Renewable energy

[peakbagger]

I spent some time at Umaine listening to Dr Hess. He would joke that some home water filters from certain areas should be considered radioactive waist. Samples bottles had so much radon that they hissed when you opened them.Rad

Used carbon filters from residential water treatment systems if disposed of commercially are treated as a special waste. It is or was an issue with firms that were servicing these systems. I think homeowner direct disposal is still legit. When I was researching options for my well it was apparent that many installers went with the more expensive up front air scrubber solution so they did not have to deal with used filters.

BTW, IMHO the entire radon removal game is pretty shady, most folks do not deal with it until they are buying or selling a house and testing flags it. They are in panic and usually ask the agent for a reference. It is rarely put out to bid and the markup on the equipment is quite steep. Many firms only will sell to authorized agents so the markups can be maintained. They are usually cobbed onto standard well pumps so the power cost is steep as the water is being pumped twice. More than a few treat all the water including the garden hoses.

 

[stoveliker]

Fewer producers & more eaters=slow collapse

That did not work out too great for California. You don't need resource consumers coming from across the globe to move to your state. What is actually needed is for competent and intelligent people to reproduce much faster than the current extinction-level fertility rate.

It appears to me you are contradicting yourself. Whatever ones opinion on the political leanings of CA, being the world's fifth largest economy, having a rather intelligent economy on average, while being able to feed a boatload of people (salad bowl of the US or something like that), pleads precisely for "it did work out great for CA" imo. And this has nothing to do with political choices one may (dis-)agree with. It's just an observation that based on the measuring stick you use (resource consumption vs production, and "intelligent people"), CA is actually doing well imo.

 

[CreoSophist]

It appears to me you are contradicting yourself. Whatever ones opinion on the political leanings of CA, being the world's fifth largest economy, having a rather intelligent economy on average, while being able to feed a boatload of people (salad bowl of the US or something like that), pleads precisely for "it did work out great for CA" imo. And this has nothing to do with political choices one may (dis-)agree with. It's just an observation that based on the measuring stick you use (resource consumption vs production, and "intelligent people"), CA is actually doing well imo.

I don't want to derail the thread, but I feel a need to respond to this. California is collapsing at a rate 1-2 decades faster than the rest of the United States, and we can watch it in real time. There is a mass exodus currently underway in California, with a net domestic migration of about -400,000 just last year. There is a MASSIVE underclass living in poverty in California, and productive middle class workers cannot afford houses.

The fact that the tech economy is centered there, and an elite class of people are bringing home $200,000+ salaries does nothing to speak to the overall health of the economy, or the state in general. Those who work in the "salad bowl of the US" as you call it, are some of the worst paid people in the country. Of course California does still have a huge amount of very intelligent people, but they are not reproducing and fleeing the state in droves. It takes decades or sometimes centuries for a collapse to fully play out, and I am looking at the long term trends.

Further, CA has the lowest literacy rate in the country, roughly 77% (compared to 93% in Maine). What economic success CA does still enjoy, is not because of millions of low-skilled, illiterate immigrants, but despite them. California sports a violent crime rate 4x that of Maine. The average IQ in CA is 95 (the third least intelligent state), while in Maine it is 103. The quality of life difference between living in an area with low IQ and social trust, and one with high IQ and social trust is difficult to articulate unless you have experienced both for yourself.

In the spirit of being green, it just doesn't make any sense to intentionally double your states population(in an area with inherent fresh water concerns), and try to offset that by marginally reducing per capita energy consumption by a few percent here and there.

 

[stoveliker]

You now add different yard sticks to measure the problem as compared to your previous statements.
Regarding population:

I do agree with the "in the spirit of being green" remark.

 

[SpaceBus]

The population of people responsible for creating and capable of maintaining the modern world is, in fact, decreasing rapidly. The growth is currently occurring in populations that are not capable of supporting themselves.
View attachment 291766
Fewer producers & more eaters=slow collapse

That did not work out too great for California. You don't need resource consumers coming from across the globe to move to your state. What is actually needed is for competent and intelligent people to reproduce much faster than the current extinction-level fertility rate.

I disagree, white collar workers are not doing this state any good when there is a shortage of tradespeople. California literally depends on foreign and migrant labor for the agricultural industry. I chuckle that you worry about African people reproducing when they do little to damage the environment compared to white industrialized nations.

