|
Guavanaut posted:Algae is also good, massive flow ponds of it. Yeah I think architects are keen on cladding buildings in algae.
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 22:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:46 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/jossgarman/status/1589713641909387264?cxt=HHwWgIDQic-I5o8sAAAA
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 22:17
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:The problems I listed had very little to do with where the electricity comes from, which I'd assume/hope would be renewable or nuclear if we every make the terrible decision of investing in this stuff. Talking about the viability of different types of energy is almost completely orthogonal to carbon capture; you seem to be getting hung up on the idea that this would be easy/make sense if we do all of this somewhere sunny or something. To re-iterate, this would be by far the largest engineering project in the history of mankind, by orders of magnitude. Again, CO2 is not the only way to damage the environment, and there's no way something of this scale wouldn't gently caress things up pretty badly. Failed Imagineer posted:IIRC there's currently about 3tn trees in the world, and if we planted about 1tn more it would absorb all the anthropogenic excess CO². That's only about 120 trees for every human on Earth, which seems kinda doable in a general sense. But obviously it would require a complete rethink of how and where human societies live.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 22:20
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:That number doesn't add up in my head. The number I've seen for before humans really started to deforest the world was like 6tn, to which you can then add fossil fuels on top. I haven't done the numbers myself, but I don't see any reason why the 2 numbers would have to match up
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 22:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1589714935767891968
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 22:28
|
|
|
I feel like "WE will decide what is the problem and what shall be done about it" is basically the new labour attitude in a nutshell, climate change is a problem when they can use it as a stick to beat the tories, but the proles must not have ideas of their own about it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 22:33
|
|
|
Good comparison of carbon capture methods here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmWpFCjh0Fk
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 22:39
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:What if we planted a lot of trees. Like, really loads. A couple of billion, maybe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildfire
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 22:43
|
|
|
When you live on a planet where profits are privatised, and costs are socialised, the result is that everything is doomed. You can plot this on a graph or chart. It's actually quite simple in principle, though the results are distressingly complex.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 22:46
|
|
|
So many enterprises that are "profitable" are actually composed of people waking up very early and working very hard to make a collective loss for humanity and our planet. Imagine a factory that makes £1 "profit" per day on the books but is also causing £2 per day of environmental damage that isn't on any books at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 23:14
|
|
|
That is the majority of my job and also I am not sure I actually make any profit either, so it's quite easy to imagine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 23:17
|
|
|
So lets look at global greenhouse gas emissions by source again. Our goal is net zero - humanity is not warming the planet any more, and we might even want to go net negative and start to repair some of our damage. Now, 70% of that is direct energy from burning fossil fuels, and that's fairly easy to replace. Just build lots of green energy and electrify, done. But then we get to the tricky bits. We're still going to be drilling some oil for plastics (plastics are great materials for so many uses) so there's still some fugitive emissions to deal with. Hopefully stricter standards will do the trick, but we still might have some to counteract. Landfills and wastewater - We're still going to have rubbish we can't recycle, and older landfills are going to emitt. We need to counter that. Cropland,rice cultivation, agricultural soils. In a more prosperous future we're producing enough food to comfortably feed 8 billion people. So those are still going to exist. Same with livestock and manure - even if meat production reduces global veganism is not going to be a thing, so we're going to have to manage those emissions somehow even if they are reduced. So all together there us still going to be a need for carbon capture in the green future. Maybe this just involves planting more forests, maybe it's mostly nature based and involves expanding peatland as a carbon sink. Or maybe it's some kind of technological solution that excess wind power at peak wind speeds will power and that will balance out. But the green future will invovle some method of carbon capture, and such they should be being researched and funded in the present day.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 23:35
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 23:46
|
|
|
colin are you having a stroke
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 23:52
|
|
|
Colin Humphries? Moar liek Colin Hunt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 23:53
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:So lets look at global greenhouse gas emissions by source again. Our goal is net zero - humanity is not warming the planet any more, and we might even want to go net negative and start to repair some of our damage. I remain uneducated on climate stuff because the information just doesn't stay in my head, but from looking at that chart the first thing I think is - all the talk about about individuals making changes to their consumption habits doesn't seem like it would make a difference even if every single person on the planet adhered to the recommendations. Do I have that right, and the suggestion that individuals can do anything about this is a distraction tactic? Because it seems like the only way to get it done is to pass binding laws and build new infrastructure, which is something that is completely out of the people's hands, notwithstanding the possibility of protesting and voting about it. roomtone fucked around with this message at 23:58 on Nov 7, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 23:55
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1589722569623863296
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 23:55
|
|
|
roomtone posted:I remain uneducated on climate stuff because the information just doesn't stay in my head, but from looking at that chart the first thing I think is - all the talk about about individuals making changes to their consumption habits doesn't seem like it would make a difference even if every single person on the planet adhered to the recommendations. Do I have that right, and the suggestion that individuals can do anything about this is a distraction tactic? Because it seems like the only way to get it done is to pass binding laws and build new infrastructure, which is something that completely out of the peoples hands, notwithstanding the possibility of protesting and voting about it. I mean it does help but yeah, even if everyone on the planet individually decided to do lifestyle things it wouldn't solve the problem. The primary function of the "personal lifestyle changes" thing is that it makes the people doing it feel good and also is a vector for marketing alternative things for them to consume. I think it's less a "distraction" in the sense that there is some evil supervillain muhahaing about how he has bamboozled people, but more that in a capitalist society, selling people the illusion of meaningful action via consumption is profitable, and companies will happily pursue it. See also: all the ukraine flag branded promotions that have been ongoing the last few months. Support ukraine by drinking the right booze! A good way to think about it perhaps is that nick clegg saying in 2010 that we shouldn't build nuclear power because it wouldn't be online until the space year of 2022, probably did more harm than everyone else in the UK's personal lifestyle habits. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Nov 8, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 23:56
