And my question still stands.

Do you condemn Israel’s Genocide?

If you think that being vocal about the Genocide of Palestinians is driving people and support away from deserving ideas and causes, I have to ask you:

Do you condemn Israel’s Genocide?

I am not an expert on bees, but I’ve had long discussions on the topic with friends who are beekeepers. The more we talked the more I understood I knew nothing on the topic.

I can’t say I remember too many details from these conversations. Still, there is one thing that stuck with me: the fact that we say they have a Queen, tells more about us observing them and our frame of reference, than about the way they actually organise. In a way, it’s more about projecting a belief system, on what we see, instead of just observing and trying to describe it. Something like that.

The scientific community is not a unified body, so having scientists questioning any scientific model does not seem like a “wow” moment. But, when the discourse starts including strong vocabulary, admittedly I start questioning/researching claims. And I appreciate it when studies conclude by saying things like: cautious of interpretation is needed, or further studies are warranted, etc.

Apart from that, sure, maybe the LNT model needs some re-evaluation, maybe not - I dunno, time will tell. Still, to my understanding, one problem with ionising radiation is that the dosage received by people is not always as tightly controlled as needed for it to be safe, despite all efforts. Not even in work environments.

- If I got this right, from in table 1, p3 one could get to the conclusion that to decommission photovoltaics creates 7 times more CO₂ (more precisely g CO2e/kWh), than decommissionning a nuclear plant for decades, as shown above. It made me wonder how they arrived to these measurements. But the link to the study for the nuclear is dead (see Heath, Garvin A., and Margaret K. Mann. 2012). So this cannot be verified.

• Having a potential solution in the works for nuclear waste is very different from what you said, which was: Nuclear waste is not and has never been a real problem.

Bye-bye now

Edit: The strikethrough, because it looks like the decommissioning of nuclear power plants was not reliably assessed after all. To be more precise, this is the 2012 meta study that is used for the g CO2e/kWh from nuclear decommissioning, and that I had difficulty finding. It clearly states:

Decommissioning was not usually described in detail; when described, most seem to closely resemble only “immediate dismantling,” not full decommissioning (see the Downstream Processes section of the supporting information on the Web).

The lifecycle emissions of nuclear plants are similar to (…)

The link you provided talks about something more specific than what you just said. It’s about the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Electricity Generation. This means that the decommissioning of a nuclear plant for example is not taken into account for these emissions, and it is well known that decommissioning a nuclear power station can easily take several decades (example from world nuclear news)

Nuclear waste is not and has never been a real problem.

The links I added above about France tell another story.

Edit: I looked a bit more into decommissioning and found the following from the International Atomic Energy Agency, and thought of sharing for easier visualisation

In terms of cleanness it is also incredibly clean.

I believe nowadays it would make more sense to compare nuclear to renewable energy, not coal. Apart from that it’s important to keep in mind the nuclear waste problem.

• France seeks strategy as nuclear waste site risks saturation point | Reuters
• Exposed: French nuclear companies dumping radioactive waste in Siberia | Greenpeace

Thanks for this, it’s the first time I hear about this and it certainly sounds very interesting. I’m gonna look more into this as soon as I find the time. In the meantime, if you know more about them and feel like sharing about your experience using them, or anything actually, I’ll be glad to have your input.

May I also suggest something? Perhaps add in the post title something like anti-marketplace or anything like that, so that it is a bit clearer what they are for those of us who don’t know. (English is not my first language and just woke up, but still silly me, by reading the title I thought they were currency exchange apps. And now my coffee is ready!)

Bill Gates is a notorious capitalist. As mentioned in this article:

Gates sees nuclear power as a way to provide data centers with the power they need as well as to lower electricity costs.

He only cares about his projects and money, definitely not about people. See:

Tell Bill Gates: Stop Microsoft’s partnerships with the Israeli Military and ICE

“Fast action” in what sense? It looks like the nuclear phase-out in Germany started decades ago.

The history behind Germany’s nuclear phase-out

The nuclear phase-out is as much part of the Energiewende (energy transition) as the move towards a low-carbon economy. (…) a majority of Germans is still in favour of putting an end to nuclear power.

after 1989 no new commercial nuclear power stations were built

This is exiting news! Fingers crossed that this process goes as smoothly as possible for you, and thank you for everything.

I think you are being too harsh on yourself! Due to its content there are very few post every month, so it’s super easy to miss. Apart from that, I am glad you discovered it because I have the impression you sound kinda happy for it.

I really liked it so I thought of posting the audiobook too.

It looks like we see this differently. I would share this blame if we shared the profits, not because I’d rather live under a roof. Apart from that, the consumers in this case are often other companies that demolish houses to make malls and other commercial stuff.

This pie chart was retrieved from eurostat.

It looks like it’s the latest one, and that the next one is planned for October 2026 (more here). In this link they clearly state that:

Several of the EU countries with particularly high levels of waste generated per inhabitant reported very high shares of waste from mining and quarrying, while elsewhere construction and demolition often contributed to the high shares.

So 100% of the waste regardless of the source, divided by the total number of people = tonnes of waste generated per EU inhabitant. So the blame of polluting the environment is statistically transposed from the relevant industries to all the people.

Of course cultural appropriation of spiritual indigenous narratives from westerners is something that has been happening for decades. And I totally see the point of your analysis.

In a way, what I was trying to say is that even tho this kinds of appropriations need to be fought so they don’t take over the political discourse about ecology, by itself this doesn’t seem enough imo. In order to fight the power imbalance that colonisers have created throughout the centuries, I believe there is also a need to consciously take into consideration, as well as incorporate the suggestions and approaches of indigenous people in the relevant discourses in western politics, ecology, and their intersections. Certainly, without the element of appropriation, but as as equals.

I tend to agree with this article, but it is also a very slippery slope.

We must be careful not to erase once more indigenous/local narratives because we don’t like the vocabulary used. We risk to contribute into reproducing the colonisers’ power imbalance by disregarding local knowledge, just because it is presented in non-western way (i.e. cultural burnings).

I thought of adding an invidious link to this video, because for me it says Video unavailable - The uploader has not made this video available in your country

I really don’t understand why this video is so highly downvoted. Can someone try to eli5?

Maybe, I really don’t know. Do you perhaps have a relevant tutorial to share?