/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16309346]

Is the Green New Deal a grift? Why the focus on windmills and solar energy when we have nuclear energy unless that is included in it?

What can I read about this?

[Anonymous No.16309354]

[Anonymous No.16309355]

>>16309346
This is a literary fiction board.

[Anonymous No.16309360]

>>16309355
reality doesn't endorse that

[Anonymous No.16309372]

>>16309346
Yes, govt energy "plans" are black holes with no accountability. Remember obama's solar "investment"? Billions given to his masters. Every single one of these plans will be used for "awareness" while whoever's ceo's son is in charge gets millions a year in administration pay

[Anonymous No.16309384]

>>16309346
it's too late

[Anonymous No.16309408]

>>16309384
I can accept this. Humanity was a mistake

[Anonymous No.16310454]

bump

[Anonymous No.16310510]

>>16309346
Nuclear has some nasty cons we don't have a surefire way to deal with. inb4 MUH FUTURISTIC MAGIC TECH WILL SOLVE IT.

The only false aspect about the GND is that it still doesn't address the actual problem. Even if the entire world had magic pollution free energy solution tomorrow, it'd only give us a bit more time. COONSUMERISM and sustainability just don't mix.

[Anonymous No.16310524]

>>16309346
Solar and Wind have massive periods of time that produce no energy. During these down-times, the energy void will be filled by coal and natural gas.
>>16310510
>Nuclear has some nasty cons we don't have a surefire way to deal with. inb4 MUH FUTURISTIC MAGIC TECH WILL SOLVE IT.
In a thread like this you should really take the time and effort to state the reasons behind your opinions.

[Anonymous No.16310544]

Green energy has been co-opted by the fossil fuel industry. There is no hope. There is no saving grace. We are doomed to a slow destruction and every child brought unto this earth is an unethical and selfish decision. We can not undo what has been done in time to save the human race.

[Anonymous No.16310561]

>>16310524
Oh come on, the whole nuclear pros and cons are known to anyone who even remotely looked into it. The risks of shit going wrong (as small as they are) and storage of waste just isn't worth it, unless there are absolutely no other other options for the region in question.

>>16310544
>Green energy has been co-opted by the fossil fuel industry.
What is the issue if they actually switch to green and shut down the fossil fuel shit? Sure, in the end the ones who caused the problem wouldn't face the consequences but that seems like a secondary concern now.

[Anonymous No.16310574]

>>16310561
That would be great but the profit margins and the actual end result of what the industry has done regarding green energy shows that they don’t give a shit and are using it as a marketing ploy and a strong arm of the industry.

[Anonymous No.16310597]

>>16309346
Yes. Nuclear is our only hope. It's already solved climate change so it's a threat to (((them))). It's literally only a political problem, not an engineering problem.

[Anonymous No.16310601]

>>16310510
Read about Gen 4 nuclear b4 speaking.

[Anonymous No.16310616]

>>16310597
Nuclear is obsolete.

[Anonymous No.16310628]

>>16310601
>Generation IV reactors (Gen IV) are a set of nuclear reactor designs currently being researched
>Gen IV reactors might enter commercial operation between 2020 and 2030.[4]. However, as at August 2020, no Gen IV projects have advanced significantly beyond the design stage, and several have been abandoned.
Yeah, that's a bit late buddy. And sure, you can blame some of it on greens paranoia from decades ago and obviously companies trying to get max bucks from ancient designs; but it's way too fucking late for the shit now. Even perfectly ready designs that would be ready to start construction tomorrow would be very close to useless.

Reducing the energy use, consumption generally and going with purely green shit which is ready already, are the only feasible ways to prevent things going totally to shit.

And since that won't happen either ... well, too bad zoomer-friends.

[Anonymous No.16310634]

>>16310561
>The risks of shit going wrong (as small as they are)
Literally one guy died from acute radiation poisoning after the Fukushima disaster. The Tsunami killed 15,893. Feel free to expand on the "shit going wrong".
>and storage of waste just isn't worth it
Nuclear fuel can be recycled but it was made illegal in 1977 by Jimmy Carter (the perception was the spent fuel could be used for nuclear weapons). Most of France's nuclear fuel is actually recycled. Considering this is very basic information related to nuclear energy, I'm just going to assume you're a retard who loves to fart out of his ass and pretend he's speaking.

[Anonymous No.16310650]

>when you’ve been consumed with the knowledge that the Earth has been doomed for years
>start off trying to warn others, everyone recognizes the problem but thinks they can do nothing to help, are powerless against every polluting company (read, every one of them)
>start to go into panic attacks and depressive episodes, they were rough know everything just comes and goes like a wave and I accept it
>start learning how to farm, I probably won’t survive it but I can try
>not even the thought of dying early startles me, begun to think if I die early I’ll at least be spared the apocalypse
>become an unironic anti-natalist

Where do I go, bros? Is there a collapse support group?

[Anonymous No.16310651]

>>16309346
>Why the focus on windmills and solar energy when we have nuclear energy unless that is included in it?

overhead and maintenance costs of nuclear, not to mention waste disposal, is more trouble than it's worth. I personally think the Green Party anti-nuclear wing goes too far, since I don't think nuclear energy is evil or will destroy the planet nearly as fast as climate change will.

