[yor_on]

Both sux

[yor_on]

It's your very own bubble of logic's, and it will carry you, all the way to a extinction.

[yor_on]

Another thing you should understand by now is that this game of inequality we play is a global phenomena. It doesn't care about politics, it is what makes politics.

[yor_on]

The democracy I describe is a way out of it. It relies on you, becoming responsible. Something you've been missing since you were born. We didn't build the game on responsibility.

[yor_on]

It doesn't guarantee anything more than that. It doesn't state that we will be sane in our choices, although I hope we will once a majority get a fair chance to state the goals.

[yor_on]

It will also introduce checks on all decisions, at a regional as well as national level, just by involving all. And there will be no hierarchy to it, no one to bribe or exchange 'favors' with. As I say, for those of you used to life being this way it must become a very scary vision. But it is what I think to be the only way out of this game.

And if we don't get out of it we will go extinct.

[yor_on]

It builds on trust, not distrust.

[yor_on]

And yes, I do think it will have the ability to change both beliefs and ideals once set in motion. It's the next step for any democracy, of any kind. You have to be very careful with how you set it up though. It needs total transparency at all levels if you want it to work.

[yor_on]

Funny

The opposite of what you call 'democracy' today.
Transparency.

[yor_on]

You can either see it as a way to minimize the effects of greed, egoism, ignorance and hubris, or as a proof of there existing other values too, or as a combination of both.

 If it goes the way I expect I better add :)

[yor_on]

What the The Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) states is very simple. Those who should pay for the emissions and global warming are the same ones that already pays a price for it, not the ones profiting on it. It's a 'protection scheme' of sorts, set up by your politicians and industries, using you. Most of the things making a profit should be able to be sorted out in simple terms, and this is as simple as I can get it.

[yor_on]

It's the same technique as with the one not capping bore holes, instead paying a small sum to the government for letting them be as they are. Once it becomes time to cap them those companies will have gone into liquidation, bankruptcy or getting off by some other technicality, leaving the costs to you.



spelling

[yor_on]

don't think about those things as 'sharing the cost', it's not sharing, it's making it 'profitable'.

[yor_on]

You become the purse from where both your industry and your politicians draw their support. And in this case you will be paying both for the emissions that doesn't come to be as well as for the emissions that already exist.

[yor_on]

So we gone into a new era of distrust. And we have found new uses for weapon plutonium in those ideal 'low yield' bombs. The 'humanitarian solution' to a atom bomb as we might call it. It's a sick joke as far as I'm concerned but who knows?. It might diminish the American stockpile somewhat, that otherwise needs to be taken care of.

" On July 16, 1945, a single gram of the grapefruit-size sphere of plutonium at the center of the world’s first nuclear explosion released three times the destructive force of the largest conventional bomb used during World War II.

Thereafter, the United States government built a grossly oversized nuclear arsenal and never envisioned having to stop building it. Between 1944 and 1994, the Energy Department and its predecessors produced 99.5 metric tons of plutonium for use in an estimated 70,000 nuclear weapons. (An additional 11 tons were produced or acquired for research and development purposes.)

The perverse logic of the nuclear arms race reached a point of ultimate absurdity during the early Reagan presidency, when it was asserted that the winner of a nuclear war would be the one with the most weapons left afterward. Now, 80 percent of the US nuclear arsenal has been discarded, and the United States is still struggling with the strategic mistake of producing so much fissile material to begin with. Currently,  a total of 61.2 tons of plutonium is declared excess to the needs of the US government, of which 53.4 tons is designated for nuclear weapons. "

That makes for a awful lot of 'grapefruits', doesn't it.

We could use it in those molten salt reactors, that we could build, and as I see it, need to build. And no, not thorium. Instead of that USA will spend billions on trying to dilute it, to then store it 'safely' for about ten thousand years. The same problem that all nuclear nations find, although not to this incredible extent. And it wouldn't surprise me if Russia is the second worst producer of weapon plutonium although I have no figures for it.  "   If one gram of soil contains as little as 1.587 micrograms of plutonium, the Energy Department is required by federal standards to geologically isolate it from the environment for at least 10,000 years at WIPP. "

10 000 years :)
Good on you.

We don't find this ability for storing anywhere, not even in Sweden that has some of the most stable rock in the world. That doesn't mean that our politicians and other dreamers think they can't do it. After all, the game is built on not being responsible, letting someone else clean up the mess, if they can.

https://thebulletin.org/2021/03/can-the-energy-department-store-50-tons-of-plutonium-for-10000-years/


syntax

[yor_on]

I'm not joking when I say you're going the wrong way. And you keep doing it no matter your agreements and pledges. It won't end good for any of us.

[yor_on]

" The very first report about climate change that was handed to Lyndon Johnson in 1965 wasn’t about how we should stop emitting—it was: “Maybe we should find some reflective stuff to throw into the ocean to bounce more sunlight back into space!”

We do, plastics.

[yor_on]

Your leaders and your hierarchies.

Get yourself a democracy

[yor_on]

As we're talking low yield those days. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs should be pretty close to what that means. They used a core of about six kilograms.

" The demon core was a spherical 6.2-kilogram (14 lb) subcritical mass of plutonium 89 millimetres (3.5 in) in diameter, manufactured during World War II by the United States nuclear weapon development effort, the Manhattan Project, as a fissile core for an early atomic bomb, that was involved in two criticality accidents, on August 21, 1945, and May 21, 1946. The core was intended for use in a possible third nuclear weapon to be dropped on Japan, but when Japan's surrender made this unnecessary, it was used for testing. It was designed with a small safety margin to ensure a successful explosion of the bomb. The device briefly went supercritical when it was accidentally placed in supercritical configurations during two separate experiments intended to guarantee the core was indeed close to the critical point. The incidents happened at the Los Alamos Laboratory in 1945 and 1946, resulting in the acute radiation poisoning and subsequent deaths of scientists Harry Daghlian and Louis Slotin, respectively. After these incidents the spherical plutonium core was referred to as the "demon core".  "

So now you just need to split 6 kg with 99.5 -61.2 metric tons = 38. 3 tons

38 300 kg of weapon plutonium split which gives you around  6 400  'grapefruits'.

[yor_on]

You really need that, don't you?