Which group in France is against? I consider making this issue a top priority for choosing who I vote for.
You forgot the /s
At my modest scale, I was banned from reddit/worldnews for pointing out that the title of the stickied thread "Iran attacks Israel" was not suited anymore to the events in gaza, and that this thread's very low upvote count was a show that its content was not so consensual.
There are lots of efforts by Likud extremists to reshape the narrative and suppress dissent.
But I'm optimistic that their efforts won't work: the students protests are strong enough, alternative communities like r/internationalnews are developing, so that a more balanced perspective emerges, that doesn't downplay Israeli crimes against humanity.
My aunt visited Afghanistan as a tourist, in a christian group of women, in the 1960's. I really wish I could do the same when I retire.
Rising costs of energy starting Feb 22 is the cause of the last huge dip. As a matter of fact, rising the price of energy and the ensuing economic slowdown is still the most effective way to to reduce GHG. Being frugal is the only way to reach 0 emissions in spite of whatever rosy paint one wants to put on green energy, housing renovation and other half-effective measures.
Usually, an impact study is made before such type of laws are made:
I’d be curious to see the impact study, as many of those are actually botched.
My recent permaban from r/worldnews for stating the obvious (is "Iran attacks Israel" still the right title for a stickied thread on the events in Gaza?) has had the positive effect of making me renew with Lemmy.
r/worldnews is a cesspool of hasbara fanboys, but their unilateral view on the conflict starts to draw away people from their toxic propaganda.
Indeed, and the legality has been challenged by the ACLU. Although they could not pursue to issue a condemnation.
The present case would be an excellent opportunity to resolve the question of whether or not a President is entitled to kill a US citizen and setup better checks and balances (because, in the case of Obama, there were definitely some, but those were disputable).
Note that they present the issue only as a financial problem rather than an actual threat to the environment or people.
You wildly overestimate the danger nuclear waste represents.
First, transportation is done in small amounts at a time, completely encased in concrete and steel, and is of no risk of exploding: the only danger would be spillovers, which would call for expensive cleaning operations.
Next, storage. The whole waste produced by 60 years of nuclear waste in France amounts to only a few swimming pools of dangerous material. If this material was actually fully useless, we could ditch it in geological layers underground where it would become soon unreachable and dispersed, posing no discernable danger for the upcoming few billion years.
Furthermore, the only reason we don't ditch this nuclear waste right now is that this material can still be useful for plenty of uses that are not yet economically viable, but could be in the long term, such as energy generation with low-yield reactors.
No, numeracy is when you draw cards to see the future.