That said, we can accomplish practically 100% of the world's energy demands with wind, solar, and hydroelectric power if societies actually gave a shit about doing so.

Atm the two biggest exceptions to fully renewable energy implementation are aircraft and long-distance ships.

[Anonymous No.16310742]

>>16310634
>Literally one guy died from acute radiation poisoning after the Fukushima disaster.
So relocation of thousands of people is cool? No problem that food supply got affected and fisheries had to close?
>Most of France's nuclear fuel is actually recycled
Great, still leaves some that will remain cancer for centuries, assuming it all goes well and some fuckup won't lead to leaks.

But yeah, sounds much better than just consuming less or going with tech that has no longterm risks.
>>16310650
You're not going to live long enough to see things going balls up either way, bro. BUT you're going to live long enough when even the dumbest fuck will get it and have the benefits of yelling "told you so" to the kids.

[Anonymous No.16310764]

You are genuinely uneducated if you aren't pro-nuclear. There is no other answer. You are either uneducated or a paid actor.

[Anonymous No.16310771]

>>16310764
See >>16310616

[Anonymous No.16310772]

>>16310650
Is this level of alarm warranted by the science? You had the founder of Extinction Rebellion saying it's going to be like a 6 BILLION gigadeath affair, but that turned out to be based on a shoddy paper rejected by most scientists.

[Anonymous No.16310775]

>>16309384
The USSR was a terrible polluter given their output. Commie production is inefficient and creates more waste than necessary.

[Anonymous No.16310777]

>>16309346
Read this. It's what a lot of the law is based on. The hesitancy around nuclear stems partially from the waste, but also a fear that the uranium could be weaponized, and that would replace one apocalyptic scenario with another

[Anonymous No.16310780]

>>16310742
>So relocation of thousands of people is cool? No problem that food supply got affected and fisheries had to close?
Considering most fisheries are currently collapsing due to our current energy framework -- yes. And considering France has had zero of these horrible incidents I'd say it's pretty safe. Hell, Hurricane Harvey literally hit a nuclear power plant and it kept running at full capacity -- something solar, wind, or fossil fuels can't do.
>Great, still leaves some that will remain cancer for centuries, assuming it all goes well and some fuckup won't lead to leaks.
Yes, we better not pursue recycling nuclear fuel. We wouldn't want a very small problem that could very rarely leak. We better just make extremely toxic solar panels they degrade quickly and spill more oil.
>Just consume less!!!
Ah, you're a fucking retard. I'm sure this plan is extremely realistic and will be implemented any day now.

[Anonymous No.16310781]

>>16310771
It's not obsolete. France is the most carbon neutral country on the planet off the back of nuclear energy. Germany is dealing with mass rolling brown outs after trying to switch their load to solar/wind instead of nuclear.

You are uneducated. Don't respond to my post unless you provide evidence that you've at least taken Calculus III.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16310783]

>>16309384
This anime meme is pretty correct
>>16309408
It’s too late for a “Green New Deal”. There is no political revolution, not Berniecrats, not People’s Party or whatever they call it, not any MList or Trotskyist will be able to do this. People world’round need to wrestle their governments to the ground and take charge.

>>16309346
> nuclear energy
Fuck your cancerous water boilers. Concentrate on fusion or gtfo

[Anonymous No.16310802]

>>16310780
>I'm sure this plan is extremely realistic and will be implemented any day now.
Either you just consume less or you're getting fucked. It's simply the reality. Replacing coal plants with nuclear plants would be a decent move four decades ago. Now we don't even have the time to build a plant before the shit will even show an effect. It's just another corporatists false-flag to earn some bucks before the collapse.

[Anonymous No.16310803]

>>16310783
How do you feel about thorium?

[Anonymous No.16310831]

>>16310781
>France is the most carbon neutral country on the planet off the back of nuclear energy
Yeah but no. They aren't no where near carbon neutral for one.

[Anonymous No.16310839]

>>16309346
It's a grift to expand State power. Look at the people funneling money into "environmentalism" post-war - it's the usual suspects on the Foundation set and everything else they push is toxic - why would this be any different? I don't trust climate scientists either, they're like, 6 tiers down from pure math, physics, or engineering.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16310844]

>>16310803
What about it?

[Anonymous No.16310868]

>>16310844
like as a fuel source in a molten salt reactor.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16310890]

>>16310868
Well it says that it has weak radioactivity to start with. It occurs naturally? Offhand it sounds like it could be workable. Isn’t it’s weakness going to make it limited?

[Anonymous No.16310893]

>>16310802
Anon, the simple reality is that no matter how little I try to reduce my consumption that has little effect on emerging energy markets in India and China. Should I sail over there and convince the Chinese to collapse their unstable economy in an effort to curtail climate change? You are simply a defeatist, smug because you've already lost.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16310916]

> According to proponents, a thorium fuel cycle offers several potential advantages over a uranium fuel cycle—including much greater abundance of thorium on Earth, superior physical and nuclear fuel properties, and reduced nuclear waste production.

Well hell. Why do we waste so much time and money on the shittiest...

[I get a chub everytime i see a(...) No.16310925]

You cant weaponize windmills and solar energy.
You also dont have to worry about a windmill going critical and melt its way down to earths core.

