this post was submitted on 24 May 2025
199 points (99.5% liked)

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

6606 readers
283 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
 

It's worth noting that he also fired many of the staff who know how to ensure that they're actually safe, as well as the staff who would approve financing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Mihies@programming.dev 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (50 children)

Nope, today nuclear actually makes sense. Renewables are cool and relatively cheap but only as long as they output power. Then what? Spin up that coal power plant such as during night? And produce a ton of climate warming co2 and a lot of pollution. The problem is that we don't have energy storage nor a viable solution for it. Said that, cutting corners is a big no-no.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (21 children)

If you start a nuclear project today, you'll get it in 20 years. And that's for conventional reactor designs with all their well known flaws. If you spend the same money on renewables and storage, you'll have it all up and running next year. We don't have 20 years. We need solutions now.

[–] Rakonat@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

This isn't even remotely true. Japan builds nuclear reactor in average of 5 years.

Edit for the down vote brigade:

80% or all nuclear reactors go from official planning to commercial production in under 10 years.

The longest process in building a nuclear reactor is cutting through red tape and getting permits cause of all the NIMBY and idiots progating mytha and lies about nuclear that originate in fossil fuels lobby.

Nuclear is the most ecologically friendly and safe power generation source we have until industrial scale fusion gets hammered out.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

How many nuclear reactors did Japan build in the past five years? Ten years? Twenty years? Thirty years?

[–] PagPag@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This comment sounds incredibly naive and yet smug at the same time. It’s this same confident stupidity that has led us here in the first place.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world -1 points 6 days ago

Insults instead of any attempt at an argument? Yeah, checks out.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (46 replies)