spidermanchild

@spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

spidermanchild ,

I've been to Maui once and it blew my mind that there isn't at least a light rail that goes from the popular beach areas to the airport. They are like 3 main roads they could follow in a loop. Tax the shit out of the tourists and get free light rail for residents. Tourists already spend $1000/week on cars/parking at resorts that just make life miserable for locals, just take that wasted money and build rail, powered by abundant sunshine/batteries. The status quo is so absurd.

spidermanchild ,

If you'd been paying attention, you'd know it wasn't permanent from the get go.

spidermanchild ,

They said it was orange corn flour all along, and they have a history of not actually damaging anything but using the appearance of "damage" to make a point. Corn flour is a very simple, inert substance. You're actually demonstrating the hypocrisy that this group is trying to highlight - more concern over something like corn flour damaging these rocks than the damage done by millions of barrels of crude oil extracted every day. Where's your outrage over acid/micro plastic in rain that falls on these stone every week? There will be new species of moss that grow on these rocks, or pollen that blows on them from invasive species, possibly damaging them as the climate heats up - are you worried about that? Why can folks summon outrage over something inert that touched a famous rock, but not for destruction of the actual biosphere? If Stonehenge is that fragile, why are people allowed anywhere near it? You're more than welcome to disagree with them, but if you spend more energy complaining about Just Stop Oil than you do complaining about actual oil companies, you're actually just supporting the oil companies.

https://professortorberts.com/shop/

spidermanchild ,

Is it actually better than coal though? It takes very little methane leakage to be as damaging as coal. Methane is shitty and we really shouldn't celebrate any of its use.

https://www.npr.org/2023/07/14/1187648553/natural-gas-can-rival-coals-climate-warming-potential-when-leaks-are-counted

spidermanchild ,

Are you just doing the thing where you cast doubt on journal articles because they feel wrong? You don't think humans can affect the natural environment in such a way? This sounds oddly familiar and a bit ironic for this community....

Meteors aren't made out of aluminum like satellites are btw. There will be more reasearch done and we will learn more. But for now, there's a potential issue.

https://phys.org/news/2024-06-satellite-megaconstellations-jeopardize-recovery-ozone.amp

spidermanchild ,

It may be true that Starlink is a great service, but that's entirely irrelevant to the point of the article and any ozone destruction that the satellites cause.

spidermanchild ,

That's not the comparison at all, the comparison is what the sattelites are made of (mostly aluminum) and what the meteors are made of (mostly other stuff, like earth).

spidermanchild ,

We're a lot better at standing, walking, and running long distances. Not sure if I'd say objectively worse, just better at different things (but objectively way less cool than peeling a banana and eating it with your feet).

spidermanchild ,

Are you saying you don't also want the 6 things they talk about on the article? The point is there's is broad public support for a range of good policies, so let's try to aggressively do those things. We can also work on other, harder things.

I'm a bike commuter and a strong towns type too, but despite this basket of policies being beneficial to everyone, it's like a prisoners dilemma of inaction. The chicken and egg game of removing parking and building transit is just exhausting and unfortunately doesn't poll well because most people can't think long term (or even medium term).

spidermanchild ,

I respect that (and am also very passionate about this topic too). I was nearly hooked just yesterday while in our new "protected bike lane" by some asswipe in an SUV and fortunately braked hard early because of a weird feeling I had about them when I glanced over. I was just loosely trying to stay on topic here. Stay safe friend.

spidermanchild ,

Not defending return to office, but public transit, EVs, walking, biking, etc. I can't imagine federal employees that aren't already in offices already making up anywhere near the 12% total carbon reduction for the entire country. This is a remarkable policy, now let's just ramp those prices up (and it would be nice if it made its way south to the US).

spidermanchild ,

What company assets are you even referring to? This is about seizing profits, you know like fines and taxes already do. I think you'd make a lot of friends seizing profits from these already subsidized companies that are doing great harm to the biosphere, but you do you.

