle between the
>>> haves and the have-nots of the future.  There is no middle class in the
>>> future.  The haves are billionaires and trillionaires after the tremendous
>>> inflation caused by the semi failure of the USA Dollar in 2029 as
>>> documented by Lionel Shriver's masterpiece novel "The Mandibles: A Family,
>>> 2029-2047".  The haves are nicknamed the zottas by the have-nots.
>>>
>>> https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/
>>>
>>> The have-nots are split into two groups, the wage slaves and walkaways.
>>> The wage slaves are tremendously burdened by debt due to failures of
>>> Social Security, Medicare, WIC, SNAP, and many other federal social
>>> programs.  The walkaways have literally walked away from society and live
>>> individually or gathered together in communes, choosing not to participate
>>> in the cities. The walkaways are not highly regarded by society and are
>>> severely persecuted by the zottas, to the point of mass deaths.  More and
>>> more have-nots are becoming walkaways over time which has the zottas
>>> extremely concerned.
>>>
>>> My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
>>> Amazon rating:  4.3 out of 5 stars (1,947 reviews)
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>
>> Thank you Lynn, might give it a go. However, I don't like overly
>> politicized books that lean heavily on feminism, libertarianism or in fact,
>> what ever "ism" the author enjoys. Would you say that this is one where the
>> "ism" sits in the front seat and the story in the back seat?
>>
>> Heinlein for me, strikes a good balance between exploring ism, while having
>> story and not letting the ism dictate too much.
>
> Tough to say. The story is well woven between the isms. However, the isms
> are you need to be self reliant, the government is bad, the rich are bad, we
> need to stop trashing the planet, fossil fuels are bad, hydrogen fuel is
> good, back to nature is good, hot and cold spas are good, money is bad,
> ownership is bad, etc, etc, etc.
>
> The problem that I had was the communes. Work is voluntary but eating is
> necessary, nobody owned the commune so they had to shame people into working,
> etc. It is a good story and one possible outlook over the next hundred years
> that I find not likely just due to human nature.
>
> Definitely not a Heinlein. Or a Scalzi. Or a Steven Gould. You have my six
> star list, nothing from Cory Doctorow is on the list. But, "Little Brother"
> was the closest.
> https://www.amazon.com/Little-Brother-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765323117/
>
> Lynn
>
>
Thank you very much for the clarification Lynn. I have read Little Brother
and it was ok but not great. I will look up Scalzi and Gould instead. =)

Best regards,
Daniel

On 1/31/2024 4:07 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>> On 1/30/2024 3:55 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Walkaway: A Novel" by Cory Doctorow
>>>>   https://www.amazon.com/Walkaway-Novel-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765392771/
>>>>
>>>> A standalone science fiction novel of the near future.  I read the
>>>> well printed and well bound 500 page trade paperback published by
>>>> Tor Books in 2018 that I purchased new from Amazon in 2023.  I was
>>>> very proud of myself, I never threw the book against the wall even
>>>> though I was tempted at least a half dozen times.  I do not agree
>>>> the premise of the book but I do see the possibility of the events
>>>> in it occurring.
>>>>
>>>> The novel approximately starts in the year 2100 and ends up roughly
>>>> 30 years later.  The primary focus of the book is the struggle
>>>> between the haves and the have-nots of the future.  There is no
>>>> middle class in the future.  The haves are billionaires and
>>>> trillionaires after the tremendous inflation caused by the semi
>>>> failure of the USA Dollar in 2029 as documented by Lionel Shriver's
>>>> masterpiece novel "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047".  The haves
>>>> are nicknamed the zottas by the have-nots.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/
>>>>
>>>> The have-nots are split into two groups, the wage slaves and
>>>> walkaways. The wage slaves are tremendously burdened by debt due to
>>>> failures of Social Security, Medicare, WIC, SNAP, and many other
>>>> federal social programs.  The walkaways have literally walked away
>>>> from society and live individually or gathered together in communes,
>>>> choosing not to participate in the cities. The walkaways are not
>>>> highly regarded by society and are severely persecuted by the
>>>> zottas, to the point of mass deaths.  More and more have-nots are
>>>> becoming walkaways over time which has the zottas extremely concerned.
>>>>
>>>> My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
>>>> Amazon rating:  4.3 out of 5 stars (1,947 reviews)
>>>>
>>>> Lynn
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you Lynn, might give it a go. However, I don't like overly
>>> politicized books that lean heavily on feminism, libertarianism or in
>>> fact, what ever "ism" the author enjoys. Would you say that this is
>>> one where the "ism" sits in the front seat and the story in the back
>>> seat?
>>>
>>> Heinlein for me, strikes a good balance between exploring ism, while
>>> having story and not letting the ism dictate too much.
>>
>> Tough to say.  The story is well woven between the isms.  However, the
>> isms are you need to be self reliant, the government is bad, the rich
>> are bad, we need to stop trashing the planet, fossil fuels are bad,
>> hydrogen fuel is good, back to nature is good, hot and cold spas are
>> good, money is bad, ownership is bad, etc, etc, etc.
>>
>> The problem that I had was the communes.  Work is voluntary but eating
>> is necessary, nobody owned the commune so they had to shame people
>> into working, etc.  It is a good story and one possible outlook over
>> the next hundred years that I find not likely just due to human nature.
>>
>> Definitely not a Heinlein.  Or a Scalzi.  Or a Steven Gould.  You have
>> my six star list, nothing from Cory Doctorow is on the list.  But,
>> "Little Brother" was the closest.
>>   https://www.amazon.com/Little-Brother-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765323117/
>>
>> Lynn
>>
>>
> Thank you very much for the clarification Lynn. I have read Little
> Brother and it was ok but not great. I will look up Scalzi and Gould
> instead. =)
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel

I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
is John Varley, another excellent author.

Lynn

On Wed, 31 Jan 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> On 1/31/2024 4:07 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/30/2024 3:55 AM, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Walkaway: A Novel" by Cory Doctorow
>>>>>   https://www.amazon.com/Walkaway-Novel-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765392771/
>>>>>
>>>>> A standalone science fiction novel of the near future.  I read the well
>>>>> printed and well bound 500 page trade paperback published by Tor Books
>>>>> in 2018 that I purchased new from Amazon in 2023.  I was very proud of
>>>>> myself, I never threw the book against the wall even though I was
>>>>> tempted at least a half dozen times.  I do not agree the premise of the
>>>>> book but I do see the possibility of the events in it occurring.
>>>>>
>>>>> The novel approximately starts in the year 2100 and ends up roughly 30
>>>>> years later.  The primary focus of the book is the struggle between the
>>>>> haves and the have-nots of the future.  There is no middle class in the
>>>>> future.  The haves are billionaires and trillionaires after the
>>>>> tremendous inflation caused by the semi failure of the USA Dollar in
>>>>> 2029 as documented by Lionel Shriver's masterpiece novel "The Mandibles:
>>>>> A Family, 2029-2047".  The haves are nicknamed the zottas by the
>>>>> have-nots.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/
>>>>>
>>>>> The have-nots are split into two groups, the wage slaves and walkaways.
>>>>> The wage slaves are tremendously burdened by debt due to failures of
>>>>> Social Security, Medicare, WIC, SNAP, and many other federal social
>>>>> programs.  The walkaways have literally walked away from society and
>>>>> live individually or gathered together in communes, choosing not to
>>>>> participate in the cities. The walkaways are not highly regarded by
>>>>> society and are severely persecuted by the zottas, to the point of mass
>>>>> deaths.  More and more have-nots are becoming walkaways over time which
>>>>> has the zottas extremely concerned.
>>>>>
>>>>> My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
>>>>> Amazon rating:  4.3 out of 5 stars (1,947 reviews)
>>>>>
>>>>> Lynn
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you Lynn, might give it a go. However, I don't like overly
>>>> politicized books that lean heavily on feminism, libertarianism or in
>>>> fact, what ever "ism" the author enjoys. Would you say that this is one
>>>> where the "ism" sits in the front seat and the story in the back seat?
>>>>
>>>> Heinlein for me, strikes a good balance between exploring ism, while
>>>> having story and not letting the ism dictate too much.
>>>
>>> Tough to say.  The story is well woven between the isms.  However, the
>>> isms are you need to be self reliant, the government is bad, the rich are
>>> bad, we need to stop trashing the planet, fossil fuels are bad, hydrogen
>>> fuel is good, back to nature is good, hot and cold spas are good, money is
>>> bad, ownership is bad, etc, etc, etc.
>>>
>>> The problem that I had was the communes.  Work is voluntary but eating is
>>> necessary, nobody owned the commune so they had to shame people into
>>> working, etc.  It is a good story and one possible outlook over the next
>>> hundred years that I find not likely just due to human nature.
>>>
>>> Definitely not a Heinlein.  Or a Scalzi.  Or a Steven Gould.  You have my
>>> six star list, nothing from Cory Doctorow is on the list.  But, "Little
>>> Brother" was the closest.
>>>   https://www.amazon.com/Little-Brother-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765323117/
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>>
>> Thank you very much for the clarification Lynn. I have read Little Brother
>> and it was ok but not great. I will look up Scalzi and Gould instead. =)
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Daniel
>
> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Change
> XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so is John
> Varley, another excellent author.
>
> Lynn