 

[CreoSophist]

You now add different yard sticks to measure the problem as compared to your previous statements.
Regarding population:
View attachment 291770

I do agree with the "in the spirit of being green" remark.

No, I really didn't.

having a rather intelligent economy on average

Further, CA has the lowest literacy rate in the country, roughly 77% (compared to 93% in Maine). The average IQ in CA is 95 (the third least intelligent state), while in Maine it is 103.

CA, being the world's fifth largest economy

Totally irrelevant to my point.

No one actually believes CA is an example that should be followed. If you want to play devil's advocate or nitpick my words, fine. Most users can understand my points.

 

[CreoSophist]

I disagree, white collar workers are not doing this state any good when there is a shortage of tradespeople. California literally depends on foreign and migrant labor for the agricultural industry. I chuckle that you worry about African people reproducing when they do little to damage the environment compared to white industrialized nations.

Ignoring the fact that you are advocating bringing mass amounts people from countries that "do little damage to the environment" (not even true, by the way, most african mega fauna is being poached to extinction) into "white industrialized nations [that do]", every single white industrialized nation has a below replacement fertility rate. You may chuckle some more in 2100 when there are 4 billion africans to feed and the phosphorous reserves are depleted... There used to be a country named Rhodesia that they called "the breadbasket of Africa", but they don't call it that anymore...

 

[SpaceBus]

Ignoring the fact that you are advocating bringing mass amounts people from countries that "do little damage to the environment" (not even true, by the way, most african mega fauna is being poached to extinction) into "white industrialized nations [that do]", every single white industrialized nation has a below replacement fertility rate. You may chuckle some more in 2100 when there are 4 billion africans to feed and the phosphorous reserves are depleted... There used to be a country named Rhodesia that they called "the breadbasket of Africa", but they don't call it that anymore...

You mean the same megafauna being poached due to industrialized nations buying the animal parts? They aren't hunting those animals to eat them. I was speaking more to climate change, not overhunting, which is very much more a problem for industrialized nations. If the birthrate is decreasing in white nations, and increasing in brown nations, then there won't really be a difference... The fact that you refer to Zimbabwe by the colonial name is pretty sus, but "Rhodesia" was never the bread basket of anywhere. Any time people talk about overpopulation or high birth rates in developing (brown) nations my Facist alarm rings. What is your suggestion for determining who gets to reproduce and who doesn't?

 

[SpaceBus]

View attachment 291771
No, I really didn't.






Totally irrelevant to my point.

No one actually believes CA is an example that should be followed. If you want to play devil's advocate or nitpick my words, fine. Most users can understand my points.

Are you trying to make a joke?

 

[CreoSophist]

You mean the same megafauna being poached due to industrialized nations buying the animal parts? They aren't hunting those animals to eat them. I was speaking more to climate change, not overhunting, which is very much more a problem for industrialized nations. If the birthrate is decreasing in white nations, and increasing in brown nations, then there won't really be a difference... The fact that you refer to Zimbabwe by the colonial name is pretty sus, but "Rhodesia" was never the bread basket of anywhere. Any time people talk about overpopulation or high birth rates in developing (brown) nations my Facist alarm rings. What is your suggestion for determining who gets to reproduce and who doesn't?

Don't know what a facist is; don't care. Don't have any rules for who gets to reproduce, never said I did.

If we are talking about historical facts, before the white farmers were tortured, killed, and kicked off their land and had their fields salted, zimbabwe (don't care what you call it) was a grain exporter. Now it's a starving nation that relies on foreign aid to survive. Whatever, doesn't really matter. The point was that the 1 billion Africans ALREADY cannot feed themselves on the land they have, you may have some reason to believe they will do better with 4 billion, but it's not obvious to me.

 

[SpaceBus]

Don't know what a facist is; don't care. Don't have any rules for who gets to reproduce, never said I did.

If we are talking about historical facts, before the white farmers were tortured, killed, and kicked off their land and had their fields salted, zimbabwe (don't care what you call it) was a grain exporter. Now it's a starving nation that relies on foreign aid to survive. Whatever, doesn't really matter. The point was that the 1 billion Africans ALREADY cannot feed themselves on the land they have, you may have some reason to believe they will do better with 4 billion, but it's not obvious to me.

