Wäre schön, wenn sowas hier zu Lande auch möglich wäre. Leider glaubt der deutsche Michel dank massiver konservativer Gehirnwäsche immer noch asphaltierte Straßen seien der heilige Gral.
"Recently there has been a concerted effort to make a kind of a vibe shift about how we talk about climate."
Yet no concerted effort can beat the money poured into desinformation, propaganda and also defeatism by the people making a fortune by destroying our planet. If we don't address that any talk about "changing how we speak about climate change" is just another diversion. Have we really not learned anything from the ecological footprint fairy tale?
To be clear: we’re going to use renewable hydrogen for some things, such as fertilizer manufacturing — there isn’t any other way to do them sustainably. There are applications for which it’s one of the most expensive choices, such as home heating, and a whole host of industrial processes and aviation sitting in between.
The opposite is true. There is no alternative to carbon neutrality and hydrogen will be needed in huge amounts to decarbonize certain sectors in industry and transport.
The problem are the insane amounts of story tellers that either pretend it will not work at all or that it's some magic solution so people can keep burning just another kind of gas without having to change anything. And both actually tell the same story: give up and stick with fossil fuels because it makes us rich.
In most countries we are NOT at the point to able to spend excess electricity.
That's wrong. There are enough countries that already have problems getting rid of excess electricity several hours a day in most of the summer half. And this will increase constantly over the next years. Oh... and we are actually paying for that electricity to be discarded already. Which is exactly why the slow buildup of power-to-gas as well as short-term storage needs to start now. Or do you believe the increase in excess electricity will just go on for a decade without a way to use it and then we snap our fingers an the power-to-gas production and infrastucture magically appears out of nowwhere?
Gas & oil companies do not care what you put into your cars, machines
Of course they care. They already know that 10 years from now no ICE-based car will be produced anymore. And they are panicking enough to spend a lot of money on bullshit propaganda to revert legislation that bans co2-emitting cars in the near-future. and if that doesn't work we they hope to confuse enough people to cling to their oil and gas longer than is good for them (and their wallets).
Bonus: All planned ‘green hydrogen’ facilities worldwide until 2035 will cover about 10% of Germany’s demand
Speakling of bullshit... that's eFuels, not hydrogen. And what you call "demand" are the numbers if we follow some insane "it will not work and is all a scam"-fairy tale (or the "oh, you don't need to change anything. Just stick with your combution engine"-alternmative), do nothing and then suddenly need gasoline for millions of cars. Which will not happen. There is no future for combustion engines. Producers have stopped development years ago. The latest generation of car engines burning gasoline to be build is already on our streets today.
So of course eFuels are not a solution. Because it's a scam to foul people into clinging to a technological dead-end and so people can tell those fairy tales about how our energy transition will fail and we should really just give up. In reality eFuels are a niche topic exclusively for long-range ship and air traffic at best and for a few specific industries (like chemical production nowadays using natural gas as a raw material instead of energy).
Seriously... how often will people parrot the same bullshit again and again? It's always the same moronic arguments simplifying facts ad absurdum and then repeating them again and again knowing that explaininmg why it's wrong will take much more time:
But batteries do not work because we can't build that much for storage!!!! And now I need to explain people that long-term storage and short-term storage are two completely separate things and how they actually work. Also how solar and wind are actually complementary and the amount of short-term storage needed is so much smaller... not even half a day to get a stable day/night cycle but even less (~3 hours to shift production peak -mid day- to demand peak -early evening).
But lithium!!!!!! No, grid storage is not a hand-held that needs maximised energy-density. Quite the opposite actually with lithium-ion batteries being exceptionally bad for big fixed installations because of their heat issues. Cheap and thermally stable are the main requirements for grid storage. No one cares if that warehouse-sized installation is 20% bigger and 40% heavier... (Speaking of different requirements: lithium batteries are used for some of that storage today... used lithium batteries to be specific, because those cheap batteries bought slightly over their recycling value because they too used up to run a car anymore fits the specifications well already...)
But there is no long-term storage!!!!! Yes, there is. Countries nowadays already store enough gas to bridge several months if necessary. We can do the same with hydrogen.
But hydrogen is so inefficient and will be far too expensive!!! No... burning it isn't more inefficient that burning natural gas. Producing it isn't more inefficient that producing natural gas either if you start including the actual production costs and transport (often over vast distances) today. And regarding the price. The EU just had the first auctions for member's first national green hydrogen production projects just last week... and before any scaling and with our electricity production just starting to generate overproduction in limited time frames the auctioned costs are already on par with natural gas.
