• 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle





  • I bought a dashcam for my vehicle, and choose to use it to protect myself from false accusations.

    Body cams should be like dash cams, something used by employees to exonerate the person wearing them.

    I’m not a LEO, and I can respect that maybe it’s not this simple… but I would expect “honest” cops to voluntarily wear one to protect themselves from false accusations of abuse of power.

    But when it crosses over from protecting the employee to big brother watching over you that’s the line.

    Body cams used to protect the wearer - Good Body cams used to punish the wearer - Bad


  • Yea basically the main contamination issue is that radioactive substances were spread around. Contamination of the surrounding area isn’t the only issue we have to deal with, nor is it the most serious, but it is generally is the most costly remediate.

    The contamination problem is caused by radioactive matter spewed into the air and settling on the trees, buildings, ground etc… in the surrounding area.

    The main remediation strategy is to remove everything in the surrounding area including the top ~3 ft or so of soil of the and haul it off to an underground landfill to slowly decay for at least a few hundred years safely separated from humans.



  • Sandford Fleming (the guy who invented time zones) actually made it easier.

    Before timezones, every town had their own clock that defined the time for their town and was loosely set such that “noon is when the sun is at its highest point in the sky.” Which couldn’t be measured all that accurately.

    If it wasn’t for Fleming, we’d be dealing with every city or town having a separate time zone.


  • Don’t take my word for it. Look up the numbers for yourself and do the math.

    Search for “National GHG inventory {your country}”.

    You find a report listing (among a bunch of other things) the amount of electricity generated each year by each method, and the emissions from each. Look up the total TWh of electricity produced by fossil fuels.

    Then look at the total TWh from renewables, and rate it has been growing Y-o-Y and extrapolate until it reaches the number needed to eliminate fossil fuels.

    You’ll find it will take decades to build enough renewable capacity to replace fossil fuel based electricity generation.

    And that’s before you realize that only about 25% of fossil fuel combustion goes to electricity generation. As we start switching cars, homes, industries to electric we’re going to need 2x-3x more electricity generation.

    Yes it takes a long time to bring on a new nuclear plant, roughly 7-9 years. If it was remotely realistic that we could build enough renewable power generation in that time to replace all fossil fuel generation then I’d agree we don’t need nuclear. But we’re not anywhere close to that.

    It’s also helpful to note too just how much power a nuclear reactor generates. I live in Canada, our second smallest nuclear power plant in Pickering, generates almost 5 times more electricity annually than all of Canada’s solar farms combined. It will take 1000s or solar and wind farms covering and area larger than all of our major cities combined to replace fossil fuels…

    …or about 7 nuclear power stations the same size as Pickering.


  • Yes and no. Renewables are now cheaper than other forms of energy but cost isn’t the only issue.

    There are practical limits on how many renewables projects we can build and integrate at a time. We’re not even remotely close to building them fast enough to save anything. We can’t even build them fast enough to keep up with the ever increasing demand energy.

    Nuclear is expensive as fuck but we need to be building more of it as well as renewables because we can’t build enough renewables fast enough to avert the catastrophe, and that’s about the only other tech we have that can generate energy in the massive quantities needed without significant greenhouse gas emissions.