spidermanchild ,

I've heard plenty about adaptation - there is much talk about resiliency, water scarcity, cooling as a right, etc. I like how you framed it as a predicament in some ways, but that seems to undermine that we (collectively) still have agency over how bad it gets. Also people seem to have difficulty grasping the complexity of the issue, so talk about adaptation can unfortunately undermine carbon reduction efforts. Let's say we harden our homes and utilities against heat/fire/floods/whatever, that's time and money that could be spent on carbon reductions. There has to be a balance somewhere, and I'd argue that almost all resources should be spent on carbon reductions first because that's likely to cost pennies on the dollar compared to adaptation measures that are always 2 steps behind.

spidermanchild ,

That's fair. In my neck of the woods for example (Colorado) the utility preemptively shut power down for a bunch of customers the other month because they didn't want to be liable for (another) fire during a red flag event. This is a first for Colorado, although it's been happening in California for awhile. It didn't go over well (for many reasons) but I've heard of several neighbors going out and spending $10k on gas generators to backup their homes. This is frankly fucking stupid to me - spend the money on solar/battery if you must, then you can have resiliency while also reducing carbon massively. Yes I know solar/storage costs more upfront than $10k, but a) if you've got $10k on standby for outages only you can afford solar/storage, and b) that money actually has a real payback period vs the sunk cost of a whole home gas generator. It's madness. So when people I talk to in my sphere talk about resiliency, it's generally ass backward conventional thinking that's often counterproductive and a waste of resources. We have got to find a way to have smarter conversations about this and educate folks, rather than let the prepper industry play that role. Sorry for the rant!

spidermanchild ,

I think you're right in terms of the overall trends, but how we get there matters. Every single day matters, and the wrong policies could result in years of missed opportunities.

spidermanchild ,

This echoes generic fear mongering of regulation from the conservative side. The EPA operates according to specific rules, it's not just out there making random policies. Legislation creates the mandate, they promulgate within the law. What does "but will it always" do good things even mean? What are some bad things the EPA has done in your mind? Saying the government shouldn't have the power to regulate emissions that are destroying the biosphere is absurd. There's no right to ICE vehicles in perpetuity enshrined in the constitution. If the EPA ever start doing truly asinine things, then we elect leaders to change the laws dictating their mandate. This is just basic democracy stuff.

spidermanchild ,

The reality is everything is at risk with a fascist anti-environmentalist leader, especially if they have a majority of Congress and the courts. I just don't see how exercising additional restraint with respect to fuel economy standards, as if that creates opportunities for abuse down the road, helps anything here. The EPA is following the law, and should keep doing that. Your example with asbestos is just the EPA not regulating harder, so let's applaud harder regulation.

As to the last 20 years, considering the makeup of Congress, I'd say the IRA was monumental.

A Wild Plan to Avert Catastrophic Sea-Level Rise | The collapse of Antarctica’s ice sheets would be disastrous. A group of scientists has an idea to save them. ( www.theatlantic.com )

I'll note that this falls into the realm of highly-uncertain efforts with a significant chance of failure. It shouldn't be considered as an alternative to ending fossil fuel use, but at most, something to reduce the harm we've already caused.

spidermanchild ,

I'm not sure what you mean. This is in depth, quality journalism on a niche topic within the sphere of climate change. I can't imagine anyone is trying to parse out a "full solution" from this, and the article touches on the evolving thinking in the community about how this type of work could be perceived as a distraction. The scale of the potential operation is fascinating.

