It will probably happen eventually for gas stations in very rural areas, but keep in mind that you only really need one gas station in a given county staying open to keep gas vehicles viable, and you don’t really need all that much traffic to keep a pump open, especially if there arn’t any other options and as such you can increase margin drastically.

I know what you meant and what they should do, I was just repeating what they actually did so far.

It’s PG&E, so they said that he’s still on the hook for this months billing cycle. Starting next month though, he’ll be billed correctly, hopefully.

Ok, i’ll bite.

While I get the instance name is lost on some visitors, it’s fascinating to see Republican campaign material posted here in complete seriousness. So much about how dare the government possibly have impeded people heavily involved in far right campaigns in making money off distracting the working class with made up culture war. How dare other private businesses want to throw the out and proud Nazi’s off their platform.

A few offhand points, it is absolutely within the State Department’s remit to identify foreign infuance campaigns, even if they don’t always get it right.

The fact that the Twitter Files also showed that companies can and did push back on numerous recommendations after their own investigation disagreed without repercussions would seem to be pretty damming evidence that they really were recommendations about potential misinformation accounts and not government censorship.

Similarly, the comments on identifying misinformation is based on the ludicrous idea that there is just no possible way for an investigation to tell the difference between a truth and an outright lie, and thusly anyone attempting to do so or tell others about the serial liar much be censoring them.

The best evidence that the government isn’t actually trying to censor these group is government doesn’t use this sort of lukewarm, you might want to take a look at these accounts methods on pleople who it actually wants to censor like leftists, they just declare them a potential terror theat and send the FBI or police in to rough up the environmental group or activists.

But hey, they called the New York Post sensationalist and massive transphobe campaigning to get trans people banned from public restrooms prone to misinformation, so I guess the deep state really is censoring poor Donald Trump and his friends and we should be outraged not at the blatant campaign to mislead the poor into voting against their interests, but of the most lukewarm, liberal, halfhearted response possible to it.

In short, get back to me when they’ve done something more than politely ask the mods to look into a questionable user, like have even approached the sort of things they do people trying to block pipelines on a weekly basis.

Personally I tend to think that the Bengal famine is better compared to the Holodomor, as it is closer in time, area, and effect. If there is a lesson to these things though, I think it’s that it doesn’t matter what economic system you use of the people in charge are fans of eugenics, and that’s why it’s so important that there be strong independent checks on the government and politicians, minority representation, multi-party rule, etc…

I know BC at least solved this problem a few years ago by just legally requiring landlords to provide L2 chargers when asked and suddenly EVs were very popular with apartment owners.

While L2 chargers are definitely the ideal for household charging, it’s worth noting for places with street parking and such that you absolutely can charge an EV overnight with an household outlet and an extension cord, At least you can if you’re not averageing more than 60 miles(100km) per day, and if you’re dependent on street parking you’re probably closer into town than that.

Ideally the government would institute a similar must provide L2 if asked for employees at places with electric service, as that would ensure that they could not only get 170miles (290km) during a 9-5 shift, but allow for bidirectional charging to actually help with bulk grid storage, or at least incentivize charging at times when solar is plentiful instead of at night where you’re going to be drawing from a grid scale battery or hydro resivor.

On the grid front, while electrification will require expansion of capacity, it is worth remembering that this is not a unprecedented surge in growth so much as a return to the normal rate of grid expansion after decades of austerity. Even in north america, with our sprawling suburbs built on long freeway car commutes, our average EV consumes less power than our average air conditioner does over the entire year.

Admittedly optimizing for grid distribution means charging overnight though, when all the infrastructure that feed those hungry air conditioners during the day is siting around with unused capacity, so the optimal mix will depend on whether upgrading distribution infrastructure is more expensive than upgrading grid storage infrastructure and nighttime generating capacity.

Precisely, their a gas company. Helping the planet means just turning everything off and never turning it on again, so you know the only green promise they want to keep is the green in their share price.

No shit, in a fossilized economy everything emits carbon, and low co2 new steel production is still in its infancy. Nevertheless it emits far, far less carbon than running a natural gas plant for the same power, and as the article points out, can and is continually reused forever with no new carbon emissions beyond that of the enegy used to transport the material and power the arc furnace.

The startup cost in carbon just means there is a delay in between when a turbine is built, and when it is produceing zero carbon energy. Studies show that even the most steel intensive offshore turbines repay this debt in under a year, and again, this is why we need to be getting as much wind energy online as soon as possible.