And I could go on like this for hours. The whole "argument" of how the planned energy transition will not work is basically a giant Gish gallop... only with the exact same chain of non-issues brought up again and again simply hoping that the majority will fall for it because the actual facts are more complex to explain and can not be brought down to just two sentences filled with buzzwords.
Die Zahl der rechtsextrem motivierten Straftaten in Deutschland ist im ersten Quartal 2024 im Vergleich zum Vorjahr um fast 50 Prozent gestiegen. Diese alarmierende Entwicklung geht aus Zahlen des Bundesinnenministeriums hervor, die auf Anfrage der Linken-Abgeordneten und Bundestagsvizepräsidentin Petra Pau veröffentlicht...
Rechtsextreme Straftaten steigen massiv -> die Gesamtmenge an Straftaten in der Statistik steigt -> "Wir müssen endlich die ganzten kriminellen Ausländer abschieben, um Deutschland wieder sicher zu machen!" -> und wieder zurück zu Schritt 1...
Nope, this is "Your system ran out of memory and now this program isn't reacting anymore (it's trying to allocate memory but there is no free memory left). Please stop the program or try to get rid of some of its subprocesses to free up memory."
After the 70s oil embargo we should have had ungodly research into nuclear, fusion, solar, and batteries.
Which is what happened... but fusion is still unrealistic (although just around the corner any year now for more than 50 years) while renewables and batteries are not centralized enough to be a cash cow for a few big companies.
So what was left was a high build up of nuclear back then. That never improved to the point where scaling effects they hoped for actually made it cheap.
But it fullfilled the most important function: making someone rich at the expense of most people. So they still cling to it like crazy, even if it's mostly only used to tell fairy tales that slow down renewable up build.
Actual statistics and basically every poll show that the vast majority of people agrees and wants to do much more to address climate change on a personal and government level. And just like you most of them are suffering from propaganda-induced brain rot and believe that they are totally alone with that opinion so it unfortunately has no sense to even try. So they don't.
Obviously the emissions are the controllable. Blaming this on El Niño [...]
Nobody is actually blaming anything on El Niño. El Niño simply covered up how bad it was already for some time.
Which also means those emissions are indeed not controllable. Because they have happened years ago and we still can't do time travel. That's the whole actual point of talking about El Niño here.
Financing-wise renewable energy has long surpassed fossil fuels. It's not capitalists in general blocking the change as they would make a lot of money. This is very specifically about a small amount of individuals making their money in fossil fuels and spending a lot on lobbying to slow the transition down as they try to squeeze as much out of their business model as possible before it runs against a wall they can already see (but try to hide from the consumer).
The same is true in other sectors, for example in traffic where totally insane bullshit gets pushed (hyper-loops, air taxis etc.) as magical alternatives to actually working public transport. That's also not some business that will ever make money. It's a diversion by people who want to keep making money in a very specific field (CE cars) before that whole sector also dies off. Also the scaling effect in EV production as well as improvements and development still have a massive potential with much money to be made by the people investing into a still developing and growing market. Unlike the dying market of combustion engines that competes on miniscule optimisations of the status quo still possible. Yet the very same companies knowing that combustion engines are dead and not even working on developing a next line but instead focusing on electric drives, still do marketing like the opposite would be true so they can sell that trash with no future perspective as long as possible.
There is quiet a lot to say against capitalism, but at the moment we don't have a capitalism problem (at least not where climate action is involved) but one of corruption that helps a few people to keep failing businesses alive a bit longer at the expense of everyone including capitalists in the future businesses that will replace them.
I condemn every single atrocity, whomever is the perpetrator or the victim [...], at the same time, I celebrate anyone who risks their life to TEAR DOWN THE WALL.
[...]
Are Israelis not justified to fear that Hamas wants to exterminate them?
Of course they are! Jews have suffered a Holocaust that was preceded with pogroms and a deep-seated antisemitism permeating Europe and the Americas for centuries.
[...]
So, let’s be clear: If Jews were under attack, anywhere in the world, I would be the first to canvass for a Jewish Congress in which to register our solidarity.
(from the speech published later, when he was not allowed to talk there...)
So in short:
I normaly condemn violence in general but I don't condemn Hamas but cheer for them.
The only antisemitism Israel should be afraid of comes from Europe and America.
No Jew in the world was actually attacked... as I would have stood with them then.
What an impressive example of a voice of reason for Palestina... totally not an antisemitic, lying populist cheering for Hamas' attacks while at the same time denying any Jew got attacked. What a f****ng 🤡.
That's what a (probably intentional) lack of education does to people.
Republican politicians can openly use traditional antisemitic narratives that a majority of people doesn't recognize anymore as a dogwhistle again.
