JD Vance pushes America First position on India-Pakistan conflict: 'None of our business'



The decades-long dispute between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir region has resulted in numerous bloody skirmishes and three full-fledged wars — in 1965, 1971, and 1999. In the wake of a horrific terrorist attack in the southern part of Indian-administered Kashmir last month, fighting has resumed and threatens now to embroil the two nuclear powers in another major war.

When pressed on Thursday to comment about the Trump administration's concern "about the potential for nuclear war between India and Pakistan," Vice President JD Vance told Fox News' Martha MacCallum that while concerned and keen on de-escalation, the U.S. is "not going to get involved in the middle of war that's fundamentally none of our business and has nothing to do with America's ability to control it."

"Look, we're concerned about any time nuclear powers collide and have a major conflict," said Vance. "What we've said, what Secretary Rubio has said, and certainly [what] the president has said is we want this thing to de-escalate as quickly as possible."

Tensions once again came to a head between India and Pakistan on April 22 when terrorists massacred 26 people, mainly Indian tourists, near Pahalgam, a town in the southern part of Indian-administered Kashmir.

'It's a shame.'

Indian officials believe that the group claiming responsibility for the massacre, the Resistance Front, is actually a proxy for the Pakistan-based jihadist terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba, reported the New York Times.

President Donald Trump stated in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attack, "The United States stands strong with India against Terrorism. We pray for the souls of those lost, and for the recovery of the injured."

While India did not publicly blame the Pakistani government massacre, New Delhi nevertheless responded with missile strikes on alleged terrorist training sites in Pakistan while also reportedly arresting thousands of people in Kashmir.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif claimed that India's May 6 (local time) strikes amounted to a "heinous act of aggression [that] will not go unpunished."

President Donald Trump said Tuesday in response to the news of India's military operation against Pakistan, "It's a shame," adding, "I just hope it ends very quickly."

'What we can do is try to encourage these folks to de-escalate a little bit.'

Secretary of State Marco Rubio noted later on May 6 that he was monitoring the situation closely and echoed Trump's hope that "this hopefully ends quickly."

In recent days, India and Pakistan have reportedly traded artillery fire and drone strikes. Sharif claimed Wednesday that the Pakistani military had shot down five Indian jets.

"We can't control these countries," Vance, who was in India at the time of the terrorist attacks, told MacCallum. "India has its gripes with Pakistan. Pakistan has responded to India. What we can do is try to encourage these folks to de-escalate a little bit."

"Our hope and our expectation is that this is not going to spiral into a broader regional war or, God forbid, a nuclear conflict," continued the vice president. "We're worried about these things, but I think the job of diplomacy — but also the job of cooler heads in India and Pakistan — is to make sure this doesn't become a nuclear war."

According to the Federation of American Scientists, Pakistan and India have 170 and 180 nuclear warheads, respectively.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Climate Protestors Disrupt Chris Wright Hearing For Energy Secretary

Any honest examination of the Los Angeles wildfires indicts incompetent government leadership rather than climate change.

Microsoft elites EXPOSE the entire playbook by re-opening Three Mile Island



The Three Mile Island power plant was the scene of the worst commercial nuclear accident in United States history. While zero people died, it’s been used ever since as the media’s poster child for why we can’t invest in nuclear energy.

That is until now.

Constellation Energy, which claims to be America’s largest producer of clean, carbon-free energy, has just announced that it has signed the largest ever power purchase agreement with Bill Gates’ Microsoft — which in light of this agreement will be reopening Three Mile Island for business.

“Wow,” Glenn Beck of “The Glenn Beck Program” comments. “Well, what about solar panels, Bill? What about wind power?”


Gates also invested $1 billion in a nuclear power plant that broke ground in Kemmerer, Wyoming, last June.

“Now two power plants. Both of them nuclear,” Glenn says, shocked. “Nothing to worry about here. Bill Gates is a responsible human being, and so is nuclear power. It’s clean, and it’s good for the environment, and it’s totally acceptable.”

However, what Glenn really wants to know is why this is necessary.

“Why do they need this power? Not because you’re having a hard time affording electricity. Not because you’re having a hard time affording heat for your house. Not because they want to get rid of natural gas and want all of our stoves and everything else to be run on electricity. Not because we are switching over to battery cars, or that’s what they hope,” Glenn says.