Looking forward to it! And I am very skeptical when it comes to man
made climate doomsday scenarios myself, so depending on the X:s and
what they mean, that could actually be a bonus. ;)

Best regards,
Daniel

In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
>is John Varley, another excellent author.

What are these people's position on nuclear power?

My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
They have another agenda entirely.

(I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
for going on 50 years.)

--
Mike Van Pelt | "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com | -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH | Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston

On 4/02/24 13:05, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>
> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>
> My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
> They have another agenda entirely.
>
> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
> for going on 50 years.)
>

New Zealand officially disapproves of nuclear power but turned a blind
eye to the USA's Antarctic plant being transported through Christchurch
airport. I am not familiar with details of our position but think it is
electricity we are depending on to phase out coal though we still export
coal to China! Our current government pays lip service to "climate
whatever".

On Sun, 4 Feb 2024, Mike Van Pelt wrote:

> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>
> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>
> My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
> They have another agenda entirely.
>
> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
> for going on 50 years.)
>
>

I think nuclear power is one of those healing technologies where
environmental "hysterics" and environmental "deniers" can happily agree.
The deniers get clean, reliable and cheap (if you de-politicize the
technology to lower the cost and use modern SMR:s) energy, and the
hysterics get less CO2.

Everyone wins!

On 2/4/2024 3:19 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 4 Feb 2024, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>
>> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Lynn McGuire  <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today.  All of his books are
>>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior.  So is John Scalzi, so
>>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>>
>> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>>
>> My touchstone remains the same:  Anyone who is opposed to
>> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>> They have another agenda entirely.
>>
>> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
>> for going on 50 years.)
>>
>>
>
> I think nuclear power is one of those healing technologies where
> environmental "hysterics" and environmental "deniers" can happily agree.
> The deniers get clean, reliable and cheap (if you de-politicize the
> technology to lower the cost and use modern SMR:s) energy, and the
> hysterics get less CO2.
>
> Everyone wins!

Except many of the "deniers" are deniers because they _want_
hydrocarbons. To keep their jobs, their profits, their "history" or
just because they can't handle being told about better ways of doing
something. "Change is EVIL!"

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 2/4/2024 5:19 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 4 Feb 2024, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>
>> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Lynn McGuire  <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today.  All of his books are
>>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior.  So is John Scalzi, so
>>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>>
>> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>>
>> My touchstone remains the same:  Anyone who is opposed to
>> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>> They have another agenda entirely.
>>
>> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
>> for going on 50 years.)
>>
>>
>
> I think nuclear power is one of those healing technologies where
> environmental "hysterics" and environmental "deniers" can happily agree.
> The deniers get clean, reliable and cheap (if you de-politicize the
> technology to lower the cost and use modern SMR:s) energy, and the
> hysterics get less CO2.
>
> Everyone wins!

The SMRs just got canceled in the USA. "The collapse of NuScale’s
project should spell the end for small modular nuclear reactors.
Although there were problems specific to the Utah Associated Municipal
Power Systems project, the financial challenges and cost trends
witnessed in that case will afflict any SMR project."
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/nuscale-uamps-project-small-modular-reactor-ramanasmr-/705717/

Not good.

Lynn

On 04/02/2024 00:05, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>
> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>
> My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
> They have another agenda entirely.
>
> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
> for going on 50 years.)

