Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Environment The Environment

04-12-2016 , 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet

And people talk about how this pollution or that will have an effect for decades or centuries, but the extinctions are permanent effects.
Yes but at the same time as extinctions, more people have been lifted out of poverty than ever before.

Better keep up with the extinctions.
04-12-2016 , 07:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Money2Burn
Yeah, I think something like 40% of US methane emissions come from decomposing food. I assume basically all that could be captured and used for energy.
Enteric Fermentation is basically cow digestion.



Another source ( https://donatedontdump.net/2014/07/0...junemy-pantig/ ) attributes 23% of US methane emissions to food waste, with beef accounting for most of that at 16% of the total.

I think a lot can be recaptured and certainly a lot less can be wasted. The amount of waste is basically insane.

61-86% of energy

30-40% of food
04-14-2016 , 10:34 PM
Would like to see the full video, Summary of Alex Epstein speaking to the senate:

04-15-2016 , 02:21 PM
Lol at philosopher.
04-15-2016 , 02:59 PM
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2015/batt...d-parity-33238



Germany hit grid parity with solar in 2011 and PV + battery storage is almost at parity now. Parity in the US is behind in most places because power is cheaper, and it is quite a bit more varied as solar resources and power costs vary widely. But, thanks to modest investments in terms of the size of the industries involved, renewables + storage parity will spreading to more an more locations.

At this point I don't really feel the need at all to argue for it because it's unstoppable. As soon as I clear my slate a little bit, I'm going to push to go into this. It will probably take 5+ years for the market to be more than a niche here, but that's fine. There's less competition and a bigger barrier to entry as it's more complicated.
04-15-2016 , 08:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
Lol at philosopher.
Would you be willing to explain where you think he's wrong?
04-15-2016 , 09:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Enteric Fermentation is basically cow digestion.



Another source ( https://donatedontdump.net/2014/07/0...junemy-pantig/ ) attributes 23% of US methane emissions to food waste, with beef accounting for most of that at 16% of the total.

I think a lot can be recaptured and certainly a lot less can be wasted. The amount of waste is basically insane.

61-86% of energy



30-40% of food
I interned here one summer in law school. Reducing food waste was a high priority while I was there.
04-15-2016 , 09:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Money2Burn
I interned here one summer in law school. Reducing food waste was a high priority while I was there.
I'm kind of a wuss about expiration dates, but I try to let as little food spoil as I can. I wouldn't say I'm that successful, but I don't do much of the shopping.
04-15-2016 , 09:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shifty86
Would you be willing to explain where you think he's wrong?
Why don't you explain his point using your words - instead of asking everyone to argue against a yootoobe?
04-15-2016 , 09:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
Why don't you explain his point using your words - instead of asking everyone to argue against a yootoobe?
Basically what I've been doing since I've entered this thread. Thanks though.
04-15-2016 , 10:03 PM
Dude you posted a yootoobe then complained because someone didn't respond with an essay.
04-15-2016 , 10:45 PM
Where did I complain? I posted a video about a person and subject we've disused ITT. This person's view doesn't seem to be taken seriously ITT because he's a philosopher. Rather then basing opinions on someone's credentials I'd like to hear an argument from someone.
04-16-2016 , 12:39 AM
His entire argument is a stupid logical fallacy; slippery slope and/or false dichotomy ad nauseam. How did I do? Only watched 2:30 fwiw.
04-16-2016 , 12:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shifty86
I'd like to hear an argument from someone.
You first.
04-16-2016 , 05:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shifty86
Where did I complain? I posted a video about a person and subject we've disused ITT. This person's view doesn't seem to be taken seriously ITT because he's a philosopher. .
I was loling at the claim he is a philosopher.
04-16-2016 , 07:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
I'm kind of a wuss about expiration dates, but I try to let as little food spoil as I can. I wouldn't say I'm that successful, but I don't do much of the shopping.
I'm most cases they are virtually meaningless, but man it terrifies me to take a sip out of a milk carton that's a day past. At the time we were trying to get federal legislation passed that required most dates to be hidden from view.
04-16-2016 , 02:30 PM
I've got some Viagra with a 2003 expiration date that still works like a charm.
04-16-2016 , 02:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Money2Burn
I'm most cases they are virtually meaningless, but man it terrifies me to take a sip out of a milk carton that's a day past. At the time we were trying to get federal legislation passed that required most dates to be hidden from view.
I trust my nose on milk, though sometimes it starts to smell before the date.

But, we've mostly switched to almond milk anyway and it keeps longer.
04-16-2016 , 08:34 PM
Gotta pour the milk into a glass before you smell it. The milk that dries on the rim can make it smell prematurely
04-16-2016 , 11:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Regret$
His entire argument is a stupid logical fallacy; slippery slope and/or false dichotomy ad nauseam. How did I do? Only watched 2:30 fwiw.
Would expect nothing less after your wall of text comparing humans to elk and elephants and that we should go back to pre transportation 1700's where the avg life ended at 30, because some species are going extinct.
04-17-2016 , 09:17 AM
So basically your mad I actually made points. Meanwhile you just posted some philosopher that is trying to find the magic balance between human interests and total world destruction. Make a point man.

Last edited by Regret$; 04-17-2016 at 09:28 AM.
04-17-2016 , 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis Cyphre
You first.
I'm still waiting for you to provide a peer reviewed study that was close to predicting run away temperature change.
04-17-2016 , 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Regret$
So basically your mad I actually made points. Meanwhile you just posted some philosopher that is trying to find the magic balance between human interests and total world destruction. Make a point man.
I'm not mad about anything. You posted a bunch of non-sense with no facts or evidence to back it up. Please show me why we are on the path to world destruction. Keep in mind life expectancy is at an all time high and climate related deaths are at all time low's.
04-17-2016 , 12:44 PM
You don't really think I am going I am going to waste my time by looking for a study so that I then can into nitpicky semantics squabble with, do you? As I said that's a cute debate tactic you are using. Just dump youtube and blog links and let others refute them instead of ever making a point yourself that you'd have to defend. No, thanks.
04-17-2016 , 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shifty86
I'm not mad about anything. You posted a bunch of non-sense with no facts or evidence to back it up. Please show me why we are on the path to world destruction. Keep in mind life expectancy is at an all time high and climate related deaths are at all time low's.
Correlation/Causation

      
m