dalyons

and how did that work out? the site is dead now because of it

personally i think we should just stop selling the leaded version, tomorrow. alternatives exist, update your planes or dont fly, but no more leaded fuel.

Subscription money of $10 mo minus the cost of the cellular data connection and data, which is probably ~$8mo. So, a whopping profit of $24 a year?

I hear this theory a lot but it doesn’t actually make sense given the numbers

Having grown up in Australia I agree with everything you say. The percentage of property parasites as a % of the working population is staggering.

Agree with all except maybe this:

It's a deliberately created problem by tying the money supply to housing as an effort to decrease the population.

I don’t think there’s a grand evil plan. it’s just people acting selfishly, on selfish incentives. It looks similar around the world because property rights and local planning controls look similar around the world, a huge number of such systems derived from common old Europe roots

If this is your situation consider asking for an ISO to NSO conversion. Many companies these days will allow you to do this, as they’ve realized it’s in their best interest to not retain checked out employees

88% seems impossibly high. “Or controlled by” must be doing some heavy lifting. Government owned power is 9% of the US, 25% of Australia, 1% of the UK.

If “or controlled by” means privately owned plants that are subject to local regulations, then that is not particularly interesting or relevant to the discussion

The speed of change is what’s special this time. Careers are being eliminated faster than people can reskill or change careers.

Yes? So? Fairly common shorthand when discussing electric power systems. No one confuses it with bombs, because that would be silly.

Because no one wants to pay for a lifetime of inflated energy costs (nuclear) for the off chance of it helping in a black swan event. Humans aren’t wired that way, and neither is capitalism

Your proposal is to use nuclear as only backup? Or for only late nights (after batteries have discharged)? That dooms nukes economically, they need to run and sell power at close to 100% 24/7 to have any chance paying back the capex & opex.

What you’re saying makes sense but only for a planned state economy where the government owns (or subsidizes) all generation. It’s not possible in a free market economy, the nukes would go bankrupt/ never be built

There are relatively few oil exporting countries so probably not a big effect

I absolutely agree we could see cost reductions with scale. Maybe 2x ? But solar is a much more simple manufacturing process that’s amenable to massive massive volume. Print silicon, add traces, assemble. 100% automated. As such it has seen a 20x cost reduction since 1994. Nukes will never be able to touch that reduction.

And I’m supposed to care? Old tech will be pushed off the grid by cheap renewables, and rapid dispatch gas will remain. Sounds great.

Last two years for china. But yes? That’s because renewables finally got great. They’re momentum is not expected to slow down

If solar and wind can be made profitable, I don't see how nuclear is any different.

Nuclear is fundamentally way more complicated than wind and especially solar. Nuclear is 10s of kilometers of high pressure piping, 1000s of tons of concrete, exotic pressure welding. Solar on the other hand is brain dead simple and amenable to mass production in a way that nuclear can never be. As such, nuclear will never see the same scale of cost reductions.

They mostly don’t seem to agree, as exhibited by the fact that virtually none of them are breaking ground on new nukes.

The increased demand is absolutely and categorically not being met by coal. Look it up, chinas total coal emissions have declined the last few years, despite overall demand growth.

It’s being entirely met by renewables.

This is just faith without evidence

Finland is the definition of an outlier, and folks in similar situations make up a tiny percentage of the world population. They can burn gas for the next 50 years, and we can still be good.

Huh? Solar is widely acknowledged to be significantly cheaper than building new coal. And it is everywhere, you can just buy containers of it and have it delivered anywhere in the world.

Something like half of all bulk transport is moving fossil fuels around. So there’s already a huge win

and yet their coal usage has declined in the last two years, and is projected to continue declining.

politics. Supply is cheap, but California has a corrupt relationship with the monopoly provider, and lets them get away with bundling all kinds of costs into the distribution charge. fire rebuilding, social projects, decades of infrastructure neglect from previous corruption.

Go and compare the rates from a non-pg&e distributor (eg SMUD in sac) and you'll see, supply is cheap enough and it doesnt have to be this way.

no, sadly its somehow become part of the global culture war. Fossil is right wing manly dominant power, renewables are woke and womanly and left.

Its all electrons how did we get here jesus.

I agree except for REAMDE that was very fast paced and barely explained

Genuinely thank you. I’ve had sleep issues my whole life and no one has mentioned these. Not saying I will pay that, but more info is always good.

Wait what are the sleep medications they actually recommend?

What about this administration so far makes you think they are remotely interested in actual accountability?

Take homes are much lower signal now with AI

Is there any relevant recent evidence of them not just doing exactly what they’re told? “Oh they will refuse unlawful orders” hasn’t exactly panned out