Thanks for posting the article and your work on this community, I often find interesting pieces here I wouldn't otherwise come across!

spidermanchild ,

I've noticed minor changes around the edges, but no transformative change. A few anecdotes - there's a "zero waste" grocer in my town with a glass jar exchange thing, but they still get product in bulk plastic and then repackage it so consumers get to ignore the upstream supply chain plastic use. Probably better than a regular grocer, but probably not better than just buying bulk at costco or co-ops. Costco had a recent article about their new rotisserie chicken bags and it was staggering how much plastic that move will save, but that's just efficiency and not actually solving the problem. So it's a step, but small and theres a limit. We also have shrinkflation that makes the problem worse. So in my observation, some stuff is happening but usually to save packaging cost while simultaneously selling it as progress, despite it being not transformative enough to actually solve anything. But I guess 10lbs of waste is better than 12lbs of waste. We need regulations.

spidermanchild ,

Yes. Use stainless steel, cast iron, and carbon steel. You can cook everything with these just as easily once you learn some basic cooking skills.

spidermanchild ,

Love to see it. Unfortunately we're still early in the phaseout of HFCs via Kigali, and the chemical companies are doing their best to inject HFOs (and resulting PFAS) as far and wide as possible. We all need to shift to natural refrigerants ASAP. If you're buying a refrigerator, make sure it's r600a, a heat pump, r290 or r744, etc. Say no to HFOs (and HFCs).

spidermanchild ,

Why don't you actually prove that the dangers are significant before writing them off? Just because it's flammable doesn't mean it's dangerous, so just saying flammable = "bad idea" isn't a good enough argument. We have been using isobutane for years for refrigerators. And propane for years for refrigerated cases. They are already here. There are low charge limits in place already, and guess what - these appliances aren't blowing up and killing people. There are monobloc propane heat pump systems all over Europe and Asia already. CO2 does require high pressures, but that can be engineered.

We already have literal methane being piped into multiple appliances in people's homes, often unvented, we have people driving around with 20+ gallons of gasoline next to their children in SUVs, we have wiring in every wall of buildings that can all start fires, we have batteries in our pockets and cars and bikes, etc. We have UL and TUV and other groups certifying equipment for safety, let them do their jobs instead of writing off these critically important solutions. The status quo isn't good enough and the chemical industry has a dog shit track record.

spidermanchild ,

Great, we're in agreement that self contained appliances can all use propane and isobutane then. That covers refrigerators, freezers, heat pump waters heaters (not split ones though, heat pump dryers, and a bunch of commercial refrigeration products like display cases at grocery stores. That was a good chunk of my comment.

What were seeing in e.g. Europe is monoblock heat pumps, where it's also self contained and not split and they use e.g. a glycol mix as to transfer heat between inside/outside. This has pros and cons of course, but it solves the propane danger for a split system with a larger charge by keeping the propane outside. The con is freezing climates where there is risk of pipes bursting during power outages, but that's manageable with failsafes. For true split systems, I agree that propane is problematic and CO2 is more promising. But we don't have to use split systems everywhere either. I'm not aware of any reason we can't add mercaptan to propane, unless it messes with the refrigerant characteristics. The low psi methane pipes can also easily make a bomb out of your house because the supply is unlimited, so I don't see that as more dangerous than a fixed (low) charge in a sealed system.

We can solve these issues though, and my point is that the work involved is worth it to eliminate the dangers of synthetic refrigerants. I appreciate your perspective, thanks for the conversation!

Trump vows to ‘drill, baby, drill’ despite rally attendees wilting in extreme heat | Supporters hospitalized following rallies in Las Vegas and Phoenix, where temperatures have broken records ( www.theguardian.com )

I'll note that heat stroke victims in Phoenix are more likely to survive this year than in the past due to ambulances stocking body bags full of ice.

spidermanchild ,

This isn't a "different political opinion". Climate change isn't an opinion, period. A different political opinion is supposed to mean a different policy solution to a specific problem, not wholesale ignoring reality.

spidermanchild ,

So dramatic. There's a difference between shadenfreude and celebrating death.

