Comments Matt G has made

Prius 3G

Wait a second.  The solar panels don't charge the battery?  The website says they just run a fan to keep your car cool.  I suppose that saves a little energy from air conditioning, but it's certainly disappointing.

Oh, and it looks like there's an EV button that makes it an electric vehicle for half a mile.  But, um, wouldn't that only make any sense if you could plug it in?On Toyota becomes world's biggest automaker, Prius goes solar, and other green auto news posted 10 months, 1 week ago 6 Responses

#2

As a veggie, I'll chime in with recommendations here.  Purely vegetarian meals often leave omnivores (and me, for that matter) feeling like there's something missing - that protein their meal is normally based around.  So I encourage them to start with manufactured veggie protein before you switch completely.  My favorite is a product called Veat, although there are plenty of great products out there.

Of course, eventually you can switch to tofu or beans.  But I've heard more than one omnivore say "eeew, tofu", so it's better to start slow.On Some ideas for green resolutions that are achievable, meaningful, and maybe even novel posted 11 months ago 9 Responses

corrections about corrections

"In simple terms, a 1,300 mile trip will use a very similar amount of fuel if you go 12 knots or twice that much."

No!  You misunderstand hull design.  There is a theoretical maximum speed a ship of a given geometry can travel - this is called the "hull speed".  The only way to travel faster than this is to hydroplane (something no cargo ship will be able to do).  So what happens as you approach hull speed?  Your energy goes into making bigger waves.  In fact, a ship can be putting much more energy than required to go hull speed but not even know it.On There are simple ways to reduce cargo ship CO2 emissions right now posted 1 year, 1 month ago 5 Responses

I like the 4kW minimum

I'm afraid that once the first plug-in hybrids are on the market, we'll see a glut of "hey, look at me, I'm a plug-in hybrid too!" cars that really don't do more than get you down the street without turning on the engine.  It's already happened with regular hybrids (example: GMC Yukon Hybrid SUV - 20mpg).

By setting a hard number (and an expensive one to reach, at that), they're promoting innovation - not just marketing.On The energy tax credits in the bailout bill, part 1 posted 1 year, 1 month ago 6 Responses

cheap?

Well, cheap if you use existing roads.  BRT systems are far from cheap if you consider them as a whole.  They require far more vehicles and therefore far more drivers (which is where much of the expense comes in).  They require diesel (ok, or biodiesel - but that's another debate), tires, and far more maintenance.  Then, for it to be anything better than a bus, they need to have their own right-of-way.  In this case they use space that used to be parking (a nice trick), but in general roads are more expensive than rail.On Bus rapid transit in Paris posted 1 year, 2 months ago 2 Responses

Remove "thermal"

"Baseload solar thermal" is a mouthful.  I think "baseload solar" would be just as technically accurate but easier to remember and say.  Plus then you're really stressing the "baseload" part of the phrase.On Time to stop using the phrase 'renewable energy' posted 1 year, 4 months ago 65 Responses

It should be easy enough

to stitch one together.  Start with a list of ideas that these groups could all agree on, and get most of these groups to agree to work together on these ideas.  Add a few charismatic leaders, a catchy name, and you're done.

Building this list shouldn't be too hard.  Just make sure to only include wide truths (e.g. Coal is an enemy to mankind) and don't add any specific controversial technologies to the list (e.g. nuclear).On Progressives discover there is no coherent energy movement to take advantage of this moment posted 1 year, 4 months ago 16 Responses

It's strange to me

That people on this site would be debating this.  It's a no-brainer in terms of energy, planning for density, renewable resources, etc.  The only question I have is why Oregon and Washington aren't getting in on this action, bringing the line all the way up the coast (next step: eastward expansion!).

Way back in this thread [Jon] mentioned beefing up Amtrak tracks.  Amtrak doesn't own any tracks except on the east coast.  This is why we call the train that runs through California the StarLate (vs. StarLight) - it operates on borrowed freight track and constantly has to stop and wait for freight cars, making it typically hours late and occasionally on the order of a day late.On High-speed rail coming to California posted 1 year, 4 months ago 29 Responses

What jugs are made of

[Kate], from the picture it looks like high-density polyethylene - the same material as other milk jugs.On Another example of how carbon constraints may benefit big box retailers posted 1 year, 5 months ago 5 Responses

It's ok Homer.

