G Brueckmann
LightNews LightNews
banner
brueckmann.bsky.social
G Brueckmann
@brueckmann.bsky.social
2.3K followers 2.9K following 460 posts
Research on climate 🌍 & energy 🔋 policies 🌐 using experiments 🎲 & reproducible research 🔁
@ipwunibern.bsky.social & Oeschger Center for Climate Change Research, @unibe.ch
PhD from @ethz.ch
(they/them)

Here: private views.

Website: brueckmann.github.io
Posts Replies Media Videos
brueckmann.bsky.social
"We find that the largest predictor of positive experimental results was sample size. This is somewhat surprising, given that experimental studies typically take power considerations into account prior to data collection." (Rauf et al 2025, doi.org/10.1093/poq/...)

😂😂😂
An Audit of Social Science Survey Experiments
Abstract. Survey experiments have become a popular methodology for causal inference across the social sciences. We study the efficacy of survey experiment
doi.org
November 28, 2025 at 8:48 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
teresabuecker.bsky.social
Bürger_innenräte geben häufig Impulse für Gerechtigkeit und moderne Politik. Dass Klöckner davon nichts hält, überrascht nicht. Sie passen nicht zum rechtsautoritären Kurs und könnten zeigen, dass die Gesellschaft nicht so konservativ ist, wie oft behauptet wird. www.zeit.de/politik/deut...
Bürgerräte im Bundestag: Bundestagsverwaltung löst Stabsstelle für Bürgerräte auf
Die Ampelregierung hatte den ersten Bürgerrat ins Leben gerufen, Bundestagspräsidentin Julia Klöckner hielt von der Idee wenig. Die SPD will dennoch daran festhalten.
www.zeit.de
November 26, 2025 at 7:42 AM
brueckmann.bsky.social
You’ve been kidnapped. The characters from the last TV show you watched are trying to rescue you. Who’s coming to save you?

— — —

Glad the flags use in protests made my curious 😅
The one piece crew
November 26, 2025 at 10:11 PM
brueckmann.bsky.social
I think this is such a cool advert by #CriticalMass #Bern that you need to see it!

🚲 🚴 🚲 🚴‍♀️ 🚲 🚴‍♂️ 🚲

They used the graph on transport efficiency that prominently features humans on a #bicycle from www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-hu...
Critical mass flyer on a colourful graph indicating the efficiency of travel by humans on a bike
November 26, 2025 at 9:55 PM
brueckmann.bsky.social
Survey on Research Data Management at 🇨🇭 Swiss Higher Education & Research Institutions

Results will contribute to improving #research data management support across #Swiss higher education institutions.

🇨🇭
#Switzerland , take the survey here: library-survey.epfl.ch/c/unibe-rdm-...
Quantitative assessment of RDM practices 2025
library-survey.epfl.ch
November 24, 2025 at 1:14 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
lakens.bsky.social
For many social dilemma's in Science (e.g. the slow uptake of diamond open access journals) stronger top down management is necessary. It won't just happen. If scientists will not create this management themselves, someone is going to create it for us.
November 24, 2025 at 5:47 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
davidajaeger.bsky.social
The world could use less artificial intelligence and more plain intelligence right about now.
November 22, 2025 at 4:17 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
dbellingradt.bsky.social
Amen to that.
vuc.bsky.social David✶🇬🇹 @vuc.bsky.social · 9d
He said "Amen" straight into the drop

Lmao Pope Leo threw a rave for an archbishop's 75th birthday this is kind of incredible
November 22, 2025 at 4:32 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
ianwalker.bsky.social
I've been trying to think of a catchy slogan to remind authorities that they won't get active travel without actually making it possible

Best effort so far: IF YOU CARRY ON SKIVING, WE'LL CARRY ON DRIVING
November 21, 2025 at 7:33 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
ketanjoshi.co
Data centres in the Netherlands consumed ~4.5 terawatt hours.

But they only disclosed 0.91 TWh worth of consumption....

leitmotiv.digital/publications...
A significant share of facilities is withholding information on environmental impact and energy consumption A second conclusion from our initial research in the Netherlands is that many reporting data centers have withheld essential information on their environmental impact when reporting to the Dutch authorities. According to the EED reports the Dutch authorities have received, data centers consumed "only" 0.9 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity in 2024, even though Statistics Netherlands (CBS) already estimated data center electricity consumption at 3.7 TWh for 2021. By our own calculations, data center electricity consumption in 2024 was closer to 4.5 TWh. In short: there is quite a gap between what is being reported to the Dutch authorities and the actual impact of the facilities.
November 21, 2025 at 9:27 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
crookedfootball.bsky.social
"tough decision" = a decision made by someone in authority to hurt someone vulnerable or abandon a basic moral principle in order to appease bullies, bigots or donors. Often someone taking a "tough decision" will be commended for their "moral courage" by a newspaper columnist
November 21, 2025 at 8:40 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
neurograce.bsky.social
PSA to academics posting threads about your paper here: you can (and should) post the link to the paper in the first post. Your X/Twitter brain rot have have you thinking otherwise, but please free yourself of that. (Also you can call them 'blue-prints' if you want).
November 21, 2025 at 2:56 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
theresaheyd.bsky.social
ha ha
Cartoon von Hauck und Bauer. Frankenstein mit seiner kreatur. "Ich habe einen Künstlichen Menschen erschaffen! Er wird mir helfen, meine Habilitation zu schreiben !"
November 21, 2025 at 6:33 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
snsf.ch
🚀 New #international #call to be launched in 2026

The international joint initiative for research “Harnessing Disruptive Technologies to Address Global Challenges” will open in January 2026, and the SNSF is taking part!

