Untitled attachment

Notices where this attachment appears

1. Embed this notice
   Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Monday, 27-May-2024 11:09:12 JST Strypey

   in reply to

   @sj_zero
   > When it comes to climate comparisons, I think it isn't so simple as "trains use less fuel per passenger"

   Agreed, and this is where the rubber meets the road. If you accept the greenhouse effect, and that the planet is warming, then it's worth investing in things that aren't financially efficient, as long as they reduce carbon emissions.

   So the key question is, would a China-style fast train network in North America reduce carbon emissions?

   (1/?)

   @fgraver @AccordionBruce @tbaldauf

2. Embed this notice
   Emeritus Prof Christopher May (chrismayla6@zirk.us)'s status on Thursday, 09-Nov-2023 15:35:43 JST Emeritus Prof Christopher May

   For 13 days earlier this year #Greenpeace activists bordered a #Shell #oil support;.

   Shell is now suing for over £2mn in damages, after court sanctioned negotiations broke down... because:

   Shell said they'd reduce the claim if Greenpeace no longer directly protests at/on Shell facilities/ships;

   Greenpeace responded they'd be willing to do that if Shell complied with a 2021 Dutch ruling requiring the to radically reduce emissions.

   So, now Shell is back to court to try & silence Greenpeace!

3. Embed this notice
   Mark Holtom (aka Kingbeard) (markholtom@mastodonapp.uk)'s status on Tuesday, 25-Apr-2023 23:46:54 JST Mark Holtom (aka Kingbeard)

   What would happen if the richest 10% reduced their CO2 emissions to the EU average (which BTW is a nice standard of living).

   Answer, there would be a 35% decrease in global CO2 emissions.

   So, all would be fixed, if we could limit the excesses of the top 10%.