Like, these kinda people exist. He’s probably depressed, unemployed, and doesn’t know what to do with his life.

My take is: we should improve society somewhat. If society improves, this too will improve, in yours and countless other examples.

There’s no point haggling with single, individual cases like these IMO, because you “fix one hole, open another” or sth. Really, i started to abandon the concept of finding personal relationships, and instead focus on what can be done to improve society as a whole. Kinda like what priests who lived without real private lifes did in the medieval times. It’s challenging, but fulfilling.

omg, that whole comment thread is just so incredibly wholesome. i’m a weirdo too, btw, in case anybody wants to be friends 🤗

What kind of info do you think they could have had? With boeing, it’s probably something about corruption, pocketing state subsidy money that should have gone to actual projects, or something similar.

People love mocking Russians when their “leaders” fall out of windows, but where are these people when corpos kill plebs within US?

You assumed it was about being fair. People just like to shit on russia to distract from internal problems, it was never about the “people falling out of the window” thing.

According to the police records, the man committed suicide by shooting himself twice in the back of his head.

edit: after reading your comment more carefully, you actually already mentioned that. oopsie.

Did he fall out a window?

meme good. i cannot comprehend how a meme can comprehend my soul so well

From what i’ve observed, people deal with “there’s no higher power” differently.

For some people, that i call right-wing, or authoritarian, having some higher power that tells them what to do, is the meaning of life. If they lose that something, then they become depressed and stop living, in any sense, a joyful life.

On the other hand, there are people, which i am comfortable to call left-wing, or hippies, or communitarian, who don’t need that higher power to tell them what to do, in fact, it rather obstructs them. They are joyful even in the absence of a higher, guiding power, because they can find their own meaning in life.

I guess everybody will come up with different answers to that.

To me, saying “there is nothing after death” is a simplified model. It asks you to live in the here-and-now, to live in the moment, because that makes you productive today.

Of course, the world won’t end when you die. You will leave an impact on the world, kind of a track. Like, when water flows over a landscape long enough, it leaves a river bed. That will stay, even after the water subsides.

So in some sense, death might be your end, but it’s not the end. I don’t know whether that helped you.

don’t forget the role that the Great Oxidation Event played in this.

Basically, earth’s atmosphere was devoid of oxygen from its beginning, and it took billions of years to change that. it wasn’t until life had learned about photosynthesis before large amounts of oxygen started to accumulate in the atmosphere.

however, oxygen is a necessary prerequisite for most animal/fungus consumers, as they use oxygen to break down the organic materials. that is probably when major fossil fuel production stopped.

yes, you are correct, it makes more sense to focus on electrifying our big consumers first.

however, cleaning up could happen eventually. maybe some politician in the future will sell it as some “jobs program” or sth.

not only that. algae are effectively plants without all the structural (wood) parts. that means, they consume less energy constructing bulky dead material, and put all of their energy towards the growth of the functional parts. that is why they can spread more rapidly and achieve a higher efficiency than plants.

Renewable energy has many parts. I have listed the 5 most important here.

As you can see, renewable biomass and hydropower are also part of renewable energy. That is because they have the advantage of being both power-sources and energy-storages. That means people will continue to use biomass and combust it in the long term.

see my comment above … yes, algae can take out lots of CO2 from the atmosphere,

in fact i remember reading that 50% of the global photosynthesis actually happens in the oceans.

also, the algae have the advantage that they might automatically sink to the bottom of the ocean, thus taking the carbon out of the atmosphere permanently. but i’m not sure about that, in fact. also, something similar could be achieved with wetlands, such as marsh and swamp, which bind organic material underwater. that water is oxygen-depleted, so it conserves the organic material permanently. this is how peat is created.

yeah, i guess the algae would also have a counter-effect to global warming.

however, one must be a bit more sensitive about it, as it’s a biological process and can mess with the biological world around it. consider: somewhen in the 1970s, a huge cargo ship full of fertilizer (ammonia) sank in the ocean and it lead to a huge algae-growth in the middle of the ocean.

it definitely took some CO2 out of the air, but these algae often also produce lots of toxins as a by-product (to keep predators away), so that lead to a massive fish-dying. which is not so wishable, either.

so anyway, i guess taking CO2 out of the air can happen, but it should happen slowly, such as to not strain the environment too much.

The only DAC variant i could see working out is if it takes the CO2 from high-concentrated sources (such as portland cement factories) and transforms it into something practical, like liquid fuel or methane.

It could be leading to cheaper methane than from biological sources, because technological processes can have higher efficiency, and therefore lower prices.

i think acetogens are biological entities, though?

wasn’t there some rule about industrial processes being 10x to 100x more efficient than biological beings, in general?

i find the technology itself more interesting than the scaling-up, because we can’t do anything about the scaling up (at least i don’t have billions of dollars that it would cost), but we can analyze the process qualitatively from home, that’s more exciting.

Interesting. I wonder how they catch the CO2 out of the air.

Ok, after reading (parts of) the paper:

• they use some amines on porous Silicate to catch the CO2 out of the air
• the whole process in the paper is actually a 2-step process, the first step being CO2 capture
• the second step describes how to convert CO2 into CO+H2 or sth