6 ms·
Scientists thought carbon emissions had peaked. They’ve never been higher
- hackrnusr 4y agoKeep calm and carry on.
- mrguyorama 4y ago"Thought carbon emissions had peaked" and "Carbon emissions have never been higher" are synonyms. What is the editor who made this title smoking?
- PraetorianGourd 4y agoI think you are missing a bit of nuance in the wording. The long-form would be "Prior to reviewing the latest data, scientists were confident that carbon emissions would not surpass previous levels, and continue a downward trajectory. However, latest data show that emissions are again rising above record levels"
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- systoll 4y agoNo they aren’t. They thought they had peaked. IE - they thought the peak was in the past. IE - they thought emissions were higher in the past than they are right now.
- _hypx 4y ago
- NoThisIsMe 4y agoIt was preventable without nuclear too, so I don't see why it would have made a difference.
- ben_w 4y agoNuclear 20+ years ago, before PV was cheaper than basically everything, would have displaced quite a lot of fossil fuels. While I don't see a long term future for fission, I'm still quite happy with it being rolled out wherever politicians decide to, simply because I see a value in diversity of supply.
- Delemono 4y agoI assume it wasn't just Chernobyl that is the reason for our current nuclear situation. Then the question is, what was it. Based on how little people cared about smog and CO2 I assume it was just never that cheap and easy to do.