Beer will always exist.  Even if I have to harvest the barley myself.

The strange thing is, beer might be cheaper without oil.  I wonder how much of beer's price is embodied in lugging glass bottles around the world.  Raw materials for brewing my own is around $0.25 a bottle (even from extract - straight from barley would be much cheaper). On Target your peak oil message to your audience posted 1 year, 6 months ago 24 Responses

What to <i>keep</i>

The only thing I can think to add is a comment numbering system, so you can respond to a massive comment thread easily.  Oh, and [Ron]'s #1 suggestion.

But please keep:

1. ability to easily get to my previous comments
   
2. list of recent comments - it helps me know where the action is
   
3. all the great anti-nuke rants

[dotcom]

/(I see this is your first comment)/  And here I thought I talked too much - Grist tells me I have over 100 comments, to your 37.

Yes, I've read the posts.  But none tell me how either Dem will get us near zero carbon.  Cap and trade will help if done right, but if introduced agressively will drive polluters to other countries.  Other than that I see a lot of "invest in clean energy" lip service.  Again, a good thing, but investing in R&D is hardly a concrete plan to solve the problem.  "Obama will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure..." (sigh)

Now I'm not saying that McCain doesn't have far worse policies in general.  I'm just saying that outlined above is a practical plan for removing most of our carbon output in a reasonable timeframe.On McCain calls for 700+ new nuclear plants costing $4 trillion posted 1 year, 6 months ago 26 Responses

We have the technology

But not many would be in favor of turning our nuclear weapons against ourselves.On Existing technology is faster and far more practical than hypothetical new inventions posted 1 year, 7 months ago 22 Responses

bison or biofuel

(imagines the next "green" fuel: Bisonal)On Are you a vegetarian? posted 1 year, 7 months ago 53 Responses

"The only way I can see change"

I was going to suggest that a carbon cap-and-trade system may price externalities into meat, and the market would reduce meat consumption.

Until I remembered all of the cattle grown in ex-rainforests, which would suddenly become much cheaper than US cows.  How are we going to deal with pricing imported products when we cap-and-trade?  Should there be some sort of estimated carbon footprint for every product?On Are you a vegetarian? posted 1 year, 7 months ago 53 Responses

It's a great time to focus on meat consumption

I wonder if those outraged over corn ethanol and our global food crisis ever stop to think about the burger they're eating.  

If it takes more than a gallon of gasoline to produce a gallon of ethanol, I wonder how much gasoline it takes to make a pound of steak.On Are you a vegetarian? posted 1 year, 7 months ago 53 Responses

Hop prices

Have been through the roof as well.  I know someone who planted hops on the south side of his house to reduce solar load in the summer - now that's a green combination of energy efficiency and helping out the beer shortage.On Climate change affects -- noooooooo! -- beer posted 1 year, 7 months ago 3 Responses

This seems like a bad idea

Yes, it could work out positively if you have enough free heat.  But in that case why not generate energy with that "zero carbon" (ha!) heat?  Think of the entropy involved with CO2 well mixed with O2 and N2 (and others), and how much energy would be involved in seperating it out.  This would only be a reasonable solution in a world where we have too much energy (not our world).  A better idea would be to use nature - for instance, grow plants that extract CO2 from the air.  Then bury these plants (or extract out the carbon first).  Yes, this still takes a lot of energy - but all of the energy required to seperate out the carbon from other gases is provided by the sun.On Potentially a long-term option for putting waste heat to use posted 1 year, 8 months ago 2 Responses

How to implement?

I suggest carbon caps to start with.  If you start funding these installations all over the country first, you'll drive down the cost of energy rather than remove coal plants.

The major problem is that of cost.  Solar is not cheap, and neither is drilling geothermal wells.  But if profit from carbon credits are used to fund financing for this, I can see it happening.On How to kill coal in 10 years posted 1 year, 9 months ago 53 Responses

Gray/Drx

I certainly hear you both.  As I commonly write, I would much rather build a completely sustainable energy supply system.  I see nuclear is a distasteful medium-term (<200 years) compromise.  But renewables aren't just not being built fast enough, we're actively losing ground - carbon emissions are rapidly increasing.  