“Bill Gates wants power because he wants to be the king of the world with AI, [and] he needs nuclear power plants, so he gets to build them. It’s almost as if we’re not allowed to talk about that either,” he continues, adding, “We’re not allowed to even talk about one for us. No, no, no. We have to have nuclear power plants for our new god of AI.”

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

How Trump Can Make The Nixonian Dream Of 1,000 Nuclear Power Plants A Reality

As we grapple with the twin challenges of energy security and energy reliability, revisiting Nixon’s vision offers valuable lessons.

'Suicidal recklessness': Biden's missile authorization against Russia prompts talk of WWIII, impeachment



Before relinquishing power in January, President Joe Biden may turn America's proxy war with Russia into a direct nuclear conflict.

Elements of the Biden administration, various lawmakers from both major parties, Ukrainian officials, and others appear convinced that attacks on Russia using American long-range missiles might put Kyiv in a better bargaining position should the Eastern nations ever sit down to negotiate an end to the war, which has lasted over 1,000 days and claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.

Critics have suggested not only that the move might protract the war, which the majority of Ukrainians now want to end with immediate negotiations, but that it might trigger a nuclear holocaust or at the very least prevent — by design — President-elect Donald Trump from brokering peace upon taking office.

Missiles fired

After authorizing Ukraine's use of long-range missile systems against targets in Russia — a move long resisted by U.S. officials concerned about escalation and identified by Russian President Vladimir Putin as a trigger for war between Washington and Moscow — Kyiv launched six U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile System missiles Tuesday morning at a weapons depot in Karachev, a Russian city 70 miles inside the country, in the Bryansk region.

'We must not fear doing more now.'

According to CNN, Russian air defenses allegedly shot down five of the ATACMS supersonic missiles, and the sixth was damaged. Pieces of the damaged missile rained down near a military facility, causing a fire but resulting in neither death nor damage.

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed the attempted missile strikes and suggested that these and subsequent long-range missile strikes would be interpreted as U.S. military actions.

Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister, said in a statement, "The [Russian] president mentioned this several times. If long-range missiles are going to be applied from Ukraine into Russian territory, it will also mean that they are operated by American experts, military experts, and we will be taking this as a qualitatively new phase of the Western war against Russia and will react accordingly."

In his Tuesday address to the European Parliament, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said, "We must not fear doing more now."

"While some European leaders think about, you know, some elections or something like this at Ukraine's expense, Putin is focused on winning this war. He will not stop on his own. The more time he has, the worse the conditions become," said Zelenskyy.

The Institute for the Study of War indicated that as of June, Putin had captured roughly one-fifth of Ukraine, with Russian forces occupying 75% of the total area of the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts.

"Today is the best moment to push Russia harder, and it's clear without certain key factors Russia will lack real motivation to engage in meaningful negotiation," added Zelenskyy.

Hours later, Russia reportedly conducted missile strikes on Kharkiv, Dnipro, Chernihiv, and Sumy, as well as drone attacks inside Ukraine.

The U.S. embassy in Kyiv announced Wednesday morning that it was shutting its doors, citing the potential of a "significant air attack."

Nuclear, mine policies updated

Russian state media indicated that Moscow revised its nuclear doctrine this week in hopes of "making conventional warfare unachievable," qualifying attacks by a non-nuclear state in conjunction with the support of a nuclear state as a joint attack, satisfying the need for for nuclear deterrence.

Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chair of the Russian Federation's security council, noted on X, "Russia's new nuclear doctrine means NATO missiles fired against our country could be deemed an attack by the bloc on Russia. Russia could retaliate with WMD against Kiev and key NATO facilities, wherever they're located. That means World War III."

Russian President Vladimir Putin signaled that he would also respond with nukes to conventional attacks on Russia or Belarus. Russia has over 5,000 nuclear warheads and boasts a supersonic missile with a range of 625 miles.

Sergey Naryshkin, director of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, claimed that the West realizes "the revisions Putin outlined have largely undermined the attempts by the United States and NATO to achieve a strategic defeat of our nation. Furthermore, the expanded criteria for using nuclear weapons essentially rule out the possibility of defeating the Russian Armed Forces on the battlefield."

U.S. State Department spokesman Matthew Miller told the Associated Press, "I'm unfortunately not surprised by the comments the Kremlin has made around the publication of this new, revised document," adding that Russia has routinely sought to "coerce and intimidate both Ukraine and other countries around the world through irresponsible nuclear rhetoric and behavior."

