human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
POSTED BY: 1kiki
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 19:38
VIEWED: 60750
PAGE 38 of 111
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Did anybody today tell Signym and 6ix they are worthless? For two valueless assholes, they certainly have as high an opinion about themselves as Trump and Putin have about themselves.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hahaha!!!
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake
Awwwwwwwww...
Somebody sounds salty that they've lost.
--------------------------------------------------
Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I don't see what SECOND's so mad about.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Did anybody today tell Signym and 6ix they are worthless? For two valueless assholes, they certainly have as high an opinion about themselves as Trump and Putin have about themselves.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hahaha!!!
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake
Awwwwwwwww...
Somebody sounds salty that they've lost.
--------------------------------------------------
Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
I even agreed with him that we should be looking at ways to capture CO2 from the air ... or at least, from flue gases. My only caveat is that since that takes energy, the only way that makes sense is uing SOLAR energy or possibly nuclear energy, since solar (and nuclear) energy are the only potentially carbon -free sources of energy for this capture process.
And since plants already use solar energy to capture CO2 from the air.... well, it just seems like one place to start. But certainly not the only one.
But jeez... SECOND can't take "yes" for an answer?
I'm beginning to think you're right, SIX. I think SECOND is REAVREBOT.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You and 6ix might be saying "yes", but in reality, you are actually capable of doing nothing which makes you no different than someone saying any variation of the following: "No! Never! Not gonna happen! Climate change is a Chinese Hoax! If the new energy sources are not cheaper than the old ones, I refuse to buy them! Wind turbines cause cancer! Green energy makes electricity less reliable! Electric cars are charged by coal-burning power plants! Lithium is unavailable in quantities needed to convert all cars to electric vehicles!" I think I could write thousands of words, either half-truths or complete lies, justifying doing nothing because I have been listening to Trumptards all my life, even before they knew Trump and Putin, the Russian variant for people who would be Trumptards if born in America, existed.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I don't see what SECOND's so mad about.
I even agreed with him that we should be looking at ways to capture CO2 from the air ... or at least, from flue gases. My only caveat is that since that takes energy, the only way that makes sense is uing SOLAR energy or possibly nuclear energy, since solar (and nuclear) energy are the only potentially carbon -free sources of energy for this capture process.
And since plants already use solar energy to capture CO2 from the air.... well, it just seems like one place to start. But certainly not the only one.
But jeez... SECOND can't take "yes" for an answer?
I'm beginning to think you're right, SIX. I think SECOND is REAVREBOT.
The Netherlands will pull out of the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), which has come under fire for protecting investments in the oil and gas sector, the country’s energy ministry said on Wednesday (19 October).
In force since 1998, the treaty, which has more than 50 signatories including the European Union, allows investors to sue governments over policies that jeopardise their investments.
But in recent years it has been used by fossil fuel and renewable energy companies to sue governments for regulatory changes that threaten returns on specific investments.
In announcing the decision, Dutch Minister for Climate and Energy Policy Rob Jetten told parliament that the treaty is not in line with the Paris climate accord and that efforts to re-negotiate it have been unsuccessful.
“The mandate for the European Commission was to bring the ECT in line with the Paris climate agreement. Despite many of the modernisations that are now in the negotiation outcome, we do not see how the ECT has been sufficiently aligned with the Paris Agreement,” Jetten told the Dutch parliament on Tuesday.
A government spokesperson later confirmed the move on Wednesday, saying the lack of guarantees on climate in the revamped treaty was the main motive for the decision to leave.
“For that reason, the Netherlands, preferably with the entire EU, will leave the ECT. When the Netherlands will officially leave is still to be determined,” the spokesperson said.
Italy withdrew from the treaty in 2016 and Spain announced its intention to pull out last week. In September, Poland initiated formal proceedings to withdraw as well.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/netherlands-follows-spain
-in-quitting-energy-charter-treaty/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:I don't see what SECOND's so mad about.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Did anybody today tell Signym and 6ix they are worthless? For two valueless assholes, they certainly have as high an opinion about themselves as Trump and Putin have about themselves.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hahaha!!!
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake
Awwwwwwwww...
Somebody sounds salty that they've lost.
--------------------------------------------------
Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
I even agreed with him that we should be looking at ways to capture CO2 from the air ... or at least, from flue gases. My only caveat is that since that takes energy, the only way that makes sense is uing SOLAR energy or possibly nuclear energy, since solar (and nuclear) energy are the only potentially carbon -free sources of energy for this capture process.
And since plants already use solar energy to capture CO2 from the air.... well, it just seems like one place to start. But certainly not the only one.
But jeez... SECOND can't take "yes" for an answer?
