nah it's natural
-
Usa was a major turning point. Went worst direction, could have gone best. Not all i brought up.
for hot water
As opposed to the fairy dust and prayers they used before.
walkable cities in
Used to hear a lot of people i knew on that continemt talk about cities getting less walkable, more car.
was aiming for
Renewable. Does not include nuclear. Assuming he wanted some amount of that, given his degree in that. But if we had started, we could have accellerated in the right direction instead of the wrong one.
telling people to not do anything
Okay you clearly can't read.
I can read fine. You can't write. Your messages so far have been full of spelling errors, are hard to understand, and you can't even quote properly. Come on now.
You act like I should know all about this Carter person, when they were in power long before I was born, in a country I don't even live in. It's daft. Most people on this site either wouldn't have been born or would have been small when Carter was talking about this stuff. That happened in the 1970s. If it isn't absolutely clear using renewables for everything in the 1970s wouldn't have been practical. Nuclear would have been great, but it's mainly environmentalists that put a stop to that, as they keep trying to do now. It seems most environmentalists and climate activists even now don't want nuclear, even though it's the obvious choice for certain applications like data centers and AI. The most staunch anti-nuclear people have always been environmentalists. Nuclear also wouldn't have solved any of the problems caused by cars. It doesn't even work without large grid storage or demand management, at least not using the reactor technology available back then. Those are things we are only just figuring out now for goodness sake. It could have at least replaced coal for baseload power, which is much better than nothing.
You can't say in one breath that the planet is already doomed, and in the next say we should make major changes. It's a contradiction. If people believe we are really doomed they aren't even going to try. This should be relatively straight forward to understand. So if you want people to make a change then stop saying we are already dead.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Phew, looks like the industrial revolution just saved us from falling below the safe climate zone! /s
-
And what were they supposed to do other than go out and vote in their own best interest?
In retrospect they'll probably feel violence was justified. How many time machine scenarios will amount to ecoterrorism in the same way that we imagine we'd kill Hitler today
-
And people think I'm crazy for starting an algae farm...
There is no quick fix.
"Science will figure something out"I am part of that science, and I can barely afford to scale beyond what I consider my carbon footprint.
narcimalgae on YouTube, although the algorithm killed it (500 to 6 views on my last video)so I may move to peertube soon.
Can you give a quick elevator pitch for algae farms?
-
I understand your feeling regarding our small action being useless, I feel the same.
What I try to tell myself to keep doing it is: If most of everyone would do it, that fart in the wind would be loud enough to make politician realise they have to take it into account and pass legislation aligned with that.
Deep down though, I know we'll never be enough to do it for it to have an impact
If we all fart in the wind, maybe it'd be enough to actually smell it.
Wait, that can't be right.
-
It's very simple: they don't love their children.
And to anyone who's going to disagree, no. True love is wise. True love is curious. True love wants to seek out the truth. Love without knowledge, love without empathy? That's not true love. That's toxic infatuation. Possessiveness.
true love
Lmao
-
Can you give a quick elevator pitch for algae farms?
Water holds 8 times the gasous CO2 as the atmosphere it is exposed to at a given pressure(altitude). The algae, being carbon-based, pulls the carbon from the water to grow, and releases the oxygen as a biproduct. The algae biomass can then be condensed and stored, or used as a raw agriculture material. Water, sunlight, and a small amount of fertilizer all fed by an air pump.
-
I can read fine. You can't write. Your messages so far have been full of spelling errors, are hard to understand, and you can't even quote properly. Come on now.
You act like I should know all about this Carter person, when they were in power long before I was born, in a country I don't even live in. It's daft. Most people on this site either wouldn't have been born or would have been small when Carter was talking about this stuff. That happened in the 1970s. If it isn't absolutely clear using renewables for everything in the 1970s wouldn't have been practical. Nuclear would have been great, but it's mainly environmentalists that put a stop to that, as they keep trying to do now. It seems most environmentalists and climate activists even now don't want nuclear, even though it's the obvious choice for certain applications like data centers and AI. The most staunch anti-nuclear people have always been environmentalists. Nuclear also wouldn't have solved any of the problems caused by cars. It doesn't even work without large grid storage or demand management, at least not using the reactor technology available back then. Those are things we are only just figuring out now for goodness sake. It could have at least replaced coal for baseload power, which is much better than nothing.