Take this example from a 2007 DOE report (borrowed from Karen's blog).  We need to use all of our firepower to defeat that haunting blue line.  Yes, a breeder reactor is expensive.  Yes, it will take money to roll out the hundreds of nuclear power plants required to cut down that blue line.  But I'm far from convinced that a purely sustainable solution can be built quickly that can knock coal out completely at a cost less than nuclear - even with a breeder reactor.

I hope you're both right and sustainable solutions are cheaper than nukes, since that would fix all of our problems without any effort.  On Nuclear power and fossil fuels face water crises and other problems posted 1 year, 9 months ago 40 Responses

ids

Not really "burying", they're in concreate casks meant for storage and transportation (to Yucca, they hope).  And they'll be moved another 400' away once the plant is dismantled (did you read the story you linked to?).  Of course with a good nuclear energy plan we can start reusing the stuff.On Nuclear power and fossil fuels face water crises and other problems posted 1 year, 9 months ago 40 Responses

Good article

But we're missing an obvious solution.  

"coal and gas-fired power plants withdrew more than 650 million gallons of water per day from seven dry western states in 2000 -- Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming -- enough to take care of the water needs of at least 3.64 million people for a year."

Let's see, the population of just Arizona is 6.2 million.  Wouldn't it make sense to use waste heat from power generation to heat domestic water and perhaps even our homes?*  This would not only remove much of the water wasted by thermal plants, but it would also remove much of the (expensive and polluting) fuel we use for heat.  If we really set up the system right, we could dump heat to our waste water as well.

The answer is: of course it would.  This is such a good idea that hotels are installing expensive equipment and burning expensive natural gas to make their own electricity, with remarkable payback.  Imagine if our power company gave/sold us our heat instead of boiling away water with it.

* and yes, this would work for geothermal or solar thermal as wellOn Nuclear power and fossil fuels face water crises and other problems posted 1 year, 9 months ago 40 Responses

Our goal

Is to get rid of coal - something that is far worse for our environment from the mine to the emissions (including radioactive emissions) to global warming.  If you can convince the world to pay for a switch to solar power* then you will be my hero.  Until then, nuclear is our cleanest large-scale option.

* assuming you can find solar made from tomato-canning-grade materialsOn Severe drought in the Southeast impacts nuclear power production posted 1 year, 10 months ago 38 Responses

Gray

1. Lifespan.  It's a bit odd to try and convince us that nuke plants only last 40 years, considering we haven't built one in over 30.

2. Re: "double or triple" the $/KW cost for solar.  Let's assume the best case:  Solar with sun tracking.  At most you'll get an average of about 60% of the rated power throughout a sunny day (since when the sun is anywhere but overhead you're filtering the light through a long distance of atmosphere).  Cut that in half due to less-than-sunny days.  Cut that in half again because the sun isn't available for half the day.  Where are we at? 15%. So that's 6.7x the cost per KW, without even looking at lifecycle.

We could always

add the distinction back, if desired.

Lime collar jobs v. Teal collar jobs.On The latest eco-buzzword posted 1 year, 10 months ago 17 Responses

Electric cars

[amarct] Although gas power vs. electricity is more or less an even swap right now in terms of carbon, at least with electric power we will have options for clean power sources.  There is no such option by staying with gasoline.  Using plug-in hybrid cars gives us a great tool to make this transition - they are fuel efficient, and can use electricity.On The Extreme (plug-in) Hybrid: no breakthrough needed! posted 1 year, 10 months ago 12 Responses

comments

I'll bet they used an SUV because it has more room for experimental equipment.  They list 30MPG for the gas-only motor, which is very good for an SUV - it's likely small compared to most SUV motors.

Re: regenerative braking lever.  Why not just add a sensor to the brake pedal?  Let the first inch of travel control regenerative braking, and traditional braking helps out after that.