Nuclear power can be done well, but traditionally
it's been a figleaf for the nuclear weapons
programme, and a source of covered-up everlasting
deadly pollution. So I use the stuff, but
I look at it sceptically.

I was raised on science fiction in which future
men had to protect their posterity by wearing
lead-lined underwear to block radiation
when they visited Earth from space, and that
is saying something. I suppose it also would
apply to women, if there were any in the stories.

On Mon, 5 Feb 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:

> On 04/02/2024 00:05, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
>>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>>
>> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>>
>> My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
>> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>> They have another agenda entirely.
>>
>> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
>> for going on 50 years.)
>
> Nuclear power can be done well, but traditionally
> it's been a figleaf for the nuclear weapons
> programme, and a source of covered-up everlasting
> deadly pollution. So I use the stuff, but
> I look at it sceptically.
>
> I was raised on science fiction in which future
> men had to protect their posterity by wearing
> lead-lined underwear to block radiation
> when they visited Earth from space, and that
> is saying something. I suppose it also would
> apply to women, if there were any in the stories.

I think SMR:s are a great step in the right direction! I don't think any
of the designs are currently in production, but I am looking forward to it
and I am hopeful that I will see one in production within the next 5 years
or so.

On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 10:40:16 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>On 2/4/2024 3:19 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 4 Feb 2024, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>>
>>> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Lynn McGuire  <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today.  All of his books are
>>>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior.  So is John Scalzi, so
>>>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>>>
>>> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>>>
>>> My touchstone remains the same:  Anyone who is opposed to
>>> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>>> They have another agenda entirely.
>>>
>>> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
>>> for going on 50 years.)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think nuclear power is one of those healing technologies where
>> environmental "hysterics" and environmental "deniers" can happily agree.
>> The deniers get clean, reliable and cheap (if you de-politicize the
>> technology to lower the cost and use modern SMR:s) energy, and the
>> hysterics get less CO2.
>>
>> Everyone wins!
>
>Except many of the "deniers" are deniers because they _want_
>hydrocarbons. To keep their jobs, their profits, their "history" or
>just because they can't handle being told about better ways of doing
>something. "Change is EVIL!"

And here is a word for them:

plastic
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 13:41:35 +0100, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

>
>
>On Mon, 5 Feb 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
>> On 04/02/2024 00:05, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>>> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>>>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
>>>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>>>
>>> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>>>
>>> My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
>>> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>>> They have another agenda entirely.
>>>
>>> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
>>> for going on 50 years.)
>>
>> Nuclear power can be done well, but traditionally
>> it's been a figleaf for the nuclear weapons
>> programme, and a source of covered-up everlasting
>> deadly pollution. So I use the stuff, but
>> I look at it sceptically.
>>
>> I was raised on science fiction in which future
>> men had to protect their posterity by wearing
>> lead-lined underwear to block radiation
>> when they visited Earth from space, and that
>> is saying something. I suppose it also would
>> apply to women, if there were any in the stories.
>
>I think SMR:s are a great step in the right direction! I don't think any
>of the designs are currently in production, but I am looking forward to it
>and I am hopeful that I will see one in production within the next 5 years
>or so.

And how long have they been only 5 years away?

Which is not to say it might happen ... this time.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 10:43:42 +0000, Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 04/02/2024 00:05, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
>>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>>
>> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>>
>> My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
>> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>> They have another agenda entirely.
>>
>> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
>> for going on 50 years.)
>
>Nuclear power can be done well, but traditionally
>it's been a figleaf for the nuclear weapons
>programme, and a source of covered-up everlasting
>deadly pollution. So I use the stuff, but
>I look at it sceptically.
>
>I was raised on science fiction in which future
>men had to protect their posterity by wearing
>lead-lined underwear to block radiation
>when they visited Earth from space, and that
>is saying something. I suppose it also would
>apply to women, if there were any in the stories.

PK Dick's /Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?/ has something like
that.

One of the advantages of moving to "the colonies" is that the
led-lined undies can be ditched.

The film /Blade Runner/ was not set in quite the same universe.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

Mike Van Pelt <usenet@mikevanpelt.com> wrote:
>Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>>excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
>>is John Varley, another excellent author.
>
>What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>
>My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
>nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>They have another agenda entirely.

