Coal produces about 33% of global electricitySolar and wind produce 8–9% eachElectricity meets about 20% of total energy demandhttps://www.visualcapitalist.com/coal-still-powers-more-electricity/
-
@jonesmurphy He was rapey and racist. Also, I'm from Boston, so I've been choking for a while on how great all things Kennedy are.
@dnkboston most white voters voted against JFK in 1960 due to his insufficient racism. When he gave his aggressive speech for the Civil Rights Act in June 1963, his approval among white voters crashed hard. Boston wasn't very fond of JFK back then. They like him a lot better dead than alive. Like MLK.
-
@dnkboston most white voters voted against JFK in 1960 due to his insufficient racism. When he gave his aggressive speech for the Civil Rights Act in June 1963, his approval among white voters crashed hard. Boston wasn't very fond of JFK back then. They like him a lot better dead than alive. Like MLK.
@jonesmurphy He said some really disgusting things to a diplomat from Europe--I want to say the Netherlands--in the context of decolonization.
That would very much track with Boston.
-
@jonesmurphy He said some really disgusting things to a diplomat from Europe--I want to say the Netherlands--in the context of decolonization.
That would very much track with Boston.
@dnkboston LBJ also was a lifetime segregationist. Yet the vast majority of white supremacist Americans hated those men for their support of MLK and the Civil Rights laws.
-
@dnkboston LBJ also was a lifetime segregationist. Yet the vast majority of white supremacist Americans hated those men for their support of MLK and the Civil Rights laws.
@jonesmurphy Johnson knew what the support would cost the Dems. I'm glad he did it, but I wish we'd had an actual strategy to counter the GOP reaction.
-
@dnkboston LBJ also was a lifetime segregationist. Yet the vast majority of white supremacist Americans hated those men for their support of MLK and the Civil Rights laws.
@jonesmurphy Reading The New American Poverty by Michael Harrington and how the Vietnam War absolutely screwed the alleged War on Poverty. Johnson did a couple of things to be proud of, but more that screwed us.
-
@jonesmurphy Reading The New American Poverty by Michael Harrington and how the Vietnam War absolutely screwed the alleged War on Poverty. Johnson did a couple of things to be proud of, but more that screwed us.
@dnkboston white supremacist voters responded by electing criminal racist Nixon, FAR worse than LBJ. LBJ's flaws are microscopic and insignificant compared to those of the vast majority of white Americans.
-
@jonesmurphy Johnson knew what the support would cost the Dems. I'm glad he did it, but I wish we'd had an actual strategy to counter the GOP reaction.
@dnkboston we had plenty of strategies. We lacked white people and non-black people of color willing to vote for those strategies.
-
@knud The actual solution is to use less energy, period. Transitions have always been a smokescreen to, in fact, use more. @gerrymcgovern
@dnkboston @knud @gerrymcgovern Jean-Baptiste Fressoz «Sans transition: une nouvelle histoire de l'énergie» thoroughly documents how historically, energy transitions have been primarily additive as opposed to replacing legacy energy resources, although to some extent new energy resources are used to enhance the extraction of legacy energy resources.
-
@dnkboston white supremacist voters responded by electing criminal racist Nixon, FAR worse than LBJ. LBJ's flaws are microscopic and insignificant compared to those of the vast majority of white Americans.
@dnkboston the Vietnam War was extremely popular among white people for years. It wasn't until the US was clearly losing in 1968 under LBJ that the war became unpopular. Even then, Nixon was extremely popular in the early 70s among white voters for prolonging the war and bombing Cambodia. Nixon won the biggest electoral college victory ever in 1972 for this.
-
@dnkboston the Vietnam War was extremely popular among white people for years. It wasn't until the US was clearly losing in 1968 under LBJ that the war became unpopular. Even then, Nixon was extremely popular in the early 70s among white voters for prolonging the war and bombing Cambodia. Nixon won the biggest electoral college victory ever in 1972 for this.
@dnkboston white Vietnam veterans are among the biggest warmongers in America today.
-
@knud @gerrymcgovern @dnkboston
The formal and accepted way is not including all the emissions. At least not in my field of work, so I have no reason to believe it to be different in another.
@tschenkel @gerrymcgovern @dnkboston
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol is the only international accepted accounting method. In its Scope 3 emissions outside an entity's immediate production (=Scope 1+2) are calculated. These are part of their emission and get reported under "Scope 3 emissions". So yes, there are standards and those include emissions from purchases.
-
@knud I think you are well-intentioned, but we're looking at this differently. I do not think that the renewable/green technology production cycle is sustainable. The amount of damage done to ecosystems to get the materials, to say nothing of the costs to human health, needs to be taken into account with these assessments. At the very least, you can move people around only after you've damaged the places they live only so many times before you run out of places to move them. @gerrymcgovern
I have literally no idea what you are talking about.