Trump as well as -idiotic as it is- Israel's government can openly steal from Hitler's rhetoric.
People wanting to peacefully protest for Palestine miss the very obvious antisemitc clues of some people standing right beside them and supporting their message for the completely wrong reason, this way delegitimizing their actual cause.
And in the end any nuanced and informed discussion (that is important for a working democracy) gets derailed and replaced by polarisation and brain-dead tribalism.
Mission accomplished... And the people behind that mission definitely aren't part of some global conspiracy (of Jews or others) but mostly just right populists and authoritarians operating independently or loosely allied at best with the same well-tested anti-democracy playbook.
Scientists say emissions from burning fuels like coal must ramp steeply down to protect Earth’s climate, yet there was an increase in electricity made from burning fossil fuels. China, India, Vietnam and Mexico were responsible for nearly all of the rise....
That's an interesting concept but the base assuptions are fundamentally wrong, because this is not how the electricity market or the grid work.
There is no classical supply and demand here. There has to always be the amount produced as is used up. More supply than demand and the grid breaks down, more demand than supply and the same happens.
When you add cheaper renewable electricity to an existing system, there is no effect of higher supply reducing the price thus creating more demand like in a classical market. The opposite is true. The base price is usually linked to the most expensive producer via some merit order system (because there must always be enough capacity to fullfill the demand in real time), so the price stays the same. And on top of the produced electricity we now also need to pay some producers to stop production. That cost is also added via some grid fee. So burning fossil fuels is indeed the worst thing to make money here. Instead you can get a lot of money with producing renewable energy on one hand (as you get a high prize for cheap production), or by not producing fossil fuel energy (basically getting paid for not shutting down you power plant in case it's needed while not actually burning fuels most of the time).
Which in the end means you are indeed replacing fossil fuels with renewables. Prices will only drop once you build so much renewables and short term storage to completely eliminate the need for fossil fuel power plants to be kept for the rare moment you need them. So there is no effect of lower prices artificially creating higher demand.
I’ll note that 2.5°C of warming by 2100 is a significant improvement over the trajectory we were on a decade ago, even if still far from where we need to be
Nope... Spreading that bullshit as a fact is part of the problem.
The economy isn't the problem. We can adapt in a lot of ways that helps the climate while also having working economies.
The actual problem is that the people with money want exactly the kind of economy that makes them money for decades. So they will block any changes to keep everything as it is.
Correct. There are however a lot of solutions that a) don't produce co2 and b) are more efficient and cheaper already, very much more so once they are properly scaled up.
So you could in fact throw money at the problem... And even those who refuse to follow the change will simply go bunkrupt over it because fossil fuels aren't even economically viable in comparison.
It's also the leader in building up renewables instead while everyone else sits lazily on their ass crying "why should we do anything when China exists?"
How about we do better than China first and then cry about them, instead of using them as an excuse to fail even harder than them?
Hamas plans a genocide of Jews on one hand -without limited success so far, but not for a lack of trying- and actively helps with worsening the situation in Gaza on the other because they can use deaths there for their propaganda. Israel isn't shy about killing as many Palestinians as possible either, because not reacting to Hamas terror isn't an option, but any reaction will produce a negative reaction and tons of propaganda anyway. So why not go all in?
So which side are you talking about? The one commiting genocide or the genocidal one? No, Palestinian civilians are sadly not a valid side you can chose as they are de facto governed by Hamas in Gaza... unless you have a plan to separate one from the other somehow. Please then go on and tell the plan to world leaders unsuccessfully looking for such a solution for many, many years now.
Or in short: Pretending there are easy sides, with one being right and one wrong, is not a solution but indeed part of the problem.
Thank you for perfectly demonstrating my point. You are an idiot thinking this is a team sport, "your" side is right and everybody not sharing your exact opinion is wrong and the enemy.
And because everyone is the same on that "other side" I somehow become a zionist bombing civilians in your alternative world view, although I could impossibly qualify for that definition by any degree.
And also because everything on your side needs to be righteous you twist reality to fit your view. I explicitly asked how to effectively separate Palestinian civilians in Gaza from their de facto Hamas governmemnt. Yet somehow in your brain that question translated to the exact opposite of what I actually said: That somehow every civilan in Gaza is part of Hamas.
Seriously... how fucked up is your delusion that things you read instantly transform to mean something completely different, just so they fit the imaginary point you are trying to make?
Ich verstehe ja den Unmut, aber für mich ist die Sache recht klar: Entweder der Landwirt kauft die Flächen der Gemeinde zum üblichen Preis ab oder er muss damit klarkommen, dass der Eigentümer sein Eigentum mit Ende des aktuellen Pachtvertrages nicht mehr an ihn verpachten will....