[Anonymous No.16310945]

>>16310916
You can't make nukes out of thorium that's why

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16310958]

>>16310925
Why I like them... but this is why the state won’t use them of course. End the state.

>>16310945
Wonderful. All Iran had to say really. Maybe some of them did.

[Anonymous No.16310960]

yes and the fact that you think you think you need to read a book about this kind of pilpul bullshit means youre either 15 or an idiot

[Anonymous No.16310969]

>>16310893
>You are simply a defeatist, smug because you've already lost.
How is your outlook on it any different, justifying doing basically nothing because muh chinks and pajeets? A switch to nuclear isn't an option that would do anything against the climate crisis at this point.

Reducing consumption on personal level won't make any difference obviously but if the West does it on a national scale, we would not only create time we simply don't have now. This will also give China and India more time to adjust their policies that are justified with "MUH West is progressing" and them being so far behind. But it'll also slow down the growth of their economies massively.

>>16310783
>People world’round need to wrestle their governments to the ground and take charge.
Basically this.

[Anonymous No.16310970]

Everytime I drive from Melbourne to Sydney I make sure to look at the big wind turbines and count how many are damaged or turned away from the air current so they won't spin. I should take pictures next time. Of about 100 wind turbines, half are either damaged witu huge bends in the blades or they've been rotated so the wind won't spin them.

Fucking useless ugly things.

[Anonymous No.16310974]

>>16310628
Like I said it's a political problem. Corona fucked some things up, there were plans for small ones in the DoE. Gates being a globohomo tried to build some in China instead of here but Trump shut him down

[Anonymous No.16310989]

>>16309384
>commie shit
Lmao socialism has no use for nature of the environment. You’re better off being an ecofascist.

[Anonymous No.16310999]

>>16310970
They're also extremely dangerous. Killed two 19 year olds.
https://youtu.be/rn-uG5KKaP4

[Anonymous No.16311004]

>>16309384
It would be better if the third panel was Linkola

[Anonymous No.16311005]

>>16310945
wooah wooaoh waooh wooah waoohhhh. Who said anything about bombs? Dial it back anon. Stay on topic with energy. Don't worry about the ability to weaponize! We've already fucked ourselves by opening pandora's box and unleashing the power of complete and total devastation and obliteration, triangulated for and against our own species, man!
>Insert Oppenheimer quote
While energy-generating systems that are backed by government dollars must, in principle, have multitudinous operations, don't say the fucking "bomb" word, man. Say, insurgency-deterrent. Or uh-- say uh, peace-keeping-button, or big-brothers-"dont-do-that"-toy. I dunno anon. If the idiots up top get wind of your nefarious musings of potential applications of social systems we will be in a pickle. A very big, very volatile Now hush up.

[Anonymous No.16311006]

>>16311004
Fuck off chud.

[Anonymous No.16311016]

>>16310969
Way to show off your massive ignorance on the topic. China and India are combating their energy woes by building nuclear reactors. That's where all the new research on Thorium reactors is coming from. Acting like a switch to nuclear still isn't viable is literally shit from Oil & Gas donations. Our outlooks are different -- you suggest that we follow a Malthusian model and give things up to avert disaster. Feel free to cite an example of a national policy that removes a new technology, the only one I can think of is the German plan to remove all carbon emissions by 2022, which actually has seen an increase in fossil fuel consumption as it phases out nuclear plants!

[Anonymous No.16311029]

>>16311016
Germany failed their emission target. That 2020 target is the new one, and they will fail that also. They are completely dependant on dirty energy.

[Anonymous No.16311032]

>>16311029
That 2022 target is the new target****

After they failed the first one.

[Anonymous No.16311047]

>>16311029
>>16311032
And the move cost $12 billion dollars -- mostly because their healthcare system now has to cover for the increased respiratory issues from it's new coal fuel sources! It's almost like getting exposed to less radiation than an airline pilot is better than breathing in smog. Unfortunately it seems like this decision isn't getting reversed since the only party that supports it is Alternative for Germany. Oh well, guess the far-left elements succeeded in getting rid of that awful nuclear power.

[Anonymous No.16311055]

>>16310781
>Don't respond to my post unless you provide evidence that you've at least taken Calculus III.
You know who has taken classes far beyond Calculus III? Ted Kaczynski. And he has a rather different view of things.

[Anonymous No.16311093]

>>16311055
Most of his problems came from the lack of freedom imposed by them, and really any energy source, in regards to the individuals freedom in life to die from the things he engages in and not from a specific issue. Everything else in his manifesto is just calling all science a surrogate activity. But yeah, I'm going to take advice from the philosopher of internet addicted virgins who saw a headline about pollution. Go send a mail bomb to a computer repair store or something.

[Anonymous No.16311110]

>>16311016
>Acting like a switch to nuclear still isn't viable is literally shit from Oil & Gas donations.
Check out remaining carbon budget, once that's crossed it's basically too late and a feedback loop of shit started. There are about ten years left to switch things up completely even if we keep the same emission levels (instead increasing them as the trend is). A bit more if some magic tech sucks out emission out of the air or we somehow reverse the trend. Before the nuclear plants became operational, we'd be on the course to 2° already without a massive stop of consumption.