The U.K. and other NATO members condemned the "irresponsible rhetoric" and reiterated their support for Ukraine.

The Biden administration had a policy update of its own.

Citing unnamed U.S. officials, the Washington Post reported that Biden authorized the provision of antipersonnel land mines to Ukraine.

"When they're used in concert with the other munitions that we already are providing Ukraine, the intent is that they will contribute to a more effective defense," said one of the officials.

While the U.S. is not one of the 164 parties to the Ottawa Convention, also known as the Mine Ban Treaty, Biden reportedly resurrected an Obama-era policy in 2022 banning the transfer and use of American antipersonnel land minds outside Korea.

Reactions

Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck suggested that the Biden administration is painting Russian President Vladimir Putin "into a corner."

"A man who is a bloodthirsty killer — you don't keep backing him into a corner, or what happens? Eventually he says, 'I'll have absolutely no credibility' [with] his people who have just been bombed with U.S. missiles, which he just said two days ago will be an act of war," said Beck. "We have entered a moment of madness. What Joe Biden did is impeachable."

'Americans do not want World War III.'

A day prior to the ATACMS strikes, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) insisted that Biden had committed "an unconstitutional Act of War" that qualified as an impeachable offense.

— (@)

Texas Rep. Keith Self (R) penned a letter to Biden Tuesday, challenging his decision to authorize Ukraine's use of ATACMS against Russia.

While Self suggested the missile systems might have proved strategically useful earlier in the conflict, at this stage in the war, their use is "counter-productive to President-elect Donald J. Trump's stated goal towards a negotiated peace."

'This is the faceless power of failing experts in action.'

"If this desperate move by your administration represents an attempt by deep-state operatives to hamstring the incoming Trump presidency, it's a dangerous miscalculation," wrote Self. "I am very concerned that this miscalculation could have catastrophic results. Americans do not want World War III."

"January 20 can't get here fast enough," Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told Fox News' Laura Ingraham. "It looks like a green light for escalation on the part of Ukraine. ... What would happen if Russia would launch and retaliate missiles into the territory of a NATO member? Then our treaty obligations would be triggered. Then we're talking about a full-scale war."

Hawley noted further that the man who authorized the use of the long-range missiles against a nuclear power was considered too decrepit by his own party to stay in the presidential race earlier this year.

Blaze News editor in chief Matthew Peterson stressed that "what is happening in regard to Russia and Ukraine while we have no functional President is one of the last, most reckless and outrageous acts from the supposed 'adults in the room' who have consistently driven our nation towards the cliff the last four disastrous years."

"This is not 'democracy,'" continued Peterson. "This is the faceless power of failing experts in action: thwarting the will of the people in the midst of the final 'lame duck' period of an aging dementia patient of a President. This is a form of masochistic, suicidal recklessness enacted by weak men."

Peterson added on "Blaze News Tonight," "There is really something that I think that is despicable about the self-assured foreign policy expert in this country. Of all the different sectors of government experts who get degrees, foreign policy people dress themselves up in the suits and in the trappings of -isms and -istics, and, 'We know all this stuff and we have domain knowledge that you don't have.' They're consistently the most evil, dangerous, and really foolish sector of the entire government complex."

— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Why It’s Terrifying That China’s Nuclear Capabilities Have Lapped The United States

China’s steady climb to the peak of nuclear energy technology underscores the need for a decisive American response.

Biden-Harris DOE official lampooned over 'queering nuclear weapons' initiative



A Biden-Harris Department of Energy official is facing ridicule over her radioactive recommendation that the policy community adopt a "queer lens," thus deprioritizing the "abstract idea of national security," when dealing with nuclear weapons and the power to exterminate all human life on the planet.

Sneha Nair started work in February as a special assistant in the National Nuclear Security Administration, the semi-autonomous nuclear security branch of the DOE. Just months earlier, she co-authored an article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists entitled "Queering nuclear weapons: How LGBTQ+ inclusion strengthens security and reshapes disarmament."

Early in the article, Nair and Louis Reitmann, an advocate for DEI in the nuclear field, expressed dissatisfaction with the critical response to a 2022 panel discussion about "LGBT+ Identity in the Nuclear Weapons Space."