Weil wenn man deren Misswirtschaft, wie beispielsweise Mais nur zur Energieerzeugung, was elendig ineffizient ist, nicht mit Steuergeldern belohnt, steigen die wieder in Ihre Trecker und gefährden mit nachts auf der Straße plazierten Hindernissen Leben, bis man einlenkt.
Bauern halt... oder wie war das korrekte Wort für so ein Verhalten?
Weil dann müßten sie ja etwas umstellen und nicht wie sonst auch immer weitermachen.
Wein unter Photovoltaik, Mais rein für die Energieerzeugung abschaffen, und dafür dann sinnvollere Dinge anbauen wäre halt möglich und würde wahrscheinlich bessere Gesamtergebnisse einbringen. Aber das ist mit der Bauen-Ideologie oft nunmal nicht zu vereinbaren.
Oder das ist schon wieder so eine deutsche Besonderheit, dass Weinanbau unter Photovoltik in Frankreich funktioniert aber nicht in Deutschland. So wie Wärmepumpen in Skandinavien funktionieren aber es in Detuschland dafür zu kalt ist...
Nato’s failure to save Ukraine raises an existential question: what on earth is it for? (www.theguardian.com)
„Tegelwippen“: Niederlande entsiegeln um die Wette (orf.at) German
This Scientist Has an Antidote to Our Climate Delusions (www.nytimes.com)
Europe's Spending Billions on Green Hydrogen. It's a Risky Gamble (www.bloomberg.com)
To be clear: we’re going to use renewable hydrogen for some things, such as fertilizer manufacturing — there isn’t any other way to do them sustainably. There are applications for which it’s one of the most expensive choices, such as home heating, and a whole host of industrial processes and aviation sitting in between.
Rechtsextreme Straftaten 2024: Anstieg um 50 Prozent (www.hasepost.de) German
Die Zahl der rechtsextrem motivierten Straftaten in Deutschland ist im ersten Quartal 2024 im Vergleich zum Vorjahr um fast 50 Prozent gestiegen. Diese alarmierende Entwicklung geht aus Zahlen des Bundesinnenministeriums hervor, die auf Anfrage der Linken-Abgeordneten und Bundestagsvizepräsidentin Petra Pau veröffentlicht...
In some cultures, that is considered an honor Samantha! (sh.itjust.works)
Nearly 75% of Climate Experts Blame ‘Lack of Political Will’ for High Chance of Future Warming (www.ecowatch.com)
Record-breaking increase in CO2 levels in world’s atmosphere | Experts issue warning after finding global average concentration in March was 4.7ppm higher than same period last year (www.theguardian.com)
cross-posted from: slrpnk.net/post/9388627...
Yanis Varoufakis sues the German state (diem25.org)
How Republicans Echo Antisemitic Tropes Despite Declaring Support for Israel (www.nytimes.com)
More and faster: Electricity from clean sources reaches 30% of global total (apnews.com)
Scientists say emissions from burning fuels like coal must ramp steeply down to protect Earth’s climate, yet there was an increase in electricity made from burning fossil fuels. China, India, Vietnam and Mexico were responsible for nearly all of the rise....
Planet is headed for at least 2.5C of heating with disastrous results for humanity, poll of hundreds of scientists finds | Planet is headed for at least 2.5C of heating with disastrous results (www.theguardian.com)
I’ll note that 2.5°C of warming by 2100 is a significant improvement over the trajectory we were on a decade ago, even if still far from where we need to be
Eurovision expresses disappointment over performer wearing pro-Palestinian symbol (tribune.com.pk)
The musician was seen wearing a keffiyeh on his arm, a symbol commonly used to show support for Palestine....
Photovoltaik statt Gemüseacker – darum ist ein Bauer so sauer (www.swr.de) German
Ich verstehe ja den Unmut, aber für mich ist die Sache recht klar: Entweder der Landwirt kauft die Flächen der Gemeinde zum üblichen Preis ab oder er muss damit klarkommen, dass der Eigentümer sein Eigentum mit Ende des aktuellen Pachtvertrages nicht mehr an ihn verpachten will....
Geoengineers think they can slow climate change. The catch? No more blue skies. (link.houstonchronicle.com)
Here's what Exxon's CEO gets wrong about the climate crisis (www.latimes.com)
Archived copyof the article: archive.today
Six incarcerated people sue Alabama leaders, alleging unconstitutional prison labor (www.montgomeryadvertiser.com)
Archived at web.archive.org/web/…/73546541007/