>Feel free to cite an example of a national policy that removes a new technology
No need to actively remove anything. The whole carbon price meme is a lovely free market solution. Or would be if it was raised tenfold at least. Once meat costs five or ten times as much, you're going to eat your greens. Once non renewable energy is basically unaffordable, you're going to switch the provider or use less. And it can be done on global level with some cooperation too.

[Anonymous No.16311123]

>>16311110
>Once meat costs five or ten times as much, you're going to eat your greens. Once non renewable energy is basically unaffordable, you're going to switch the provider or use less.
Haha and we're back full circle with communism starving everyone out again
I guess Stalin and Mao were too ahead of the curve. How could those dang capitalist pigs not see that they were reducing future carbon emissions?

[Anonymous No.16311125]

>>16309346
The nuclear energy debate isn't *really* about how cheap or clean the power is. It's about the strategic location of the plants to provide material for nukes and a radiation smokescreen for their transportation. That's why nuclear plants get shut down during peacetime.

[Anonymous No.16311129]

>>16311123
How is having a more balanced diet starving again?

[Anonymous No.16311154]

>>16311110
>Once non renewable energy is basically unaffordable, you're going to switch the provider or use less.
Well unfortunately I don't decide what energy sources the state of Texas uses for it's power grid.
>feedback loop
Yeah you're right we shouldn't eventually switch over to a power source that could fill our current needs with zero emissions. We should simply "consume less" based on the principle of free market economics! Oh wait, massive amounts of cheap natural gas have been found all over America! When exactly do you think fracking will become so expensive that the three main power grids in America mainly draw from non-renewables? When do you think that our batteries will get good enough to provide us with power when wind and solar aren't operational? When will solar panels capture even as much sunlight as a plant? No, though, I'm sure your retarded idea that a Malthusian collapse will have use all eating vegetables will happen.

[Anonymous No.16311156]

>>16311125
>>16311047
Example: German left-wingers bitch about the environment, but they still burn "brown coal" for heat and drive around in dirty stinking diesels. They don't really want nukes because, on an abstract level, they are under control by Russia and want Germany defanged and exposed.

[Anonymous No.16311168]

>>16311156
The entire Republican party in the US is under control of Russia. Same with the Brexit retards in the UK.

[Anonymous No.16311194]

>>16311154
>we shouldn't eventually switch over to a power source that could fill our current needs with zero emissions
Why not. Just why doing it now when the crucial bit is about reducing them NOW, not in ten years.
>Malthusian collapse will have use all eating vegetables will happen
I mean, if you prefer not eating at all once the climate fucked your food supply, that's cool too. Just seems a bit extreme to suffer for your beliefs that life without COONSUMING is not worth it.

[Anonymous No.16311207]

>>16311156
German left-wingers, like most left-wingers are still stuck in the MUH JABS phase of the last centurs. Though yeah, they do appear to have a too cozy relationship with Russia, despite it being a hypercapitalist hellhole.

[Anonymous No.16311223]

>>16311168
proof?

[Anonymous No.16311238]

>>16311194
>Why not. Just why doing it now when the crucial bit is about reducing them NOW, not in ten years.
There was a shift away from nuclear after Fukushima. That's biting us in the ass. You don't actually have to build new power plants as new reactors can be built in already existing plants. This would not take a decade.
>I mean, if you prefer not eating at all once the climate fucked your food supply, that's cool too. Just seems a bit extreme to suffer for your beliefs that life without COONSUMING is not worth it.
For the past three years 90% of the meat in my diet has been game animal. Maybe you should learn how to actually care for your basic needs before larping on 4chan.
>COONSUMING
Great Freudian slip. You're too stupid to even get your discord meme right.

[Anonymous No.16311263]

>>16311238
>There was a shift away from nuclear after Fukushima. That's biting us in the ass.
Yeah, that was stupid and rushed. GG coal lobby and opportunism of Greens trying to get the anti nuclear boomers on their side.
>For the past three years 90% of the meat in my diet has been game animal.
That's great. Then you wouldn't need to care about prices of factory meat rising tenfold either.
>Great Freudian slip.
Yes but actually, no.

[Anonymous No.16311684]

>>16310783
And soon enough they will find out why there aren't any old uprisings anymore

[Anonymous No.16311744]

it's all a fucking con and you are collateral damage. we don't have a way to safely deal with fissile waste. wind/solar/lithium are lucrative business ventures with a strong lobby. hydroelectric is tapped out, geothermal is too niche to be viable. we can't turn it around. we need to learn to adapt to the environment we're creating.

[Anonymous No.16311853]

>>16310561
>>16310510
nuclear literally has no cons and everything 'bad' about it you can is 10x worse for the alternatives that are used RIGHT NOW to generate the electricity you are using

[Anonymous No.16311914]

>>16311853
Indeed, if only we sank as much money into nuclear as we did wind or solar. And honestly, there are more efficient forms of renewables.

[Anonymous No.16312587]

>>16311744
literally just bury it in a hole retard

[Anonymous No.16312625]

>>16312587
Do you even groundwater, bruv?

[Anonymous No.16312726]

>the least deaths per TWh
>brainlets still spout bullshit about how dangerous it is

[Anonymous No.16312742]

>>16311006
>haha I claim to be an environmentalist and see no contradiction between that and wanting mass immigration boosting the already bloated population

[Anonymous No.16312773]

>>16311853
Nuclear blows up.
You're only interested because you want to see big mushroom clouds from your bedroom window.

