Let’s pack it up then, if there’s a cooling tower in a picture we can’t use it, even if it’s actually a picture of a sprawling petrochemical plant with a massive smokestack emitting CO2 that also happens to include the cooling towers that are part of the facility.
Its just not that binary and people change their minds (intentionally and unintentionally). Let’s say you meet some people and you’re not sure if you’d like to date any of them, but you at least know you’d like to get to know them and hang out more. Then after getting to know them (likely in group settings) you then realize that you’d like to date one of them. Then you get the courage to ask and they’re not interested and just wanted to be friends. Sprinkle in some apprehension here and there and then you have the meme. It’s not as black and white as immediately categorizing people you meet as “friend” or “carnal” and then sticking with that label forever. None of this is static and we’re all just making it up as we go.
Didn’t he die just today trying to suck on his own penis? Hard to keep up with the news these days.
That’s not how this works and a golf club isn’t a court. This means the lawsuit can proceed. If they had already decided to rule in O&G’s favor on this, they would have done so by hearing the case and making a ruling in their favor.
It seems like the forces trying to ensure car dependency won that one. I’d have much preferred a history of expensive roads because we’d have more walkable/bikable/transit oriented development this whole time.
The planet is warming though, so the term is not without merit. We have headlines every day about 1.5C of warming. The problem has always been that the earth’s systems are too complicated for regular folks and they don’t understand that a more energetic system can produce all sorts of anomalies in any given location. There’s no magical term that will resonate with denialists anyway so why bother trying?
Practically everywhere is a wildfire zone though. Yes we need much more forest management, infrastructure hardening, fire resources, etc, but giving folks a one time payout and then they move to another area that gets destroyed and now they don’t get support doesn’t seem helpful since we can’t really predict what will burn. It’s simply harder than e.g. flood mapping.
Marginal cost is never zero though. That would imply truly free unlimited energy. There is a cost to build solar, wind, storage, etc. that needs to be amortized. We also want to incentivize folks to not waste energy, so a reasonably strong link between usage and price is helpful.
It’s going to be interesting to see how this all plays out for gas infrastructure as folks electrify and cut their gas service. Once the spiral starts, fixed costs will grow for the remaining customers and push more people to cancel their service.
But the size of the array, and therefore the cost of the array, are intimately tied to the production of said array. So there can’t be flat rate unless consumption never surpasses production, which is of course will when you have zero marginal cost.
The article says it’s primarily increased cooling load since it was hot as shit in 2024, with data centers playing a smaller role. We also have EVs, heat pumps, and growth in the manufacturing sector. Also mostly ignored is the fact that we have physically more people here, mostly due to immigration. Like most issues, it’s multifaceted. That being said, AI is bullshit and I hate it.
Why don’t you tell us again what geopolitical conclusions you’re trying to draw from a scientific study to understand the extended continental shelf (consistent with established international law) and the fact that using ammunition uses ammunition?Those simple facts don’t support anything you’re talking about with respect to the MIC and some grand plot to annex land and weaken allies. Since that’s plainly obvious you’re either a troll or just that dumb. I won’t be posting more to you on this and providing more feedstock.
Some trolls don’t. Other trolls provide links that don’t remotely support the conclusions they purport as facts. You’re the latter.
Oddly specific but also very relatable. Well done.
Unexpected to whom? If the study found out that the porous limestone foundation at the coast was truly stable in the face of rising sea levels, that would be unexpected.
Do you have to wear fleece? Cotton and wool flannels and shirts, and nylon down or synthetic puffies will shed dramatically fewer microplastics. Could do more of a canvas jacket instead of puffy but I live in Colorado so it’s puffies all the way down. I don’t own any fleece and don’t miss it at all.
What? Of course you can base your political views on rationality. For example, climate change is literally an existential threat to life on this planet, so the rational thing to do would be to support policies that preserve the biosphere and therefore dramatically reduce carbon emissions. This is rooted in the core biological desire to reproduce and care for your offspring. Similar arguments can be made for all basic human and animal needs, like food, shelter, etc.
If your point is that everything is contrived and therefore irrational, then that precludes this entire conversation to the point of uselessness.
There’s barely even a Toyota Corolla of ICE anymore. Everything is moving against right to repair and getting more techy. The Bolt is pretty close and is coming back, and there will be more cheaper cars. I don’t care about Tesla, they aren’t the whole market and they are awful for many reasons. And batteries absolutely are getting cheaper:
https://electrek.co/2024/12/10/ev-battery-prices-plummeting-great-news-for-buyers/
The viable alternative is electric vehicles, and they are already here. I hate cars and want rail/bikes/density too but nobody is naively banning cars here.
EVs are already close to price parity (and there are some screaming deals, new and used) and battery prices continue to plummet. Gas cars will be on the roads in CA until at least 2050. The poors will drive EVs because they will be cheaper than gas cars by then (probably long before then). Yes we need walkable communities and trains and bikes but this ban is not the big scam you think it is. Keeping gas cars doesn’t magically fix the actual issues with the egregious use of personal vehicles. We need fewer cars, but the cars we do have need to be electric.
Gas is not a simple global market like oil is and there isn’t a single methane price everyone pays. That would require significantly more LNG terminals around the world and policy changes. This is precisely why gas companies want to build more LNG terminals - this would increase volume while raising domestic prices (and likely lowering foreign prices). It’s not a simple econ 101 global free market though.