Post B0bdUVem9B6DQ6DQJ6 by benroyce@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by benroyce@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #B0bWUKbqWMxPTioTwm by randahl@mastodon.social
2025-11-25T08:07:22Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
Here is my Ukraine peace proposal:1. Putin is sent to The Hague.2. Russian soldiers leave Ukraine including Crimea.3. Russia returns all kidnapped Ukrainian children.4. Russia releases all Ukrainian prisoners.5. Russia pays damages for everything their war has destroyed. 6. Russia pays damages to Ukrainian families who have lost family members.7. Russia pays damages to every person who has been tortured, abducted or otherwise criminally mistreated.8. Ukraine becomes a member of the EU.
(DIR) Post #B0bWUM5J2K7I3NbWVM by bortzmeyer@mastodon.gougere.fr
2025-11-25T12:41:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@randahl Ukraine joins NATO? Or is it too radical?
(DIR) Post #B0bZk6OFSJIrsEfGZk by PierreM@piaille.fr
2025-11-25T08:11:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@randahl not sure about the right point though.Ukraine deserves true democracy right now, nott o have to deal with the likes of Orban.
(DIR) Post #B0bZk7SBVA2vAjVvLk by randahl@mastodon.social
2025-11-25T08:17:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@PierreM Orban loses power in March 2026, so this will not matter.
(DIR) Post #B0bZk8Nc3dz22qNmrY by Npars01@mstdn.social
2025-11-25T08:48:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@randahl @PierreM Here's another:Accelerate the switch away from fossil fuels. Enough with the oil wars.Putin can't fund a war if people don't buy his toxic fossil fuel products.https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2025/10/08/eu-unites-to-phase-out-russian-oil-and-gas-imports/https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/eu-parliament-committee-supports-quicker-phase-out-russian-gas-2025-10-16/https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2025)775863https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/european-parliament-seeks-faster-phaseout-of-russian-oil-and-gasTrump can't wreck the planet on behalf of his oil oligarchs if people switch to cheaper solar & wind instead.https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-oil-industry-donationshttps://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2025/nov/21/cop30-live-fossil-fuel-phaseout-final-text-brazil-belem-latest-news-updateshttps://theconversation.com/this-years-climate-talks-saw-real-progress-just-not-on-fossil-fuels-269903https://theconversation.com/renewable-energy-is-cheaper-and-healthier-so-why-isnt-it-replacing-fossil-fuels-faster-269685
(DIR) Post #B0bZk9NeKzbh9FPKYi by Archivist@social.linux.pizza
2025-11-25T13:17:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Npars01 @randahl @PierreM well, a bit of that is that we need some amount of pilotability in the power grid. Traditionally that is hydro, nuclear or fossil fuels. Switching to more hydro is incredibly impopular (and very dangerous) and switching to more nuclear is also impopular (due to perceived danger)
(DIR) Post #B0bahxYrPTnrrnAdpg by benroyce@mastodon.social
2025-11-25T13:28:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM there's tidal, wind, solar, geothermal, etc"Switching to more hydro is incredibly impopular (and very dangerous)"what does that mean?
(DIR) Post #B0bcnvDXEmfSF7AOK8 by Archivist@social.linux.pizza
2025-11-25T13:52:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@benroyce @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM of those, only geothermal is pilotable.Hydro is impopular because it requires the most expropriations and destruction to setup. It is also responsible for over 90% of deaths related to energy production in the past 70 years at the very least
(DIR) Post #B0bdUVem9B6DQ6DQJ6 by benroyce@mastodon.social
2025-11-25T13:59:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM sure but it's not the only option, that's my pointand you can assemble all the dangers with hydro, all the dangers with nuclear, etc...and fossil fuels are still way more dangerous than all of that(in terms of climate change, funding putin and other nasty regimes, etc)
(DIR) Post #B0beuGNXflGFWGzzLU by Archivist@social.linux.pizza
2025-11-25T14:15:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@benroyce @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM oh I do not disagree with that. But politicians want to avoid the issue because it will make them impopular. My opinion is that we need more nuclear right now and a tighter bond with Australia for fuel, and to start thinking of 10 to 30 valleys in Europe to sacrifice to hydro in 50 yearsThat does not exclude setting up more renewable, it is part of doing that, the goal is to run pilotable sources as low as possible. A nuclear reactor running at 30% is far more reliable and durable than one running at 100%, and can still ramp up production in times of need
(DIR) Post #B0bfG4AVkaAk1NIfjs by benroyce@mastodon.social
2025-11-25T14:19:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM in addition to that nuclear tech has advance to where- of course nothing is 100% safe, but certainly orders of magnitude safer than 1960s era tech that led to all of our accidents. things like pebble bed reactors, passively safe, where you can just walk away from them and they just slow down, they don't meltdownpebble bed reactors, ironically, pioneered by germany, which gave it all up to suck at the russian fossil fuel teat. we see how that turned out
(DIR) Post #B0bhB6pSdBzkjVDaAS by painting_squirrel@muenchen.social
2025-11-25T14:29:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@benroyce @Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreMExcept that we don't have even nearly enough uranium on this planet to cover a significant portion of our energy consumption over a significant amount of time (for certain meanings of "significant"; e.g. if we were to cover all our current worldwide electricity consumption through nuclear, all the uranium on Earth would be deleted within a year)
(DIR) Post #B0bhB83g3oxeXssRxw by Archivist@social.linux.pizza
2025-11-25T14:41:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@painting_squirrel @benroyce @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM while that is partially true, fuel recycling and breeder reactors solve that problem from the foreseeable couple of centuries
(DIR) Post #B0bhFD0ZbBo33WN2ki by stellarsarah@mastodon.world
2025-11-25T14:41:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Archivist has hydro actually caused the most deaths? It looks like coal is worse from what I've seen (e.g. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-production-per-twh). @benroyce @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM
(DIR) Post #B0biH23DPQ6Fbb2Wjw by benroyce@mastodon.social
2025-11-25T14:48:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@stellarsarah @Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM yeah i agreefossil fuels are obviously orders of magnitude worse in terms of death than hydronevermind climate changenevermind the irony that coal pumps more radioactivity into our atmosphere than nuclearthe point is hydro is obviously better than fossil fuels, and "perfect energy source" is not and never will be on the menu
(DIR) Post #B0biH3d3XeMaV2ofFA by stellarsarah@mastodon.world
2025-11-25T14:51:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@benroyce it looks like the "most deadly" title for hydroelectricity is based on a dam failure in China in the '70s, but doesn't include all the deaths and disabilities causes by burning coal (possibly just the coal-related accidents). @Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM
(DIR) Post #B0biH4Yq4oaHOFqoJE by Archivist@social.linux.pizza
2025-11-25T14:53:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@stellarsarah @benroyce @Npars01 @randahl @PierreMYeah, the stat source I used only counted deaths from accidents. Coal is definitely very deadly, and produces a fuckton more radioactive pollution than nuclear
(DIR) Post #B0bmszsGLkC7fwH8D2 by stellarsarah@mastodon.world
2025-11-25T15:45:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Archivist fair enough. I'm also not suggesting that hydro is the ultimate answer or suitable in all situations. I grew up in southern Ontario, which has some massive waterfalls that make it ideal for hydroelectric power (there's not a dam, they just redirect some of the water from the Niagra River into some turbines instead of letting it fall naturally), but obviously there are other locations where it's a less suitable option.@benroyce @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM
(DIR) Post #B0cGD2iOOWxMwrZMe0 by thomas_klopf@dobbs.town
2025-11-25T21:13:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@randahl dude I’m with you, but let Ukrainians decide what is enough compromise. It’s so scary for them and we can’t even imagine what the war-weariness is like.
(DIR) Post #B0dJujCgnCg2CIDs5w by Archivist@social.linux.pizza
2025-11-26T09:29:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@stellarsarah @benroyce @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM where I live is also provisioned mostly by damless hydro, many rivers to pull from in the mountains
(DIR) Post #B0fcJ9Rv3BmW2P3tj6 by jt_rebelo@ciberlandia.pt
2025-11-25T13:49:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@benroyce people don't want land to be under the dam's water, the destruction of habitats, etc, and there's a high risk of droughts with climate change (so, a big construction site and people moving from their homes for nothing, as for the dangerous part it has to be because ruSSia targets dams as military objectives). But as you say, there are several renewable energy sources, and part of them don't depend on the weather.@Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM
(DIR) Post #B0fcJAtbfjWUWZ1WWO by benroyce@mastodon.social
2025-11-25T13:57:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jt_rebelo @Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM oh i agree, i was more attacking their statement on its incompleteness (and you are completing their concerns)as a contrast to these concerns, denmark is well on its way to 100% renewables by 2050, and denmark is not exactly mountains and lakes and hydroso i view the problem more as them ignoring the other obvious optionsthe real topic?fossil fuels is more dangerous than anything else
(DIR) Post #B0fcJBj0acdj5z4Zdo by econads@mendeddrum.org
2025-11-27T08:35:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@benroyce @jt_rebelo @Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM fossil fuels already passed the tipping point, big oil and it's political minions are fighting a rearguard action.
(DIR) Post #B0fcJCen7mrPzC6ihs by jt_rebelo@ciberlandia.pt
2025-11-27T08:37:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@econads unfortunately they are still making millions of victims around the world, and the changes they made to climate seem to be long-lasting and nigh irreparable. @benroyce @Archivist @Npars01 @randahl @PierreM
(DIR) Post #B0fcJDZ9kDwmo0TjYu by Archivist@social.linux.pizza
2025-11-27T12:05:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jt_rebelo @econads @benroyce @Npars01 @randahl @PierreMThey are almost irreparable, keyword almost. For reference on how old coal is, it was formed because when the plant matter that composes it died, bacterias were not yet able to digest it. It is so old that bees did not exist, and plants were pollinised by insects in the family of bettles.Reversing the damage will take cutting just as many trees over centuries and burying them in a medium where they cannot decompose via aerobic processes in sediment layers that will prevent decay products from reaching the surface