I'm beginning to think you're right, SIX. I think SECOND is REAVREBOT.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake
Yup.
He's peddling scams and thinking he's saving the world.
Meanwhile, Reaverfan's got himself an electric pickup truck that can't haul anything.
Good news for him is that once he realizes this and admits it to himself, there should be no shortage of overpaid soy-boy college graduates that won't actually use that bed to haul anything that he should be able to con into buying it from him without losing too much money. He might have to sell it out of state though. I can't imagine many men in Texas want to drive around a glorified Power Wheels toy.
I'll bet Reaverfan looks real cute in it while wearing his cowboy hat and matching boots in his Lightning. He should find himself some tumbleweed to throw in the bed so it doesn't look so sad and useless. Just one or two of them though. If he puts 3 in the back he's pushing almost 50lbs and he'll be recharging that truck up every 750 feet.
--------------------------------------------------
Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Big boom in carbon capture projects . . . according to a new report from think tank Global CCS Institute, which advocates for carbon capture and storage (CCS).
https://status22.globalccsinstitute.com/
That includes projects to scrub CO2 out of smokestack emissions from a veritable pantheon of the most notorious pollution sources: power plants, natural gas processing plants, oil refineries, hydrogen producers, cement and steel factories, and petrochemical and synthetic fertilizer manufacturers.
Right now, there are only 30 CCS facilities operating and 11 under construction. But 153 more carbon capture and storage projects are in development, according to the Global CCS Institute. Of the 196 projects in the pipeline globally, 61 new projects got started in 2022 alone.
Looking at the report’s list of CCS facilities either operating or in the works in 2022, The Verge found that a majority of projects are tangled up with oil and gas. Roughly 60 percent of the projects are either backed by fossil fuel companies and / or aim to capture emissions from fossil fuel power plants, petrochemical facilities, and fossil fuel-adjacent industries like industrial fertilizer and hydrogen production that are major gas consumers. And 30 of the facilities already use or plan to use the captured carbon for a process called enhanced oil recovery, in which fossil fuel companies shoot the CO2 into the ground to push up hard-to-reach oil.
With those numbers, it’s no wonder that some environmental groups are skeptical of carbon capture as a climate fix. Many are worried that the technology will only deepen economies’ reliance on fossil fuels rather than help to usher in an age of cleaner energy sources. In the US, that includes Food & Water Watch, The Indigenous Environmental Network, and Friends of the Earth.
There are several reasons why groups like these say carbon capture tech isn’t a cure-all for fossil fuels. For starters, it doesn’t typically capture 100 percent of the CO2 a pollution source like an industrial plant generates. For instance, a plan to build a carbon capture facility at Louisiana’s biggest source of industrial greenhouse gas emissions, an ammonia plant, is supposed to capture 2 million metric tons of CO2 annually when complete — even though the plant produced 10 million metric tons of the greenhouse gas in a single year.
More at https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/18/23410755/global-boom-carbon-captur
e-storage-ccs-pipeline-oil-gas-industry
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I am going out to lunch with my frienemy from the industry. He asked if I was gonna drive us there in "The Corporation Jet", meaning my pickup. He is exactly right which is why I go to lunch with him. I love my Lightning as a status symbol. It actually has a trailer hitch and Ford claims it can tow 7,000 pounds but I never tried.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Yup.
He's peddling scams and thinking he's saving the world.
Meanwhile, Reaverfan's got himself an electric pickup truck that can't haul anything.
Good news for him is that once he realizes this and admits it to himself, there should be no shortage of overpaid soy-boy college graduates that won't actually use that bed to haul anything that he should be able to con into buying it from him without losing too much money. He might have to sell it out of state though. I can't imagine many men in Texas want to drive around a glorified Power Wheels toy.
I'll bet Reaverfan looks real cute in it while wearing his cowboy hat and matching boots in his Lightning. He should find himself some tumbleweed to throw in the bed so it doesn't look so sad and useless. Just one or two of them though. If he puts 3 in the back he's pushing almost 50lbs and he'll be recharging that truck up every 750 feet.
https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/f150-lightning/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:I am going out to lunch with my frienemy from the industry. He asked if I was gonna drive us there in "The Corporation Jet", meaning my pickup. He is exactly right which is why I go to lunch with him. I love my Lightning as a status symbol. It actually has a trailer hitch and Ford claims it can tow 7,000 pounds but I never tried.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Yup.
He's peddling scams and thinking he's saving the world.
Meanwhile, Reaverfan's got himself an electric pickup truck that can't haul anything.
Good news for him is that once he realizes this and admits it to himself, there should be no shortage of overpaid soy-boy college graduates that won't actually use that bed to haul anything that he should be able to con into buying it from him without losing too much money. He might have to sell it out of state though. I can't imagine many men in Texas want to drive around a glorified Power Wheels toy.