spidermanchild ,

You need to learn about nuance. Thanks for letting us know that shadenfreude is bad, karma is bad, fuck around and find out is also bad, do stupid stuff and win stupid prizes is bad, irony, also bad, leopards eating faces, beleive it or not, bad. Let's all pour one out for aggressive drivers getting speeding tickets, all the bullies out there who got punched back, and anytime justice is a served while we're at it. If someone displays any emotion besides unbridled empathy for adults inflicting misery on themselves in all situation, bad!

spidermanchild ,

Slippery slope would be the person comparing self-inflicted heat stroke whilst supporting a fascist climate denier to getting cancer. Let's make sure nobody ever has to face consequences for their actions ever again, what a noble fight! Thank you for making the world a better place.

spidermanchild ,

This article says cheese can be a part of the planetary diet. They aren't recommending veganism in this piece, they are focusing on whole foods over processed foods primarily, while also advocating plant based food and advocating for e.g. chicken over red meat.

spidermanchild ,

Shiping represents about 10% of the 25% of global carbon emissions from transportation, so 2.5%, similar to aviation. Yes, it's a problem but it's not the boogeyman you seem to think it is.

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport

spidermanchild ,

I don't think the issue is whether it's effective in isolation (clearly we can alter the environment), it's the fact that it's likely to be used as a shitty band aid to continue emitting carbon and it's likely to have unforseen consequences. We need to stop burning fossil fuels, all of them, immediately.

spidermanchild ,

There are lots of folks working on maritime (and aviation) decarbonization, it's not being ignored. It's just harder than decarbonozing other sectors because they can't just electrify like you and I can do with our cars and homes. The solution is likely to be synthetic fuels of some sort, ammonia, hydrogen, biodiesel, etc. We're seeing sails come back, there have been innovation hull designs, etc. You could even call tarrifs a partial solution here because building locally reduces shipping needs. It's just not as cheap/easy as installing solar panels/wind/batteries though. We need policy to drive change here, which puts it on a different level than the personal responsibility measures. I absolutely agree we need to do all of the above though.

As to the source, I don't know but it's cited in government records everywhere. They have a good handle of how much fuel is produced everywhere, we know exactly what ships exist and where they go in real time globally, we know how efficient they are, so it doesn't seem nebulous enough to me to have any real doubt in. NASA can probably track all their emissions from space too.

spidermanchild ,

This article touches on the idea of an event, which aligns with your language around a transition. That seems appropriate to me, e.g. the industrial revolution would be the event that kicked off the next epoch. Considering the profound impact we've had on the planet since the industrial revolution, it seems like a reasonable place in time to assert that a new epoch has begun, however. It has clearly started to take shape. We have already done 1.5C of warming, with all signs pointing to much more to come. Biodiversity is already plummeting and will continue to drop. It's perfectly reasonable to conclude that we've created a deviation from the Holocene normals and are simply calling this new thing something else, something undefined but clearly underway and likely to be as disruptive as any epoch change in the past. It's an observation that we've fucked things up, but it's not surprising that geologists aren't ready to make the leap to a formal name, especially one randomly invented by a dude in an off the cuff comment and not through the scientific process.

spidermanchild ,

This seems like an attempt to shift the blame to another group you don't identify with. We collectively did this. Humans have been clearing forests and altering ecosystems for millennia, and the only thing that really changed is industrialization and the ability to easily extract massive amounts of fossil fuels from the earth. Technology made that possible, and once the cat was out of the bag it became very difficult to put it back in. Sure capitalism sucks and all that, but humans, organized by country and loosely in competition with each other, were bound to fuck this all up regardless of whether the Soviet Union or the US or the British Empire or China was "in charge". It's a prisoners dilemma stacked on expectations of comfort. And sure a global authoritarian government exclusively focused on sustainability could pull this off, but people sure as shit wouldn't like it, so here we are. Capitalism and it's effects to undermine solutions in the name of profit are absolutely making it worse, but to place exclusive blame on capitalism seems naive and ignores human nature itself.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190829150702.htm#:~:text=Humans%20in%20these%20time%20periods,land%20clearance%20and%20selective%20breeding.