'Queer theory can help change how nuclear practitioners, experts, and the public think about nuclear weapons.'

The Biden-Harris official suggested that criticism of the event — such as the suggestion that "they should not allow mentally ill people near weapons of mass destruction" — evidenced "the common belief that queer identity has no relevance for nuclear policy."

The remainder of the article appears to have been an attempt to correct that belief.

Nair and Reitmann emphasized:

We would like Bulletin readers to understand that the visible representation and meaningful participation of queer people matters for nuclear policy outcomes. Discrimination against queer people can undermine nuclear security and increase nuclear risk. And queer theory can help change how nuclear practitioners, experts, and the public think about nuclear weapons.

According to the duo, non-straight people have unique insights and "specific skills," such as empathy, that could come in handy when making decisions about nuclear weapons.

The inclusion of more non-straights and women into the greater policy community would apparently serve as a check on group think and possibly even upset the "perpetuation of theories like deterrence and crisis stability."

By "queering" the nuclear space, minority staff might also be spared some of the "enormous psychological stress" previously associated with making decisions around world-ending weapons.

'The Biden/Kamala regime is a danger to the entire country and sanity itself.'

Working under the presumption that non-straight workers offer unique perspectives and enjoy special skill sets, the Biden-Harris official and her DEI co-author indicated that their "exclusion creates nuclear security risks."

The Biden-Harris official and Reitmann suggested further that "queer theory," a radical spin-off of feminist theory, not only has a place in the nuclear weapons space but should help inform "how officials, experts, and the public think about nuclear weapons."

Should, for instance, a foreign adversary appear to be preparing for an intercontinental ballistic missile attack on the homeland, Nair would apparently want American officials thinking about a possible pre-emptive nuclear strike to also contemplate "whose experiences are being excluded."

"Queer theory is also about rejecting binary choices and zero-sum thinking, such as the tenet that nuclear deterrence creates security and disarmament creates vulnerability," said the article. "Queer theory helps to shift the perception of nuclear weapons as instruments for security by telling the hidden stories of displacement, illness, and trauma caused by their production and testing."

Shortly after the publication of this article, Nair co-authored a policy paper claiming "that development of a DEI nuclear security culture is not only a sustainable solution to these long-standing challenges but critical to strengthening the nuclear security community’s ability to identify and mitigate threats in a shifting national security landscape."

Conservative filmmaker Robby Starbuck was among the many critics who responded to the recently resurfaced article, tweeting, "The Biden/Kamala regime is a danger to the entire country and sanity itself."

"As I've long said, DEI is simply a Trojan horse for left wing values that's meant to solidify total power consolidation by the left," continued Starbuck. "Once they fully consolidate, there's no going back for decades. Opposing this virus and removing it should be the actual national security objective. Oh and yes, China is laughing at us."

Libs of TikTok posed the question online: "Can someone explain how 'queer theory' has anything to do with managing our nuclear energy?"

The Biden-Harris DOE appears to have attracted more than one LGBT radical in recent years.

Samuel Brinton, a nuclear engineer who ran a "Physics of Kink" class and made a habit of dressing in women's clothing, served as deputy assistant secretary for spent fuel and waste disposition in the Office of Nuclear Energy at the Energy Department. He recently pleaded guilty to petit larceny for stealing women's luggage.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Russia and China are planning to build nuclear reactor on the moon to power settlements



Russia and China appear have to joint aspirations of building a nuclear reactor on the moon to power future settlements. According to Yuri Borisov, the CEO of Russia's equivalent to NASA, Roscosmos, the construction of the reactor would be part of an unmanned mission relying on those technological solutions the two nations intend to master in the latter half of this decade.

"Today, we are seriously considering a project to deliver to the moon and mount a power reactor there jointly with our Chinese partners somewhere between 2033 and 2035," Borisov said during a talk at the World Youth Festival in Krasnodar Krai, Russia.

The work on the reactor would be automated on account of radiation.

Reuters noted that nuclear power is regarded as necessary because solar panels apparently do not generate enough electricity to power future lunar settlements.

In addition to a nuclear reactor and an "interplanetary station" on the moon, Borisov suggested Russia was also "working on a space tugboat. This huge, cyclopean structure that would be able, thanks to a nuclear reactor and high-power turbines ... to transport large cargoes from one orbit to another, collect space debris, and engage in many other applications."