You mean the white colonizers that stole the land from the natives which they also enslaved and exported? You mean the white colonizers that ruined the native lands which they seized through violence? Being a grain exporter does not make one the bread basket of a continent. Africa is quite possibly the worst example, it is covered in arable land. It was colonized to be exploited for its great climate for growing food. The reasons for Africa being a net importer of food are not related to the capacity for the continent to grow its own food.

Apparently you can't imagine someone making a typo of the word Fascist. There is the correct spelling, to clear up any confusion you may have.


"Rhodesia" is the name the slave holders gave the land. The free people chose Zimbabwe.

 

[CreoSophist]

You mean the white colonizers that stole the land from the natives which they also enslaved and exported? You mean the white colonizers that ruined the native lands which they seized through violence? Being a grain exporter does not make one the bread basket of a continent. Africa is quite possibly the worst example, it is covered in arable land. It was colonized to be exploited for its great climate for growing food. The reasons for Africa being a net importer of food are not related to the capacity for the continent to grow its own food.

Apparently you can't imagine someone making a typo of the word Fascist. There is the correct spelling, to clear up any confusion you may have.


"Rhodesia" is the name the slave holders gave the land. The free people chose Zimbabwe.

This will be my last reply, considering you are posting lies and disinformation. The colony of southern Rhodesia was established almost 100 years AFTER the British Empire outlawed slavery, and went to war against several African kingdoms to stop it.

Africa is quite possibly the worst example, it is covered in arable land. It was colonized to be exploited for its great climate for growing food. The reasons for Africa being a net importer of food are not related to the capacity for the continent to grow its own food.

You got that one right 😆

 

[woodgeek]

No one actually believes CA is an example that should be followed. If you want to play devil's advocate or nitpick my words, fine. Most users can understand my points.

No one? What about the people in California? The people voting democratically for its leaders? Or the people moving there?

Maybe 'No one' you regularly associate with?

I wonder how you feel about Philadelphia... that engine of enterprise (and poverty) right here in PA.

 

[woodgeek]

Yet the inhabitants of sub-Saharan Africa never domesticated a single animal or cultivated a single crop.

Last time I checked there were a lot of african herdsmen. You don't think they domesticated that cattle?

You would like 'Guns, Germs and Steel'. It talks about how H. erectus got to Asia, and found all these animals that had never seen a human before (and were fearless), and (being poor hunters) ended up domesticating a lot of them. H sapiens gets to the America's, again, a bunch of animals that don't fear humans, but being better hunters, they wiped out nearly all the megafauna. Nothing left to domesticate.

There is also a luck of the draw here... many animals resist domestication... a lot of the African megafauna and US bison, for example, have never been domesticated.

 

[CreoSophist]

No one? What about the people in California? The people voting democratically for its leaders? Or the people moving there?

Maybe 'No one' you regularly associate with?

I wonder how you feel about Philadelphia... that engine of enterprise (and poverty) right here in PA.

Res ipsa loquitur


Philly is a travesty, but more than 0 people live there and they have elections sometimes, so I guess it's good by your metric.

 

[woodgeek]

View attachment 291791
Res ipsa loquitur


Philly is a travesty, but more than 0 people live there and they have elections sometimes, so I guess it's good by your metric.

You understand that that is the NET number, a lot of people are moving there too, right?

 

[CreoSophist]

You understand that that is the NET number, a lot of people are moving there too, right?

Yep, you got me. I was totally under the impression that no one moved to a state with 40 million people in it last year.

 

[CreoSophist]

Last time I checked there were a lot of african herdsmen. You don't think they domesticated that cattle?

You would like 'Guns, Germs and Steel'. It talks about how H. erectus got to Asia, and found all these animals that had never seen a human before (and were fearless), and (being poor hunters) ended up domesticating a lot of them. H sapiens gets to the America's, again, a bunch of animals that don't fear humans, but being better hunters, they wiped out nearly all the megafauna. Nothing left to domesticate.

There is also a luck of the draw here... many animals resist domestication... a lot of the African megafauna and US bison, for example, have never been domesticated.

I have read the book. It's full of just-so stories and falsehoods.

American bison could be easily domesticated; there is not much reason to do it at this point. It is comparable to the ancestor of modern cattle. Indeed there are bison ranches today.