spidermanchild ,

This feels like semantics though, of course there is an end accompanying the beginning of the next one. So we're on track to cause mass extinction (I'm talking biodiversity in general, not human), i.e., the end of the Holocene by your logic, and something new is starting, which some folks are calling the anthropocene. The question is whether the industrial revolution and it's carbon consequences are enough of a step change to define the end of the Holocene and start of something new. I think what we've caused is likely as consequential as exiting the last ice age, which is the start of the Holocene. And the Holocene wasn't ever defined as the age of humans, so tying the extinction of humans to it seems silly - you seem to be creating an entirely new definition of the Holocene here.

No right wing wave in Finland as Left Alliance take record result in EU elections ( yle.fi )

Finland's results in the European election bucked a continent-wide trend of rising support for parties on the outer fringe of right-wing politics, with the Left Alliance and the National Coalition winning big at the expense of the nationalist Finns Party....

spidermanchild ,

You seem to supporting the concept though. More people didn't keep voting left, they voted center/left which sounds like has been moving right, so things stayed the same/went right. Who you vote for matters too - we have multiple opportunities to vote between "dems". To me OPs comment is a simple truism - we can't move left by not electing leftist individuals (and parties by extension). Any other strategy is some pie in the sky game theory.

Biden Administration Tightens Mileage Standards to Buoy E.V.s | The new rule requires automakers to achieve an average of 65 miles per gallon across all models by 2031. ( www.nytimes.com )

The new standards require American automakers to increase fuel economy so that, across their product lines, their passenger vehicles would average 65 miles per gallon by 2031, up from 48.7 miles today. The average mileage for light trucks, including pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, would have to reach 45 miles per...

spidermanchild ,

Why would you assume the fee unit is pennies? I assume you'd scale all of these values proportionally to the revenue needs. I think the road damage formula was to the fourth power of weight, not third though.

spidermanchild ,

Yes. NYT has been feeding me propane ads and BP ads. I already bitched at them last week and I'll do it again. I think it was Pennsylvania years ago where I saw a billboard that literally said "you need fossil fuels to survive".

Energy buffs give small modular reactors a gigantic reality check ( www.theregister.com )

With a few SMR projects built and operational at this point, and more plants under development, the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) concludes in a report that SMRs are "still too expensive, too slow to build, and too risky to play a significant role in transitioning away from fossil fuels."

spidermanchild ,

Why not? We're working on things like iron air batteries that only need basic material inputs. We have all kinds of demand response potential that isn't realized. And we can do more transmission so a local event can be covered by capacity in other regions. Besides, any issues we have with the last 5% of generation are meaningless for the next 50%.

spidermanchild ,

Yes and no. Yes they are built to be cheap and minimally code compliant but they are also way too fucking big. Most of the new construction I see is shitty ass mcmansions at 4k sqft and up with 5 bathrooms and 50 windows, when it could be 2800 sq ft to something close to passivhaus standards (PGH), all electric and very, very efficient for the same price. But somehow these asswipes needs a 5th bathroom to shit in so we are stuck with them optimizing construction to size and number of shitters, not efficiency. Unaffordability is a real issue but it's a cop out to shitty oversized inefficient housing. We need to use the codes and tax structures to build smaller efficient homes, which will actually help affordability.

spidermanchild ,

If Republicans want to elect Republicans that force them to pay extra for their preferred (marginal) carbon free power source, fine I guess? The rate increases aren't great for the other 48% of the state though.

Electricity From Coal Is Pricey. Should Consumers Have to Pay? Environmental groups are making a new economic argument against coal, the heaviest polluting fossil fuel. Some regulators are listening. ( www.nytimes.com )

This economic argument has been a key part of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign since around 2010.

spidermanchild ,

FFS there are absolutely regulators that are pushing against coal, several being mentioned in the article specifically and including the EPA itself. Being skeptical is one thing, but just ignoring the entire article isn't remotely productive.

