Complications posted:

Lemme put it like this - nuclear could have upset part of the fossil fuel industry's profits and in turn that industry supercharged a wing of the environmentalist movement and effectively neutralized the technology. These same fossil fuel companies are both promoting and seeking subsidies for hydrogen production. What does this signal to you?

Mayor Dave posted:

Last time I looked into it hydrogen would need a revolution in materials technology for mass scale storage to be feasible, not to mention sourcing enough electricity to crack that much water

MightyBigMinus posted:

edit: replying to trab here, threads movin fast

see i think thats going to be mostly true but also mostly not matter because the economics on green will shoot past the economics on CCS faster than they have time to play the blue bullshit game.

but i entirely conceed this is well within the parameters of "who's running the regulator" and "who's sitting on the appeals court" and those are not hopeful venues in many scenarios.

Complications posted:

Lemme put it like this - nuclear could have upset part of the fossil fuel industry's profits and in turn that industry supercharged a wing of the environmentalist movement and effectively neutralized the technology. These same fossil fuel companies are both promoting and seeking subsidies for hydrogen production. What does this signal to you?

AceClown posted:

you know that guy in Pompeii who, in the face of a deadly pyroclastic flow that was unavoidable, whipped his dick out and started bashing one out?

That's this thread and it owns

Homeless Friend posted:

Cup Runneth Over posted:

What really makes it this thread is that that never happened but people pretend it did because it's funnier

celadon posted:

Navy gonna build massive nuclear ships and just sail them around the world hooking up to grids where there’s predicted heat waves and sell electricity at usurious rates

Brendan Rodgers posted:

Has that been proven, I'm interested. Show me the pyroclastic masturbation analysis.

DarkLich posted:

from reading this thread I've learned a bit more about hydrogen power, and that it's getting more political attention. I remember a teacher talking about it 20 years ago - cars that could run with only water as an output - but since then I haven't heard any murmurs about it becoming a real thing

does anyone have any articles or studies that discuss its present day viability? with a google search, all I see are press releases or pure-optimism articles.

Mayor Dave posted:

Last time I looked into it hydrogen would need a revolution in materials technology for mass scale storage to be feasible, not to mention sourcing enough electricity to crack that much water

a strange fowl posted:

225 new posts, croup what did you do

quote:

Carbon from burning coal is "effectively permanent on human timescales" and can't be offset by planting trees, the commission said.

quote:

It also incorporated the latest science, which shows reducing emissions (through polluting less) and carbon removals (through sequestration) are “not directly equivalent”. This is due to “inconsistent timeframes”, the commission found.

“The carbon stored in fossil fuels has been locked away deep underground for millions of years. When fossil fuels are burnt, this carbon is released to the atmosphere and adds to the ‘active’ carbon cycle – the continual exchange between the atmosphere, land and ocean.”

Removing carbon from the active cycle takes hundreds of thousands of years, meaning new fossil carbon “is therefore effectively permanent on human timescales”.

By comparison, land-based carbon storage or burning involves carbon that is already part of that active cycle. Reversing it takes years or centuries.

“Releasing fossil carbon is fundamentally different from the release or storage of carbon on land from human activities,” the commission wrote.

In other words, while our accounting systems allow one tonne of carbon dioxide absorbed by a pine forest to offset a tonne of CO2 produced from burning coal, the atmosphere reacts differently.

Hubbert posted:

As per the Grand Goon Tribunal, I have determined that all posters in this thread have committed unspeakable and unfathomable crimes against humanity, life, and the biosphere itself.

You are hereby sentenced to death. There is no possible way in which we can be redeemed, as clearly everyone in the Biosphere Collapse thread is a useless and unforgivable cretin in the eyes of the average Kramer.

For the record, please state your crime - and why you undertook this action.

Personally, this morning, I used up the last of some coffee creamer as contained within a plastic receptacle, and I threw this plastic bottle into the trash.

The impact upon the Earth is inexcusable, and I must suffer for my crimes for the good of all who come after me.

silicone thrills posted:

Considering how to make sure that when I die from glacier peak or mt rainier or baker going or maybe even yellowstone if we are lucky, to make sure it looks like I was masturbating as I die and hope that my body stays that way for some future society to laugh at.

im_sorry posted:

I waste the valuable resources of the Earth in such frivolous ways as playing video games, making lovely music, and endlessly reading a dead internet forum.

Cup Runneth Over posted:

The easiest way seems like it would be to just be masturbating when you die

Mola Yam posted:

one day there's gonna be like 1000 new posts because half of antarctica snapped off. that'll be a good postin' day.

quote:

The study looked at forests in the Western U.S. and found that they are evolving to handle to warmer temperatures—something scientists call "thermophilization"—by becoming increasingly dominated by trees that are better able to tolerate the stress caused by heat and drought.

However, the researchers found that rate of this transformation is "lagging behind climate change by roughly tenfold." That's creating a situation where, the paper said, "forest trees are becoming increasingly mismatched with their environment." That means trees are more likely to die or be susceptible to fire or insect infestations.

Researchers from the University of California at Berkeley and the U.S. Forest Service analyzed the composition of roughly 50,000 forest plots in the Western states over 10-year periods. The USFS has undertaken multi-decade effort to build an inventory of trees on these plots to monitor long-term changes, and the researchers used this data and then mapped localized climate change data on top of it.

As worrisome, said Rosenblad, is how the ratio of trees is shifting. New species are not coming into the forests. Instead the change in composition is happening mostly because established species that prefer colder and wetter conditions—Douglas fir, for example—are dying and or are being weakened and attacked by insects.

That could lead to vast ecological change over centuries or perhaps even decades. "Places that are forested today may only be able to support grassland," Rosenblad said. "Try as we might, we may not be able to stop that."

The U.S. has more than 32 million acres of old-growth forests on public lands, according to a survey released earlier this month. Those mature trees are particularly valuable because of their ability to store a large amount of carbon. U.S. President Joe Biden's administration is expected to use information from that census as the basis for a new forestry policy that protects more old growth timber from logging.

However, as the study shows, stopping logging alone may not be nearly enough. In recent years rampant wildfires and beetle infestations have decimated millions of acres of trees, and driven in part by rising temperatures.

"Even if they remain forests, the type of forest will be very different," he added, "So for the people and animals who depend on these forests, this is going to be a drastic change and we need to start thinking about how we will adapt."

Hubbert posted:

biceps crimes posted:

declare thread bankruptcy. this thread tends to be shittiest whenever there's been a rash of new posts, and is best when it's at its typical pace

Erghh posted:

eh dnd will be in demanding an explanation for why everyone's looking at antarctica instead of petitioning for hydrogen powered cruise ships or some poo poo

Mola Yam posted:

one day there's gonna be like 1000 new posts because half of antarctica snapped off. that'll be a good postin' day.

same reason i hover over the elon thread for the day he ODs

or the doomsday econ thread for the day the S&P hits -9999

or the covid thread for the day bird flu goes H2H

Blockade posted:

The hydrogen thing is so silly. The problem is our energy comes from fossil power, you spend more energy turning water into combustable hydrogen and oxygen then you get from reversing that reaction

There's a not understanding of even the most basic scientific concepts there thats worse in its lack of understanding than thinking global warming is fake entirely

jetz0r posted:

What dildo material is both safe and non reactive enough to survive as long as a fossilized skeleton?

If glass doesn't shatter initially, it should last a nice long time. Stainless would probably corrode on these time scales.