Coalition tells Cop28 it will tback tripling of nuclear energy if Peter Dutton becomes prime minister
www.theguardian.com
Ted O’Brien declares global climate summit ‘the nuclear Cop’ despite only 11% of nations backing the pledge

The federal Coalition has declared at the Cop28 climate summit that it will back a global pledge to triple nuclear energy if the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, becomes prime minister, but will not support Australia tripling its renewable energy.

Speaking on the sidelines of the conference in Dubai, the opposition’s climate change and energy spokesperson, Ted O’Brien, also said a Coalition government would consider supporting Generation III+ large-scale nuclear reactors, and not just the unproven small modular reactors it has strongly touted.

The statement at the global summit confirmed the Coalition was on a markedly different path to Labor. The Albanese government last week joined more than 120 countries in backing a pledge to triple renewable energy and double the rate of energy efficiency by 2030, but did not sign up with 22 countries that supported tripling nuclear power by 2050.

While only 11% of countries at the talks – mostly nations that already have a domestic nuclear energy industry – backed the nuclear pledge, O’Brien declared “Cop28 will be known as the nuclear Cop”

[. .]

    • rainynight65@feddit.deOP
      17·
      1 year ago

      This kind of segregation of topics didn’t work on Reddit - I doubt it will work here on Lemmy, where there’s way fewer users. In my opinion, post traffic is not high enough to introduce fragmentation at this point.

      Just my $0.02.

        • Gorgritch_Umie_Killa
          3·
          1 year ago

          For me, i’ve always treated c/Perth as WA in general, but i think thats more to do with having such a dominant city, for instance half of applecross is owned by wheatbelt farmers (i might be exaggerrating here lol). Perth as a stand in for WA kind of makes sense because almost everybody has a connection to it anyway.

          For somewhere like Queensland maybe it makes less sense though.

              • Gorgritch_Umie_Killa
                2·
                1 year ago

                Maybe i’m not understanding the issue properly.

                Why are we unable to make name changes of communities to essentially reclasify them? And at the same time consolidate/remove some of the communities and tip them into broader subject area communities?

        • WaterWaiverEnglish
          4·
          1 year ago

          Thanks DHMO.

          Several thoughts merged into one (pick any choose bits, not all or nothing):

          • c/Auslocal <- replacing /c/Syd /c/Melb etc. General discussion
          • c/AusInterestingNews <- “interestingNews” is probably better wording than “goodNews” as it might avoid some politics ending up there. Less drama for users & mods perhaps.
          • c/Australia <- people posting politics will probably default to the general “Australia” regardless of what rules you try to put in. If you roll with that and intentionally keep it as a honeypot then it might be an easier solution for users and mods? ie don’t try and move the politics out of /c/Australia, instead move everything else out into c/Interestingnews.
    • WaterWaiverEnglish
      3·
      1 year ago

      What’s the motivation of splitting things into Australia-general and Australia-politics? Is it to have a space that’s less stressful than the other to read?