Re: status.  I think the never-plug-it-in consumers would be very few compared to those not using their flex-fuel vehicle's capacity.  The reason? Cost and convenience.  Who wants to spend time at the gas station and pay for gas instead of just plugging in your car?  Besides, I don't think I've seen a station with E85 yet.On The Extreme (plug-in) Hybrid: no breakthrough needed! posted 1 year, 10 months ago 12 Responses

nb

Here you go.  I'm not sure how many watts per ounce, but if it's over 3 then you're set.

http://www.siliconsolar.com/Scrap-Solar-Cells-1oz-p-107.h ...
On A roadmap to getting 70 percent of U.S. electricity from solar by 2050 posted 1 year, 10 months ago 42 Responses

Oops

John beat me to it.On A roadmap to getting 70 percent of U.S. electricity from solar by 2050 posted 1 year, 10 months ago 42 Responses

(raises hand)

"I wonder, do we have any precedent for a president playing a significant role not just in tapping but in creating a social movement that drives politicians to action?"

I know that one:  Al Gore?On Are Obama and Edwards promising ponies? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 24 Responses

Domestic water towers = free energy storage?

Here's an idea.  Most towns and cities use water towers to provide constant pressure domestic water.  These have level sensors that turn on water pumps when they run low.  I'm sure this often happens during peak demand, since the control systems don't know the difference.  How about running these pumps during times of low demand and high wind?  You'd top-up the water towers and not need to run the pumps during peak periods.  It's not a complete solution, but effectively turns all water towers into water energy storage devices.On A concise introduction posted 1 year, 11 months ago 38 Responses

The best bag I've seen

Was a bag from a store that sells only Auroville products (I was in Chennai, India at the time).  It was made out of a page of (presumably already read) newspaper, 4 small metal eyes, and two pieces of yarn as handles.  It had the name of the store stamped on it in a bright orange color, and I'll probably be able to use it as a lunch bag for at least 2 weeks.  Now that's useful packaging.On Retailers beef up the packaging posted 1 year, 11 months ago 3 Responses

As a nice bonus

With current security restrictions, riding rail could be faster than air travel for even intra-state travel.  

Example: Currently it takes about 3.5 hours to take the train from Seattle to Portland (at a liesurely 50mph, assuming they aren't late), 3 hours to drive (assuming no traffic), or 50 minutes to fly.  Of course with flying you have to get to the airport an hour early, making this 2 hours.  Add to that time to get out to the airport and then back from the airport on the other side, since airports are never located downtown (unlike rail stations).  I generally consider a plane trip to Portland to take about 3 hours thanks to these headaches.

Now, if we built some standard fast rail such as England's 225's we could reduce the rail time down to 1.5 hours.  Or we could (dare to dream) copy Shanghai's Maglev and get there in 50 minutes without needing to add the time for security and with leaving right from downtown Seattle.On Public transit will be necessary for CO2 reductions posted 2 years ago 5 Responses

PV effectiveness v. temperature

A quick search turned this up. On Nuclear plants require lots of water in an increasingly dry world posted 2 years, 1 month ago 28 Responses

KenG

8000 miles a year = $1,600/year in gas, or about $800 a year in savings if you doubled the economy.  It seems insurance would be less than this.  Maybe instead of a 3rd car, you could try something like FlexCar and leave the truck at home?  Assuming you're close to a FlexCar, you can get the environmental and perhaps cost benefits of an economy car without having extra insurance, maint., and purchase costs.On Tell BioD what car to buy posted 2 years, 1 month ago 27 Responses

Biomimicry

Is a great idea.  Well, for science fiction at least.  I love to imagine genetically engineered vehicles absorbing sunlight from their soft self-cleaning green skin.  But what solutions do the biomimicry group have within the timescale of coal use and global warming impact?  

(oh, and nature does use metals - your blood depends on the stuff)

That being said, I was struck by a great solution back in ~1994 in Science Magazine (I think).  The author suggested we start building automated solar-powered self-constructing factories in the deserts that would produce solar panels.  The author predicted we'd be able to power all of the US after a few factory generations, and then we could shift the focus of the factory to desalinization or a dozen other world-changing tasks.  The project would be a massive undertaking, but could have been on its way to running by now if we'd jumped on it.On James Lovelock's terror masks the same old industrial-era thinking posted 2 years, 1 month ago 13 Responses

Any takers?

More importantly, is Greg Blencoe taking any more bets?