👉 See the call announcement here: https://sohub.io/xjzz
November 19, 2025 at 7:45 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
economeager.bsky.social
btw i post so many links to longer form content because i believe we can get our attention spans back but only if we actually do it, not if we sit around complaining on short form platforms about how bad our attention spans are
November 19, 2025 at 4:33 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
neorsd.org
just learned we won an award for our blog post about Tom Holland and stormwater management.

remember, when you see an article about stormwater management, you repost it. i don’t make the rules.
What Tom Holland’s historic lip-sync showcase taught us about stormwater management
Grab your umbrella and your tights.
neorsd.medium.com
November 19, 2025 at 12:22 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
rmkubinec.bsky.social
The PNAS paper is really important, but it's also important to remember the goal of the paper was to design an AI system that could evade existing checks.

It was *not* to identify a system that could filter out LLMs.

I.e., this is not the "end" of online survey research. We do need better systems.
November 19, 2025 at 12:44 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
lakens.bsky.social
I have seen the same people criticize preregistration, based on highly unlikely hypotheses about why they would not be needed, or even counterproductive. Literally *none* of these critics have provided any empirical support for their criticism in the last decade. I wonder why.
November 17, 2025 at 12:56 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
derek.bike
this rocks so hard
photo of a man woman wearing a green dress with a large bike lane train. she’s standing outside in an actual bike lane
November 15, 2025 at 5:31 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
stacydvandeveer.bsky.social
#YIMBY #Urbanist #Fashion rocks
jasonthorne.bsky.social Jason Thorne @jasonthorne.bsky.social · 14d
This is brilliant.
November 15, 2025 at 8:21 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
bogatyrev.bsky.social
Not hard to make profit margins over 30% if you don't pay people who produce the content you sell, and their employers pay you for access
paolocrosetto.bsky.social Paolo Crosetto @paolocrosetto.bsky.social · 17d
What is the most profitable industry in the world, this side of the law? Not oil, not IT, not pharma.

It's *scientific publishing*.

We call this the Drain of Scientific Publishing.

Paper: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Background: doi.org/10.1162/qss_...

Thread @markhanson.fediscience.org.ap.brid.gy 👇
November 13, 2025 at 9:37 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
hansonmark.bsky.social
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
cwolbrecht.bsky.social
Me, in class:
November 12, 2025 at 7:27 PM
Reposted by G Brueckmann
ianwalker.bsky.social
xkcd nails car bloat

xkcd: Car Size xkcd.com/3167/
Car Size
xkcd.com
November 12, 2025 at 8:02 PM
brueckmann.bsky.social
This is how Swiss residents get informed about their climate tax revenue redistribution:

Did you notice this in your health insurance mailings?

#carbondividends #carbonpricing #ctax #carbontax #CO2taxation
Picture of letter in German. Merkblatt Rückverteilung COz- und VOC-Abgaben 567 Mio. Fr. für die Bevölkerung Sie erhalten dieses Jahr Fr. 61.80 aus der CO2- und der VOC-Abgabe zurück! Die Rückverteilung an die Bevölkerung geschieht direkt und effizient jedes Jahr über eine Verrechnung mit Ihrer Krankenkassenprämie. Anrecht auf die Rückverteilung haben alle Personen, die in der Schweiz wohnen und bei einer Schweizer Krankenkasse grundversichert sind. Abgaben auf schädliche Stoffe In der Schweiz gibt es eine Lenkungsabgabe auf klimaschädliche CO2-Emissionen (CO2-Abgabe) und eine auf umweltschädliche Bestandteile von Lösungsmitteln (VOC-Abgabe). Diese Abgaben haben zum Ziel, dass die schädlichen Stoffe sparsamer eingesetzt werden - das hilft dem Klima und unserer Gesundheit. Rückverteilung an die Bevölkerung Zum einen profitieren Unternehmen und die Bevölkerung: Ein Teil der Einnahmen aus den Lenkungsabgaben wird rückverteilt. Im Jahr 2026 werden insgesamt 567 Millionen Franken an die Bevölkerung rückverteilt. Das entspricht Fr. 61.80 pro Person. Förderung des Klimaschutzes Zum anderen wird die COz-Abgabe gezielt für den Klimaschutz eingesetzt. Im Jahr 2026 stehen dazu rund 324 Millionen Franken zur Verfügung - für klimafreundliche Gebäude (Gebäudeprogramm), nachhaltige Technologien (Technologiefonds) und den Ausbau erneuerbarer Energien. Wichtig zu wissen: Lenkungsabgaben sind keine allgemeinen Steuern. Sie folgen dem Verursacherprinzip - wer die Umwelt belastet, zahlt mehr. Wer umweltfreundlich handelt, wird entlastet und profitiert. Video zur Rückverteilung: youtu.be/yS4CRnXBTUk Weitere Informationen: • www.bafu.admin.ch/co2-abgabe • www.bafu.admin.ch/voc • www.dasgebaeudeprogramm.ch • www.technologiefonds.ch Bundesamt für Umwelt BAFU
November 12, 2025 at 1:18 PM