Where's Global Warming when they need it? Mongolia has just seen its harshest winter in 50 years.

[rruff]

So solution is not to restrict growth of countries who came to the fossil table later, but to develop energy which is carbon neutral (or, as i said with butanol grown by bacteria in vats from solar energy, CO2 and water, carbon negative) and CHEAPER than the fossil fuels.

The trick is producing something that is actually cheaper...

 

[Happy Camper]

There's a chance you have Mercury around locally as well. No matter where you are, chances are you can find it.

 

[Morgana]

A couple of good and creepy articles on AI in today's New York Times. On AI companies running short of data to feed into their systems and ...

... heading into some serious grey areas privacy- and copyright-wise:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/06/...e_code=1.iU0.f45z.qLT1hQFGK321&smid=url-share

... starting to experiment with "synthetic" data (made up by the AI itself):
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/06/...e_code=1.iU0.WNyQ.v_-4dPBAEZy8&smid=url-share

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[Raven+Squid]

I'm not having any success searching for that. This site claims that mercury from a plant in Indiana dropped to near background levels after 31 miles. https://theconversation.com/how-poi...red-power-plants-into-the-fish-you-eat-176434

We have mercury in lakes no doubt, but we also have many coal plants still operating in the US.

This article addresses mercury in western North America. Several sources are mentioned, but China isn't... or any non-local source. https://www.usgs.gov/news/featured-...ad-mercury-contamination-across-western-north

My post was part science and part belief.
Kind of pointing out the why blend cherry picked science along with belief makes for bad info that sound authoritative.

 

[rruff]

My post was part science and part belief.
Kind of pointing out the why blend cherry picked science along with belief makes for bad info that sound authoritative.

So your reply was just a demonstration of you doing this yourself?

 

[rruff]

What could possibly go wrong?

I think way too many people have little grasp on reality now... and it's going to get worse. Fake news just to get us tweaked... and these stories are believed rather than what is right in front of us!

The last couple years I've occasionally had happy hour on my neighbor's deck. Lately, she mostly rants and raves about crazy stuff... that is often not only verifiably false (violates math, physics, observation, measurement, logic, common sense), but only serves to make her paranoid, anxious, angry, and miserable.

But back to the real world... it was a beautiful sunny spring evening. Sky so blue it hurts to look at. Herds of deer and elk wander about as usual. Tourists stop in the middle of the road and take pictures. It's the off-season so the town is quiet; peaceful. But she is completely missing it... trapped in a hell that exists nowhere but in her imagination. Sad... And she is an educated relatively intelligent person with a good income.

 

[wanderlust]

The trick is producing something that is actually cheaper...

Yes, but we don't need new science, scientific breakthroughs.

Example:
I am not sure what is your position on COVID vaccines. But after investing $10B, in about a year the work was done which was expected to take 10 years, previous minimum was 4 years to develop a vaccine against something. And if you understand the biology, the development of MRNA vaccine (the most successful one) allowed to develop many other vaccines - now you can use math and computers to design the exact genetic sequence of the antibodies of the vaccine you want, what is much cheaper and faster then doing it old school biological way.

so, what I am saying is: if we (western civilization) decide that climate change is real danger, and we really want to do something about it (not spraying tomato soup on famous paintings or blocking road to hospitals), and we spend necessary funds for it, we can develop new technologies, and even make money selling it to the rest of the world. Or give them for free, if it helps to save our civilization.

We can do it if we decide we want that. Yes, it might cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Trillion of dollars was lots of money before USA started the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[dandiff]

I think way too many people have little grasp on reality now... and it's going to get worse. Fake news just to get us tweaked... and these stories are believed rather than what is right in front of us!

The last couple years I've occasionally had happy hour on my neighbor's deck. Lately, she mostly rants and raves about crazy stuff... that is often not only verifiably false (violates math, physics, observation, measurement, logic, common sense), but only serves to make her paranoid, anxious, angry, and miserable.

But back to the real world... it was a beautiful sunny spring evening. Sky so blue it hurts to look at. Herds of deer and elk wander about as usual. Tourists stop in the middle of the road and take pictures. It's the off-season so the town is quiet; peaceful. But she is completely missing it... trapped in a hell that exists nowhere but in her imagination. Sad... And she is an educated relatively intelligent person with a good income.

I used to enjoy spending time with my brother. Now all he can talk about is q Anon, Illuminati, MAGA stuff. I feel like I've lost him totally.

 

[user 22017]

I used to enjoy spending time with my brother. Now all he can talk about is q Anon, Illuminati, MAGA stuff. I feel like I've lost him totally.

I feel the same way about one of my sons. But that is not from AI exclusively. That is the internet. People who subscribed to those ideas didn't need AI to be convinced.

A YT channel with lots of subscribers, click bait, negativity, memes, Fox News and websites put out by the right all contributed. Talk radio and so much more... All of it contributed. Easy info... No research needed and so many like minded ppl .

 

[rruff]

If we (western civilization) decide that climate change is real danger, and we really want to do something about it (not spraying tomato soup on famous paintings or blocking road to hospitals), and we spend necessary funds for it, we can develop new technologies, and even make money selling it to the rest of the world. Or give them for free, if it helps to save our civilization.

I think you may be forgetting that the people running things are narcissistic psychopaths... for the most part...

There are no shortage of companies who'd love to developing a green and cheaper alternative for the massive profit alone. But many have been working on this problem and failed... so far anyway. It would be foolish to assume that this can even be done commercially and cheaper than current oil. Period. Likely it will happen when oil gets quite a bit more scarce and expensive.

