I don't know acidburn but I'd argue that having a PhD in nuclear engineering and having worked in the field is likely to increase your bias towards nuclear (being a "nuclear bro") rather than equalize it. PLT PhDs will tell you Haskell is the best programming language and environmental science PhDs will tell you solar is the best energy source.

This is an odd argument. You're basically saying that being more knowledgeable about something makes your opinion less useful. Everyone knows there's bias but if you're arguing that we shouldn't value someone's opinion because they're an expert then we're not going to progress very far in society. I'm not saying you have to take his word as divine truth but dismissing experts is extremely naive.

If you're knowledgeable in one field primarily, I think it's likely you have some bias towards that field. If you are doing a lot of research only in e.g. Solar, I think it'd be harder to provide an unbiased comparison between solar and nuclear than someone who studies power generation in general.

EDIT: At a first glance, the linked article seems reasonable if not a bit optimistic for future developments and very positive phrasing for NPP in general.

> If you're knowledgeable in one field primarily, I think it's likely you have some bias towards that field.

'It is ever the domain of specialists to overstate their domain.'

Sibling comment is basically what I meant and my general opinion about the linked website as well.

> You're basically saying that being more knowledgeable about something makes your opinion less useful.

In certain contexts I definitely think this. Imagine you're a CEO that has to decide how to distribute profits among departments. Obviously you'll listen to the head/experts of every department to weigh your options, but you can't really trust them to be unbiased (Obviously not the best analogy but I hope it helps get my point across (: ).

(“Acid Burn” was also Angelina Jolie’s handle in Hackers - if it was ringing anyone else’s bell).

Yeah I made my HN username on a whim years ago after watching that movie and didn't realize it was a dumb choice. I wanted it to be 'hackery' and anon. Oops.

I think you misspelled “awesome choice”.

His take on nuclear is that of a nuclear expert.

His take on nuclear's competitors and hence its relative competitiveness as an electricity source is substantially more nuclear bro / Fox News viewer.

We need a new pejorative to mirror "nuclear bro" for people who take any mention or discussion of any downside of wind and solar and blanket categorize them as a Fox News viewer.

There are a lot of anti-100%-renewable nuclear proponents. There are fewer and fewer full-on anti-renewable nuclear proponents.

Most of us support everything that can make low-carbon energy.