[Anonymous No.16312790]

>>16312625
retard

[Anonymous No.16312802]

>>16312773
Powerplants at most can have hydrogen explosions/high pressure explosions.
Those don't make the meme clouds.

[Anonymous No.16312811]

>>16312790
You are but why announcing it?

[Anonymous No.16312846]

>>16312773
>nuclear power plant
>big mushroom clouds
????

[Anonymous No.16312848]

ITT: "Mother Earth is going to punish us for failing to become Communist. It's definitely going to happen, comrade."

[Anonymous No.16312850]

>>16310999
How is an accident that kills 2 people make the entire wind sector 'extremely dangerous'?

What do you consider automobiles then? Apocalyptically dangerous?

[Anonymous No.16312852]

>>16312773
You greenies are so fucking retarded.
Do you not see the irony in destroying the environment by creating more toxic waste and razing outrageous amounts of land for solar and wind farms all the while creating more need for peaker plants?
Oh yeah we won't need peaker plants cause we'll build more batteries. Yeah, more land we need to clear for space and more toxic waste for China to dump into the ocean.

Nuclear power is the least environmentally damaging viable power there is and if you think nuclear power plants can have nuclear explosions then please cure your indoctrinated mind by doing a google search.

[Anonymous No.16312858]

>>16312742
>great replacement conspiracy
>debunked in less than 12 seconds
You're worse than a flat earther.

[Anonymous No.16312862]

>>16312852
>Nuclear power is the least environmentally damaging viable power

[Anonymous No.16312875]

>>16312858
Nothing he said has anything to do with "great replacement" conspiracy

[Anonymous No.16312893]

>>16312862
Ooooooh the shittiest version of a cold water reactor with no safety features ended badly, clearly every kind of reactor is just as dangerous!!!1!

[Anonymous No.16312898]

>>16312875
Pretending like there is any sort of push for mass migration is eery close to the shit. There is quite the difference between "treating people at the boarder humanely" and "invite everyone in".

[Anonymous No.16312909]

>>16312852
No, they see the irony, they just don't care about the environment. The point is to sustain capitalism. Constant consumption of windmills and solar panels (both imported) is better for capitalism than might-as-well-be self sufficient nuclear power plants that run off of materials that can be found in essentially every country on the planet.

>>16312862
>communism fucks up nuclear power because communism is trash
>therefore, we need to adopt communism in order to prop up capitalism
Retard.

[Anonymous No.16312914]

>>16312862
Again, you greenies are such retards for sucking up fearmongering indoctrination campaigns funded by the oil industry.

It was a TEST.
They IGNORED standard protocol which are there for a reason.
Their reactors are OUTDATED.

Chernobyl literally cannot and will not happen again unless some third world dictator decides to make shitty nuclear reactors.

[Anonymous No.16312918]

>>16312862
Even if we had 10 more Chernobyls the human death and environmental degradation would still be less than that caused by burning coal. I am a strong environmentalist but it's so fucking hard to find others who are pro-nuclear. Maybe we'll get something else in the future but if we'd really switched in the last century the current one would be much better.

[Anonymous No.16312925]

Imagine studying history in a post-technological world where most of humanity has been wiped out by nuclear warfare or climate catastrophe.

[Anonymous No.16312953]

>>16312898
But there is a push for mass immigration? I don't know what you are smoking. There is a very simple economic reason and that is the fact that the population in Western countries is getting older and there aren't enough young people in the workforce to pay their retirements.

[Anonymous No.16312964]

>>16312953
>But there is a push for mass immigration?
Where? I don't recall a single party who goes "vote for us, we'll bring in more immigrants". Allowing a few lucky ones in isn't a push for immigration.

[Anonymous No.16312967]

>>16312953
You misunderstand. He doesn't believe that there isn't a push for demographic replacement, rather he's doing the Jewish Trifecta.
>it's not happening
>but it's happening, and that's a good thing
>and you're a bad person for not wanting it to happen.
You're at the first point. His response will be the second point.

You've made it clear that you DON'T agree with demographic replacement, therefore his programming will kick in and he'll move down the list. If you keep arguing after point three, he'll disengage as you are immoral and as such he does not have to associate with you.

[Anonymous No.16312978]

>>16312862
yes, the only problems is its too expansive for jews who want fast profits

[Anonymous No.16312994]

>>16310651
>Atm the two biggest exceptions to fully renewable energy implementation are aircraft and long-distance ships.
Use hydrogen fuel

[Anonymous No.16312995]

>>16312964
What country/countries are we talking about? I think you might be confusing the rhetoric of political parties with their actual policies. Immigration isn't popular and so of course no one is going to campaign on "we'll bring in more immigrants." Most parties even left-wing parties make a big show of being "tough on immigration" for the electorate by brutalising a few asylum seekers while quietly incentivising economic migration. Anti-immigration politics is 99% rhetoric. Conservative parties, despite their racist dog-whistle rhetoric, are some of the biggest drivers of it.

