sartalon

Didn't they elect Hamas though?

China's subsurface capabilities are laughable at best.

They are decades behind even Russia and pose no real threat to anyone but the same small Asian neighbors they have been bullying for years.

Copy paste that for every continent outside of Europe.

Trickle down never works. No way an owner is going to pass that cost savings to their tenants.

But billboards don't bother me, except the political/religious ones.

You are quoting "The majority of studies..." but I am not sure where you are pulling that from.

I have an issue with that quote since it is absolutely wrong about shipping and air trasport.

Edit:

And furthermore, you can't just abandon a significant sector and expect to pick it up later on.

There is tremendous momentum in each sector and to just focus on one, at the behest of others, is a TERRIBLE idea. Each sector does not exist in a vacuum. They all have supporting industries that also need to be developed and planned out. To put everything into renewables, is irresponsible at best. If we don't subsidize it all all. Then it will be a stillborn process that will never see anything outside an office.

Great, we now have 100% renewables, but we've had elevated CO2 for decades and now we have to spin up carbon capture from scratch because someone had the great idea to drop everything else. So add another 20 years for that to work up. We don't have that luxury.

You're equivocating. But hey, whatever you need to justify bullshit to yourself. You do you.

Not as it exists now. There are zero viable solutions for shipping or air travel, for example.

Achievable yes, but not in any near time frame, so we HAVE to look at other mitigating options as well.

Putting all your eggs in one basket is a very poor strategy.

Building more nuclear WOULD help. Yes, it has a huge capital front cost, and it takes a while to earn that back, but then it keeps paying.

The whole point of allowing these localized monopolies on power, is because power benefits from economy of scale and nuclear, right now, is the pinnacle of that. Large up front cost but also a solid, continual return that doesn't rely on outside factors.

I have to disagree with you because we need to invest now, if for no better reason, to advance carbon capture technology. It needs to advance in parallel. Otherwise we are just pushing that can down the road.

As much as I want to be 100% renewable/clean, that is never going to happen. Not at our population, not at our power demand level, not at our rate of growth.

Hell, we can't even get people to accept nuclear power as part of the solution.

Wait, are you suggesting that a bunch of fundies, praying at a temple, is a reasonable excuse to target high populated civilian areas, to maximize innocent deaths? Oh and add kidnapping to the list too.

Oh noes, they "Stormed the site and prayed."

Better kill them all.

Wait, what!? How would this be a "huge strategic gain for the U.S."?

You could argue that it's a proxy conflict between the West and radicalized Muslim states. Sure. I would even listen to a discussion about rich elites using governments to keep areas destabilized in order to further their own fortunes.

But saying that somehow the U.S. would gain a huge strategic advantage is reaching.

What would the strategic value be? Is there oil there? Would they put a base there that somehow had more capabilities than facilities they already have in the area?

This isn't 5D chess. This is two cultures that refuse to get along, being supported openly, and behind closed doors by larger nations.

Israel hates it's neighboring countries for good reason. Those countries hate Israel for good reasons.

The human rights violations are disgusting and I support the freeing of Palestine.

But when you do shit like what the Hamas just did, you destroy any sort of moral high ground you may have had. Two wrongs don't make a right, no matter what your culture is.

You can't divorce Hamas from Palestine either, like some commentors are trying to do.

Tribalism at its worst.

My work is trying to engineer a design /plan for electric school busses connected to the grid.

They are only used for 4-6 hours a day and are stationary the rest. Perfect resource to keep plugged into the grid and help stabilize demand. Our initial study shows they could potentially pay for themselves, but at the very least subsidize their own cost quite significantly.

That looks more like a sunrise to me.

Meh, what do I know.