Hydrogen would have been a great idea in a world with a high price for fossil fuels, had batteries not improved.  But the price of fossil fuels won't reach the required levels in 8 years to have hydrogen make sense, and sustainable hydrogen generation wouldn't exist in sufficient quantity in 8 years even if we started building them right now.On Your chance to get in on the hydrogen action posted 2 years, 1 month ago 11 Responses

But that's what Taxis are for.

Ok, taxis are worse than SOV's because they generally require twice the driving for one trip (not to mention the time they spend circling near airports and hotels looking for a fare).  But as an occasional necessity, especially when you're sick, your very small increased carbon footprint would be worth it. On My brush with medical reality, on a bike posted 2 years, 1 month ago 6 Responses

Hybrid cargo: numbers update

Oops, my fuel and maintenance data was from 2005.  The expanded version of my linked article tells me they're seeing a 15% drop in fuel use and no change in maintenance.On Politicians are still pumping biodiesel posted 2 years, 1 month ago 40 Responses

Picoallen

Where does the heat go?  I can imagine using a refrigeration cycle to transfer a high amount of heat to air, which may be the purpose of the Kalina cycle but doesn't sound like it from your description.  In order to generate energy you need a heat source (nuclear material, geothermal, burning coal, etc.) and a heat sink (evaporating water, exchanging cold water with oceans, etc.).  You describe the heat source (difference in temperature of water from ground) but not the heat sink.On Water limits on power plants posted 2 years, 1 month ago 14 Responses

Perhaps

You can grow your own and dry it using solar ovens?On The eco-depredations of the tobacco industry posted 2 years, 2 months ago 4 Responses

Ok, so maybe we'll be able to seperate it out

Then what do we do with the stuff?On New membrane technology for capturing CO2 posted 2 years, 2 months ago 5 Responses

lifecycle costs

I would guess lifecycle costs would be difficult to get at, mostly because the most useful hybrid designs rely on batteries based on new technology.  Lead-acid battery lifecycle impacts may be reasonably easy to determine, but the impact of nanotech lithium-ion batteries may be tough/impossible to understand since they haven't reached their lifecycle yet.On A panel discussion on how much plug-ins rule posted 2 years, 2 months ago 32 Responses

Q to Jo

"Unfortunately few people will follow their way"
Why?  That doesn't seem to be a very good world-changing attitude.  Maybe only a few people will switch to flickering compact flourescents.  Maybe only a few people will drive a hybrid.  And fewer still an electric car.  But the reality is that changing your diet can have a far greater global impact.

I understand the distaste for PETA's tactics.  But why does everyone have such a harsh reaction to this particular change of lifestyle?On Animal-rights group makes the stupid claim that enviros must be vegetarians posted 2 years, 2 months ago 208 Responses

Hmmm...

Has anyone been in a calm, unexcited debate about vegetarianism?  I find them quite rare, and this article is no exception.  Any of the scores of issues brought up in the comments above could be the basis of long debate, so I'll just weigh in on the article.

Basic points in the article:
 * PETA went too far by calling meat-eating environmentalists non-environmentalists.  Fair point, but this is what PETA does - it's their strategy to ignite debate.  There are other organizations out there making calmer, less incendiary arguments - but I doubt you've heard of them.
 * Eating meat isn't as bad as they say it is.  No, it's as bad as they say it is.  Sure, it doesn't have to be that bad - you can eat only meat that gathered its food from the wild.  But other than non-farmed fish, most people in the US never run across this kind of meat.  Just as it's a bad argument that ethanol can be made only from fallen fruit that wouldn't be used anyway (whereas in reality most is from farmed corn), saying it's ok to eat meat because it could be farmed in sustainable ways is a bad argument.
 * Eating meat doesn't make you a non-environmentalist.  I agree.  I encourage people to live as greenly as possible.  But everyone needs to find a happy balance.  
On Animal-rights group makes the stupid claim that enviros must be vegetarians posted 2 years, 2 months ago 208 Responses

"making the lives of poor people worse"

I don't buy that argument.  Who decides what makes someone's life worse?  I'd say that's the individual themselves.  This money may buy them food, or cattle, or medicine, or a new roof, etc.  Yes, people will provide manual labor for money.  But I don't think providing what ammounts to a paying job for someone with a hard life is a bad thing.On On the problem of carbon-offset projects in developing countries posted 2 years, 2 months ago 49 Responses

Diesel Engines

Don't they run most efficient at a constant speed?  It would be nice if they left everyone in the efficiency dust with a diesel hybrid.On Honda fights to regain green car company mantle posted 2 years, 3 months ago 33 Responses

re: Where's my hybrid minivan?

