Thank you for taking the time to reply. I think I kinda understand what you say but I have more reading to do. Currently I’m on some relevant wiki pages trying to get a better understanding [Spent nuclear fuel, Radioactive waste, Long-lived fission product].

In case you (or anyone) have any other links to suggest, please do not hesitate.

Thank you for sharing this link. It was very interesting listening to someone from within the US that is head of an office now and started from Shell Solar.

There is a reasoning that I didn’t get. Maybe I misunderstood something or I lack some information/knowledge. Anyways, here it is:

At 1:02 they talks about nuclear waste saying that all the nuclear waste produced in the US by the nuclear power plants is like a football field that is 10 yards tall and then he talks about why this waste is not concerning.

Later at 1:07 He mentions that the US is not reprocesing the uranium fuel rods, in which 95% of the energy is still there, and that the US should do reprocessing like other countries do.

Doesn’t that mean that these unprocessed rods in the US that are in the “football field of nuclear waste” are therefore a concern?

What kind of a moron are you? When you make claims you bring the proof.

Or you know, I could assert that you’re, say, a donkey-fucker. If you got proof to the contrary, please provide it.

I am not making claims. I shared an article on a matter that bugs me. I wanted to see what people think and potentially inform myself further.

And your input was definitely invaluable!

These are not my points, they come from the article. So for example in relation to your question on the

SMRs cannot be counted on to provide reliable and resilient off-the-grid power…

they have a couple of paragraphs that give an explanation.

My personal stance is that sustainability cannot be achieved within capitalism due to its model of eternal growth. We can have one or the other, but not both.

So creating more energy could not be the solution. Creating less demand would be, and the demand comes from industries.

More often than not, I it seems to me this discussion about clean energy is a deflection of the real problem which is industrialisation under capitalism. We don’t question anymore what this energy is needed for.

US citizens don’t need to fear any Russian disinformation video campaign, just themselves. Remember Pizzagate? No video was needed for this one to stick.

Yes, there is this effort to equate anti-zionism with anti-semitism. Thankfully there have been Jewish people against zionism, since its inception. Btw Meet The ‘Wrong Jew’ The Media Doesn’t Want You To Know Exists, and they say

“Not in our name!”

Obviously I don’t see this as good news because I can’t see how ecology and capitalism can work together, unless it is greenwashing. Environmentalism/ecology/etc want sustainability, capitalism is all about eternal growth of the business, and I don’t see corporations and other financial entities changing their business model? Do you?

deleted by creator

Left bias yes, but even Media Bias Fact Check the score they give for Jacobin is high:

Factual Reporting: HIGH MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

[Edit - In relation to this article’s historical content here is another source:

Jewish Voice for Peace - Nakba Fact Sheet

Jewish Voice for Peace - Our Approach to Zionism]

I suppose greenwashing works? in the sense creates favorable stats, not that it helps the environment.

I see what you mean and I feel the same more often than not. On the other hand I think this is part of the authorities’ narrative that wants us to stay home. In reality we got the power and it is visible went we are out in the streets protesting, this genocide for instance. If we didn’t have the power authorities would not exercise so much force to stop us talking, marching or squating gras.

No paywall

deleted by creator

I guess some anti-booing tech will be deployed this year as well.

So according to statista in 2023 global emissions were 37.5 billions of tons, and exponentially growing since 1944.

In the article they say they can remove 36,000 tons of CO2 and the goal is

For the world to achieve “carbon neutrality” by 2050, “we should be removing something like six to 16 billion tons of CO2 per year from the air,”

That’s a drop in the bucket alright. Sustainability and capitalism (with its embedded exponential growth) cannot coexist.

I wouldn’t hold my breath. For mtgox it took a decade like to start doing so. Centralized finance sucks by default.

In the link I provided above it says something very similar:

While it had many strains historically, the Zionism that took hold and stands today is a settler-colonial movement, establishing an apartheid state where Jews have more rights than others. Our own history teaches us how dangerous this can be.

Palestinian dispossession and occupation are by design. […]

Apart from that when you say There’s probably a lot of flavors of Zionism that you’d agree with I must inform you that this is not the case.

Agreed its not one man. It’s zionism

Ok, I’ll try to explain then.

There is no crypto without a blockchain, and blockchains live on the internet. Btw the projects that are worth in this environment are decentralized.

Federal courts in the US are passing laws and these laws are valid only in the US. They don’t threaten the survival of the “crypto industry” cause they live on the internet, not in the US. It just makes it harder to create a legit project in the US, or if you are a user you will need a VPN to access some sites that are not available in the country you live in.

This is why there is binance.com (for almost everywhere, except US) and binance.us (only for the US). This article fails to mention this difference so claiming that:

The cryptocurrency industry is counting on the federal courts to survive

makes it clear to me that the author has no understanding of how crypto works. That’s my good faith take on this article.