Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
an
ParticipantTrump, Trump, Trump. This is the shit I’m afraid off.
Participant#neverTrump. I can deal/settle w/ Hillary and Cruz, but definitely #neverTrump.
ParticipantGold.
ParticipantVery well said flu. I agree 100%. Drumpf might not be specifically saying that all Latino are illegal, but he did speak in hyperboles, such as “they’re all rapist and drug dealers”. He also say most Muslim hate us. Not to forget he’s also a big birther as well. So, as the saying goes.. if it walk like a duck, quack like a duck, waddle like a duck…
I sincerely hope that if Drumpf win the delegate count, the Republican would run a 3rd party candidate. If they don’t, they would completely lose my trust and respect.
ParticipantAt that $/sq-ft, I’d rather live in Del Mar/La Jolla with an ocean view… But that’s just me.
ParticipantVast majority is not good enough. Not when they suppose to replace human driving but won’t take on the liability. If a person have an accident, then at least one of those drivers involved are at fault and their insurance goes up. Who’s at fault when the computer make mistake? This is not assisted driving, this is autonomous driving. Which means it has to take into account all situation and be able to react as well or better than a human who’s paying attention.
ParticipantInventory is still extremely low in my hood. It would have to tripple to just be back to last fall supply.
ParticipantThat AC example is exactly what I’m talking about in term of side effect. I bought my AC a few years ago and my AC system is SEER-16 and my heater is 98% efficient. I have the $ to front the cost difference banking on the energy saving in the long run. However, not everyone can afford to spend a few more grand up front. Which mean those people would have to live w/out AC or upgrade to 92% efficient unit if their old unit is @ <80%, if we put a limit at 95% efficiency.
As for incandescent vs LED, that's another horrible example. W/ incandescent, each bulb is a few cents while LED, each bulb is a couple of $. How long would you have to use those incandescent before it break event w/ LED? My outdoor light gets used maybe 1 hour a month on average. How long do you think it'll take to break even? There nothing wrong w/ LED, but not everyone can afford it and it's not the right solution in all situation.
Participant[quote=spdrun]
What about leakage of nuclear plant?
What about loss of land due to leakage of nuclear (3 miles island)?Not a problem if you don’t hire idiots to design and operate the plant. And modern designs are a lot safer than 1960s designs in operation in the US.
Burning coal also puts radwaste into the environment you know.[/quote]
There are a lot of idiots out there.Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]That’s analysis paralysis that the fossil fuel industry wants.
We just need to take reasonable steps while we bank fossil fuels for future generations. You wouldn’t want to use your grandkids’ fossil fuels now, would you?[/quote]No it’s not. I just want to make sure the steps we’re taking actually make a meaningful change. How do we know it’s a meaningful change unless we thoroughly analyze it? Without proper analyzing the solution, how do you know it’s even going to make a difference or take you in the wrong direction? Since none of the solution is absence of side effect, wouldn’t it be smart to analyze the side effect and let the people decide whether a particular solution is worthwhile w/ a particular set of side effect? I mean, we all can go back to 1900 without cars, planes, and kill off 1/2 of the world population. This whole CO2 problem would be solved 100%. But would people be OK w/ the side effect?
I believe in technology and believe that by my grandkids’ time, they’ll have fusion all figured out and they’ll have infinite renewable energy.
Participant[quote=spdrun]
What would those long term cost be? I think most reasonable people would agree human contribute to increase of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Pollution from extraction, leakage, and burning.
Loss of land area due to greenhouse effect. Same goes for food production capacity, etc.[/quote]What about leakage of nuclear plant?
What about loss of land due to leakage of nuclear (3 miles island)?
Food production capacity? Easily solved w/ tech (cloning and GMO).
Now, what about the many other products that uses oil, like plastic? What would replace those?Participant[quote=spdrun]Long-term environmental costs are not factored into the cost of fossil-fool power..[/quote]
What would those long term cost be? I think most reasonable people would agree human contribute to increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. The real question is, what is the cost if we do nothing and would would be the cost of eliminate the problem. I don’t think I’ve ever see any real solution that say, “if we do x, y, z, it’ll solve the problem 100% but here is the consequences of that solution”.ParticipantI find it kinda amusing that they give people credit to help spur solar, EV, drought tolerant landscape, etc. Then when solar reduced usage, EV reduced gas tax revenue, drought tolerant landscape reduce water usage, they charge us more. What were they thinking would happen when they hand out those rebates?
ParticipantI’m hoping there aren’t as many NIMBYism folks in MM as people in Chula Vista. This development is need. This will transform MM from a nondescript suburb to a true town w/ a town center.
-
AuthorPosts
