This would be true, except for the fact that nuclear is terrible at filling in slack times. Nuclear power for the most part needs to run really consistently, 24/7. Better to fill gaps with a diversity of reasources, more transmission, and storage.
Basically no one outside of china is advocating for coal use anymore, so this is a BS comparison. The much more apt comparison is against wind, solar, and storage, against which nuclear is far more dangerous. Also, it’s hard for environmental damage assessment to take into account the EXTREMELY long-lived impacts of fuel “disposal”.
I like the Bourne Ultimatum theory better. We peaked there and will never achieve that high again!
Same! And most of that’s just rent!
I didn’t know that reference but this makes is so much better!
The pilot on my plane a few years back was named Max Power
Musk’s wealth went up in 2020. So did several other billionaires. The ultra wealthy don’t obey the same rules you and I do, and they’re still making billions when the world is shit.
Is this what the Cheese of Truth guy does?
It’s impressive that every part of this is wrong!
I visited Molossia a while ago, dude was awesome and super friendly. Plus the weather in Molossia is always perfect, although with the close borders with Nevada sometimes the bad weather from the US bleeds in.
Looked at your profile, you’re in Mexico? Ultimately the question you need to ask yourself is how your political decisions (voting or not voting) impacting others. Like someone else said, if you live in society with others there is no such thing as “not being political”, every action has consequences.
If you want to support a conservative politician who is harming other people from a community you identify with, you need to know that’s what you’re doing and that it has an impact. If you don’t vote to oppose a candidate who harms you community, you also need to be aware of that and recognize that you had a part in making it happen.
Do what you want and identify how you will, but regardless it’s probably going to impact others, positively or negatively.
Well that is a fascinating and bizarre definition.
Where are you? Most US conservatives use socialism as the bogeyman and practically a swear word.
Exactly! In the report, the companies that do have meaningful goals of at least 80% emissions reductions by 2030 do WAY better than the rest of the companies! But a 2050 goal is meaningless, and “net” zero by 2050 is even more meaningless because they can claim to fill it with carbon capture or carbon credits.
The wrong wiki is linked, but here is the right one if anyone is interested! Wiki:Lemmy
Edit: nevermind, wrong article is linking because of a bug in Lemmy.
I mean, we obviously need to do both. The conversation in the thread is about nuclear, which is a supply side resource. DR and demand shaping do even more to enable truly renewable resources. Why do the demand shaping to enable nuclear when renewables are cleaner and cheaper?