Few things before I get down talked

  • I am not an extremists and I believe in Tech, I mention it because getting rid of everything like cars, airplanes is for my understandings not an option for modern society. I know some people here see it different but please keep that in mind.
  • I know some things I mention are highly controversial because everyone has its own opinion but I think proposed ideas are necessary trade-off.

You do not need to like it but this is what I suggest.

  • Invest more money into Fusion Power.
  • Remove all nuclear power plants and replace them with wind, earth thermal energy, water, and the other usual renewable suspects.
  • Create more decentralized networks for energy create more batteries on bigger scale, the money we use for nuclear and power plants can be used to create batteries facilities near wind off-shore parks because wind and sun is not always blowing and shining.
  • Declare coal and nuclear illegal, positive effect for climate directly because no nuclear threat + better air quality + less people die because coal has bad history regarding your health when you work there or live near around it.
  • 2 humans only policy. I think 2 children are enough. Of course this is against freedom but I see this as necessary evil. However, I am against shooting someone, the punishment should more to cut funding from government in case you violate it. I am not someone who says you should get rid of the child or something, because there is still rape etc. I think life should be valued but there should be some restrictions on how you punish someone because otherwise people find excuses to bypass this rule. I am aware that this is alone is controversial and delicate topic.
  • Renew the energy networks, the ones we have a not really designed to be used the way we use it and we need fundamental upgrades to handle decentralization. So we need money here to improve the situation.
  • Money for research should be a much higher priority. We should fund good ideas and instead of wasting 2 trillion each year on war, weapons etc, we should use the money for good. This also can be used for medical things.
  • Create at least in the cities better infrastructure for bicycles and open supermarkets 24 7. In my country supermarket often closes and running them maybe 24 7 helps to hire more people, easily ride with your bicycle into it whenever you have time, after work etc.
  • Getting rid of plastics or drastically reduce it, the effect would be noticeable I think, see oceans, micro-plastics, cancer rates etc.
  • Support more vegans and find better ways to make it more attractive. I tried it several times and it tastes awful, maybe I had bad recipes or wrong guidance, aka none. I think we should make people more aware of their options and directly provide guidance in the supermarket or via apps funded directly by the government so you know it is open source, no scam and everyone could help submitting new things.
  • War should be declared - useless - and we should work together. Getting rid of all weapons in the world should be a long time goal. I mention it but that is just not realistic until 2050, but I personally would like to see that we evolve to such a point. Positive effects are so many, I do not think I need to mention them all.

This is no end solution and only my first abstract what I think is necessary and needs to be done. I clearly want to outline that all of this is a team effort and we need to come to an common ground and understand + act pretty fast on this if we really want to turn something bad around to gain more time.

🥺

  • ziproot
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 years ago

    I am fine with nuclear energy as a temporary solution since climate change is such a big problem, and we need all we have to deal with it. Once that problem is dealt with, then we can continue to ramp up low-emissions renewable energy. I think we should wait to declare nuclear illegal until climate change is solved.

    • DPUGT2
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      Most likely you’d not even need to do so. If renewables are so awesome, then surely they are cheaper and cheaper always wins out over more expensive, barring perverse incentives.

      • ziproot
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        Yes, renewable energy is better: https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1038/s41560-020-00696-3

        However, declaring nuclear energy illegal means destroying functioning power plants that have very low emissions. We should wait to destroy nuclear energy until we can replace it with renewable energy, and we should not be having to replace nuclear energy until we’ve replaced fossil fuels and biofuel.

        EDIT: Basically, we should start out by getting rid of* what is most polluting (agriculture/industry emissions), and then working our way down from there (coal, natural gas, oil, biofuel, and nuclear, in that order).

        *Agriculture emissions can be offset by transitioning to a more vegan diet. I don’t call it plant-based because that excludes fungi and bacteria that we also consume.

    • CHEF-KOCHOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 years ago
      • Climate change will not be solved with nuclear.
      • Climate change will also not be solved with renewables.
      • Betting mainly on winning time is a high gamble, once you hit a specific line there is no turning back and some problems can maybe never be solved.
      • DPUGT2
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        Climate change will not be solved with nuclear.

        Won’t be solved by discarding what amounts to 20% of the global electricity budget either.

      • ziproot
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        I agree to everything you just said. It appears like someone else already discussed what I said in a comment thread below, so I apologize for bringing it up again.

        EDIT: What I meant by agreeing with you was that I agree that climate change will not be solved with nuclear or renewables alone. I did not mean that using nuclear energy and renewable energy does not have any effect on solving climate change.