BestBouclettes

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 97 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

And homosexuality, and mental health, and ADHD, and...

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

They kind of were, then they started soldering and glueing everything shut because it was cheaper

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 weeks ago

Not shitting outside, and catching or dying from treatable diseases, and income tax if they get a job. If they don't have to live outside, everyone benefits.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

That's not the beginning, it's more than halfway past now

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, they're testing the water to see how far they can push

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The downside is less money going towards the rich

[–] [email protected] 139 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

JWST doing exactly what it was supposed to do ! That's both exciting and terrifying !

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago

He says it like it is, but I promise, you're looking waaay too much into what he says !

[–] [email protected] 52 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

That's the great thing about trickle down economics, when it goes up, they get richer and we get poorer. When it goes down, we get poorer and they get richer !

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

I was talking specifically about plant and animal life.

It's obviously not a paradise, but what I mean is, ionising radiation is literally less harmful to them than human presence. That's pretty bonkers to think about.
Leave that zone alone, let nature take over again and make it a monument to human hubris.

I don't think I talked about growing food in irradiated ground though? But, we currently are growing food in polluted ground thanks to fossil fuels (microplastics, coal dust, oil leaks, fracking in some backwards ass countries, etc.).

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Well, good news, because I'm not the one saying it. That's coming from our Transmission Operator. Everything is detailed in their 992 page report:

https://www.rte-france.com/analyses-tendances-et-prospectives/bilan-previsionnel-2050-futurs-energetiques#Lesresultatsdeletude

What it says is that 100% renewables in France by 2050 is not possible, as the technology is not quite there yet, and also because our energy consumption ever keeps growing.

What they propose is a mix of nuclear and renewables to reach carbon neutrality, then phasing out nuclear over decades.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Completely moving away from fossil fuels with just renewables is a pipe dream. Nuclear is not a panacea and it has its problems but it's part of the solution to get rid of fossil fuels entirely.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
view more: ‹ prev next ›