The only alternative to producing energy via solar and wind is fossil. Do you want that?
-
@dnkboston @knud @gerrymcgovern Jean-Baptiste Fressoz «Sans transition: une nouvelle histoire de l'énergie» thoroughly documents how historically, energy transitions have been primarily additive as opposed to replacing legacy energy resources, although to some extent new energy resources are used to enhance the extraction of legacy energy resources.
@nyc @dnkboston @gerrymcgovern
Germany is phasing out coal while having phased out nuclear, and while reducing primary energy use. All this driven towards lower carbon intensity of energy by a strong push to renewables:
So the "historic" perspective doesn't extrapolate to the present, bc ending the 500,000 year epoch of burning stuff is fundamentally new.
-
I have literally no idea what you are talking about.
The only alternative to producing energy via solar and wind is fossil. Do you want that?
@knud I’m in agreement with “we need a combination of both” (https://mastodon.social/@knud/116540906047307330) but…
The greater metals dependency per GW generated will matter more than we think. The *dependency* of renewables on fossil infrastructure and inputs for manufacture will matter more than we think.
The dishonesty of how they’re described and thus what they’re understood to be is part of the picture of why power consumption grows and why demand reduction is not part of policy
-
@knud
There's nothing remotely "clean" about solar. Just because something is less dirty in one area does not make it clean. Modern tech is inherently toxic. We must seek to radically reduce energy use.@gerrymcgovern @knud @dnkboston this is bullshit. There are numerous other forms of renewable energy besides solar. The principal obstacle to them is not China. It's your Nazi relatives, friends, neighbors and tribesme. You're bashing China which is a far lower emitter per capita than Europe and its evil Diaspora. You are racist as hell. Western conservatives are the worst people in the world on this and many other topics.
-
@knud I’m in agreement with “we need a combination of both” (https://mastodon.social/@knud/116540906047307330) but…
The greater metals dependency per GW generated will matter more than we think. The *dependency* of renewables on fossil infrastructure and inputs for manufacture will matter more than we think.
The dishonesty of how they’re described and thus what they’re understood to be is part of the picture of why power consumption grows and why demand reduction is not part of policy
@knud nevertheless, I don’t think we are strategically in control of what we’re doing and the incentives pretty much ensure that we are not capable of becoming so.
Oil and gas will become radically less affordable in the coming years and the lived experience of being on the enforced downslope of power consumption will help us forge new ways of being
-
@knud @gerrymcgovern @dnkboston
The formal and accepted way is not including all the emissions. At least not in my field of work, so I have no reason to believe it to be different in another.
@tschenkel
Yes, all sort of trickery at play. A key purpose of science has always been to justify economic expansion.And, of course, we only measure some of the harms. Up 80% of the total harms done by modern tech is in its mining, manufacturing and e-waste disposal. Metals mining causes massive toxic waste which destroys soil, air and water for generations.
-
@tschenkel @gerrymcgovern @dnkboston
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol is the only international accepted accounting method. In its Scope 3 emissions outside an entity's immediate production (=Scope 1+2) are calculated. These are part of their emission and get reported under "Scope 3 emissions". So yes, there are standards and those include emissions from purchases.
@knud @gerrymcgovern @dnkboston
My point is that scope 3 emissions don't include all the emissions that I think should be included. The way we calculate footprint is biased in favour of the global north.
-
Then they need more fuel. Fuel that will displace people (coal), or impact their immediate (fracking) or wider (extreme weather) environment. Producing this energy with renewables removes this "more".
By now solar panels and batteries can be 100% recycled. Sodium batteries use little exotic materials, etc.
So my point is not one of "more" but of "instead". And that implies installing solar and wind harvesting, and shutting down burning facilities.
2/2
@knud
There is no such thing as 100% recycling. The true recycling rate for modern electronics is probably about 5%, and every year electronics become less and less recyclable.You always hear about sodium batteries replacing lithium--always a solution just around the corner. Meanwhile, in the USA alone 100 new lithium mines are planned.
-
@knud nevertheless, I don’t think we are strategically in control of what we’re doing and the incentives pretty much ensure that we are not capable of becoming so.
Oil and gas will become radically less affordable in the coming years and the lived experience of being on the enforced downslope of power consumption will help us forge new ways of being
@urlyman
Consumption is out of control, for sure, and we have found the easiest and cheapest oil, gas and metals. But if history is a teacher, then our civilizations will double down on the worst behaviors of the Growth Death Cult.I can only see environmental and civilizational collapse coming. The question is: What comes after? How do we be good ancestors so that everything is not destroyed.