Russian state media noted that Roscosmos and China National Space Administration signed an agreement in March 2021 to cooperate on the development of an international lunar research station. To advance this project, Beijing plans on sending three missions, Chang'e 6, Chang'e 7, and Chang'e 8.

The construction of a nuclear reactor on the moon would be part of a subsequent series of lunar missions.

The initial lunar missions, scheduled to begin in 2026 and proceed through 2028, would test key technology and set the groundwork for a robotics base where experiments and research could be conducted remotely.

CNSA plans to launch a relay satellite to work in conjunction with the Chang'e 6 mission sometime this year, reported CNN.

China appears to have been emboldened in its cosmic pursuits after the successful construction of its orbital Tiangong space station in 2022 and its rover's journey to the dark side of the moon in 2019.

Gen. Stephen Whiting, the U.S. Space Command chief, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last week that space has become an "expanding security challenge" and that communist China was growing its "military space and counterspace abilities at a breathtaking pace," reported The Hill.

On Tuesday at the 2024 Space Summit, Whiting indicated that Russia, too, poses a "formidable" challenge to the U.S. in space even though its first lunar mission in decades, Luna 25, crashed into the moon's surface last year.

Newsweek indicated that Borisov's announcement of possible fission on the moon has the wonks at the Institute for the Study of War concerned about a fusion of Russia and China's long-term strategies.

The ISW, a think tank based in Washington, D.C., suggested that Borisov's remarks were "indicative of warming relations and Chinese willingness to foster a long-term strategic partnership with Russia to posture against and possibly threaten the West."

"A strategic space partnership with China suggests that Russia would be unlikely to use this or similar technology against China and that both states would mutually benefit from Russia's posturing against the West through space and satellite technology," added the ISW.

The strategic ties between China and Russia have been strengthening in recent years, especially economically.

The Straits Times noted that Sino-Russia trade hit a record high of $240 billion last year.

China's foreign minister Wang Yi said Thursday that the two powers have created "a new paradigm of great power relations that is completely different from that of old Cold War era."

According to Bonny Lin, the director of the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Russia's war against Ukraine has helped to solidify Moscow's relationship with Beijing.

Lin offered various reasons to account for this solidification, but noted that Western efforts to economically punish Russia over its invasion of Ukraine especially "amplified concerns in Beijing that Washington and its allies could be similarly unaccommodating toward Chinese designs on Taiwan."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

China developed nuclear battery giving cell phones radioactive power lasting 50 years, drones could last 'forever'



A Chinese company has claimed to have developed a nuclear battery that provides enough energy to power a cell phone for 50 years without a charge.

China's Betavolt New Energy Technology company has claimed to have developed a new battery that utilizes a combination of a nickel-63 (⁶³Ni) radioactive isotope and a 4th-generation diamond semiconductor. The result is reportedly a battery that provides enough power to last for 50 years.

The brand new modular nuclear battery makes new energy promises that have never been realized.

New Atlas recently reported, "Betavolt's new battery, called the BV100, uses two single-crystal diamond semiconductor layers with a thickness of 10 microns each sandwiching a 2-micron layer of ⁶³Ni. Each one of these sandwiches can produce current, but they can also be stacked or linked like old-fashioned voltaic cells to form hundreds of independent unit modules that work together to boost the current."

According to TechRadar, "Betavolt Technology claims to have successfully miniaturized atomic energy batteries, which measure less than a coin at 15 x 15 x 5mm. The compact battery uses the radioactive isotope Nickel 63 to generate 100 microwatts and a voltage of 3V of electricity through the process of radioactive decay."

"The battery is currently in the pilot testing stage and Betavolt plans to mass-produce them for commercial devices like phones and drones, but also states nuclear batteries could be used for aerospace equipment," TechRadar reported. "AI, medical equipment, advanced sensors, and micro-robots. The Beijing-based company claims to have drawn inspiration from devices such as pacemakers, and satellites."

Betavolt plans to produce a 1-watt battery by 2025.

TechRadar reported, "It could even prove to be safer too, as Betavolt states that the BV100 will not catch fire or explode in response to punctures or even gunshots, unlike some current batteries that can be unsafe if damaged or when exposed to high temperatures."

There are reports that this new technology could provide drones with enough power to allow them to fly "forever."