|
|
|
Also add on that Reduce, Re-use, Recycle is in heavily descending order of effectiveness. But what happens? Reduce? The one thing on the individual level that could actually make a difference. But on the whole, nope. Steak for me, please! Make it two. Re-use? Are you loving kidding? People might think I'm A Poor. Recycle? Easiest to do, does the least, maybe the council gives you different bins. See a meme saying it all goes in the same bin at the end anyway, so don't bother.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 00:03
|
|
|
i understand the marketing aspect of low carbon products, that doesn't seem like the most insidious part. it's that you still see this change your consumption thing proffered by people on news programs when it seems like that wouldn't actually fix the problem. maybe it would 'help', but if it helps by making climate change 10% less bad in the fantasy scenario where everyone actually did it, which will absolutely never happen anyway, then it isn't really a help is it? having 10% less of a terminal illness wouldn't be much help. and if you add to that the effect of feeling good like you said, people might feel like they've done all they can when in fact they've effectively done nothing, so it removes the pressure on people to take political action in the limited forms they do have. i think industry heads and politicians definitely would knowingly proliferate the idea that individuals can maybe turn their TV off if they care so much, to delay the issue becoming about their industrial activities being the primary cause of climate change. they denied it existed for decades. they'd sit in a meeting and come up with a PR plan to blame it on powerless consumers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 00:06
|
|
|
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/07/cats-protection-charity-seeks-home-kitten-neither-male-nor-femalequote:A homeless kitten has stunned vets at a UK animal charity, being the first cat they have seen that is neither male nor female. No sex organs? Which bog should they use? What would the terfs make of this dear kitty?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 00:10
|
|
|
Well I would suggest that that's in keeping with the fundamental function of news programs, which are to provide information for you to consume which will lead you to want to continue to consume information from them in the future. It is certainly contradictory if you operate off the assumption that news programs are something other than another form of consumption but I don't know if that is borne out by reality. The same is arguably true of most forms of politics as well. The voter is something to extract value from by providing them with a sense of validation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 00:10
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean it does help but yeah, even if everyone on the planet individually decided to do lifestyle things it wouldn't solve the problem. This was then blamed on people doing deliveroos and the internet, so either we have to fully transubstantiate into a potato and lie down just beneath the surface of our back yard until we are exhumed and eaten by a vegan jack russell terrier, or it might be something other than just individual action. Jaeluni Asjil posted:Which bog should they use?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 00:17
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/07/cats-protection-charity-seeks-home-kitten-neither-male-nor-female clearly this is damien, child of beelzebub and lord of the underworld, come to reap horiffic gender neutral vengeance on everyone that questions their pronouns
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 00:35
|
|
|
I've never been more proud of my town
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 00:39
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:
Confusing the terfs by making GBS threads on your turf.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 01:04
|
|
|
Only Kindness posted:Colin Humphries? Moar liek Colin Hunt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 01:31
|
|
|
what's this from?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 03:08
|
|
|
I was wondering that too, the lass in the fishnets looks very kate beatonesque.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:what's this from? Steeple by John Allison https://steeple.church/comic/2020-02-17/
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 03:13
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:It's an excellent name for making sure I'm never tempted to run it indoors, especially near the carpets, I'll give it that. Or near your Nan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 08:13
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:I haven't done the numbers myself, but I don't see any reason why the 2 numbers would have to match up I suppose the speed of deforestation back in the day might have allowed some of that CO2 to get cycled out, but still, that's a lot of loving trees.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 08:43
|
|
|
They’re back!!! https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1589880398288674816
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 09:26
|
|
|
Someone explain to me how ID cards do gently caress all for illegal immigration 1965917 fucked around with this message at 09:53 on Nov 8, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 09:51
|
|
|
It does nothing. If you are on the track for ILR/Citizenship the state already has every bit of biometric data they can collect. You are unable to work (legally) without doing so. If you are in the asylum/refugee system it's the same. ID cards do nothing to reduce 'illegal' immigration, and nothing to prevent employers hiring staff off the books.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 09:54
|
|
|
Because they're going the "you can be forced to carry one at all times" route rather than the "hey check out how much you can do with these, you'll want to carry it" route. Again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 09:54
|
|
|
I'm fine with ID cards personally, providing that they are free (or very low cost) and contain nothing more than this is an official document that says I am who I say I am. They won't reduce immigration though. If a government wanted to reduce immigration it could do so easily (no government wants to the economy relies on it). The economy relies on illegal workers as well to launder dirty cash back into regular taxation through VAT etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 10:02
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:what's this from? OwlFancier posted:I was wondering that too, the lass in the fishnets looks very kate beatonesque. Stormgale posted:Steeple by John Allison Steeple is very good, but imo Allison's best work is Giant Days, which is a slice-of-life comedy about three friends at Sheffield Uni. It's got a slightly Spaced vibe about it, in that situations get exaggerated to an extreme but are ultimately mundane.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 10:03
|
|
|
They will reduce the appearance of immigration by allowing the filth to harass people for their papers. That's always been a big part of the point every time New Labour have raised it. Tories want to do the same thing but without the card, just based on 'common sense'.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 10:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:46 |
|
|
ID cards just reminding of that insane guardian article by the trans woman who wants all trans women to have official trans ID
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 10:05
|
|
