this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2025
68 points (100.0% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

6237 readers
303 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
68
Perhaps the biggest winner in Germany’s election: nuclear power (www.motherjones.com)
submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

What kind of dumb argument is that? "Nobody would do that if it was bad, so because people do it it must be good". Pff. "Drugs must be good, otherwise people wouldn't do them". "Shit must be good, otherwise flies wouldn't eat it".

Energy markets are merit order markets. As long as there's a single jerk that's more expensive than you, that's a good thing. Even better, if you own 10 power plants that are cheap as fuck, you'll do your best to keep the expensive plant running and selling its power, just because that's the price you'll then get for your 10 cheaper ones as well.

One kWh from wind turbines sells for about 8 cents where I live. From a nuclear plant, that's about 42 cents. That's more than I pay for it at my plug. Nuclear plants live on subsidies from the state. And afterwards they dump their waste at the feet of the people who paid extra for their stupid generation method.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Drugs must be good, otherwise people wouldn’t do them

Yes, that is why people unironically do drugs.

As for nuclear energy, it is cost competitive with renewables, and cheaper than fossil fuels. I'm not going to bother giving you links to supporting studies though, because let's be honest, you're not interested in changing your mind, and I don't argue with science deniers who are religiously hellbent on preconceived notions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

Yes, that is why people unironically do drugs.

The point is that societies or governments should have more foresight than just to the next high.

As for nuclear energy, it is cost competitive with renewables

I call bullshit. Here are my sources, where are yours?

https://www.bund-sh.de/energie/atomkraft/hintergrund/die-wahren-kosten-von-atomkraft/

https://www.unendlich-viel-energie.de/projekte/erneuerbar-statt-atomar/mythos-5-liefert-uns-atomkraft-billigen-strom

https://www.mittelstandsbund.de/themen/energiewende/atomkraft-in-deutschland