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

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

6585 readers
297 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
silence7@slrpnk.net
186
Trump Orders Faster Build-Out of Nuclear Power Plants | Among a flurry of executive actions, Mr. Trump directed the nation’s nuclear safety regulator to speed up approvals for new reactors. (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 1 day ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
109 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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
[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

You don't actually need to get as much power out of them - this is a benefit of a system built upon renewables. There's far greater resilience as the power generation is spread out over more nodes, leading to less large potential points of failure. Add in distributed localized storage capacity, and you've got a far more sophisticated solution than one based on a few large nuclear plants.

[–] Lightor@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

You don't need to get at much power? You need a certain amount of power, and even if you setup a country wide grid that can self balance, it's is still prone to tons of issues. You then have to setup and manage storage. Issues nuclear just doesn't have.

The solution you're presenting is sophisticated yes, but that's not good. That's more points of failure, more things that can break in the complicated system. You need to account for: weather impacts, storage imbalance and redistribution, maintaining communication between all nodes to balance, finding suitable places to build solar fields, cleaning and maintaining all those panels, having good sun tracking to get max power value, etc. Nuclear makes power and sends it, whenever needed. It's that simple.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 hours ago

It's that simple.

That's such a massive oversimplification of operating a nuclear power plant that I'm not quite sure there's any more value to be had in this discussion.