I'll bet Reaverfan looks real cute in it while wearing his cowboy hat and matching boots in his Lightning. He should find himself some tumbleweed to throw in the bed so it doesn't look so sad and useless. Just one or two of them though. If he puts 3 in the back he's pushing almost 50lbs and he'll be recharging that truck up every 750 feet.
https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/f150-lightning/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
The only thing believable from the above paragraph is that you're stupid enough to own a Ford Lightning and you love smelling your own farts when you drive it.
You don't have friends, let alone frienemies. You don't own a business. And Ford is certainly lying to you about being able to tow 7,000lbs.
Go ahead and try it and see if you can make it to the next charging station before you're calling AAA for a tow.
--------------------------------------------------
Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:One of the reasons why I promote carbon dioxide capture .. by plants.
Originally posted by second:
Big boom in carbon capture projects . . . according to a new report from think tank Global CCS Institute, which advocates for carbon capture and storage (CCS).
https://status22.globalccsinstitute.com/
That includes projects to scrub CO2 out of smokestack emissions from a veritable pantheon of the most notorious pollution sources: power plants, natural gas processing plants, oil refineries, hydrogen producers, cement and steel factories, and petrochemical and synthetic fertilizer manufacturers.
Right now, there are only 30 CCS facilities operating and 11 under construction. But 153 more carbon capture and storage projects are in development, according to the Global CCS Institute. Of the 196 projects in the pipeline globally, 61 new projects got started in 2022 alone.
Looking at the report’s list of CCS facilities either operating or in the works in 2022, The Verge found that a majority of projects are tangled up with oil and gas. Roughly 60 percent of the projects are either backed by fossil fuel companies and / or aim to capture emissions from fossil fuel power plants, petrochemical facilities, and fossil fuel-adjacent industries like industrial fertilizer and hydrogen production that are major gas consumers. And 30 of the facilities already use or plan to use the captured carbon for a process called enhanced oil recovery, in which fossil fuel companies shoot the CO2 into the ground to push up hard-to-reach oil.
With those numbers, it’s no wonder that some environmental groups are skeptical of carbon capture as a climate fix. Many are worried that the technology will only deepen economies’ reliance on fossil fuels rather than help to usher in an age of cleaner energy sources. In the US, that includes Food & Water Watch, The Indigenous Environmental Network, and Friends of the Earth.
There are several reasons why groups like these say carbon capture tech isn’t a cure-all for fossil fuels. For starters, it doesn’t typically capture 100 percent of the CO2 a pollution source like an industrial plant generates. For instance, a plan to build a carbon capture facility at Louisiana’s biggest source of industrial greenhouse gas emissions, an ammonia plant, is supposed to capture 2 million metric tons of CO2 annually when complete — even though the plant produced 10 million metric tons of the greenhouse gas in a single year.
More at https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/18/23410755/global-boom-carbon-captur
e-storage-ccs-pipeline-oil-gas-industry
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That won't work as well as you imagine because climate change releases the greenhouse gases stored by plants.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
One of the reasons why I promote carbon dioxide capture .. by plants.
The first example is the Amazon Rain Forest burns down, releasing greenhouse gases. The Amazon is estimated to contain about 123 billion tons of carbon above and below ground, and is one of Earth's most important terrestrial carbon reserves.
https://research.noaa.gov/article/ArtMID/587/ArticleID/2778/Deforestat
ion-warming-flip-part-of-Amazon-forest-from-carbon-sink-to-source
The second example is climate change releases the stored carbon in permafrost in the form of methane produced by decayed plants. There's a huge amount of carbon stored in permafrost — an estimated 1,500 gigatons, or twice as much as the atmosphere contains. This carbon is the remnant of plants and other organic matter that didn't fully decompose in the frozen soils over thousands of years.
https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/permafrost
Engineers have started the process of releasing carbon into the air (by designing chainsaws and logging trucks for the Amazon rain forest and designing drilling equipment for natural gas) because it is very profitable to sell these tools to people who are unwise, such as Jair Bolsonaro, President of Brazil and Darren Woods, CEO of ExxonMobile. The release of carbon into the atmosphere will just keep on increasing unless others kick the hell out of those engineers to stop them from doing that. There is no possibility that Bolsonaro or Woods can understand that they should stop releasing carbon. These guys have a long record of NOT understanding what they are doing. They aren't changing their ways.
Signym, there is no way trillions of green plants can take carbon out of the atmosphere as fast as a few people (Bolsonaro or Woods) are adding carbon. But there are people who could stop Bolsonaro or Woods.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME