No idea what you mean and not gonna read the ipcc report now.

Ok, bask in your american exceptionalism if you please.

Those data centers would soon be somewhere else due to… economics. And even if not, wouldn’t be significant.

Maybe if you start heating your homes by burning car tires in your gardens. But otherwise, no. You are already so far behind the curve that economics really don’t allow CO2 emission increases on a global significant level.

The world is not just the USA…

They don’t even say that. They say emissions will peak which is en par with other institutions.

Comparing users to MAU seems disingenuous. The fediverse has ~12 million users, according to fedidb and around 1.1 million active ones.

Most of them on Mastodon.

I don’t agree with you but either way that doesn’t change the fact that nuclear is just slow, expensive and a bad idea in 2024.

There are just better/faster options…

If this is ever deemed feasible the world will already run on renewables. There might have been a time for NPPs but 2024 ain’t it.

This is happening, to a degree, in most of Europe. Storage is the answer as described in the article. Unfortunately politics are not proactive, you need to break the system before something happens… and now the system is broken, yeah!!!

Put as much money into the research of SMRs as you would like to waste. Meanwhile we just build a cheaper, better and more reliable system based on renewables.

This will happen with or without the nukebro hypetrain.

Unfortunately capacity is the first step, but its a step. I’ll crack open a beer when it’s consumption or production…

What a giant waste of resources.

“Enlightened” centrism is not the answer…

Yes for Sulfur derivates and nitrous oxigens but no for CO2. The biggest contributord to CO2 emissions are electricity production and traffic.