World is still fucked

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

The Road.

Even then when civilisation and crops have collapsed into a never ending nuclear winter of scavenging and violence I fear the gun toting lunatics will be objecting to 'turning us into a communist country'.

[Thomas]

Well, sounds like insects are fucked so unless you mean the actual ball of rock called Earth the general environment for life itself is being changed.

However, I also read that fertility rates for humans are in permanent irreversible decline so get your skates on.

In the manner of greenery and wildlife flourishing in the ruins of Chernobyl (nevertheless glowing slightly), might insect populations bounce back if the environment is nurtured? Until insects are fully extinct, I think the general environment for life has a chance at restoration. Thankfully we've got until the end of next month until the bees are gone forever.

Life has been around for perhaps 4 billion years. The sun might have 5 billion years left, but only 1 billion before it gets too hot to support complex life on Earth. Geologically we're already in the inevitable end times. Most of the timeline is already well used up.

When we discovered these facts, we should have turned our minds to preserving Earth for as long as possible, planning epic-scale space travel in the meantime - or else redefined our attitude towards death and vanishing, accepting and embracing the prospect of extinction. Instead, we get to watch the 1% dicking about in sub-orbital publicity stunts, consuming their warehoused goods to stave off the programmed fear of nonexistence.

[All Surrogate]

And we're still pinning most of our hopes on nuclear of course, which is renewable-ish but hardly green.  And can also kill everyone if it goes a bit wrong.

I think we should start building plenty more nuclear power stations. I can't see an alternative for providing sufficient reliable baseload electricity without producing greenhouse gases.

[Shit Good Nose]

The sun might have 5 billion years left, but only 1 billion before it gets too hot to support complex life on Earth. Geologically we're already in the inevitable end times. Most of the timeline is already well used up.

Mate that's fucking months.  What are you worrying about?

[Shit Good Nose]

I think we should start building plenty more nuclear power stations. I can't see an alternative for providing sufficient reliable baseload electricity without producing greenhouse gases.

Hydropower (perhaps with offshore wind backup where possible) is the best and safest option for baseload, but it needs a lot of investment and careful planning with the native environment - artificial waterfalls and narrowing of water courses fucks up passes for migratory fish, for example.

What to do with nuclear waste is still a huge problem.  Some of the leftover energy can be "recycled", but you'll never be left with a pile of nuclear waste which is safe.  Options - bury it in concrete graves (seems to be the favourite), bury it at the bottom of the sea, send it into space.  None of them are particularly appealing.

An old work mate of mine is working on Hinkley Point C, and he says it's absolutely terrifying how easy it is for something to go wrong.  Which isn't what you want to hear from someone who knows what they're doing and what they're talking about.

[Zetetic]

Hydropower (perhaps with offshore wind backup where possible) is the best and safest option for baseload, but it needs a lot of investment and careful planning with the native environment - artificial waterfalls and narrowing of water courses fucks up passes for migratory fish, for example.

Still, good news for the death squads, given where most of the UK's current and potential hydropower capacity is to be found.

[chveik]

the existence of pro-nuclear power socialists always bewilders me

[Zetetic]

Why?

None of them are particularly appealing.

On the other hand, neither is digging a bunch of horribly poisonous stuff out of the ground.

[Shit Good Nose]

Still, good news for the death squads, given where most of the UK's current and potential hydropower capacity is to be found.

Will these be government sanctioned death squads, or made up of people who don't have house arses and sit in a paddling pool by their front door?

[Zetetic]

I assume that technically they'll be subsidiaries of utility companies.

[mothman]

I think we should start building plenty more nuclear power stations. I can't see an alternative for providing sufficient reliable baseload electricity without producing greenhouse gases.

Monbiot came to this conclusion several years ago - and was roundly slated by other environmental campaigners for it. To them nuclear is a bete noire - but it's the only way to provide the energy our high-tech civilisation requires.

[jamiefairlie]

Why do socialists have to have any particular opinion on the environment or forms of power sources?

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Why do socialists have to have any particular opinion on the environment or forms of power sources?

Suppose cos its absolutely integral to any plans whatsoever

[mothman]

Plans as in... any plans at all whatsoever, or just the plans of people socialists don't like?

[Zetetic]

I guess plans that involve either living somewhere ("the environment") or doing something while you're there ("power").

[mothman]

I - and, I presume, jamief - am just curious why chveik said this:

the existence of pro-nuclear power socialists always bewilders me

[Fambo Number Mive]

Sorry to butt in but I noticed this in the Manchester Evening News

Chloe Brimicombe, a heatwave hazards researcher at the University of Reading, told the Sunday Times : "Southern England could see its first 40-degree day within the next ten years.

"Most of our rail network would not be able to run in those sorts of temperatures.

"We would see increased pressure on water resources, productivity would be reduced, and it could affect our livestock and our crops."

29 degree heat was bad enough, imagine 40 degree heat

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/scientists-warning-over-killer-heatwave-21146725

[mothman]

Don't have to, have experienced many times. But in dry heats, making it more bearable; this country's humidity, not so much...

[chveik]

i just don't think it's worth the risk, can't we find something less dangerous? i've read enough about fukushima and chernobyl to be horrified by the whole thing. besides the construction of new generation nuclear plants (in Finland and France) is a pure environmental and economical disaster. surely there are better ways to spend all this money. and i don't think all those very old plants are going to fare well in the middle of relentless natural catastrophes

[Thomas]

"Most of our rail network would not be able to run in those sorts of temperatures.

"We would see increased pressure on water resources, productivity would be reduced, and it could affect our livestock and our crops."

This is the sort of specific apocalyptic detail I was looking for. Cheers, weather boffins!

[Chedney Honks]

Put a frozen bottle of ice in front of your fan.

Sorted.

[WhoMe]

It is quite sad, considering how much energy is truly available if we could harness it, to fall at this hurdle. Like dying of thirst on the edge of a natural spring.

[Sebastian Cobb]

Monbiot came to this conclusion several years ago - and was roundly slated by other environmental campaigners for it. To them nuclear is a bete noire - but it's the only way to provide the energy our high-tech civilisation requires.

They should've been built decades ago. Given it takes almost 20 years to build them it does kind of feel like renewables and some form of storage, plus smarter, load following devices (although that's going to hit poors the worst so one would hope they're subsidised) may make them less necessary by the time they're coming online.

The planned Hinckley point ones sounded fucking stupid.

[Fambo Number Mive]

I think as well as looking for more environmentally friendly energy sources we need to think about ways to reduce demand - penalising offices which leave their lights on all night, for example, and getting rid of those electronic advertising screens on the side of bus stops (I know they make money for local councils but they must use a lot of energy).

[TrenterPercenter]

Suppose cos its absolutely integral to any plans whatsoever

But it's not integral to being socialist; well in as much as it would just be about who owned the nuclear power plant.

Green socialism might be a domain on the left but it isn't a foundational tenet of socialism not even slightly.

[chveik]

Green socialism might be a domain on the left but it isn't a foundational tenet of socialism not even slightly.

maybe not historically - and it was a blindspot imo - but it seems essential now.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I think as well as looking for more environmentally friendly energy sources we need to think about ways to reduce demand - penalising offices which leave their lights on all night, for example, and getting rid of those electronic advertising screens on the side of bus stops (I know they make money for local councils but they must use a lot of energy).

Piss in the sea when you consider the plans to move cars and heating off fossil fuels and on to electric.

[Shit Good Nose]

Sorry to butt in but I noticed this in the Manchester Evening News

29 degree heat was bad enough, imagine 40 degree heat

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/scientists-warning-over-killer-heatwave-21146725

Most of the UK's electricity and communications networks would also not function in that sort of temperature.  Huge parts of the respective networks' pipelines and cables haven't been replaced since the 60s and 70s, which is why energy and comms suppliers' profits are so enormous because they've only invested a very small amount in improving the infrastructure.

[Shit Good Nose]

getting rid of those electronic advertising screens on the side of bus stops (I know they make money for local councils but they must use a lot of energy).

They don't at all (less than £100 a year, and up to 50% of that cost will be non-energy charges), and most if not all of them will be on 100% green or renewable contracts now, most from the same unmetered network that covers street lights and illuminated bollards etc.

[Sebastian Cobb]

Most of the UK's electricity and communications networks would also not function in that sort of temperature.  Huge parts of the respective networks' pipelines and cables haven't been replaced since the 60s and 70s, which is why energy and comms suppliers' profits are so enormous because they've only invested a very small amount in improving the infrastructure.

That's kind of the problem in the US with rolling blackouts too. The fires and need for blackouts were due to poorly maintained electrical infrastructure. Sure, man and climate change cause the conditions but the lack of maintenance exacerbate it massively.