Printable View
We are going to need another source of energy to make a difference. My bet is Atomic.
Attachment 389832
Yes, the chart shows we are at 82% derived from FF and if we all hit the Paris goals it will become 70%. Get comfortable with glowing shit.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-l...on-11632943155
The big problem with nuclear remains the expense. That shit is wildly expensive compared to any other source of power generation right now. But that's not a good reason to decommission an existing power plant. The expense is all capex: operating costs are not high. It's also far safer than burning fossil fuels, any way you measure it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skrilla Gorilla
Also, you guys know that strapping nuclear waste to a rocket is probably the dumbest place to put it on the planet, right? Because rockets sometimes explode and disperse their contents throughout the atmosphere? We have to deal with the waste here, on this planet, one way or another.
Sent from my Pixel 5a using Tapatalk
News Flash! They want you to talk about nuclear that you will never implement.
Electrify your fucking homes for the love of ULLR...and your whips if you can find a way to afford it. As of roughly 2010, any additional dollar spent on a gas furnace or water heater is like throwing trash out the window of a moving F-350, rolling coal, and driving over baby seals.
https://saulgriffith.medium.com/one-...s-48a7c3cf0694
Now back to your regurlarly scheduled programming;
- Nuclear is carbon free (except the exhorbinant embodied emission of buildings a $500b facility filled with nasty-concrete, and the associated mining operations for materials running up and down the periodic table.)
- It is cheap
- We don't know how to deal with the waste
- It will never be perfectly safe
- If we build enough capacity to handle the world's energy needs (33 times more plants just for electricity, call it 100 times more for all energy,) statistics says we'll have 100x the meltdowns. So...about 300 meltdowns every 50 years or so.
If I find out you buy a fossil-fuel powered water heater, I'm stealing your damn quiver.
Peace,
shaft
edited for Edgnar, who is the man
For those who don’t know- Nuclear is not carbon free. The cement and steel required to build nuke plants is extremely carbon intensive. Sure, producing power that way doesn’t produce carbon, but building the plants require producing thousands of tons of it. It also requires decades to permit and build. The Georgia Power Vogtle nuke plant is delayed AGAIN. At last check, that puts its roughly 15 years behind schedule and billions over budget. So much for cheap.Quote:
Originally Posted by shaft
Definitely do electrify and insulate your home. Also put solar on the roof if you can. Call your electeds and tell them you want renewable energy and you want energy efficient buildings. Tell those assholes it’s time to stop subsidizing fossil fuels. The energy transition needs to go faster.
I should add that I’m really glad that in the 8 years I’ve been away from this place this discourse has gone from “global warmingz aren’t real” to discussions of solutions.
Ultimately, we need breakthroughs in lower or zero carbon ways to produce cement and steel along with other industrial products that require that kind of heat. This is an area where we need a big r&d push from Uncle Sam in addition to some sort of carbon price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edgnar
We have the technology for carbon free transportation mostly solved. We have the technology for carbon free power generation solved. Concrete and steel production is not a problem that we are particularly close to solving.
Sent from my Pixel 5a using Tapatalk
https://twitter.com/thejuicemedia/st...743739393?s=21
These videos are awesome.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-59274686
Totally normal, nothing to see here.
Damn; locusts were badf enough, but a Plague of Fucking Scorpions?!?!?
Seems ominous.
Ski areas around the Four Corners region are postponing their planned opening dates. It's been very warm.
Warm and possible delayed openings seems to be the happening at areas in WY, MT, and UT near me too. There has been a lot of news about spring coming earlier, but I'm sure winter also will generally arrive later bow. I know West Yellowstone used to have reliable enough snow in November that Nordic teams from around the world would head there for early season on-snow training. The last decade or so the snow has not been reliable at all. Probably will get worse too. Biking at Thanksgiving instead of skiing anyone?
Well I actually moved to Flagstaff to have those options and often, high elevation riding through most Novembers but this feels warmer than the usual and it sure is weird for the places you mentioned. It's no longer when or if it happens, it's happening right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by WMD
Colorado's November fire season...
https://www.coloradoan.com/story/new...ts/8638268002/
70 degrees in Helena yesterday. Today its windy as fuck and colder but there is very little snow for a base right now and much in the way of skiing at Big Sky next Thursday seems overly optimistic. BB is not even talking about an opener until 12/10.
Anyone know of seasonal prediction graphics similar to these but based on inclusion of more recent data ? https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/hig...future-climate
It’s interesting how the Tahoe region in these models gets historically similar precip amts in Winter but less in Spring. Coupled with the modest temp rise predicted (relative to some other regions), might actually result in higher altitude resorts staying in business.
Utah looks fucked though.
The 2021 Yellowstone Climate Assessment shows that since 1950 snowfall has decreased 24" inches (25%). Precipitation is the same now but 25% that was snow is now falling as rain. https://www.gyclimate.org/
Even with increased winter precipitation it may not be snow, which is not good for skiing or snowpack.
AT LEAST YOU DUMB CUNTS THINK YOU KNOW WHY IT'S NOT SNOWING NOW. BLAME THE CHINESE FOR NO SNOW AND COVID....OH WAIT, THAT'S NOT POPULAR WITH BEIJING BIDEN VOTERS
you're pedantic schtick used to be funny when it wasn't about such a serious and obvious
issue
YOUR RELIGION IS ANNOYING.Quote:
Originally Posted by k2skier112
The dumber they are the louder they yell..
