this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
17 points (87.0% liked)

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

5239 readers
507 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
17
Nuclear Power Was Once Shunned at Climate Talks. Now, It’s a Rising Star. | Growing worldwide energy demand and other factors have shifted the calculus, but hurdles still lie ahead. (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 3 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

No it's not.

It's a rising star with climate change deniers who wave it around as a "viable" "new" energy source that competes with the, in their opinion unviable solar and wind energy alternative which are already running and generating power at a fraction of the cost associated with building nuclear power plants.

How many more Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Sellafied and Fukushima will it take for people to get it through their thick skulls that running a nuclear plant on Earth is not reasonable?

Sellafield happened in 1957 and they're still cleaning up the site and aren't expecting to finish this century, and that's if they don't run out of money.

Chernobyl is in the middle of the war between Russia and Ukraine and continues to be threatened by idiots with small dicks and big guns.

Nuclear power is not a viable option.