I think David has a good idea here.  Yes, it's hard to get too much of an efficiency bump from a big box on wheels that generally has a small engine anyway (or used to - I haven't ridden in one in years).  But think of the soccer moms competeing with each other for green status.  This is a market that has a huge green potential if we can get them in the right mindset.  This is the population that spends a large amount of time shopping, driving, and interacting with the next generation.  On Honda fights to regain green car company mantle posted 2 years, 3 months ago 33 Responses

I like the strategy

Especially if they consider energy savings all the way from the source.  Looking at the Energy Flow Trends chart, if we could magically remove all of the inefficiency from the electrical power sector upstream of the end user, we'd get rid of 69% of all electricity use.  That's the largest single chunk of potential energy (and carbon) savings, and is something that utilities have less incentive to reduce (electricity is much less expensive to them than it is to us).On And it's goood ... posted 2 years, 3 months ago 14 Responses

Looks like a waste of material to me.

Biodegradable bags are smaller and you can find them at most pet shops.

I use these, carried in a fabric bag attached to a leash.On A biodegradable doggie bag posted 2 years, 3 months ago 5 Responses

Another case of anti-nuke camp fear mongering

Yes, design conditions for all kinds of systems will need to be adjusted as global temperatures rise.  But this does not preclude future nuclear plants, and to suggest it does is dishonest.

"If nukes have to go offline just when you need them most, that's a huge monkey wrench in plans for a nuclear resurgence." No, we're talking about a small fraction of increased capacity in new plants.  

"essentially it's building a more robust cooling system and then not using any of that greater capacity most of the time"  No, you're using it all of the time, you've just increased the efficiency (that's a good thing).

"And having to spend on maintenance for it all the time." Not really, we're talking about very simple systems here.  A cooling tower is a concrete tube that you spray water in.  A heat exchanger is a box with two seperated streams of water.  Adding a little more capacity to either system keeps the same system, just makes it a little bigger.

Dumping heat in rivers is certainly an issue, but one that can be overcome in extreme cases by building cooling towers.  On And that's not cool, man posted 2 years, 3 months ago 10 Responses

correction

(oops - that's 518,400 pounds of force.  still nothing to laugh at.)On The question must be asked posted 2 years, 3 months ago 16 Responses

hayden

Nobody here is claiming to know what made the bridge collapse.  It's true this is speculation, but it's educated speculation.  1-2 F can make a huge difference in stress on a bridge, and it's fair to bring the cause of this 1-2 F as a factor.

-Matt
 Mechanical EngineerOn The question must be asked posted 2 years, 3 months ago 16 Responses

Added savings...

The nice thing about energy savings in gyms is that you get to double-count it.  These things are always air conditioned in the summer, and reducing your electrical load also decreases your heat load - saving air conditioning energy.  Actually, David's comment would save even more energy - since the energy you use in a gym is turned directly into heat.  I suppose if you can generate enough energy through excercise you can run the lights and air conditioning as well.    On New York Sports Club kicks in to conserve posted 2 years, 3 months ago 7 Responses

Any fool

can build a bridge.  It takes an engineer to build one that barely stands up.

Nature's actually pretty good at optimization - it just has a much longer history than we do and has learned more lessons.  It's wasteful, both to mankind and to the environment, to build a levy that can withstand anything.  But then it's wasteful to build one that won't withstand enough.  I think as we come to understand how we're changing our world, we will begin to understand how much is "enough".On Put a whole society on a tightrope without a net and wait posted 2 years, 4 months ago 8 Responses

Interesting

I wonder if it's more about power.  What I'd hate about carpooling with an acquaintence would be having work-late options.  Often things come up where you just need to work a bit late.  Carpooling with my wife, this isn't a huge issue - she'll work late to compensate, and I do the same when she needs to work late.  But asking someone who isn't a very good friend to do that on a continual basis would seem far too rude.  And having to leave at a particular time every day, no matter what, just isn't an option in many occupations.

