• 1 Post
  • 23 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 11th, 2023

help-circle









  • Amen.

    For people who are not from Argentina, you should at least make the effort to understand the current problems argentinian society is facing.

    If you don’t care to do that, why even share any opinion at all and just hate Milei.

    There’s a lot of good reasons to hate the other candidates too. Even more than Milei if you ask me. The thing is, this guy does not come from the elite ruling class.

    Disclaimer: I am not Argentinian, but I have family and friends over there.










  • There’s also United States of Brazil.

    But you’ve got “Mexican” and “Brazilian” for both of those countries that include United States in their proper names.

    I’d continue to say “United statean” in Spanish because that’s an accepted name in the Spanish language. There’s no confusion to what country you’re referring to.

    But in English it is a lost battle. If you mean to include people from the entire continent, you’d have to say “American, as in the continent”.

    Edit: The current official name of Brazil is Federative Republic of Brazil.


  • racsol@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlPower Sources
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    All technologies you’ve mentioned are in R&D, not ready to use as you seem to imply. Great investment is still required to implement them at-scale. What I’d agree on is that It’s in our best interest to invest heavily in them, and they are probably underfunded given their importance in the survival of humanity.

    The idea that we can transition from fossil fuels to traditional renewables (solar, wind, etc) while refusing to rely on nuclear power seems wishful thinking to me. In the short and mid-term (10-20 years) we only have nuclear as a realistic alternative for clean energy. In this transition, we can develop those promising methods of energy storage and also build the necessary infrastructure they require.

    Just to provide a real case scenario: Germany vs. France.

    Both Germany and France want to reach zero emissions by 2050.

    We know how Germany opted to phase out nuclear power already in the year 2000 and completed its ‘nuclear exit’ in April 2023. Compare that to France that since 1974 has been heavily investing in nuclear power with the goal of producing most of its energy from it (Messmer Plan (Wikipedia)).

    The results for me are apparent:

    Greenhouse gas emissions 2021 in Germany: 665.88 megatonnes (8.0 tonnes/capita)

    Greenhouse gas emissions 2021 in France: 302.33 megatonnes (4.5 tonnes/capita)

    Source: How energy systems and policies of Germany and France compare .

    I’d take a real reduction in green house emissions any day before the “wish” of reducing them while refusing to make any compromise.

    Without being disrespectful, I think it is a big mistake to refuse prioritize nuclear power to replace fossil fuels in the near future if the goal is to reduce greenhouse emissions.