this post was submitted on 19 May 2025
-11 points (17.6% liked)
Collapse
817 readers
16 users here now
This is the place for discussing the potential collapse of modern civilization and the environment.
Collapse, in this context, refers to the significant loss of an established level or complexity towards a much simpler state. It can occur differently within many areas, orderly or chaotically, and be willing or unwilling. It does not necessarily imply human extinction or a singular, global event. Although, the longer the duration, the more it resembles a ‘decline’ instead of collapse.
RULES
1 - Remember the human
2 - Link posts should come from a reputable source
3 - All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith.
4 - No low effort, high volume and low relevance posts.
Related lemmys:
- /c/green
- /c/antreefa
- /c/gardening
- /c/[email protected]
- /c/[email protected]
- c/[email protected]
- /c/biology
- /c/criseciv
- /c/eco
- Old posts https://lemmy.ml/c/collapse
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Because for sequestration you need to use 100% renewable energy, at scale. Which leaves you only with solar photovoltaics. Which does a lot worse than geothermal, in Iceland. And it doesn't even work in Iceland.
Dude. I’m not discussing any of that. I’m talking purely from the energy output perspective. I don’t care about carbon sequestration, it’s not part of the discussion.
If the amount of fossil power generation goes down and renewable goes up, things are mostly stable.
I'm afraid there is no energy transition https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-primary-energy
The amount of fossil in primary energy use remains at about 80% and changes so slowly, it doesn't matter.
Great website.
“No energy transition?”
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-fossil-renewables-nuclear-line?time=2004..latest
Did you notice the "primary energy" part?
I never said renewable would magically replace fossil in a year. Just saying there’s a huge emphasis on “production is down X%!” Whereas the renewables % is effectively replacing that loss.
The rest of the article is so much speculation. Companies reducing the amount they have in storage is somehow predictive of a collapse? Fewer rigs? Yea, not like there’s a ton of economic uncertainty or anything.
Listen, there are many reasons a global collapse can happen. This one is just so much damn speculation it hurts.