"Dutch are dumb for putting people before profit" says journalist who will never have to live in the effected area...
This reads like a lobbyist wrote it.
do that make it false?
It makes it untrustworthy.
It also means it implicitly denies its biases.
It might still be true, but that's a coincidence.
I agree. But since the article make some valid point (the gaz extraction was already forbidden) and cement is C02 intensive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_concrete) , I'd rather hear some argument against it, than an ad-hominem about the author.
Yes
The Merkel and Scholz governments prematurely shut down twenty gigawatts of nuclear power.
This is misinformation, like the rest of the article.
Most were shut down after their eol.
But the decision to shutdown was under their governement
Doesn't affect the factual correctness/misleadingness of your statement. A couple of them were quite problematic and had issues. All were old.
These wells are already inactive; destroying them doesn’t do anything for safety or the environment. The government is demolishing the wells to prevent a future government from reconsidering its decision to stop producing gas.
Call me a dummy, but wouldn't the cement stay beneath the gas, given it's way denser, even accounting for the high pressure? Filling it with cement sounds like it'd keep the remaining gas accessible.
Also, the earthquakes are only part of the problem, the ground can sink and destroy infrastructure without a proper earthquake. The city of Maceió, in Brazil, has recently had to deal with that kind of problem due to rock salt mining
Not to mention that the whole "huge numbers of winners and small numbers of concentrated losers" speaks for itself on whose side this article is on: the money. The "winners" are the companies and the rich, the "small losers" are everyone else. I'm surprised it didn't even call them "just a bunch of poor idiots who should know better than to stay in the way of profit". Exhibit A:
Destroying the wells does not change the likelihood of additional earthquakes. It does not change the world’s emissions pathway either, given that production had stopped.
This is the whole "Oh well, climate change has already fucked everything, so we might as well continue on 'til the end!" bullshit
They're not filling the entire gas bubble, just the "neck" of the gas well. The problem is that with the well sealed, gas will acumulate, making it extremely hard to redrill it in a new spot.
The thing is, we COULD just stop extracting, but keep the wells around for some kind of emergency, like a giant war or something. But instead, we decided to fill in the well, changing nothing, but making it impossible to access in case of emergency.
Granted, I DO see how some future rightwing government might go "Raising taxes by 0.01% is an emergency, drill baby drill!", and that's mostly hampered by this move. But it doesn't exactly show tremendous foresight.
Because we're fucking idiots
Welcome!
We strive for high-quality standards on the latest world events.
The basis of these standards comes from the MBFC, which uses an aggregate of methodologies, including the IFCN and World Freedom Indices, to rate the Bias and Factual Reporting of News.
Does your post fit the standards? Check this thread!
Rules:
Rule 1: No Further Gaza/Israel war posts
Rule 2: No US internal news/US politics
Rule 3: Editorials, opinions, analysis, blogs, gifs, memes, etc non-serious news sources
Rule 4: Non-English articles require a translation in the post or comments (mark the title with the source language eg. [FR] for French)
Rule 5: Petitions, advocacy, surveys
Rule 6: All-caps titles
Rule 7: Old news (≥ 1-Month-old) articles
Rule 8: Unlabeled NSFW images/videos
Rule 9: URL shorteners
Thank you.