Theo

Sending Life Between Earth And Mars Using Asteroids! YouTube video by Scott Manley

Sending Life Between Earth And Mars Using Asteroids! youtu.be/6CMckMaOY5M?... by @scottmanley.bsky.social

Et leur choix de sortir du nucléaire plutôt que du charbon leur en a fait perdre sur la decarbonation de leur production électrique et sur la santé de la population européenne

Autre solution
bsky.app/profile/terr...

Surtout que c’est plutôt les usines chinoises que le développement allemand qu’on doit « remercier » pour les prix des ENRi

On est à quasiment 2500 décès prématurés à cause du charbon allemand d’après WWF
www.wwf.mg/en/?272333/D...

J’avoue XD

Et enfin, pourquoi ne pas s’être basé sur le droit européen et international comme ça a été le cas pour l’action contre la France ?

Dans ce cas pourquoi dire initialement que la législation ne permettait pas d’attaquer le gouvernement allemand plutôt que de dire qu’une action a été tentée mais n’a pas aboutie ?
Au passage il semblerait que le manque de résultat ne soit pas du qu’à la législation

De ce que je vois ça se base pas mal sur le droit européen et le droit international

« Vous vous en foutez du climat au fond »
Ce niveau d’hypocrisie venant du porte parole d’une ong qui se bat contre une source d’énergie électrique bas carbone et pilotable

Un bannière n’a rien à voir avec une action en justice
Greenpeace a attaqué le pays qui a une production électrique bas carbone et pas le pays qui a supprimé du bas carbone pilotable.
Bref, Greenpeace est hypocrite

And I debunked them

It’s a fact that solar and wind are their most deployed source of energy. And it doesn’t work

You’re the one coming with all your lies
And here is you yearly data that proves it doesn’t work

Solar and wind are still their most deployed source of electricity and do not prove to work

Say the one lying about the capacity of solar (which musk loves as much as you) and wind

And it is still their two most deployed source of electricity production and it doesn’t prove to work

You were speaking about a solar dominated source which works 50% at best. Has huge drop op performance when clouds come and is not hugely available in winter
Solar has not proven to work as nuclear did to power a country

Claim without proof once again (no surprise from someone who prefer countries that use coal)
Here it is based on the year and surprise. Germany emits way more

The Netherlands, what another great example of

Wind and solar are their top 2 installed capacity. They’re all in on renewable

The Energiwende didn’t stop. It takes time and do not prove to work unlike the Mesmer plan

And this is what happens

1) It is not my arbitrary go to. It’s your initial claim that didn’t have it
2) than do not take Brazil for example when you talk about solar + wind + batteries.
3) claim without proof
And IRL Germany tries it and emits CO2/kWh more than France

Germany seems to struggle a lot to do that and still emits more than France while killing tens of thousands of people per year

Or nor. Available 50% of the time at best. Low production in winter.
Once again, claim without any proof
Meanwhile Nuclear proved to work

1) because those were the option you were giving
2) was speaking about the whole country
3) claim without proof that 90% of countries can do wind + solar + batteries

1) it’s not « solar + wind + batteries » as you were saying
2) currently, hydro is the main power source
3) not all countries have those conditions

And good luck powering the whole country that way (or another country with very different conditions)

So … depends on the country
Iceland do not need neither wind and solar nor nuclear. Geothermal + hydro is perfect for them
In France nuclear + hydro proved to work
Wind + solar + battery, nowhere (and Germany still kills tens of thousand per year in Europe with its coal)

I prefer an electric system which is :
- as low carbon as possible
- safe (with few death per kWh)
- controllable