this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
2165 points (94.4% liked)

World News

39032 readers
2458 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 6) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Kyoto was in 1997. 2030 is 33 years, you can't seriously consider 1.5 generations is a sprint.

Which, by the way, there is almost no conceivable way we are going to meet the 2030 deadline to maintain 1.5C. We have to think longer term.

There still is no zero emissions technology for long haul airlines, shipping, or pouring concrete for infrastructure. Those are all huge emitters.

[–] kaffiene@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (23 children)

I don't think we should shutter existing nuclear plants, but renewables are a better idea than new nuclear plants

[–] utopianfiat@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think we should do whatever decarbonizes us faster

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 4 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


In April, the environmental campaign group announced it would appeal against the EU Commission’s decision to include nuclear power in its classification system for sustainable finance.

Ia Aanstoot, from Sweden, who for three years took part in the Friday school strikes movement started by Greta Thunberg, said Greenpeace’s legal challenge served fossil fuel interests instead of climate action.

This week, Aanstoot submitted papers to the EU court of justice asking to become an “interested party” in the upcoming legal battle between the European Commission and Greenpeace.

One of these, Julia Galosh, a 22-year-old biologist, said: “I’ve protested opposite Greenpeace in horror as they campaigned to stop Germany’s nuclear reactors – something which led to much more demand for coal.

A Greenpeace EU spokesperson said: “We have the greatest respect for folks who are worried about the climate crisis and want to throw everything we have at the problem, but building new nuclear plants just isn’t a viable solution.

Encouraging investments into nuclear energy by including it in the EU taxonomy risks diverting funding away from renewables, home insulation and support for people hit by extreme weather.


The original article contains 764 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›