YOUR SISTER GETS REALLY DUMB IN BED WITH ME THEN.Quote:
Originally Posted by SumJongGuy
Hey could you do a Mom joke for me? Thanks.
A MOM JOKE? LIKE WHEN YOUR MOM PINCHED YOU OUT LIKE A WATERMELON SEED AND WAS DISMAYED THAT THE ABORTION WAS UNSUCCESSFUL?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunion 2020
I think your caps lock is on ^
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to remind people that the US is by far the biggest historical emitter of greenhouse gases. Since CO2 stays in the atmosphere for centuries to millennia, the US is most responsible for climate change. It's our fault more than anyone else's.Quote:
Originally Posted by JONG SLAUGHTER
https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2Quote:
the United States has emitted more CO2 than any other country to date: at around 400 billion tonnes since 1751, it is responsible for 25% of historical emissions;
this is twice more than China – the world’s second largest national contributor;
the 28 countries of the European Union (EU-28) – which are grouped together here as they typically negotiate and set targets on a collaborative basis – is also a large historical contributor at 22%;
many of the large annual emitters today – such as India and Brazil – are not large contributors in a historical context;
Africa’s regional contribution – relative to its population size – has been very small. This is the result of very low per capita emissions – both historically and currently.
HERE'S A LINK FOR YOU COCK CHUGQuote:
Originally Posted by WMD
https://www.investopedia.com/article...ioxide-co2.asp
THANKS FOR REMINDING ME TGR DOPES ARE OFF THE CHAIN RETARDED
Sup, Brett!
^^^
Not only have we been the biggest emitter but we’ve consistently been the biggest obstacle towards even recognizing climate change. Or doing anything about it.
Somewhat ironically our military is the branch of government that’s putting the most amount of money towards new technologies and combating climate change. And the Money they’ve put into the system is showing some results. Northrop Grumman is pretty secretive but has been making some big claims. MIT has a recently scientifically published theory proven fusion reactor that’ll be built by 2025.
Just read that a new small scale fission plant is going to be built in Kemmerer Wyoming. Bill gates is the backing money. Will be interesting to see what the tech behind it is.
We’re going to need a way to transmit new forms of power. Our current grid is absolute garbage. That’s going to need to be a government backed change as it’s way to large for a private company to do without government backing. The grid is a major issue for solar and wind, as prime locations for production aren’t located near areas necessitating large loads. And industrial scale solar is pitifully lacking. Just today I drove by the last solar system I installed, when I worked in the industry. 4000+ panels at a Cisco systems server in SLC. it was .5% of their usage. Just to power the amount of EVs that’ll be out in the next 15 years is going to necessitate either all those new EV owners charge thru panels on their residence (one of the best things you can do to reduce carbon footprint) or a bunch of new electric generation plants.
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH YOU IDIOTS BEEN SCREAMING ABOUT THIS FOR 40 YEARS AFTER YOUR "GLOBAL COOLING" DIDN'T WORK OUT.
Was the Blurred11’s name banned? Can’t you just post under your real handle?
Ok, I'll explain it again but using easy words just for you. Yes, today China emits the most CO2. But the US has emitted twice as much as China historically, and the total amount of cumulative emissions is causing the climate to change. We have emitted the most and this are most responsible.Quote:
Originally Posted by JONG SLAUGHTER
That's still too many big words for you so let's compare it to a bathtub with no drain. The tub is almost 90% full and the US has added 25% of that water, far more than China. Today China is adding the most water to the tub, but the US is still adding the second most water. When it is full the US will have added the most water, twice as much as China. Who put the most water in the tub? The US.
Damn, I just realized you probably don't bathe so this makes no sense to you.
Sorry, also meant to say Gina not China so you'd understand.
Oh well, I tried.
Not banned. Just trying to get more attention.
COOL BRO. MAYBE YOU COULD SPREAD SOME SO2 TO COMBAT THE EFFECTS. OR JUST FLUFF YOUR OTHER CIRCLEJERK BRETHREN HERE.Quote:
Originally Posted by WMD
Strong work JONGSLAUGHTER!!! I admire your commitment to the part. :wookie::wookie::wookie:
They're biting every time.
Attachment 393002
ONLY CATCHING SUCKERS AS BAIT FOR MORE TRASH FISH.
Seeking negative attention from random internet strangers is "stong"? That shit's for incels that can't make friends in real life. Are you seriously trying to impress a bunch of middle aged dudes? Cool.
"STONG"? STFU JONG.Quote:
Originally Posted by JerkPorkins
Blurred did the antiwork thang and gave up on pizza delivery?
Lotsa time on his hands, eh.
I'm very aware he's a troll. I'm just having fun myself and I appreciate him giving me the chance to make sure others understand. What's funny is Jong thinks I'm talking to him when I respond!🤣Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasputin
How much of China's Co2 emissions are the result of producing products going to the US and Euro folks? And, how much of that is actually US or Euro funded contract manufacturing? That's shit that's actually on us as much as China IMHO...
Let's start with the tablets, computers, and smartphones some idiot's caps lock is stuck on..