Of course, if there's an alternate way home (bus, etc) this isn't an issue.  And I can't specifically link this to gender, but perhaps there's a link (men more often in have-to-work-late roles?  women less afraid to ask for favors?  men have less tolerance for uncertainty?).On A gender fender mind-bender posted 2 years, 4 months ago 12 Responses

Answers

This works using evaporation and condensation.  Therefore anything that evaporates can end up in your water.  However, when you're stuck waterless in the woods or on the beach, you don't care much about stuff that evaporates.  What's really harmful is bacteria and other microbes that can make you sick.  These can't evaporate, and will be left at the bottom of the container.

My thoughts are that this works fine with lake water, river water, or even plant material when you there is no water available at all (one good trick is to simply put a clear plastic bag over a tree branch in the sun, with the same effect).  The warning seems more to keep you from drinking truly contaminated water - don't try this with water in an urban gutter, for instance (gasoline, unlike bacteria, evaporates).  On Solar confusion posted 2 years, 4 months ago 4 Responses

It's an interesting concept

(sorry, catching up with the science here)

On the acidification front, I suppose their hope is they'll get results like:
Iron --> Plankton pulling CO2 from ocean (ocean less acidic) --> Dead Plankton settling on the ocean bottom --> Sequestered carbon

The main argument against this might be that the plankton will pull CO2 from the air, then dissolve it back into the water as the plankton decomposes - ending up with more CO2 and less O2 deep at the bottom.  If they were proposing a slow and gradual iron increase, I might be on their side - as long as O2 levels were monitored in the deep ocean.  But a sudden dumping?  If they're wrong, it sounds like they could mess up the local deep sea ecology for years.On Illegal, but they'll do it anyway posted 2 years, 5 months ago 5 Responses

You could probably remove the lobby bit

Find me a reasoned defense, even if it was written by big coal.  It's all spin and no substance.On The paper, like everybody else who doesn't stand to benefit, doesn't like it posted 2 years, 5 months ago 2 Responses

Contrails aren't that scary

Air travel is even more complex of an issue than [JMG] mentions above.  The fact that they only last a few hours makes this a dynamic and transient problem.  If we all stopped flying today, their effect on the planet would stop literally tomorrow.  This doesn't mean this isn't a problem, but I'll take a problem you can fix in a day over something with the time scale of atmospheric carbon dioxide anytime.On The Musing Environmentalist highlights a keeper posted 2 years, 5 months ago 10 Responses

Re: more anti-nuke links

Both of these articles state their case a bit too strongly.  One might even call them disingenuous.

Wasserman:
"the heat they dump into the air and water directly heats the planet"
He's playing off global warming fears here, but the issue is thermal pollution - warming waters that can contribute to issues like algae blooms.  This is a real issue, but one with a simple solution of rejecting heat to the air (which is quite common for nuclear plants).  There is no global warming impact of simply rejecting heat (I can go into detail if you'd like), making this statement just plain bad science.

Brothers:
"new nuclear power plants presently cost more to build than do fossil fuel plants. This includes fossil fuel plants such as those fired by natural gas, a fuel that carries lower environmental costs"
Lower environmental costs than coal?  Certainly.  But natural gas still dumps a huge amount of carbon dioxide into the air.  Why exactly is Brothers excited that it's cheaper to build coal or natural gas plants than nuclear?

Brothers:
"Accepting nuclear energy as green will increase the number of targets terrorists might strike..."  
I'm picturing the US president and the green community holding hands and singing anti-terror songs.  

Of course, there were good arguments in both articles - especially the bits about fossil fuels used in mining and construction.  But I'm not convinced that's enough to stop nuclear.  The alternative is not renewable power - we just won't pay for it on a large scale (yet).  The alternative is oil, natural gas, and coal.  And the carbon impact of construction and mining for nuclear is tiny compared to those.On Using high gas prices to push for a rebirth posted 2 years, 6 months ago 74 Responses

But there are 3 other colors!

Red, green, and light blue.  The green and blue are a bit bright, but certainly beat the zebra stripes.On Three wheels, 40 mph top speed, and 20-mile range I can live with ... posted 2 years, 6 months ago 2 Responses