Colorado’s Bold New Approach to Highways — Not Building Them | The state has made it harder to widen highways, and transportation officials are turning their eyes to transit. ( www.nytimes.com )

In Colorado, that new vision was catalyzed by climate change. In 2019, Gov. Jared Polis signed a law that required the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 90 percent within 30 years. As the state tried to figure out how it would get there, it zeroed in on drivers. Transportation is the largest single contributor to...

spidermanchild ,

Wasn't 470 all funded by municipal bonds, paid for by tolls and some vehicle registrations and governed by a board of local governments? And last I heard they still had like $1.2B to pay off. I don't necessarily like the model, but I'm sure the alternative models where federal funds, general taxes, etc are used for growing roads forever aren't any better. I'm not for profiteering, but I am for road users paying the actual costs instead of begging for subsidized roads as per usual.

As to RTD, yeah it's a mess but for a lot of different reasons, with the top one imo is the dog shit land use policies in the entire service area. They were dealt a damn near impossible hand given the horrible sprawl and shit development, which tragically is still going on right now (barfs in general airport direction).

spidermanchild ,

Quite a shit opinion piece honestly. It's a complex issue and the author's argument of "but it's 2024 come on" and then quoting the bible is lame.

The reality is solar is worth next to nothing in CA without storage, community solar is therefore worth next to nothing without storage, and the transmission level connections don't offer the same advantage that individuals homeowners can achieve with batteries (actual backup), so utility scale comes out ahead on cost. The CPUC made their decision on cost, so unless the author has some actual data to back that up (they don't, and they even sympathize with that argument), it's all really just a feels piece. The Ward legislation was flawed in that it set constraints that could not be navigated through the cost modelling structures.

Other states that haven't hit the belly of the duck will deal with this eventually and should thank early adopters like CA/TX for bringing down prices for battery storage for when they inevitably run into these issues. As a solar owner without battery in Colorado, I can guarantee you I'm taking more from the utility than I put in, which simply will fail at a certain scale and create inequities. You can argue that this is all fine and the carbon reduction is more important (and I generally agree), but there has to be a line somewhere where we need to agree on least cost solutions when all of the options get us to near net zero in the same timeframe.

spidermanchild ,

What makes you think setting the whole thing on fire is more likely/feasible than pricing in environmental externalities?

spidermanchild ,

The headline absolutely makes sense for the US market. The default terminology in the HVAC industry here is that an air conditioner provides cooling, and a heat pump provides heating and cooling. It's really that simple and correct in this case, as that's the common understanding in the industry.

Obviously other countries, thermodynamics textbooks, and other applications like refrigeration use different terminology. But holy shit it's not that hard and we don't need to get all pedantic using definitions from other industries that don't apply to this narrow topic.

spidermanchild ,

CDC says they reduce injury crashes.

https://www.cdc.gov/transportation-safety/calculator/red-light.html

spidermanchild ,

You're preemptively upset about an upcomimg movement that you acknowledge is vague on specifics. Do you even live in NYC? Why are they are all "shitheads"? Saying protesters also use petroleum is a bullshit point too. It's got dumb Charlie Kirk "you criticize society but are a member of society, curious" energy. Just say you hate protests and move on. Every other post here is someone that thinks whatever someone else is doing is wrong and it's not remotely helpful or interesting.

spidermanchild ,

I could similarly say you should meet with them in person and explain to them directly the error in their ways. Saying there are zero lessons that can be learned from the civil rights movement is also absurd. Obviously it's different in many ways, but not completely.

I don't live anywhere near NYC and was just offering a counterpoint to the unnecessary criticisms of something that hasn't even happened yet. If that counts as "feeling righteous" to you, that's your conclusion and not anything to do with me. I've dedicated my career and significant time and expsne to this cause that I "supposedly support", but I do so without shitting on others in the way you've chosen to. I wish you success in however you are planning to dedicate your resources to the cause. We're on the same team friend.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •