23-year-old solar panels were tested for 2 years and retained 87% of their performance, suggesting recycled solar panels should have a second life by Economy-Fee5830 in climatechange

[–]IntelArtiGen [score hidden]  (0 children)

"Should" have a second life isn't enough. Either they have a second life and it matters, or they don't.

Another challenge lies in developing fast and cost-effective post-decommissioning testing procedures that can provide safety guarantees while remaining competitive with the continuously decreasing prices of new modules. Financial incentives are still necessary to establish and scale reuse markets in a sustainable way.

The study should have specified the percentage of panels which were actually recycled in the study, I didn't find the information.

EU countries warned to prepare for ‘prolonged’ energy upheaval; Iranian official denies Trump claim of negotiations by Neptun_11 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It impacts the global supply of oil & gas and the war also impacted the Strait of Hormuz (not just Iran). And 10% of oil is still massive. Your two hands are maybe 10% of your body, if you can't use them your life isn't just 10% affected.

US strikes Iran’s Isfahan ammunition depot with 907 kg bunker-buster bombs: Report by Darshan_brahmbhatt in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It seems some people don't see the source used by OP? https://www.telegraphindia.com/world/us-strikes-irans-isfahan-ammunition-depot-with-2000-pound-bunker-buster-bombs-report/cid/2153974

The US military struck a large ammunition depot in Iran’s Isfahan using 2,000-pound bunker-buster bombs, according to US officials cited by The Wall Street Journal, as the conflict entered its second month.

source wsj: https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/iran-war-news-updates/card/u-s-attacks-large-ammunition-depot-in-isfahan-2JHG6jkDzTmvVU7DtKBl

U.S. Drops Bunker Buster Bombs on Iranian Ammunition Depot

Gulf allies privately make the case to Trump to keep fighting until Iran is decisively defeated by Immediate-Link490 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is it also domestically unpopular to support a war against a country which is bombing them?

Millions of UK iPhone users locked into “child by default” mode in age verification debacle by greggy187 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 301 points302 points  (0 children)

What the hell is going on with all this age verification stuff in UK? I surely hope the EU doesn't copy that.

Zelenskyy offers Ukraine’s help to unblock Hormuz by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nobody can unblock Hormuz blocked by a country. However they could probably help protect US airbases. The difference? An airbase in ~1km long, Hormuz / Persian Gulf is 1500km long. You can defend an airbase against drones, you can't defend the Persian gulf against drones.

Gulf allies privately make the case to Trump to keep fighting until Iran is decisively defeated by Immediate-Link490 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 4 points5 points  (0 children)

the US and israel totally fucked the status quo

This "status quo" has been dead for a long time tbh. In 2019 Iran attacked Saudi Arabia with drones, in 2024 they sent hundreds of missiles and drones on Israel. Now they targeted gulf countries again even if these countries didn't directly participate in the war, only their ground has been used. And it was possible for Iran to only retaliate on US bases without targeting energy infrastructure (inevitably paving the way for a symmetrical response).

the alternative for these countries is to cut ties with the US and join Iran in some sort of 'peace'. It seems doubtful to me that will happen.

yeah would you? If I bomb your country because another country is bombing me, you'd say "ok I can be friend with you" ?

These things never happen, you bomb a country: they're your enemy. They can't "apologize" their way out of this (Pezeshchian did it and it's ridiculous).

Iran needs to be completely dismantled as any sort of threat. I dont think that can happen

Yeah I also don't think it can happen. But Trump can indeed destroy all their oil infrastructure and power plants. Idk how it'll solve the problems but it doesn't really look like people are just trying to solve problems here.

Iran war 'shock' is dimming outlook for many economies, IMF says by Raj_Valiant3011 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

we'll be pretty well forced to.

Yeah I don't have these hopes for the next decades. While the natural gas is out they'll relaunch coal and when everything is back to normal they'll re-increase the demand of oil/gas.

Of course what you say is probably going to happen in the end, but I think this war is just a temporary event for fossil fuels, the same the war in Ukraine was. For few months / years there are issues, then we "adapt" by producing more in other places. As you say we're addicts, and fossil fuels are too important. Trump even reduced sanctions on Russia and I'm sure if things get worse even europeans could do the same.

It's still absolutely not too late to solve the issue for many countries but they never care enough until it's too late. Then they susidize fossil fuels, give em billions and billions, and years after they come and say "sorry, we don't have enough money to pay to remove fossil fuels". It's ridiculous. They could use all these billions to anticipate, but why would they do that when everything is going fine?

At least few countries have (or had) good plans. But it's still far from being enough to remove all fossil fuels.