If going to a smaller turbine design means that you save four months worth of startup carbon, but means a wind farm only captures two thirds as much wind energy over its three hundred month design lifespan then going with the smaller design will have effectively cost nearly a hundred months worth of output to save four. While that two thirds number is going to very by project constraints, the reduction doesn’t need to be very large to work out to a net carbon savings, even if you couldn’t recycle steel at all.

As things like available project land, projected ongoing maintenance budget, and most often capital availabllity ultimately constrain a given projects size and net generating capacity, it makes sense to go for the larger turbines that more efficiently make use of these limited resources, instead of the practically unlimited in this context supply of steel.

In short, optimizing for steel use is effectively producing kilotons of ongoing co2 emissions to save tons of co2 once.

I mean they’re using an effectively off the shelf reactor which if outputted as promised would fatally irradiate anyone in the area, so i’m not sure the’re really set up to do much beyond separation of fools and money.

I mean they did go green. An average of ten percent growth in earnings per year over the last five years, seems like things were pretty green over there to me. I mean it’s a gas company, what other kind of green could they have been talking about?

Precisely, good stable wind blowing when we need power is not something we have an unlimited amount of, like times we can recycle steel. The steel in todays wind turbine is the steel in a thousand years from now’s turbine, where as the co2 that got pumped into the atmosphere because that turbine wasn’t enough is also the co2 killing people in a thousand years. The higher you get a turbine above the ground, the less turbulence it will see, and the more constantly it will be in the right range to generate power.

The more you can count on it, the less battery and hydro you need to cover when the winds not blowing, and thusly the less space and turbines you need.

As for labor efficiency, i’ve always though of the goal of solarpunk to be a world where we’ve settled out into a way of life that can be maintained long term and where people are free to do what they want and help out where they can instead of worrying about if they’ll earn enough from the megacorp to have heat and food next month.

While you still need someone to do dangerous and unpleasant things like climbing turbines, ideally you’re only asking as few people as possible to do so as you need.

And given that even in that future people will still be paying the price in lives for the GHGs we emit today, we owe it to them and possibly us if we live long enough to shrink the river of co2 we’re putting out as fast as we can, as every fossil plant that is replaced by clean energy today is decades of that’s plants cost gone.

They use steel more effectively, but use other resources like wind, land, labor, and electronics less effectively, and all of which are harder to recycle. It also didn’t mention household or village scale as much as was still comparing very large grid scale systems, which is important as once you get much smaller than that energy efficiency falls off a cliff.

Finally, while a detailed look into a specific resource can be very interesting, it’s important to take a holistic look at how energy sources compare and not just evaluate on one figure.

Ultimately, as our ability to manufacture steel is not currently a major constraint to decarbonization, more important limitations like installation and maintenance costs are going to be dominant at least for the next few decades. Similarly as the low hanging fruit like electricity generation make up less and less of our collective GHG emissions, we’ll have more resources like plentiful wind energy to throw at problems like decarbonizing steel, as its still a problem will have to solve sooner or later.

The problem is that people are conditioned to blame the president for the current cost of gas, and that gas should always cost the same. If not, then inflation is too high, never mind that keeping the cost the same means the real cost is falling. Or that right now gas costs two cents lower than it did in 2013 pre inflation.

Amaricans would absolutely blame the current government for gas going from $3.52 a gallon to the sill subsidized to an extent EU average $7.31 a gallon. Throw in the more realistic costs of actually cleaning up said co2 with direct air carbon capture at a $100 a ton and you get $8.20 a gallon, which is actually nowhere remotely near as bad as I expected it to be, though that would require someone to actually do carbon capture at scale. Electricity of course beats the pants off of all of the above at an US average cost of about $1.90 per gallon equivalent.

You also have the inflationary effects of the US being very dependent on trucks for most goods transport, due in no small part to rail companies entering a state of ‘managed decline’ and looting said infrastructure for scrap at a time where everyone from China and India to Ethiopia and North Korea were electrifying, and thusly being stuck with trains that cost nearly twice as much to run as electric lines run by an industry of managers who think that their customers are going to replace a single train with gravel with several thousand trucks any day now so might as well sell the tracks off.