[Anonymous No.16313004]

>>16312862
Coal kills more people daily and is greater radiation hazard WHEN ITS WORKING AS INTENDED than nuclear has killed in total

[Anonymous No.16313034]

>>16313004
anti-science fags BTFO

[Anonymous No.16313050]

>>16313004
>>16313034
>they think nuclear power will ever be rolled out to the public
You do know that oil companies have had people killed in the past to protect their business?

[Anonymous No.16313051]

>>16312995
>What country/countries are we talking about
Any relevant one in the West would do.
>Conservative parties, despite their racist dog-whistle rhetoric, are some of the biggest drivers of it.
Sure but that's just the usual "desperate poor people without rights are going to make us moneys" thinking. It's a fucking literature board, so when someone used "push for X", the policies happening and presented should represent it. Compare it to "push for green energy" when there is a clear message and actions. Or how "push for coal" would sound absolutely retarded, even though policy-wise not utterly wrong.

"Actually not being fully opposed to immigration" or even "tolerating it" would be much closer to reality. "Push" is bait-tier polemics. Hell, it'd be even questionable to use if there were some parties actively campaigning for that, unless they actually have some power or at the very least perspective to obtain it.

[Anonymous No.16313060]

>>16313050
>muh oil companies murder people
Who the fuck cares, future is now old man, move aside or you get the machine gun too

[Anonymous No.16313061]

>>16309346
There's a lot of reasons to be anti-Nuclear energy.
1.It takes a long time to build a nuclear power plant. Climate action is needed yesterday and we don't have the luxury of time to build nuclear power plants.
2.The process of finding,mining,extracting, and enriching Uranium is in itself carbon intensive.
3.It's not needed. We have the models that show us how it's possible to switch the grid to 100% renewable energy by 2030.


The people pushing for nuclear now are cut from the same cloth as the people who were pro-natural gas as an 'climate solution' answer decades ago, and we saw how well that turned out with fracking spewing tons of methane into the atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.16313065]

>>16309384
Bourgeoisie "socialist" made this meme. I can tell you right now if you're even worried about this shit, then you have too good of a life and should suffer so much that you realize even making it another day is difficult. Remember, people who suffer will be made commissars. You'll be forced to a gulag where you belong.

[Anonymous No.16313074]

>>16313060
>he has no idea about all the regulatory bodies
I used to be like you too, then I looked at the legislation. You can insult me all you want but it won't remove the red tape. It won't happen in your life time. You're a utopian.

[Anonymous No.16313077]

>>16313051
Well immigration is being "tolerated" at unprecedented levels in political history. There are two major reasons for this: one economic-pragmatic and the other moralist liberal-humanitarian. I think you're being a bit disingenuous for denying this.

[Anonymous No.16313086]

>>16309346
Renewable energy is a scam. We should go nuclear 100% and dump all our wastes in Siberian salt mines

[Anonymous No.16313093]

>>16313050
We're having this debate about western countries but India and China don't give a fuck and have built many nuclear power plants and are building tens more.
It's a step in the right direction.

If only they would just build some nuclear power plants in Australia they could power the entirety of AU, NZ and other SEA countries but their coal industry won't allow them to.

[Anonymous No.16313099]

>>16313086
The only reason renewable energy was allowed to be rolled out is because it's made using coal and petroleum products.

[Anonymous No.16313101]

>>16313074
We already crushed the comnunists once in our last civil war and they've only gotten more pathetic and useless since

[Anonymous No.16313115]

>>16313077
Sure, if you put it that way, I'm not disagreeing. And yes, before you're going there, obviously there are suboptimal consequences for the climate too if poorfags from third world shitholes start polluting the world as bad as poorfags in first world ones. But acting like it makes a notable difference for the big picture is silly. Corona offered us a pretty decent picture of how small of a factor personal actions are.

[Anonymous No.16313116]

>>16313086
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE FRIGGIN WASTE YYYYOU CANT GET RID OF THAT SHIT.... WHOAH DUDE WHAT IF WE LIKE SHOT IT INTO OUTER SPACE WHOOOOOAH! NAH DUDE, FORGIDABBOUT IT..... SOLAR AND WIND ARE THE FUTURE. IMAGINE IF ALIENS SAW US LITERALLY FISSING ELEMENTS TO BOIL WATER DUDE. FUCKING LAUGH MY ASS OFF.

[Anonymous No.16313120]

>>16313093
Malcolm Turnbull was kicked out of office as Australias PM primarily because he went against the oil lobbyists, not in words but in legislation. These people are so powerful they have half the house in their back pocket.

[Anonymous No.16313128]

>>16313093
Australia might be the only Western country more cucked than Murica. They basically only have two parties which mainly represent the coal lobby.

[Anonymous No.16313139]

>>16313120
>These people are so powerful they have half the house in their back pocket.
Turn the military industrial complex on them, literally. Hydrogen is superior fuel

[Anonymous No.16313147]

>>16313128
It's corruption. Australian politics are more cut throat than even US but it's all backroom deals. It's also a surveillance state, again worse than the US. They can legally implant rootkits and keyloggers based on suspicion. No encryption works in Australia because of the Assistance and Access bill, if it does work you face 10 years in prison.

[Anonymous No.16313157]

>>16313147
Once a prison colony always a prison colony

[Anonymous No.16313176]

>>16313061
Your post encapsulates the anti-nuclear greenie sentiment perfectly.
Poses as some kind of "rational voice of reason" and presents "facts and logic" when the reasons are all bullshit that applies even more to non-nuclear renewables and finishes with an ad hominem as a cherry on top.
You anti-nuclear greenies can only comprehend muh carbon emissions when we're talking about the entire environment from the sea to the sky. Non-nuclear renewable will release more toxic waste and harm the environment more irreparably than dropping nukes on the ocean and forests.
It's also ironic how you draw the parallel between "pro-natural gas" who ended up doing more harm to the environment and nuclear energy, because on the contrary, that's exactly what you lot are.

[Anonymous No.16313177]

>>16313147
>if it does work you face 10 years in prison.
What the unholy fuck. How does Apple manage to sell stuff there? Or are people forced to unlock it?

[Anonymous No.16313188]

>>16313061
Cite me those models

[Anonymous No.16313193]

>>16313157
It's why so many Australians are going full anti-gov psychotic. Here's one from today. The idiot was making one of the most dangerous high explosives known to man and doing test runs so he could later scale it up.

Excuse the AMP link but it's the best article.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/12640830

[Anonymous No.16313201]

>>16313061
Simply by switching to hydrogen fuel all human co2 emissions would drop by over 90%

[Anonymous No.16313206]

>>16313177
They are forced to insert a backdoor in the OS. Apple called these laws "incredibly dangerous" and so did IBM, they tried to fight them but the government won. They gave themselves the power to hit these companies with billion dollar consecutively, as well as prison time.

This isn't just bad for Australia, because they are part of the "5 eyes" now countries like the US and NZ which have stronger privacy laws can literally re-route internet traffic through Australia and then boom, everyone is now subject to Australian laws.....

[Anonymous No.16313211]

>>16313206
Billion dollar fines consecutively***

[Anonymous No.16313306]

>>16313206
Seems it passed a while ago but I can't find any cases of it actually being used. Maybe the companies are waiting for an opportunity to counter-sue or just hope they won't need to crack it. Even beyond the 5 eyes fuckery, it's basically a total kill for security world-wide if some backdoored version for the Australian market exists. The consequences would be so severe, it'd probably be cheaper to avoid the Australian market before the companies murder their security.

[Anonymous No.16313337]

>>16309346
Because nuclear disasters are total nightmares that cost billions of dollars and last many decades and no matter how many times they say it won't happen again: it does.

[Anonymous No.16313348]

>>16313337
coal kills more people each day AND is a bigger radiation hazard to environment WHEN WORKING AS INTENDED as nuclear has killed in total

[Anonymous No.16313355]

>>16313337
Very funny how we come full circle back to "OH BUT MUH MONEY" argument.
I thought we cared about the environment more than we do about money but I suppose you're just showing your true colours.

Also,
>no matter how many times they say it won't happen again: it does.
Prove it.

[Anonymous No.16313382]

I honestly blame the Simpsons for nuclear energy hysteria. Pretty much all of us watched that show, the nuclear power plant is depicted as being extremely dirty and toxic, while being run by a man who only cares about money at the total expense of his workers and the environment, dumping toxic waste, causing radiation deformities in animals. The employees are depicted as incompetient fools who constantly cause meltdowns.

It definitely had an effect on the population.

[Anonymous No.16313390]

>>16310783
>Fusion
Nice science fiction you got there. And fusion will still be a water boiler because it's the best and converting heat.

[Anonymous No.16313395]

>>16313382
Yes, but we can only try to reverse the misinformation.

[Anonymous No.16313403]

>>16309346
>Why the focus on windmills and solar energy when we have nuclear energy unless that is included in it?
Nuclear comes with a set of risks and overhead that challenge its benefits in massive energy per resource input invested.
>nonzero probability of meltdowns or accidents caused either by human error or natural disaster
>creates waste material that cannot easily be disposed of
>Uranium is a rare earth mineral that is hard to extract, transport, purify and process

Meanwhile for other "green technologies"
>Sunlight and wind and geothermal are effectively infinite resources
> The technology is improving at record pace, making previous concerns about energy output of economies of scale irrelevant
>can be constructed almost anywhere in the world where it is sunny or windy
>has use many possible creative use cases (e.g. replacing regular skyscraper windows with ones that have a transparent layer of photovoltaic mesh so the building can supply its own energy

[Anonymous No.16314196]

>>16313403
Solar panels use rare earth metals that hard more toxic than uranium. They also degrade quickly and have to be disposed of. Where do you think these panels end up?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16314264]

>>16313390
Fiction for now, and boiling water is fine. It’s the cancer that I don’t like.

[Anonymous No.16314343]

>>16313403
>nonzero probability of meltdowns or accidents caused either by human error or natural disaster
INCREDIBLY small chance that few people might die and a small patch of land will be irradiated vs Climate Change
hmmmm, hard choice
Chernobyl happened because of old ass tech and incredible levels of incompetence + unluckiness, its also not a big fucking deal (you can go to Chernobyl right now, its not a fucking wasteland.)
>creates waste material that cannot easily be disposed of
Recycle it, after your done with it cover it on all sides with a layer of concrete, 100% foolproof

>Sunlight and wind and geothermal are effectively infinite resources
I wasn't aware solar panels spring into existence from nothing, ex nihilo my nigga. Look up how much uranium is in the earths crust btw
>The technology is improving at record pace, making previous concerns about energy output of economies of scale irrelevant
Do you have a single real scientific study that shows converting all of a countries power to solar would even be viable? Do you have any idea how many millions of solar panels that would take? Do you have any idea how often you would have to replace every single one of those millions? Do you have any idea how much it would cost to maintain those millions.

And here is the real coup de grace for you, solarfag, what happens at night? "Batteries!" you cry, so now not only are you building and replacing and maintaining millions of panels, you are now also maintaining millions of fucking batteries. Do you have any idea how garbage our large scale electrical storage technology is? How fucking inefficient and expensive it is?

t. worked on solar panels, fuck em

[Anonymous No.16314379]

Legit how fucked are we? Is the damage done and the avalanche heading our way is just gathering speed?

[Anonymous No.16314380]

>>16309384

[Anonymous No.16314392]

if everyone agrees climate change is gonna screw us hard, then why is there so little change being made?

[Anonymous No.16314431]

>>16312587
we tried that and chief slapahoe of the bumfuck nowhere tribe shot us down try again genius

[Anonymous No.16314436]

>>16309346
no hope.
no room for the pampered billions and their ever-fattening "needs".
not enough resources in the galaxy to satisfy the gross hunger.
not enough heroes willing to take up the axe
and cut clinging hands from the gunwales.

[Anonymous No.16314450]

>>16314379
we're fucked and need to figure out how we're going to adapt/survive

[Anonymous No.16314503]

>>16309346
certainly it will only further financialize human ecology and it's not the degrowth that is needed. But anything to get fossil fuel energy less entrenched in the economy is infinitely preferable to doing nothing. Obviously there is no debate to be had, the green new deal is a worthy cause to support. even if it turns out to be inept and corrupt, and it probably would, it is far better than the alternative, letting the extraction sector run and ruin the already crippled government. as had been happening way more than usual for about 4 years now.
NO MORE MONKEY BUSINESS BIDEN 2020

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16314539]

>>16314380
This is covered by the Green Soviet stage. A big fat NO

Unless what you consider green fascism is just green anarchism, sure. But fuck nation-states

[Anonymous No.16314727]

>>16314380
Is there anything more pathetic than delusional right wing environmentalist actually giving the fbi legitimate precedent to classify environmental activists has terrorists? You fucking LARPers claim to care about ecology yet you give tactic support to orangeman and the society he represents? Curious

[Anonymous No.16314736]

[Anonymous No.16314741]

>>16314539
>>16314727
You both ARE aware the government posts terroristic threats anonymously to internet by itself so it has something to submit to court as evidence?

[Anonymous No.16314766]

>>16314539
>green anarchism
>having rules
>anarchism
man the cringe

[Anonymous No.16314778]

>>16309384
Fucking lol, China is the biggest polluter and USSR ruined dream of the "Nuclear Future" for all the brainlets who are now afraid. Thanks gommunism.

[Anonymous No.16314781]

>>16314264
cancer form what ? Have you bothered to understand how it works ? Do you know that all the fuel is already in the ground and radioactive at that?

[Anonymous No.16314784]

>>16314766
anarchists have rules, leaders and follow a military hierarchy and thus are among first people to be killed by communists
>It soon became clear why Moscow had resisted the publicizing of the Bolshevik-Makhnovist treaty. On November 26, 1920, less than two weeks after completing their successful offensive against General Wrangel's White Army in the Crimea, Makhno's headquarters staff and several Black Army subordinate commanders arrived at Red Army Southern Front headquarters to participate in a joint planning conference with Red Army commanders. Upon arrival, they were arrested and executed on the spot by a Red Army firing squad; the Makhnovist treaty delegation, still in Kharkiv, was also arrested and liquidated.[12][14] The Bolshevik then sent 5 regular Armies numbering more than 350,000 with armoured cars, artillery,aircraft, and armoured trains, with the purpose of destroying the Makhnovist movement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Insurrectionary_Army_of_Ukraine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makhnovia

[Anonymous No.16314806]

Any solution that isn't inherently about dismantling the technological system is a grift, yes. Most, if not all, politicians promoting anything else has money in the game, i.e. they've taken money or have investments in certain things they propose or wish to take money from such industries.

[Anonymous No.16314817]

>>16314806
>Any solution that isn't inherently about dismantling the technological system is a grift, yes.
Why would anyone at all care what you guys have to think, a single machine gun is gonna do your whole fucking civilization in

[Anonymous No.16314849]

Collapse now and avoid the rush

[Anonymous No.16315091]

>>16310775
>USSR
>Communism
What is it in dictatorship of the proletariat that you don't understand? Of course you are unread. But at least stop pretending. Just stop.

[Anonymous No.16315103]

>>16309384
Green Capitalism is the ultimate scam. There is nothing green in this mode of production. It is just pretending. Society of the spectacle, as usual.

[Anonymous No.16315144]

Fuck thorium plants, i want my cobalt bombs.
Humanity doesn't deserve nice things.

[Anonymous No.16315163]

>>16314343
Solar and wind is today cheaper than nuclear (check the figures).
Also, brown third world cannot manage nuclear reactors. They can manage solar combined with batteries thought.