Or maybe stop massively overdrawing from the river instead?

People like to go on about how the river needs rain as though the problem is just a lack of rain, all while ignoring the fact the US has a massive problem with the way it supplies water and where it draws it from.

Yes, the lack of rain is an issue. But it's not the cause. The cause is the overdrawing of water from strained sources that can't sustain the demand, even if the drought was broken.

I never said they went full Solar. I said they've committed to full Solar and Wind. It might not sound like that much of a difference, but I assure you there is a massive difference between saying Germany went full Solar and me saying they committed to going full Solar and Wind. Which is true.

Last I checked their energy shares on paper was around a low 50%, high 40% in terms of Solar and Wind. A sizeable share, yet it's been struggling to expand thanks to the innate flaws of Renewables that forced Germany into heavy reliance on Russian Natural Gas.

As far as I'm currently aware of?

China, Japan maybe since they've committed to restarting already built plants and say they'll build more (but not much has happened since), France, and the U.K. on a technicality with SMR's, and Poland I believe.

There might be some more actively investing in the industry, but I am not at this time aware of those nations. (Also, before someone gets confused, there's a difference between maintaining and investing)

Fr.

Renewables are insanely light in power density, and the world literally doesn't have enough resources to support zero emissions through Renewables. It's nice that China is still working towards the end goals, but people need to look beyond the warm fuzzy feelings from headlines and actually examine the long-term. Not just the short-term.

The Coal is a temporary measure to shore up Energy supply while they bring on the only actual solution for zero emissions - Nuclear Energy.

China is currently one of about 3 or 4 nations actually investing in expanding Nuclear energy, and the only nation currently heavily investing it. Their plan is to supply most of their energy through Nuclear power, then to use renewables as small scale auxiliary supplies - something akin to what France currently does.

Imo the sheer brutal success of this method is best seen in the carbon loading difference between Germany, who's gone all in on Solar and Wind renewables, and France, who uses predominantly Nuclear. Germany averages between 300 to as much as 400 grams of Carbon per kw hour more than France, with at one point Germany producing about 500 grams of Carbon to Frances 7 grams.

Imo the proof is beyond question, as is the immense amounts of science and research into this. Solar and Wind are not solutions, only small, local scale solutions that are being stretched into a role they were never designed to fill, let alone come close to filling. Without Nuclear to back renewables up, it is literally impossible to reach net-zero emissions.

I'm gonna be that guy here. The problems around cost are solely down to our Capitalist culture, and can be utterly countered by State subsidies like those offered in places like China. Which, ironically enough, is where almost all of the worlds actual recycling takes place.

The real issues with recycling Solar Panels is that most of the stuff can't be recycled and has to be sent to landfill anyway. Even then, what can be recycled has to be recycled down into more disposable and single-use type things.

​

I know it's a bit of a shitty thing to be bringing down uplifting news like this, but when it comes to climate change, news articles like this encourage a culture of turning a blind eye to fake solutions with ego padding headlines that are often used by people to embrace a comforting lie and avoid the uncomfortable truths of the world.