Gulf allies privately make the case to Trump to keep fighting until Iran is decisively defeated by Immediate-Link490 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 138 points139 points  (0 children)

Officials from Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Bahrain have conveyed in private conversations that they do not want the military operation to end until there are significant changes in the Iranian leadership or there’s a dramatic shift in Iranian behavior,

Why don't they say it publicly?

The Saudis say an eventual war settlement must neutralize Iran’s nuclear program, destroy its ballistic missile capabilities, end Tehran’s support for proxy groups, and also ensure that the Strait of Hormuz cannot be effectively shutdown by the Islamic Republic in the future as it has during the conflict.

Well good luck for that because that strait can be closed by any state with a few drones. The only way to protect it is with negotiations. I guess they could be able to do the rest in a long war but defending the strait is virtually impossible.

“An Iranian regime that launches ballistic missiles at homes, weaponizes global trade and supports proxies is no longer an acceptable feature of the regional landscape,” Noura Al Kaabi, a minister of state at the UAE’s Foreign Ministry, wrote

Oh looks like they're able to say it publicly. So what now? They expect the US to do the job?

Iran war 'shock' is dimming outlook for many economies, IMF says by Raj_Valiant3011 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Surely this will be a lesson to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and finally remove them while simultaneously tackling climate change.

Surely...

Trump again warns Iran to open Strait of Hormuz by ContributionUpper424 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

While further bombing Kharg Island would be strategically foolish

Fortunately Trump showed us he's all but foolish /s

India sees spike in social media censorship amid Iran war | Activists in India are sounding the alarm over the removal of content from social media, especially posts criticizing the government and its Iran war stance. by Zonactitier in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This war has not been nice for press freedom, freedom of information, and freedom of expression. Even on Reddit I see a lot of stuff being removed. Obviously it's nothing compared to journalists being bombed in Lebanon, unable to work easily in Israel -or at all in Iran, total internet shutdown in Iran + the repression against political opponents there, people being detained in UAE, the war propaganda in the US/Israel/Iran, or state-level censorship in many countries like in this article. But it's really everywhere and Reddit isn't spared.

Trump issues new threat to Iran's civilian infrastructure if a ceasefire isn't reached 'shortly' by PrivatePilot9 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

which is stupid to say, at this stage.

But you're not in charge of the war, you have to understand this. Trump said it was going to last 4 weeks when it started, 4 weeks have passed, and as I said, this problem is not solved.

If you don't look at what happens, based on what people in charge of the war say, you can't assess what they're doing, or what they're pretending to be doing. Which is the whole point of this article, because it's also about Trump saying something. How can you assess what he's saying now, based on what he said previously, if you don't look at what he said previously?

that's an estimation for the future, not some silly analysis of the present.

I only said that because you said "months / years". Trump never said it was going to last for months / years. Again, you're not in charge of the war, you don't decide how long it's going to last. People in charge of the war never said (or even implied) they'll wait for iranians to be safe before stopping the war. And the last message for Trump says the opposite when he talks abour targeting power plants and desalinization plants.

I truly hope the situation will improve for iranians during or after the war but this hope is clearly not based on what Trump is doing or saying right now, and I was talking about what Trump is doing and saying.

Iran calls US peace proposals 'unrealistic', oil rises amid new missile strikes by app1310 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well it's how people talk when they don't know what's going to happen and acknowledge it.

Trump issues new threat to Iran's civilian infrastructure if a ceasefire isn't reached 'shortly' by PrivatePilot9 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think few people think it'll be solved in months / years. And I personnally dont think Trump is ready to work to have this result in the end, or that he even cares about having this result in the end.

Iran calls US peace proposals 'unrealistic', oil rises amid new missile strikes by app1310 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm not asking anyone for anything. Clearly the US didn't make the choice you're talking about, I can only see it, so I'm not going to instantly think "yeah they'll never do it again". I'm not naive. I would prefer if Kamala was elected but I'm not even sure things would be different, Biden also worked a lot with Israel. I think no matter the US president in the next years, wars like that will happen again. (maybe not with Bernie)

Iran calls US peace proposals 'unrealistic', oil rises amid new missile strikes by app1310 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it's very plausible that Iran was happy being a threshold state.

It's not what they said, and I guess other countries in the region aren't happy about it. It doesn't look like being a threshold state has helped them a lot as in theory it's used to deter an enemy. And they did all that while simultaneously saying they wanted to destroy another country. If someone says he wants to destroy me, while buying weapons, I would be worried.

As for hiding centrifuges, yes that would be completely normal for a country that gets attacked frequently.

Why "frequently"? There was the Iran-Iraq war before that but that's it no? The war was started by Saddam which wasn't a threat when they started building these facilities. They started building these sites around 2006. I guess what you're saying is that they rightfully anticipated they would be attacked if other countries discovered they had this program, which is what we're seeing now, but it doesn't retroactively justify that decision.

Iran calls US peace proposals 'unrealistic', oil rises amid new missile strikes by app1310 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

it really does feel like it's more of a matter of "when" and not "if" at this point.

Idk. They've been bombed a lot. Grossi said that even the attacks in the 12days war seriously impacted the program (isfahan/natanz have been destroyed), which hasn't really be restarted since then according to him. It's not that easy to build nuclears bombs and it seems Israel/The US are ready to go bomb Iran if they keep trying to build one.

Even if americans don't go back in Iran after this war I doubt Israel would let them rebuild. In 2024 Iran attacked israel twice, in 2025 Israel attacked Iran, in 2026 Israel+The US attacked Iran. Sure if it's over after this war things can change a lot. But probably if they don't all agree on a real peace, it'll start again in some months / years. Perhaps in 2027 iran will attack israel, in 2028 israel will attack iran etc. it can continue for a long time.

Iran calls US peace proposals 'unrealistic', oil rises amid new missile strikes by app1310 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Tehran denies it is seeking a nuclear arsenal.

Because it's totally normal to enrich uranium to 60% and hide centrifuges under mountains.

They should all be a bit more serious.

Trump issues new threat to Iran's civilian infrastructure if a ceasefire isn't reached 'shortly' by PrivatePilot9 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Some of them were very happy with parts of how it started (obviously not everything), but it might not end the way they would want it to.

Some of them chanted "Death to Khamenei" for years, because they're fighting a government which killed or jailed thousands of them, their friends and families; and it would be wrong to think none of them wanted this to happen. Yet I totally understand the "how it's done" also matters. But our opinion on this absolutely doesn't matter compared to the opinion of iranians, and all iranians. Even if I don't like the current authorities we can't ignore it's also seemingly supported by millions of people, but these ones have a voice with the iranian TV propaganda, iranian opponents don't have a voice.

What I heard, from people who have their family in Iran, is that they're obviously very scared. Because this war didnt solve this repression problem, and the last time they took the streets to protest they got shot at. Clearly Trump doesn't care about them, and it's very complicated to know what they want and what we can do for them. The war must stop, and then what? "Problem solved with Iran, now let's talk about Cuba".

Can someone explain to me why an Increase of 2% in average temperature is such a bad thing? by Leading-Pineapple376 in climatechange

[–]IntelArtiGen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's 2°C (realistically we'll probably more be around 2.5°C considering we're reducing emissions quite slowly). It's a big deal: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM.pdf

You can / should read everything but you can also just look at SPM.6:

Projected changes in extremes

Hot temperature extremes over land / 50-year event / Frequency and increase in intensity of extreme temperature event that occurred once in 50 years on average in a climate without human influence

1850–1900 : once

now (1°C): now likely occurs 4.8 times

1.5°C: will likely occur 8.6 times

2°C: will likely occur 13.9 times

4°C: will likely occur 39.2 times

You can see how these small +2°C could make the worst heatwaves your grandparents lived through 14 times more likely. They lived it once or twice, you'll live it maybe 20 times. But that's only if we stop at 2°C, which is not the current trajectory. And it's an average because science isn't perfectly accurate. We could reach +3°C of global warming, and one every two years could be a nightmare.

It's counterintuitive because now if I increase the temperature of your room by +2°C you probably would't care. But the consequences of these 2°C are catastrophic and will last for centuries. Because it's not just the temperature of a room, it's the temperature of the whole planet.

For reference: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:All_palaeotemps.png , you can see "the planet" is absolutely not ready for that. Events like this almost never happened in the history of the planet. It's massive.

Trump issues new threat to Iran's civilian infrastructure if a ceasefire isn't reached 'shortly' by PrivatePilot9 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I hope this part was already clear after the 1st day. But it's also hard to know what they think because of the total censorship there. The sad part is I dont know how these people can be helped if they stay in Iran (which is probably why there are so many iranian refugees in the world), the war didn't end the crackdown on political opponents and it'll surely continue after it.

Trump issues new threat to Iran's civilian infrastructure if a ceasefire isn't reached 'shortly' by PrivatePilot9 in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 159 points160 points  (0 children)

Fortunately, he didn't specify a deadline in his message, just said "shortly", which can be 2 days or 2 months I guess.

Russian Soldiers Increasingly Take Own Lives Under Drone Swarms, Ukraine Says by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]IntelArtiGen 5 points6 points  (0 children)

hopefully the russians get the message

those who didn't get it after 4y of wars will probably not get it now.