strainer

11 ms·

61.
by strainer 5y ago
If someone introduced microplastics to your house while you had no part in it - so you find yourself eating and breathing little bits of hydrocarbon chemicals which none of your ancestors in natural history have ever ingested. No mites can
62.
by strainer 5y ago
I like your point about moving upwind, but think it rather relies on conservation of momentum as that insists the wheels must result in thrust in the opposite direction to the props thrust in order to change the momentum of the earth as muc
63.
by strainer 7y ago
You make no direct connections with the article, open with an absolute statement "100% bullshit" which can almost never be justified, and shortly describe yourself cursing at the author. The links you added do not amount any sort
64.
by strainer 7y ago
I'm not suggesting they could be expected to last beyond their design. Just when this is the state of blades being built in unprecedented number today, a twelve year old review of much smaller ones made 35 years ago could easily be lar
65.
by strainer 7y ago
That seems like a relatively old study now. I think blade design and manufacture has developed rapidly. Here is a short piece on the testing of much larger modern blades designed to last at least 25 years offshore [1] [1] https:/&#x2F
66.
by strainer 7y ago
Here you complained that farmers were not paying for certification, because you had not checked the facts. Your gov is involved because it has authority to enforce accuracy of labeling. Organic standards are "safety-related", no
67.
by strainer 7y ago
That acceleration graph starts at 1G and goes up to 4.5 Freefall is 0G. The G force we feel is the difference between gravitational acceleration and our motion towards the center of gravity, so most of our lives we experience 1G. The compli
68.
by strainer 7y ago
I don't believe its a big problem to either professional or amateur astronomy, but rather a publicity controversy acting on fears that night skies will be visibly tainted. The satellites are not visible to naked eyes, 240 have already
69.
by strainer 7y ago
Its a quite small influence, about 50 milliWatts per square meter iirc. Overall we are well insulated from heat circulating inside the Earth (by miles of rock) while hundreds of watts per square meter enters the atmosphere from solar radiat
70.
by strainer 7y ago
Here is an atmospheric treatment of the subject by indie history buff channel: History Time - "How Doggerland Sank Beneath The Waves (500,000-4000 BC)" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DECwfQQqRzo
71.
by strainer 7y ago
The investment analysis firm Lazards publishes detailed reports on LCOE every year. These are current costs per MWh without subsidies [1]: Nuclear : $118 to 192 Solar with storage : $102 - 139 Gas : $44 -
72.
by strainer 7y ago
My prophecy that solar and renewables will continue to scale is based on their performance to date which is not so much prophecy as standard extrapolation. Your proclaimed "serious environmental, regulatory, or economic challenges &qu
73.
by strainer 7y ago
The nuclear fleets peak was decades ago when environmental and safety regulation was more permissive than it was today, and the long term problems and threats were not as well known. Even a handful of articles about planning applications be
74.
by strainer 7y ago
This term "astronomical" applies no more to the scale of renewables needing built than it would nuclear. The existence of a somewhat related pdf doesn't make the prophecy realistic, that big challenges are more likely to sho
75.
by strainer 7y ago
Even without CCS fossil can be switched to carbon neutral biomass and syn-gas for that occasional demand which is not economic to meet with oversupplied renewables, hydro and battery storage. Nuclear promotion desperately ignores that there
76.
by strainer 7y ago
They do. It is not wise to infer controversial information from ambiguous journalistic language. I typed "us organic certification cost" into google, and it helpfully quoted this at the top of the page [1] : > Certification cos
77.
by strainer 7y ago
Its not bullshit in the UK at least. Here is a mainstream article which cites government testing [1] Quote : "A Maximum Residue Level (MRL) for pesticides in foods is set by law and is below the safety level. In the most recent study,
78.
by strainer 7y ago
A very valid comment but I think it should be seen in addition to the issue of PFAs from manufacture and mil/industrial uses which are polluting the wider environment and drinking water to a significant but unclear extent. I think it i
79.
by strainer 7y ago
Well, in the 90s before they had lots of grades, the instructions where to never put anything on it, just wash and tumble dry. It has a slightly coarse texture like it has microhairs. It can bead water but can also get wet, but when it is w
80.
by strainer 7y ago
Unless you really saturate cotton in wax/oil so it has no breath-ability, it only holds up against showers. It becomes sodden and little use in persistent rain. PU coated polyester rainwear can perform on a different level in persisten
81.
by strainer 7y ago
Gore-tex (at least the heavy 'classic' kind) doesn't have any refreshable coating. Its an inner layer of moisture wicking mesh, stuck to a thin rubbery ptfe membrane of some sort and an outer very abrasion resistant layer whi
82.
by strainer 7y ago
Here is more detailed report on this problem in Europe [1] They seem to indicate levels many times higher are present in Europe than the EPAs suggested limited of 70 PPT. Although that limit also seems to be commonly exceeded in US. It is c
83.
by strainer 7y ago
I'm not convinced by the long term benefit of nitrogen fertiliser synthesis. A significant boom in food production is attributable to it but also long term degradation of agricultural soils, pollution from fertiliser run off and repres
84.
by strainer 7y ago
However the reception of brand names is surely often self fulfilling like that, they don't succeed through robotic reason but through fuzzy associations. The murderers connection to the product is very direct so it seems it wont be for
85.
by strainer 7y ago
There is no good reason to expect the ¨last 5%¨ of demand will be more economically met by the next generation of nuclear plants - than by the generation of renewable tech which will be developed by the time it is already supplying the othe
86.
UK General election Ads are 'indecent, dishonest and untruthful'(bbc.co.uk)
1 points by strainer 7y ago|0 comments
87.
by strainer 7y ago
> Ground based mirrors are very large, in the 10s of meters, and those mirrors are extremely heavy, like tons. Seemingly fantastically - SpaceX is currently constructing a system designed to launch 100 tons to LEO, for as low as $35&#x2
88.
by strainer 7y ago
I didnt vote that down since I can explain - base load is a theoretical fraction of electricity demand, not a separate physical entity. Renewable supply competes for whatever anyone wishes to categorize as "base load" the same as
89.
by strainer 7y ago
I'm certain that in general you are a very coherent thinker, but in this discussion I cant make coherent sense of your criticisms : > it wouldn't be too hard to just ban fossil fuels tomorrow That sounded a "super green&qu
90.
by strainer 7y ago
> the green party spoke person repeats the argument of being net exporter of green energy in response. I think its a valid argument or caveat to the undesirable coal burning. That's a spoken debate, open to interpretation and misund

More ›