You can't say in one breath that the planet is already doomed, and in the next say we should make major changes. It's a contradiction. If people believe we are really doomed they aren't even going to try. This should be relatively straight forward to understand. So if you want people to make a change then stop saying we are already dead.
Read what i wrote. Or don't, if you can't.
-
I was just thinking about the poor air quality today and yesterday here in the Midwest, and then I see this. I want to be hopeful we can change this in my lifetime, but I am also not optimistic.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I am optimistic. I will get downvoted to oblivion, but I want to share what I honestly observe:
1. AI demand is driving huge investment in production of carbon-free energy at scale.
Yes, AI is sucking up all the immediate term cheap fossil-fuel energy while it can. But it needs more, so it's driving carbon-free investment.
Immediate term with Small Modular fission Reactors (SMRs)
... and immediate term, multiple commercial fusion energy plants are being built.
2. Commercially viable carbon-free energy at scale is coming online in < 10 years
SMR is real, exists today, and just needs economies of scale ... and stable regulation. AI datacenters are driving the orders now and even if MAGA cultists keep USA out a few more years, science-accepting countries will be investing in clusters of those, rather than coal plants, when they see working examples and so less risk.
The Fusion plants this decade will not be just prototypes, but plants that produce more energy as a whole than they take in, multiple times over, and ofc don't produce nuclear waste. This is largely made possible by high temperature superconductors (which didn't exist commercially when ITER was built) and a demo plant fully online in 2027
EDIT: ofc we should reduce excess CO2 emissions immediate term, don't misconstrue long term optimism for polyannish denial of imemdiate term emergency
-
This post did not contain any content.
Fortunately for them, I flushed my kids.
-
I am optimistic. I will get downvoted to oblivion, but I want to share what I honestly observe:
1. AI demand is driving huge investment in production of carbon-free energy at scale.
Yes, AI is sucking up all the immediate term cheap fossil-fuel energy while it can. But it needs more, so it's driving carbon-free investment.
Immediate term with Small Modular fission Reactors (SMRs)
... and immediate term, multiple commercial fusion energy plants are being built.
2. Commercially viable carbon-free energy at scale is coming online in < 10 years
SMR is real, exists today, and just needs economies of scale ... and stable regulation. AI datacenters are driving the orders now and even if MAGA cultists keep USA out a few more years, science-accepting countries will be investing in clusters of those, rather than coal plants, when they see working examples and so less risk.
The Fusion plants this decade will not be just prototypes, but plants that produce more energy as a whole than they take in, multiple times over, and ofc don't produce nuclear waste. This is largely made possible by high temperature superconductors (which didn't exist commercially when ITER was built) and a demo plant fully online in 2027
EDIT: ofc we should reduce excess CO2 emissions immediate term, don't misconstrue long term optimism for polyannish denial of imemdiate term emergency
wrote last edited by [email protected]AI as it now stands gives me quite the opposite of hope. It's only intended to enslave the working class and further transfer wealth to the top 0.01%, as is fusion.
Solarpunk gives me hope.
-
I understand your feeling regarding our small action being useless, I feel the same.
What I try to tell myself to keep doing it is: If most of everyone would do it, that fart in the wind would be loud enough to make politician realise they have to take it into account and pass legislation aligned with that.
Deep down though, I know we'll never be enough to do it for it to have an impact
Yeah. It just feel really pissy, that we're guilted into not taking the car to work. While coal plants are just spewing out all day.
I'm not saying we shouldn't do what we can. That's what the individual can do. I'm just really pissed on all the shit talk from politicians.
There's 256 coal power plants in Europe. Until politicians have made sure they've all closed down, THEN they can start talking about raising tax on fuel for ordinary people, on an environmental basis.
Until such time. They have not done enough themselves. It feels like I'm scooping out water from a boat, and instead of fixing the leak, I'm told I'm not scooping out enough water.
-
AI as it now stands gives me quite the opposite of hope. It's only intended to enslave the working class and further transfer wealth to the top 0.01%, as is fusion.
Solarpunk gives me hope.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Well, maybe you aren't aware of how it's being used to design proteins to create therapies for pretty much... everything, from cancer to Crohn's. Another 2-3 years before you see products in human trials.
