i2amsam

It happened to me last week when I tossed my coat forgetting the phone was in the pocket. I was very confused when I came back 30s later and dispatch was on the speakerphone asking what the emergency was

Your comment reminded me of a restaurant we frequented growing up https://www.waysiderestaurant.com/history/. Founded in 1918 and still operating today!

Love this idea! I’d love to be able to include one photo a day.

In Vermont there’s a very popular social network called Front Porch Forum that collects posts and only issues them once a day, it seems like adding time delays and eliminating fast replies is a good circuit breaker to defuse toxicity.

Well, we did invade Iraq, so sometimes it works.

Vermont as well. Really noticeable when you drive on the highway, much more relaxing and scenic.

From the outside this seems obvious and perplexing why it is being done anyway.

Biomass is a very small percentage of US electric generation.

Check out https://www.drawdown.org/ it’s an ordered list of the areas to tackle

My favorite piece on this topic is “What can a technologist do about climate change” http://worrydream.com/ClimateChange/

We started http://climateaction.tech/ to amplify and connect tech workers with just these types of questions, check out our guides there and join the Slack to connect with other folks wrestling with the same questions.

One thing that has been interesting to me owning an EV for about a year now is how charging and refueling create different needs.

With an EV I rarely need to charge when out and about, because I leave every morning at 100% charge. Those few times I do need to visit a charger it's generally for a full charge, so it'll take 20 minutes to an hour, so I'll much prefer charging stations at restaurants or grocery stores.

I think there will be a big market to reimagine the gas station concept into something more destination oriented, e.g. much more like truck stops, fewer in number but with more services.

They also make a wonderful push lawnmower.

I don't knows where everyone is picking up this talking point, but it's really bullshit.

The agreement was weak and not a treaty because the Republicans in the Senate would not have ratified a treaty, just as they failed to ratify Kyoto. If any Republicans thought this was a swell idea but just wasn't binding enough they could enter into a second, more aggressive binding agreement with whatever parties they like. Nobody thought this was a great agreement, it was too weak and timid, but it was the strongest agreement we could make without the Senate.

I'm going to go with a prolonged period of worldwide cooling?

Lab tests that show CO2 is not a greenhouse gas?

Isotope concentrations that show increasing CO2 is not coming from anthropomorphic causes?

Evidence that the glaciers are melting because of some other reason than it's hot?

Through happenstance I rode an bike with electric pedal assist a couple years ago, thinking that electric bikes were not for me, but why not try. I was instantly hooked, the high-quality pedal assists feel "magical", like you are just stronger or that your always headed down a gentle slope. They are also very quiet which helps make the experience (at least for me) a bit dream-like and surreal.

I really recommend everyone give one a test ride. For us, it ended up replacing our second car.

I expect you're receiving downvotes (not from me) because you're introducing a strawman argument.

The issue under investigation is if there was collusion between members of Trump's campaign and foreign operatives to, e.g. time releases or coordinate messaging, not attack the voting apparatus. The fact that the national security advisor lied to the VP about discussions with Russia (for which he was fired) and now will only testify under oath with immunity suggest that there indeed may be something worth investigating there.

It can be improved as soon as average electricity generation is cleaner than internal combustion engines, which it is today.

Imagine instead of murder the information was less extreme, like that you know that I once got a DUI 10 years ago, while your friend committed murder last year and is now being blackmailed for that fact. If both the friend and I are up to become CEO of some company, you might see how leaking only one set of information is distortive.

How "clean" is taking off the top of a mountain for coal?

Compare the costs of restoring a mountain after we tear it down, extract the coal and burn it into the atmosphere. How much will that cost? What about moving cities inland? will that be more expensive than recycling solar panels?

There is no perfect energy system, but the status quo is clearly unsustainable, and solar disposal is a much more tractable problem than destructive extraction and atmospheric pollution.

So, we should do less? The first 1% is the hardest, the next 1% slightly easier, by the time it gets to 10% probably 80% of the hard challenges will be overcome. Successful adoption curves always look like hockeysticks, which means a slow early grind. Less carbon is always better, and taking the gains we can now is better than waiting for perfection.

What is an optimistic timeline from here? When could this be energy positive / used commercially?

So our options are having civilization collapse, clean up all corruption everywhere before trying anything, or trying something that "some research" says might be ineffective? Seems like that's a pretty easy choice.

Well, there are a couple engineers currently working on things which are not sustainability/stability engineering.

What evidence would convince you it is a large problem? Massive dieoff of coral reefs worldwide? A cruise ship from Alaska to New York?

This strikes me much like a personal hypothesis that smoking is not harmful. It's a fine theory to have in your own home, but when you apply to your theory next to a daycare folks will be more upset.

There's the skeptical professor from the BerkleyEarth project who was doubtful about many aspects to the science, but when we looked at it in detail became concerned enough to devote all his time to the problem. http://berkeleyearth.org/. His opinion, after studying it for years along with research assistants, is that it is happening, man made, and probably a very bad thing for many, many people on Earth.

I think what frustrates a lot of folks is that there seem to be many people hanging around daycares smoking saying that they don't believe it is hurting anyone, while the US Pediatrician Organization, WHO, etc, etc all say that second hand smoke is bad, causes asthma, etc, and the only way to convince anyone seems to be waiting 5, 10, 20 years until all the consequences are apparent (and irreversible).

I'm sure that you can still find a doctor who says smoking is good for you and those around you, but the consensus is that is has a lot of negative externalities that other people bear.