this post was submitted on 31 May 2024
51 points (96.4% liked)

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

5289 readers
554 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]
51
Georgia governor calls for even more nuclear power despite budget woes (grist.org)
submitted 5 months ago by jeffw to c/[email protected]
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kalkulat 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's thanks to the training (started with Rickover) and discipline and no shareholders. Commercial nukes don't measure up, e.g. when it comes to leakages and knowing what to do in case.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Now you're just being disingenuous. I am certain that qualified individuals from the private sector and qualified individuals from the military both receive adequate training to operate their facilities

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

What's funny about this is that most of the qualified private sector individuals are former Navy personnel. The civilian nuclear industry loves to hire people with nuclear training from the Navy because they're already trained and experienced.

The Navy does operate a lot of nuclear reactors, and quite safely overall, but they also spend DoD money on building and maintaining them and training personnel for them.

[–] kalkulat 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Way to start out with an ad hominem. Cheap too. Since you're 'certain' (and I know very well that's hard to come by for this sacred cow), your #1 reference?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If I called you stupid that would have been an ad hominem attack, I'm saying you're misrepresenting facts which would require intelligence. Therefore, disingenuous.

[–] kalkulat 0 points 5 months ago

Poor governor of Georgia, one more in a long, long line.

I learned much of what I know about how facts are misrepresented by reading advertisements by the industry. Like the full-page regional newspaper ad along the lines of "One myth about nuclear power is ... instead the fact is this ... " back in the 1970s. Or my all-time favorite fact, one of the earliest: Safe, clean, 'too cheap to meter', said AEC chairman Lewis Strauss, in 1954.

Maybe it was catching? But the facts, like those countless millions of escaped curies, were invisible. Convenient.

This 14-year-old Fermi story might help: https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-detroit-nuclear-20161003-snap-story.html