 

[EbS-P]

Using a pandemic effected year that has no corollary in the past 100 years for population data when birth rates took a nose dive is a single data point and may or may not be indicative of a trend. Housing cost is an issue for many people.

My interpretation many people with means that could work remote chose to move to a more rural area but not too far away. Then there’s Florida??????? Early retirements. Seems plausible

I don’t think Maine created 15000 new jobs. Secondary residences became primary. County by county data as a percentage change would be the most interesting. Is the impact of California loosing 1% or Maine gaining 1% have similar impact on revenue. How about Idaho? Is there influx increasing tax the base enough to take care of the extra resources the extra population requires.

Millennials have different priorities from their parents. Even if population growth rate hits zero electricity consumption will continue to increase faster than efficiency improvements can reduce it. (There I’m back on topic). The states with the largest population gain, to my knowledge, have not put in place sufficient policy to adequately address climate change and and infrastructure revitalization in the next 25 years.

 

[SpaceBus]

This will be my last reply, considering you are posting lies and disinformation. The colony of southern Rhodesia was established almost 100 years AFTER the British Empire outlawed slavery, and went to war against several African kingdoms to stop it.

You got that one right 😆

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

You mean the people that originally enslaved the natives and stole their land then later outlawed the practice of owning people, that they invented!? What a joke! "Rhodesia" had it's own version of Apartheid with a white English colonist minority controlling the territory while the native peoples are left in poverty and squalor. Yeah, we get it, you are a fascist and a racist.

 

[SpaceBus]

Last time I checked there were a lot of african herdsmen. You don't think they domesticated that cattle?

You would like 'Guns, Germs and Steel'. It talks about how H. erectus got to Asia, and found all these animals that had never seen a human before (and were fearless), and (being poor hunters) ended up domesticating a lot of them. H sapiens gets to the America's, again, a bunch of animals that don't fear humans, but being better hunters, they wiped out nearly all the megafauna. Nothing left to domesticate.

There is also a luck of the draw here... many animals resist domestication... a lot of the African megafauna and US bison, for example, have never been domesticated.

Obviously the indigenous peoples of the CONTINENT of Africa were not capable of domesticating animals or growing crops without white people to educate the savages, after all.

This is sarcastic, in case that didn't translate.

 

[SpaceBus]

View attachment 291799
I have read the book. It's full of just-so stories and falsehoods.

American bison could be easily domesticated; there is not much reason to do it at this point. It is comparable to the ancestor of modern cattle. Indeed there are bison ranches today.

Bison ranches operate the same way Caribou or Reindeer ranches do, as in the animals are NOT domesticated and purposefully kept wild. Reindeer are being managed the same way today as they have been going back thousands of years, nomads herd them around artic regions. Some Caribou are kept on ranches, but those are non-migratory species, and the "ranch" is just their native territory.

Just because those Zebra have saddles does not make them domesticated. The domestication process goes beyond putting an animal in captivity and takes generations.

Bison have never been domesticated, and the ancestor to modern cattle are aurochs, not bison.

 

[woodgeek]

Welp, this thread couldn't get any crazier, so I thought I'd post this fun long-read take-down of the TED talk phenomenon (and esp TEDx) that started it all:

What Was the TED Talk?

Some Thoughts on the “Inspiresting”

www.thedriftmag.com

As a fun thing for me it also includes a roast of Bill Gates (my personal bête noire), Elizabeth Holmes and Elizabeth Gilbert.

As a techno-optimist (and occasional utopian) I have to maintain boundaries with some of this crapola.

 

[stoveliker]

As a scientist, I have often liked the ideas in Ted talks, because they were inspirational. And that is sorely needed in the daily grind of science. But I have indeed always been puzzled about the talks of which I understood the basics (physics and materials science). So unrealistic, ignoring reality.

I do think this article hits the nail on the head.

There may be a place for talks like this, but not in the science domain, and not as seriously proposing solutions to current problems - only as motivational encouragement (which almost always is unrealistic).

megachurch infotainment can have its usefulness, though that does not lie in a realistic description and prediction of actuality.

Thank you for that read.

 

[woodgeek]

Me too. I enjoy a nice TED talk.

Inspiration and positivity have their place... we need to dream it before we can realize it. That is true in my experience in science; I need to inspire my students. But simplifying science and tech down to a ridiculous level, and one that is viral social media ready, is just going to confuse matters and invite a loss of confidence.