The billions of tons of CO2 each year from tree cover loss are mostly linked to agricultural expansion, logging, and wildfire, with a tiny bit for settlements/infrastructure and mining.

Forests are absolutely allies in fighting climate change! Forests are not the problem - it’s people cutting them down and/or burning them.

Long thread to say "shit rolls downhill." But yes, anti-vaxx is a form of child abuse. Sometimes it's men abusing children as a way to abuse their wives. Sometimes is women abusing children because they can't punch upwards.

Patriarchy is an abuse factory. Which is why it must end. Fin.

Bone Shop, the prequel to the Marla Mason novels by Tim Pratt

*at the cost of directly participating in atrocity

which is a significant asterisk to leave off!

I don't know! Mostly I know that historically, American nuclear, like much other American construction in the modern era, has a tendency to extreme cost overruns due to basic operational competence issues.

depends! also depends on how much ecological and displacement cost you're willing/able to pay for the hydro; there's an argument to be made that nuclear is greener than hydro when ecological impacts are taken into account, although this also depends on how one thinks a/b uranium mining impact

it's just that "France has plenty of nuclear despite even more political crazies because French project managers understand construction cost estimation and we somehow don't" suits *no one's* political narrative and so propaganda doesn't pick it up

My understanding, although I haven't dug into this much, is that American politics around nuclear were less impactful than the American nuclear industry tends to want to think, and have as much or more to do with America's general loss of ability to *build shit* as anything else.

There are whole campaigns designed to get people to hold onto their phones for just one year longer because it's so bad for the environment to toss them every two years, and now people are doing that and CNBC Is like "we were kidding"