You wouldn’t believe the secondary costs caused by thawing salt. And then there’s the primary cost of operating vehicle park to spread a lot of salt each winter.

Although general streets would not be my first choice (you should start with bridges where corrosion is even more of an issue) every example of heated street I saw was just a matter of “yeah, simple math says this makes sense”.

PS: And that’s obviously not car-specific even. Every newly build bike lane should incorporate this idea. Modern bike and pedestrian bridges doubly so.

PPS: For reference: new bicycle-bridge in Germany… 16 million € to build, of which the added heating is a very small fraction (300k).

And adhering to the law would kill my thriving “pay me a dollar and I allow you to club a billionaire to death”-business. So what?

Answering a day later while criticising me for not being only 24/7 and reacting to a comment in time is not without a certain humour…

“Fuck basic human rights. For the eCoNoMy!!1”

Did you seriously remove my comment because you don’t know what the word actually means and confuse a very fitting definition of CDU policies for a slur?

And in 2027 they suddenly realize that they can’t meet those targets anymore so the legislation needs to be changed…

They don’t need to invest into productivity, which btw is already through the roof.

They can just happily ignore facts because nothing (but the profits of the top 0,x %) is linked to actual productivity anymore. Instead it’s linked to wages that can be kept low.

(PS: And all actual context aside, modern day Germans are actually working more than ever, too. So it’s not even malicious misinterpreting of reality but just plain lying.)

Removed by mod

You are still trying to justify Palestinian calls for a genocide with Israel’s genocidal actions.

So I will repeat again:

Out of the two insane and genocidal sides of that conflict none can claim moral superiority.

A Free Ukraine does not mean a genocide of Russians.

Because it’s not a free Ukraine that insists on covering 100% of Russia’s territory.

Palestine is not Hamas. There is an internationally recognized Palestinian Authority that has actually recognized the 2 State Solution.

The last election was held 19 years ago. Hamas clearly won with 76 out of 132 seats. Pretending that the Palestinian Authority is somehow speaking for Palestinians because they say the stuff you want to hear is rediculous wishful thinking.

The same Palestinian Authority is being ratfucked over every step of the way by Israel. Undermined, delegitimized, made to look ineffective, ignored, silenced

You don’t need to delegitimize people on year 19 of a 4 year term where they actually lost…

Fun fact: Knecht and knight share the same origin but actually mean very different things.

The German Knecht is a (lowly) servant while the higher class defined themselves by their ability to provide their own armor, weapons and horse as “Ritter” (lit. rider).

In English the same people defined themselves as their liege’s highest servants (=knights).

So in the end both “Knechte” and “knights” are indeed servants but the cultural context and their position in a feudal hierarchy are extremely different.

PS: The personal servant of a knight would be a “Knappe”, the German equivalent to a “squire”. Basically a knight’s apprentice…

if you have accepted the premise that “a Free Palestine Must Necessarily Mean The Extermination Of Jews”

Yes, a free Palestine ranging “from the river to the sea” while at the very same time -just like Israel- staunchly rejecting the idea of a two-state solution is exactly that.

Out of the two insane and genocidal sides of that conflict none can claim moral superiority.

(For reference: see §2 of the Hamas charter that clearly defines the borders of their “free Palestine” that covers 100% of Israel, West Bank and Gaza…)

Yeah, it’s really shameful to lament a genocide while advocating for a genocide… but your propaganda-induced brain damage causes impressive cognitive dissonance.

Requirements: hardware (optional)

Blame the Germans… the printing press reached England at the absolutely worst time to standardise spelling: right in the early phases of an ongoing vowel shift.

it’s centrists and progressives who arguably have more money who are buying these cars

What are they to buy alternatively? The basically non-existent sanely sized cars?

You are wrong… they need to increase their profit margins even more, so they can afford the neccessary protection for themselves while they watch everyone else’s skin melt.

Nuclear is a fairy tale told by lobbyists. Those working in nuclear and those trying to keep fossil fuels active as long as possible by inducing constant idiotic discussions.

Worldwide solar/wind/hydro made up ~86% all newly constructed energy production (and rising… those where numbers of 2023, I expect >90% for 2024 but haven’t seen newer data). Renewable deployment as well as battery storage is growing exponentially because no other method of production can actually compete with those low costs anymore.

Nuclear is an option for all the countries that already have massive capacities build (so basically France, that’s it). Or for those with a demand increasing so rapidly that they use all available options in parallel anayway (see: China, but even there nuclear is in regards to capacity a tiny fraction compared to renewables).

For every other country it’s basically a choice between starting to lower your emissions now and steadily over the next 1-2 decades via renewables or doing nothing for at least the same time period while nuclear power (that also needs all the costs upfronted now btw) is build. (PS: Nuclear also doesn’t work without long-term storage via produced gas btw… That’s the reason France is the other country in the EU beside Germany pushing for a scaled up green hydrogen market. In fact hydrogen production via electrolisation is the only reason their nuclear plans work economically, because that production gets better economically with a more constant power supply compared to a pure renewable setup - see RTE’s study about power production in 2050).

That’s the point. The backup needs to produce (close to) 100% of the demand 2% of the time.

And coal plants are incredibly bad at quickly reacting. It takes a day just from ignition to working temperature, several days to establish the transport chain constantly providing the huge amounts of fuel needed (bonus points for a lot of them being ship-based and possibly suffering from low water levels).

Also there is a lot of industry that will already need climate-neutral gas produced by green energy as their only valid way for electrification. And in the end it’s also a cost issue. If the industry already needs huge amounts of gas and the transport network anyway (of which a lot already exists - refitting natural gas networks for hydrogen has already started) the state doesn’t need to pay much than just the power plants. And they are comparably cheap (the exact opposite of nuclear where constrution is expensive but fuel and operation are cheap).

No, that’s a rather conservative estimate. My federal state alone has more than 20GW in total capacities. And the backup for the rare days when neither solar nor wind produce relevant amounts needs to be able to cover the demand.

The actual point is having those power plants yet in the end never using them aside from those few days a year. And then producing the gas for them climate-neutrally with reneawable overproduction from the remaining 98% of the year.

PS: That the positive thing about solar and wind prices nowadays. They are actually so low that other production methods simply can’t compete and won’t be used more than actually needed.

PPS: That also the actual economic reason why nuclear is a bad idea. You also need enough production capacities for a cold winter night without solar and wind… but then producing less the remaining time of the year doesn’t actually save you money because fuel is a miniscule part of nuclear costs. Have you never wondered why the two countries in the EU pushing for a properly scaled green hydrogen market are Germany and France? Because both models only work economically with peak-burners based on greenly produced gas.