this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2026
157 points (98.8% liked)

Europe

11799 readers
477 users here now

News and information from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] brainzzz@piefed.world 40 points 1 week ago

Am I the only moron who thought they meant music?

[–] Pip@feddit.org 31 points 1 week ago (11 children)

Wow, all that super stable, super reliable base load energy is just mindblowing!! Let's build more nuclear power plants!

[–] plyth@feddit.org 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Let’s build more nuclear power plants!

If we had done that early on we wouldn't have global warming and there wouldn't be a cool water shortage.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 19 points 1 week ago (4 children)

but that's not true. Electricity only accounts for about 18% of emissons, its non renewable, you'd have a waste pile the size of a mountain, would have run out of fuel by now and you'd need to start decommissioning most of them and rebuilding them

There's a persist myth that some technology can just magic a fix here, nothing short of vastly reduced energy consumption, and lifestyle changes can work, 10000 aging nuclear reactors that need replacing ain't going to cut it.

an example ?

we'd get a 30% reduction in emissions if the richest 10% loved like the average European, not enough but an excellent start

[–] plyth@feddit.org 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Electricity only accounts for about 18% of emissons

You have to switch all processes to electricity or hydrogen like steel making or fertilizer.

Best results come from not abusing the third world and letting them have a future that allows them to only have two children.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You have to switch all processes to electricity or hydrogen like steel making or fertilizer.

Doesn't turn Uranium into a regrowing resource.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Others have mentioned breeder reactors. There is also Thorium. But it is only necessary to use the energy until renewables take over. The last 70 years and the next 30 would have been enough to prevent global warming.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (10 children)

The last 70 years and the next 30 would have been enough to prevent global warming.

Suggesting that this would only be possible by going nuclear has absolutely zero basis in reality. Spinning magnets to generate electricity is a known way generate electricity since way before the first nuclear reactor was ever built. Hydropower and wind turbines were invented during the industrial revolution.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] ThunderclapSasquatch@startrek.website 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Hi big oil, propaganda still paying off?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Vincent@feddit.nl 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's more relevant what we should/can do now than what we should've done years ago, no?

I mean, obviously learn from history and not make the same mistakes, but it's also not necessarily the case that whatever would've been the solution back then, still is today.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago

If the same people are still in power and don't show acceptance of their mistakes or a willingness to correct them then it is relevant. There are solutions but it should be clear that they won't implement them.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] zloubida@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Nuclear is not a solution, evidence 836382.

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well, most of the time you would be right indeed. Uranium fuel rods are solid. But in a molten-salt reactor the fissile material is actually dissolved in molten salt, so it is a solution!

The more you know!

[–] jenesaisquoi@feddit.org 8 points 1 week ago (22 children)

It's also now more expensive than renewables. And it has always been less safe. There is literally no reason to build nuclear anymore. Renewables is the way to go. Cheaper, safer, makes Europe energy-independent, and also much better for the environment.

load more comments (22 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mrmisses@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Begun, the water wars have πŸ˜”

[–] jenesaisquoi@feddit.org 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is just the beginning.

This is the least heat and the most water we'll have for the rest of our lives.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago

Missed opportunity to use a nuke for peak Fallout.

Call it the Blew(up) Danube?

Meanwhile I want to nuke one measly hurricane and everyone looses their minds

[–] turdburglar@piefed.social 4 points 1 week ago

so, like, black sabbath? or something harder that the kids today listen to?

[–] onipa@feddit.org 3 points 1 week ago

At least some pyros from the Romanian navy have fun ... πŸŽ†πŸ”₯

[–] borisentiu@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago

When you hit rock bottom, that's at least the point, where yo-...hm, wait a second...

[–] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] jenesaisquoi@feddit.org 3 points 1 week ago

Astroturfing bots

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί