this post was submitted on 24 May 2025
167 points (99.4% liked)

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

6585 readers
282 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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ton@lemmy.world 1 points 57 minutes ago

Great, more power at unrealistic prices in… 2045.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 hour ago

What prevents the approval of the reactors, is it bad designs or just a case of planning permission delays because people don't want a nuclear reactor built. Surprised to see Trump being in favour as nuclear as he normally seems to favour the oil industry.

[–] collapse_already@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I am sure making consideration of climate change impacts illegal during the approval process won't have adverse consequences. When the water used to cool the reactor dries up, we'll have plenty of money and foresight to just pump it in from somewhere else, right?

[–] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Cooling water is generally cycled.

[–] Birch@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 hour ago

Not really, those massive cooling towers use evaporative cooling and that water just goes poof

[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 hours ago

Individually alot of his ideas could be good, with proper care and planning. Instead he does them all at once without any sort of considerations, its wild to witness this train wreck.

[–] BlackSheep@lemmy.ca 6 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

This is the Titan Submersible all over again, only on a devastatingly national level.

[–] BlackSheep@lemmy.ca 12 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Let me elaborate. I think nuclear power is a great option, but not if you’ve removed real scientists and proper engineers. Trump doesn’t like scientists and engineers. Or anyone really, that doesn’t agree with him.

[–] endeavor@sopuli.xyz 8 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Nuclear power is the safest, cheapest and cleanest only because we have learned so many painful mistakes and that every new reactor is built with only safety in mind.

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 3 points 8 hours ago

No discard all that so we make steam now!

/s

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 3 points 10 hours ago

Quite glad that America is far away from where I am.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 18 points 23 hours ago

great idea, nothing wrong will come from pressuring the nuclear power regulators. nuh uh.

load more comments
view more: next ›