olofscience

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    2,296

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

  • Feedback

    N/A

Posts posted by olofscience

  1. 9 minutes ago, metalslug said:

    Are you asserting that replacement is only required when it gets to zero?

    No, I'm asserting that the lifespan is more than 10 years.

    10 minutes ago, metalslug said:

    By that standard I can confidently state that I recycle paper cups filled with warm coffee. The coffee inside them is valuable to me, the rest of the item goes someplace else. Win !

    This is a bizarre and nonsensical analogy. Are you ok?

  2. 53 minutes ago, metalslug said:

    Most solar panels currently in use will last perhaps 20 years, the supporting batteries about half that

    This is the lie, solar panels are getting a LOT more reliable. Some of the newest ones are rated for 40 to 50 years: https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2017/failures-pv-panels-degradation.html

    The battery lifespan is also a lie - the 10 years usually quoted is for the number of cycles for batteries to reach 80% of their rated capacity.  You're talking as if they suddenly go to zero.

    57 minutes ago, metalslug said:

    then someone gets to decide which landfills to dump them in (any toxic materials in them notwithstanding)

    The lithium in them is extremely valuable, this is another silly argument. If you replace your car's catalytic converter, do you dump it, platinum and all, in a landfill? Most batteries are easily recycled.

  3. · Edited by olofscience

    1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

    But I also predicted there would be record coal production. I predicted CO2 emissions would continue to increase.

    You could also predict that the sun would rise tomorrow and nobody would give a shit.

    Those "'predictions" you made didn't have much uncertainty to begin with, which is why nobody gives a shit. It doesn't make you clever like you think it does.

     

    And I remember, I asked you to make an actual prediction (on an uncertain subject, predict a specific number) and you just ran away "to watch the game". :rofl:

  5. · Edited by olofscience

    7 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

    I hope you know the difference between projections and observations.

    You're one to speak, you don't even know the difference between observations and models :rofl:

    Now you're pretending to know better than NASA? 

     

    (cue brent citing a cherry-picked, obscure, old paper with inaccurate predictions, not representative of the general scientific consensus, to "prove" his point)

    (edit2: also he'll use one of his denier sites to do this, since he can't understand the papers themselves)

    :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

  7. 1 minute ago, lippy said:

    You could show a bit of empathy, or at minimum keep your mouth shut and count your blessings for having the sheer dumb luck of being born a white dude in North America....or, you could have a chuckle 'cause they wear dresses but were born with penises.

    Didn't you know that Brent was born a white dude in North America not because of luck, but because of his hard work and intelligence?

    If you stupid lefties would only listen to him, and work as hard as he has, you can ALSO be born in the best place and have the best things*! /s

     

    *refer to the other thread "The morbidly rich need to be taxed more" thread for a comprehensive list

    (cue airdvr chiming in that white dudes also struggle...yes, yes they do but that's a different topic...)

  9. 41 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

    Corporations can and should have a say because some far right liberals treat corporate profits as a public pecuniary interest. But if your point is that corporations use their financial powers to buy politicians to tilt what should be a level field. I'd agree.

    Governments' reason for existence is to protect the welfare of their citizens. Corporations are not citizens.

    Corporations employ citizens, so they do have a say on how the country is run, just through their employees and not the company itself.

     

    35 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

    If its a lie to force concessions then the government needs to go full Regan.

    Even if it isn't lying, it's still not a level playing field - because the consequences are still imbalanced. It's like a rich man making a $1000 bet with a poor man - both risk the same amount of money, but the consequences for the poor man is much bigger than for the rich man.

  10. 13 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

    Maybe what I dislike the most is how these nouveau princelings have the money, and the capacity for mischief to play kingmaker at home and develop their own foreign policies as is they were private governments. The impact of their wealth to affect domestic policy is manifest.

    This is one of my arguments for a Universal Basic Income.

    Companies and CEOs currently hold and decide the means of living for millions of people. They're not afraid to use them as HOSTAGES to get what they want from governments, and they do. All the time.

    Government policy should only be dictated by the citizens, not by companies using their employees as hostages in their negotiations.

  11. 1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

    Nobody just sits on their money. All of it is working doing something in the economy. Unless you count Scrooge McDuck rolling around in his vault for of gold and cash.

    There's a lot of economically-useful gold just sitting in gold vaults underground in London. That gold could be used for various coatings, corrosion protection, etc. but they're just sitting there because some rich people think they should be used to "store" their money instead.

    We're animals, and we just like hoarding and accumulating stuff. This is why capitalism is flawed - money's net flow is upwards, where it will stop and accumulate. The upwards flow, and downwards flow (i.e. trickle down) are not equal. Since they're both just money you can add the numbers together and they cancel out, and what remains is the net flow.

  12. This entire thread is pretty much just Brent jumping at any opportunity to flex. Yep, he's definitely not insecure...

    However there's a brutal truth - if society was more equal, with billions more people in the middle class, total global CO2 emissions would be VASTLY more than they are now. Those billions that billionaires are sitting on, doing nothing, are also billions not generating more CO2. (They *are* very very wasteful with CO2 per billionaire, but there's not that many of them)

    It really sucks, and we really should be able to alleviate human suffering without increasing CO2 emissions, but our technology is not quite there yet (though in less than 5 years, it will be). So in some weird sense I'm with Brent on this...sort of.

    How's that for a typical lefty? But I'm risking an actual discussion on this thread and interrupting Brent's ego trip :rofl:

  13. 5 hours ago, gowlerk said:

    I hate the common misuse of that word as well.

    This is really funny since in another thread, Brent was trying to insinuate that I needed to use google to look up a common word for female sheep.

    He really needs to brush up his vocabulary.

    13 hours ago, brenthutch said:

    imaginary lefty hobgoblins: Systematic racism, the patriarchy

    Yup, says an old white man these problems don't exist! I guess we can all go home now, nothing to see here :rofl:

    • Like 1

  14. Piston engines are less efficient though. They'll have to throw away a lot of heat to avoid melting (note how much cooling water is mentioned in the link you provided)

    However they do have the advantage of quicker start-up time than turbines. Still, grid-scale batteries are better.

  15. On 3/29/2024 at 8:51 PM, billvon said:

    and natural gas (eventually switching to biogas and syngas) for peaking.

    Agree with most of your post except this, turbines take time to start and spin up. And every turbine start affects their lifetime. For peaking, grid-scale batteries have much faster response times and probably much lower total cost.

  16. 1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

    Looks like he is polling around ten percent, drawing largely from left leaning voters.

    Left-leaning like Slim King? :rofl::rofl::rofl:

    1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

    Could RFJ Jr. be Biden’s Ross Perot?

    You definitely hope so! :rofl:

  17. 14 hours ago, brenthutch said:

    You’ve probably never heard of David Beckham either. You need to get out more. 

    You're so desperate aren't you :rofl:

    Your "burns" are just so contrived and made up...just like your normal posts actually.

  19. 9 hours ago, brenthutch said:

    “According to data from Emissions Analytics, EVs tend to shed around 20 percent more from their tires due to their higher weight and high torque compared to traditional internal combustion engine-powered vehicles.”

    “According to a recent report issued by researchers at Imperial College London, “There is emerging evidence that tyre wear particles and other particulate matter may contribute to a range of negative health impacts including heart, lung, developmental, reproductive, and cancer outcomes.”

    Both tyre wear particles and tailpipe emissions are bad, but if I had to choose between them, I'd choose tyre particles.

    Tailpipe emissions have more smaller particles - PM2.5 and below, while tyre wear causes larger particles.

    PM2.5 is linked more definitively to negative health impacts, and death.

     

    And you HAPPILY announce any increases in coal use - they're one of the biggest emitters of mercury in the air. It's also funny how you pretend you care about pollution when plastic bag waste increases, you're almost jumping for joy.

    • Like 1

  21. 10 hours ago, wmw999 said:

    Shhhh — we’re not supposed to notice that there are more of something bad in a larger state mainly because it’s larger!

    Wendy P. 

    That would require: (1) understanding of the concept of dividing a number with another, (2) to enable fairer comparisons

    1) His ability (or lack of) in maths doesn't really need any further repetition here

    2) He doesn't want fair comparisons, he wants unfair comparisons in his favour to make himself feel good

     

  23. 4 hours ago, Coreece said:

    You'd have a point it he started a thread with a giant photo of a pile of trash without any other context, and said "BWHAHAHAHAHA!"

    He already told you who he's "laughing" at and why, and it's not the damage, you know he's not and everyone else knows he's not, so stop acting like a typical gen z tik-toker and get over it.

    You're quite misinformed about Brent's record of making honest arguments here.

    And it's not like this is the first time he's done it either. He DOES laugh at the damage, and he's just denying it, and you're also mistaken about how "everyone else knows he's not" exactly because of this. And yes, I do have proof. Go ahead, ask for it.

  24. 3 hours ago, brenthutch said:

    well meaning yet so blinded by virtue signaling that they fail to see the damage they cause

    But you're laughing at the damage. I need to emphasise: you're laughing at the damage.

    You're not laughing at just the progressives any more. You delight in the damage.

     

    You've got serious problems, man.

    3 hours ago, brenthutch said:

    I am the villainous Reality in the safe-space of Speakers Corner 

    Nah, reality isn't that bad at maths.

  25. 9 hours ago, brenthutch said:

    It would make me happy to see more folks learning from California’s failures instead of emulating them.

    No, your "laughing" emoji was literally laughing about plastic waste increasing.

    Something's gone very wrong in your life that you're acting like a cartoon villain. What next - rolling over laughing if a progressive train driver causes a toxic spill in your town resulting in an environmental disaster?

    You should try practising that laugh in the mirror. For villains, british accents are also popular, need any help with that?