Land, Food, Water, Energy

ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
I wonder how secure the unhackable control systems on modern agricultural tractors and other powered equipment is
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Could we put the adults back in charge again please and stop pretending that retarded children can do anything except make things worse

 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
More retardedness



De Blasio’s Gas Stove Ban Was Intended To Help the Environment. Experts Say It’ll Backfire.​

The city is trying to help minorities and the environment at the same time. It's ended up hurting both.
de-bl-736x514.jpg


In December 2021, outgoing New York City mayor Bill de Blasio signed a bill banning natural gas hookups in newly constructed buildings. The law passed with support from environmentalist groups including the Natural Resources Defense Council, which said the ban would "eliminate emissions" by requiring electric heat.

There was just one problem: Almost all of New York City's electricity comes from natural gas. That means electrifying buildings will increase emissions rather than reduce them, energy experts told the Washington Free Beacon.

"Emissions will go up," said Mark Mills, a physicist and energy expert at the Manhattan Institute. "It's unavoidable."

It takes twice as many fossil fuels to power an electric stove as a gas one, Mills said, because energy gets lost in the conversion process. So without a relatively green grid, fewer gas stoves means more gas burned overall and more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

It seems counterintuitive: If climate change endangers "the future of all life on earth," as the president of the Natural Resources Defense Council said in April, why did environmental groups support a policy that will make it worse?


One answer is the environmental movement's increasing focus on racial justice, which has made it more skeptical of clean energy sources—including nuclear and hydropower—that allegedly harm minorities.
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
why did environmental groups support a policy that will make it worse?

One answer is the environmental movement's increasing focus on racial justice, which has made it more skeptical of clean energy sources—including nuclear and hydropower—that allegedly harm minorities.


I like hydropower - I live directly between two of the largest hydro projects in New York State, the one at Niagara Falls and the one at Massena - a double bite at the same water. But it comes at a significant ecological cost, and is dependent on weather patterns that are often unreliable.
And in terms of harming minorities? No that's just retarded. And we can't afford having policy set by retards anymore. We need to silence the noisy retards.

The future is small nuclear reactors, currently represented by those called modular. A single one can power a small city and can be transported on semi truck trailers. And the only people who think they harm minorities are ...

Yeah - those guys again.
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
ok doser said:
... The future is small nuclear reactors, currently represented by those called modular. A single one can power a small city and can be transported on semi truck trailers. ...
Click to expand...
If fossil fuels run low. I'm not convinced either that CO2 emissions are harmful, or that we're anywhere near the end of the earth's fossil fuel resources. I think it's just as likely that we've only scratched the surface, only found the easy to find stuff, and some of the slightly more difficult to find stuff, but that there's a 'ton' of it left for us still to find, for centuries more if not longer.

And nuclear cannot be the solution until we do something about geopolitics. That's a way tougher nut to crack than building and operating nuclear plants.
 
H

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
ok doser said:
More retardedness



De Blasio’s Gas Stove Ban Was Intended To Help the Environment. Experts Say It’ll Backfire.​

The city is trying to help minorities and the environment at the same time. It's ended up hurting both.
de-bl-736x514.jpg


In December 2021, outgoing New York City mayor Bill de Blasio signed a bill banning natural gas hookups in newly constructed buildings. The law passed with support from environmentalist groups including the Natural Resources Defense Council, which said the ban would "eliminate emissions" by requiring electric heat.

There was just one problem: Almost all of New York City's electricity comes from natural gas. That means electrifying buildings will increase emissions rather than reduce them, energy experts told the Washington Free Beacon.

"Emissions will go up," said Mark Mills, a physicist and energy expert at the Manhattan Institute. "It's unavoidable."

It takes twice as many fossil fuels to power an electric stove as a gas one, Mills said, because energy gets lost in the conversion process. So without a relatively green grid, fewer gas stoves means more gas burned overall and more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

It seems counterintuitive: If climate change endangers "the future of all life on earth," as the president of the Natural Resources Defense Council said in April, why did environmental groups support a policy that will make it worse?


One answer is the environmental movement's increasing focus on racial justice, which has made it more skeptical of clean energy sources—including nuclear and hydropower—that allegedly harm minorities.
Click to expand...
I am for all-electric housing, as it eliminates house explosions caused by leaks.
 
H

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
ok doser said:
why did environmental groups support a policy that will make it worse?

One answer is the environmental movement's increasing focus on racial justice, which has made it more skeptical of clean energy sources—including nuclear and hydropower—that allegedly harm minorities.


I like hydropower - I live directly between two of the largest hydro projects in New York State, the one at Niagara Falls and the one at Massena - a double bite at the same water. But it comes at a significant ecological cost, and is dependent on weather patterns that are often unreliable.
And in terms of harming minorities? No that's just retarded. And we can't afford having policy set by retards anymore. We need to silence the noisy retards.

The future is small nuclear reactors, currently represented by those called modular. A single one can power a small city and can be transported on semi truck trailers. And the only people who think they harm minorities are ...

Yeah - those guys again.
Click to expand...
Can we put the nuclear waste in your yard?😁
 
H

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
ok doser said:
Go to 10:10

Click to expand...
So is that a yes?
It seems that if you can spare a few square feet of your yard, we can store some nuclear waste, at least till you try to sell your home.
(BTW, I'm mostly for solar, wind, and water produced power)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top