The way I see things no nuclear facility should ever be bombed. Never.

I also think that the Israeli attacks are related to Iran’s nuclear program but I don’t think they are related to this alleged leak. Here is a 25 min long al jazeera podcast for more on this:

Why is Israel attacking Iran now?

Thank you for your input. Even tho I find this to be totally faisable, from what the cradle article provides, I cannot verify much:

• fars looks like it’s an Iranian outlet I personnaly don’t know if I can trust or not, regardless of mbfc
• the informed sources are not named
• I didn’t manage to find the documents mentionned*

Apart from that at some point it mentions that Grossi said in Times of Israel that “We have seen some reports in the press. We haven’t had any official communication about this.”, but it is about Iran stealing Israeli documents.

Anyways, if you or anyone has more on this, please share.

Edit: *I mean deducted, or something

I have noticed that The Conversation has articles that I consider to be great and others that I find to be the opposite. Unfortunately, for me, this one is in the later category.

In this one, mainly they talk about how the technologies will work, about money and the urgency to use this tech. The real urgency is to start phasing out fossil fuel globally. Also, they don’t talk about the unintended consequences, the too many known unknowns, and let’s keep in mind there are uncountable unknown unknowns in geoengineering.

More info:

• Key reasons to oppose geoengineering | Geoengineering Monitor
• [email protected]

Coincidentaly, I also posted this article but after reading it a second time, I decided to delete it because I found it was very problematic since it says very contradictory things. If I misunderstood something, please point it out to me.

Examples of contradictions:

Over 99% of the almost 1.89m tCO2e estimated […] is attributed to Israel’s aerial bombardment and ground invasion of Gaza.

[…] 50% [of CO2e emissions] were generated by the supply and use of weapons, tanks and other ordnance by the Israeli military (IDF), the study found.

• And there is this graph claiming that most emissions by sector come from Gaza aid delivery (trucks).

According to this study, it looks like most emissions come from Israel’s IDF

Over 99% of the almost 1.89m tCO2e estimated to have been generated between the 7 October 2023 Hamas attack and the temporary ceasefire in January 2025 is attributed to Israel’s aerial bombardment and ground invasion of Gaza.

I would say, it’s much longer than 40 years.

This is what the United Nations, use as starting point:

1917 – 1947: British mandate

Palestine was among former Ottoman territories placed under UK administration by the League of Nations in 1922. All of these territories eventually became fully independent States, except Palestine, […]

Please, stop using the tactic of whataboutism. Meaning, this paper is specifically about Israel’s war on Palestine, so let’s talk about this post, and not everything else instead.

Edit: I need to correct my comment, since this paper is about

• Israel - Palestine
• Israel - Iran
• Israel - Lebanon
• Israel - Yemen

Sorry, but what are you talking about? Who is he? What jets?

Maybe take a look at the article?

I think I understand your point, but it looks like I see things very differently.

Mining companies all over the world are breaking the laws because it is more profitable for them to pay some fines when they get caught, instead of following the law. This is the problem.

Since green energy needs mining, we should always talk about both green energy transition and mining as one topic in order to apply efficient solutions. This is why it is called the Triple planetary crisis, because the topics of climate, environment and biodiversity, intersect and viable solutions are only those that take this as a fact.

I think the rest of the article (just below the graph you added) gives a decent overvue on how the situation is, and includes some equaly decent projections. It looks like there is a possibility that they have peaked, and will plateau or hopefully will diminish emittions. Still, no certainty that this is a trend, or that it will continue.

And June is a month to keep an eye out to see how its new electricity pricing policy for renewable energy will be.

Economic growth makes us all better,

No. Economic growth under capitalism is the problem. Capitalism requires infinite growth on a finite planet, and this is what got us here in the first place. So this is not a sustainable economic system.

If I understand you correctly in the part you talk about labor, robotics and AI, it reminds me of what was said by capitalists when automations started being employed in factories, meaning many, many decades ago.

At the time the capitalist narrative was saying to workers stuff like “we know you work hard, but thanks to the technological advancements in automations your children will work less and have a better life”. We very well know this never happened, only the rich got richer, to the detriment of everybody else and the planet as a whole.

So, allow me to say, this approach is not new.

I was wondering if anyone here has read it as well. And what your take is.

Personally, I will not read it because:

Meet the authors

James Arbib is a technology investor and the founder of Tellus Mater, an independent philanthropic foundation dedicated to exploring the impacts of disruptive technology and its potential for solving some of the world’s most challenging problems.

Tony Seba is a world-renowned thought leader, author, speaker, educator, investor and Silicon Valley entrepreneur.

In relation to the content of the book, I wouldn’t be too surprised if these two capitalists suggest misleading technological “solutions” to a problem that is not technological in nature, but systemic. Meaning, the problem is the eternal growth of the capitalist system on a finite planet, and there is no techno-fix for that. Also, I’m pretty sure they are making baseless claims about humans and human societies to back their proposals.

Anyways, now that I said all that, may I suggest another reading? Totally free and priceless :)

What is Solarpunk?

Let’s not forget an important factor: within the span of 30 years.

I spent too many hours yesterday trying to find the relevant info without taking this into consideration.

I know that in the article they mentions €42,980 and I appreciate carbon brief. Still, I tried to find in the study itself how they calculated it, but somehow I didn’t manage to. This is why I asked for another link.

Do you have a decent link to corroborate that?

Do you have any decent link that supports this?

I didn’t manage to spot in the study itself, how they calculate this number. If anyone has, please share this part.

I don’t think so. I have the impression that the introduction part was talking in general, mainly because it says The amount varies by location and local wage trends, and then it talks about the US, specifically.

Appart from that, in page 23 of the Global Wealth Report 2024 by UBS in The global weath pyramyd 2023 it also says saomething similar, that 16.3% of adults have wealth in USD of 100k to 1m.

Did I get something wrong?

The calculations in the site you linked is more of a creative accounting approach for feel good purposes. Nothing serious there imo.