I am very, very much in favor of nuclear power. But I am against nuclear
power systems which produce plutonium as a byproduct, because refining
plutonium for use in bombs is chemical process that is relatively simple
compared with separating uranium isotopes. And I am not in favor of nuclear
bombs.

It's a thing that can be done, but people need to actually spend the money
to do it instead of yelling about how nuclear power is terrible or how nuclear
power is wonderful.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 10:40:16 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
><dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>>On 2/4/2024 3:19 AM, D wrote:
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> On Sun, 4 Feb 2024, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>> Lynn McGuire=A0 <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today.=A0 All of his books =
>are
>>>>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>>>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior.=A0 So is John =
>Scalzi, so
>>>>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>>>>
>>>> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>>>>
>>>> My touchstone remains the same:=A0 Anyone who is opposed to
>>>> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>>>> They have another agenda entirely.
>>>>
>>>> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
>>>> for going on 50 years.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>=20
>>> I think nuclear power is one of those healing technologies where=20
>>> environmental "hysterics" and environmental "deniers" can happily =
>agree.=20
>>> The deniers get clean, reliable and cheap (if you de-politicize the=20
>>> technology to lower the cost and use modern SMR:s) energy, and the=20
>>> hysterics get less CO2.
>>>=20
>>> Everyone wins!
>>
>>Except many of the "deniers" are deniers because they _want_=20
>>hydrocarbons. To keep their jobs, their profits, their "history" or=20
>>just because they can't handle being told about better ways of doing=20
>>something. "Change is EVIL!"
>
>And here is a word for them:
>
>plastic

chemical feedstocks in general.

But 90% of the deniers profit comes from the stuff that's burned.

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 13:41:35 +0100, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>On Mon, 5 Feb 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/02/2024 00:05, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>>>> In article <upeb3l$1m4ku$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>>>>> excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>>>> Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi,=
> so
>>>>> is John Varley, another excellent author.
>>>>=20
>>>> What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>>>>=20
>>>> My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
>>>> nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>>>> They have another agenda entirely.
>>>>=20
>>>> (I've been advocating phasing out coal in favor of nuclear
>>>> for going on 50 years.)
>>>
>>> Nuclear power can be done well, but traditionally
>>> it's been a figleaf for the nuclear weapons
>>> programme, and a source of covered-up everlasting
>>> deadly pollution. So I use the stuff, but
>>> I look at it sceptically.
>>>
>>> I was raised on science fiction in which future
>>> men had to protect their posterity by wearing
>>> lead-lined underwear to block radiation
>>> when they visited Earth from space, and that
>>> is saying something. I suppose it also would
>>> apply to women, if there were any in the stories.
>>
>>I think SMR:s are a great step in the right direction! I don't think any=
>=20
>>of the designs are currently in production, but I am looking forward to =
>it=20
>>and I am hopeful that I will see one in production within the next 5 =
>years=20
>>or so.
>
>And how long have they been only 5 years away?
>
>Which is not to say it might happen ... this time.

Not very likely:

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/nuscale-uamps-project-small-modular-reactor-ramanasmr-/705717/

kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>Mike Van Pelt <usenet@mikevanpelt.com> wrote:
>>Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>I will be posting a Steven Gould review today. All of his books are
>>>excellent even though he is a Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
>>>Change XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate Disruption warrior. So is John Scalzi, so
>>>is John Varley, another excellent author.
>>
>>What are these people's position on nuclear power?
>>
>>My touchstone remains the same: Anyone who is opposed to
>>nuclear power *does not really care* about CO2/climate-whatever.
>>They have another agenda entirely.
>
>I am very, very much in favor of nuclear power. But I am against nuclear
>power systems which produce plutonium as a byproduct, because refining
>plutonium for use in bombs is chemical process that is relatively simple
>compared with separating uranium isotopes. And I am not in favor of nuclear
>bombs.
>
>It's a thing that can be done, but people need to actually spend the money
>to do it instead of yelling about how nuclear power is terrible or how nuclear
>power is wonderful.

A good discussion here. TL;DNR - viable as an adjunct to other forms of
energy production, but not capable of replacing fossil fuels on its own.

https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9js5291m#etoc@tocid.16