We've been working on fusion reactors ever since the H-bomb was invented... and yet there is still no clear path to making that work regardless of the cost.

 

[rruff]

I feel the same way about one of my sons. But that is not from AI exclusively. That is the internet. People who subscribed to those ideas didn't need AI to be convinced.

It got my dad before the internet was invented. Remember Rush? I was amazed that such a belligerent, obnoxious, ranting POS was popular. This was on radio, but he still had a big influence.

The internet and targeted AI content has ramped this up to epidemic levels. I think we are all effected some, and many are a lot. It has created and maintained both "sides" in our sociopolitical divide, and both keep getting dumber and more ridiculous all the time.

 

[wanderlust]

I think you may be forgetting that the people running things are narcissistic psychopaths... for the most part...

As Jefferson said, one of the requirements of democracy is informed electorate.

I think it would be beneficial to pay some people NOT to vote.

Old wisdom was, we inherited the country from our ancestors. New wisdom is, we borrowed it from our grandchildren.
Catch is, grandchildren do not vote, so...

It would be foolish to assume that this can even be done commercially and cheaper than current oil. Period. Likely it will happen when oil gets quite a bit more scarce and expensive.

Current oil seems to be cheaper because it's price does not account for the externalities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

Fossils fuels will not get scarce anytime soon. Known reserves are few decades of oil, and few centuries of coal. So much, that looking for more does not make economical sense.

 

[Raven+Squid]

So your reply was just a demonstration of you doing this yourself?

Half right!

 

[rruff]

Fossils fuels will not get scarce anytime soon. Known reserves are few decades of oil, and few centuries of coal. So much, that looking for more does not make economical sense.

We've always had a few decades of oil... in a few decades, we'll probably have a few decades worth.

These are very energy dense materials that we can just pump or dig out of the ground... and then burn. Any alternative requires material and energy to produce... often more energy than we eventually get out! Using electricity seems like a better thing to focus on, rather than alternative fuels. In solar and wind we already have economically viable production, with storage being the limiting factor.

 

[Morgana]

My post was part science and part belief.

Hey, when you do that, do the rest of us a courtesy and make sure it's clear which is which.
For extra credit (and credibility), cite your sources too.
No point in other people chasing 'em down for you, especially if they don't exist.

 

[Morgana]

Using electricity seems like a better thing to focus on, rather than alternative fuels. In solar and wind we already have economically viable production, with storage being the limiting factor.

Apparently they are making quite some strides on storage, too, though not nearly enough yet.
I don't pretend to understand this stuff well enough to explain it, but I worked on a project recently that cited this document
https://royalsociety.org/news-resou...gy-programme/large-scale-electricity-storage/
Maybe the techies here can make something of it.
Every time I have to edit something related to electricity I'm amazed. We just plug a toaster into a wall and it works, but what goes on to get it there and keep it steady is mindblowingly complicated (and about to get more so, was my impression).

 

[Happy Camper]

I often wonder what the liquid thrower thinks they are accomplishing. Soup in a museum. Paint at a leather jacket. Etc.

If they feel that strongly, here's a thought. If they hold their breath for a year that's 3 tons of CO2 that isn't in the atmosphere. If we can just get all of them to hold their breath that long it's a win for everyone.

Less CO2 in the air, less having to hear rants on how everything is terrible and we're all gonna die (hint: we're all gonna die regardless) if this one thing isn't done now now now. And the cleaning people don't have to wash the walls and floors, or clothes, or whatever they are throwing liquids at and making a mess.

I would also make the climate throwers clean up after another group of throwers, and vice versa for punishment.

At least the ones that light themselves on fire let go of their CO2 in one shot. Just saying.

 

[LargeMarge]

...we should ban coal exports...China... India...Indonesia

.
a)
The cost of anything must include costs of transportation.
For ocean cargo, costs must also include replacement value of new ships, plus costs of breaking and recycling older ships.
A lot of ship-breaking occurs around the Indian sub-continent, and those costs must include injuries and deaths of breaker workers.
.
I remember seeing a number for 'acceptable' deaths among ship-breakers.
I think it was around a couple hundred fatalities every day, seven days a week, year-round.
.
Despite their birth-rates of replacement workers, I am unwilling to accept that as sustainable.
.
.
b)
The chinese fornicated themselves into needing massive constant continual *non-sustainable* imports of food and goods.
Not my problem.
.
.
c)
For decades, global transportation relied on cheap easy petroleum.
That transportation also relied on cooperation between nations.
These days, shipping costs must include Maritime Security crews.
.
If you want to believe in the marketing-gimmick fairy-tale of diminishing "fossil-based petroleum", you probably should consider that will be harder to extract with related increases in costs.
At some point, the balance tips in favor of Victory Gardens and hand-me-down toothbrushes.
.
Well-before that, I might consider preparing for the collapse of global trade and its incestuous global economy.
.
That is the up-side.
.
The downside?
More ships, more potential for disasters.
Bigger ships to decrease operating costs, bigger disasters.
How many Exxon Valdez repetitions can I tolerate before my beloved ocean goes toes-up, flat-lined.
.
I don't have any answers.
But it sure seems our species is rigged for locusting our home until nothing remains.
.
.
I apologize for the lack of cute jokes to close this post.
I will make up for it next time.
Promise.
Probably.

 

[Gr8ful]

The 16 biggest ships produce more pollution than all the cars in the World https://www.lngtransfer.com/news/th...ore-pollution-than-all-the-cars-in-the-world/​

 

[rruff]

I apologize for the lack of cute jokes to close this post.

No worries... you are still invited to the end of the world party!