Or how it's revolutionized climate science and weather forecasting.
If all you see is the hype Grok images and SEO slop, it's reasonable to reject the technology. But that would be deeply misguided.
-
Well, maybe you aren't aware of how it's being used to design proteins to create therapies for pretty much... everything, from cancer to Crohn's. Another 2-3 years before you see products in human trials.
Or how it's revolutionized climate science and weather forecasting.
If all you see is the hype Grok images and SEO slop, it's reasonable to reject the technology. But that would be deeply misguided.
I'm aware of the promises of AI, yes. LLMs are trash. Folding proteins is awesome. Nonetheless, it's all controlled by the ultrawealthy, and that is THE problem today, which AI ain't solving for us.
-
If we all fart in the wind, maybe it'd be enough to actually smell it.
Wait, that can't be right.
Negative farts
-
Yet "you have to have a car to work" like ok no for one fuck you for two we have several modes of transport AND energy sources now you actually do choose actively to diarrhea out carbon on purpose and I fucking see you
Depends a lot on where you are from. Not everyone has the means to uproot and move to a walkable city or a city with public transport.
Our governments have fundamentally failed us
-
We don’t exactly know where the tipping point towards a Venus Scenario is. We just know it’s somewhere past +12℃, and before +16℃.
And the problem isn’t so much that we will reach that temp - we will go extinct long before that point - but rather the warming process - with all of the feedback loops that it kicks off - will push the planet into a Venus Scenario.
So no. The planet is not fine. The “friction” of prior warming events that would slow its “inertia” - the slowly-migrating, slowly-adapting biospheres that continue to draw down CO2e - won’t have that capability this time around. It’s just all happening far too fast for them to migrate or adapt.
We have literally “cut the brakes” with the speed and inertia of the current warming we have created. And one very real consequence may be a dead planet with a superheated atmosphere.
Maybe we kick off a nuclear winter before we go out
-
This post did not contain any content.
This is my boomer dad whenever he complains about it being extremely hot in the summer, cold in the winter, too much rain, etc. Always responds well it won't last too long and that's just nature, nothing we can do about it because it has a mind of its own.
-
I am optimistic. I will get downvoted to oblivion, but I want to share what I honestly observe:
1. AI demand is driving huge investment in production of carbon-free energy at scale.
Yes, AI is sucking up all the immediate term cheap fossil-fuel energy while it can. But it needs more, so it's driving carbon-free investment.
Immediate term with Small Modular fission Reactors (SMRs)
... and immediate term, multiple commercial fusion energy plants are being built.
2. Commercially viable carbon-free energy at scale is coming online in < 10 years
SMR is real, exists today, and just needs economies of scale ... and stable regulation. AI datacenters are driving the orders now and even if MAGA cultists keep USA out a few more years, science-accepting countries will be investing in clusters of those, rather than coal plants, when they see working examples and so less risk.
The Fusion plants this decade will not be just prototypes, but plants that produce more energy as a whole than they take in, multiple times over, and ofc don't produce nuclear waste. This is largely made possible by high temperature superconductors (which didn't exist commercially when ITER was built) and a demo plant fully online in 2027
EDIT: ofc we should reduce excess CO2 emissions immediate term, don't misconstrue long term optimism for polyannish denial of imemdiate term emergency
AI demand is driving huge investment in production of carbon-free energy at scale
I feel like AI companies are creating a large demand for energy no matter where it comes from, and feel like having some minor investments in potential carbon free energy is mainly a marketing ploy or something to point at if they ever get sued.
Immediate term with Small Modular fission Reactors (SMRs)
Tbh, the big problem with nuclear in america is that we don't really have the federal power needed to actually coordinate and mandate the needed infrastructure for it. The US is so obsessed with state rights that we're susceptible to nimby attacks and disputes at the local and State level governments.
To actually cut through the red tape, we'd have to empower federal agencies for a good reason for once, and I'm not very optimistic about our current political climate.
and immediate term, multiple commercial fusion energy plants are being built.
Yeah..... I think it would be more accurate to say that fusion experimental sites are being built. Most nuclear engineers I've heard talk about fusion are still skeptical about fusion being viable in the next 20 years.
-
Ah yes, Teddy Roosevelt, the Trump of the 1800s.