The Independent reported, "Their small size means they could be used in series to produce more power, with the company imagining mobile phones that never need to be charged and drones that can fly forever. Its layered design also means it will not catch fire or explode in response to sudden force, Betavolt claims, while also being capable of working in temperatures ranging from -60C to 120C."

"To create this revolutionary battery, Betavolt's scientists used nickel-63, a radioactive element, as the energy source. They employed diamond semiconductors to convert the energy. The team developed a thin single-crystal diamond semiconductor, only 10 microns thick, and placed a 2-micron-thick nickel-63 sheet between two diamond semiconductor converters. The decay energy of the radioactive source is then converted into electrical current," according to The Economic Times.

“The atomic energy battery developed by Betavolt is absolutely safe, has no external radiation, and is suitable for use in medical devices such as pacemakers, artificial hearts and cochleas in the human body,” the company stated. "Atomic energy batteries are environmentally friendly. After the decay period, the 63 isotopes turn into a stable isotope of copper, which is non-radioactive and does not pose any threat or pollution to the environment."

Like Blaze News? Circumvent the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

France poised to drop renewable targets and fully embrace nuclear energy to ensure 'energy sovereignty'



France is looking to lean more heavily on nuclear power, having apparently realized that a civilized and productive nation cannot reliably run off so-called renewable energy.

The French government will consider legislation in early February that would eliminate renewable power objectives within France's energy code, including targets for reducing energy consumption by way of renovating buildings. France24 indicated that the legislation sets no explicit targets for building renewable capacity.

Instead of mucking around with objectives for renewables, the legislation would have France embrace "the sustainable choice of using nuclear energy as a competitive and carbon-free" source of power.

To this end, the proposed French legislation — touted as a means to ensure "energy sovereignty" — would push for the construction of between six and 14 new nuclear reactors.

Energy Transition Minister Agnes Pannier-Runacher told the weekly newspaper La Tribune Dimanche that the construction of these reactors is necessary to reduce the country's reliance on fossils fuels to 40% from 60% by 2035, reported Reuters.

The U.S. Department of Energy admitted in 2021 that nuclear energy was the most reliable energy source, at least on this side of the Atlantic Ocean. Each nuclear reactor typically generates the same amount of power as 431 utility-scale wind turbines or 3.1 million solar panels.

In addition to being less productive than nuclear and fossil fuels, renewables are unreliable.

A 2021 study published in the journal Nature Communications indicated, "If future net-zero emissions energy systems rely heavily on solar and wind resources, spatial and temporal mismatches between resource availability and electricity demand may challenge system reliability."

The researchers indicated that "the most reliable renewable electricity systems are wind-heavy and satisfy countries' electricity demand in 72-91% of hours ... Yet even in systems which meet >90% of demand, hundreds of hours of unmet demand may occur annually."

Despite the efficacy of nuclear, the French legislation has been met with some criticism.

Arnaud Gosse, a lawyer with the French energy-focused firm Gosse Avocats, suggested in a blog post that the bill, which goes before the French cabinet next month, "weakens France's climate objectives, starting with the objective of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. The objective would no longer be to 'reduce' but to tend towards a reduction in 'our greenhouse gas emissions.'"

Gosse suggested further to France24 that the bill "a terrible step back."

Jules Nyssen, the president of France's Renewable Energies Union, was unsurprisingly antagonistic of the bill, claiming he was "stunned" to learn it removes renewable targets.

Anne Bringault, an activist at Climate Action Network — an alarmist group that seeks "transformational change in our societies and economies" — told France24, "this is an extremely significant step backwards, and totally inconsistent with European objectives."

RFI reported that France remains among the lowest emitters of greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union largely thanks to the 57 nuclear reactors it has built since the 1973 oil crisis.

Reuters indicated that an increase in French exports of nuclear power to other European nations would likely reduce their dependence on fossil fuels and thereby spare climate alarmists the guilt often associated with winter warmth.

Already this year, France has reportedly overseen a three-year high in nuclear generation. From Jan. 2-9, France was an average daily net exporter of over 12.2 gigawatts of power, with roughly 3 gigawatts going to Germany and another six headed to Switzerland, the U.K., and Italy.

France is not the only European nation waking up to the unreliability of renewable electricity. The Swedish parliament announced last year that in the interest of a "stable energy system," it would have to abandon its goal of "100 per cent renewable electricity production by 2040."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!