That being said, a high vehicle registration tax on gas and diesel vehicles combined with an effectively free one on new energy vehicles seems to have demonstrated more of an effect, though admittedly places that have tried that have also tended to have a far less subsidized cost of fuel in the first place so it may only have an potent effect in combination.

Functionally the US also needs an equivalent to or allow import of the French Ami and similar such cheap city cars as well as Canadian style legislation demanding that landlords must install L2 chargers if asked if it wants for cars to still be an option for poor rural people, which unfortunately given the need to cut carbon now and the demonstrated ability of US cities to take a decade and millions of dollars to put in a bus lane it probably does. City dewellers will of course just use bikes if they can get their city to stop wasting money on far more expensive to maintain per person-mile car lanes.

All in all this problem needs a lot of complex legislation to solve, but I sopose the benefit of WAITING THIRTY FUCKING YEARS AFTER IT DECIDED THAT CONTINUED EMMISIONS WERE A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THE VERY EXSISTANCE OF THE NATION is that most of the possibilities have already been tried before so you can pick what works and skip what doesn’t.

Especially since the raw materials for grid scale storage are almost all mined in Australia, mass packaged into batteriy cells in China, then bought back. Australia could absolutely move up the value chain on these if it wanted to and the government put investment into it, but that would require the best nation in the world for solar to stop trying to subsidize fossil fuels at every opportunity.

China even gives you a clear step by step example of how to do it. Just take the billions they are trying to make contingent on nuclear and instead use it to provide a minimum order guarantee for LFP and Sodium Ion cells.

If you realy wanted to commit, you could join up with Chile and Argentina, all agree to build battery plants, then raise export tariffs on the raw stuff and become OPEC but with three quarters of the worlds battery production instead.

It is absolutely possible for the largest supplier of lithium in the world to package it into battery cells instead of just selling it raw, and all that it would take is the smallest bit of future planning and not outright bowing down to a dead end industry, which of course means that it’s never going to happen and the government will continue to prop up coal, petrol, and gas while its citizens continue to buy back actually useful energy infrastructure from China.

Note, since the 80s the vast, vast majority of piston driven aircraft engines have been able to operate on unleaded fuel. We know this because for decades GA pilots have been filling out the paperwork for an experimental fuel variance and then running these engines unmodified on the cheaper unleaded they got from the gas station down the street without any apparent issue or rise in engine maintenance/failures among pilots that do this. The main hurdles being the necessary and not insignificant paperwork as well as concern over insurance rates.

From my understanding there was a problem with one series of engine in the seventies that was suspected to be due to unleaded fuel among the more modern product line of a major manufacturer, and while the engine was modified to fix it neither Lycoming nor Continental, the two primary piston engine manufacturers who make up the vast majority of the market, saw significant pressure to drop the official recommendation for unleaded until relatively recently.

Since the US finally started to get serious about phasing out leaded avgas in the 2010s, and the aditude of its been fine so far so why risk any change has run up against said pressure, both have to my knowledge dropped the requirement retroactively with no modification necessary for the majority of their historical and current product line.

You might need to re-engine or more likely just get an exemption for flying history aircraft, but the benefit to the hundreds of thousands that live near GA airports in terms of reduced damage to children’s nervous systems far outweighs the nebulous cost of switching the default form of avgas.

The biggest concern in this place is the effect on collapsing the aquifer like has happened across the border in Pakistan. Overuse of water rights is difficult to enforce, but at least farmers had to trade one valuable liquid for another. By contrast with solar your only cost is upfront, and as such farmers are effectively penalized for turning off the pumps and not taking all they can to an even greater extent.

Now obviously it’s better to not be burning diesel and this was still a problem before electrifying, but it’s still seems bittersweet in this case.

Really? Doesn’t seem that wild to me that a place where cartels have openly claimed responsibility for assassinating politicians that threaten the status quo might see a large pushback against a change to the status quo.

You know what you must do. Down with all landlords./s

More seriously, I will note that multigenerational households are only looked down upon when the poors do it, if the rich do it than it’s just a family manor.

I mean a lot of Amarican infrastructure was built by the new deal with a hundred year lifespan, so it’s not exactly a surprise that now a hundred years after the new deal there is a lot of Amarican infrastructure that needs to be replaced.

Important to note that their stuff is not only things like remaining photos of dead parents and relatives, but also medications and the documents required to get a job, both of which have to be replaced at taxpayer expense. But hey, we offered them a place in the five and a half year long wait list they were already on, so the government really is doing all it can.