Jump to content
Fragile Bird

US Politics: The Accountability Problem

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Rorshach said:

I really don't know too much about CCS, so I'm probably behind the curve here. And I completely agree it should be part of the solution. 

I seem to remember, last time i checked, that the technology isn't viable for large scale CCS, though. Is that still the case?

So I was thinking more of CCU rather than CCS (U being use rather than sequestration). The thing that excited me a few months ago is someone put a $100-250 value per MT of CO2e being reused through capture. Previous numbers were closer to $600/MT, so a substantial improvement.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/06/its-possible-to-reverse-climate-change-suggests-major-new-study/562289/
 

Quote

A Harvard professor says his company should be able to suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, at industrial scales, by 2021

The new paper says it can remove the same ton for as little as $94, and for no more than $232. At those rates, it would cost between $1 and $2.50 to remove the carbon dioxide released by burning a gallon of gasoline in a modern car.

Their technique, while chemically complicated, does not rely on unprecedented science. In effect, Keith and his colleagues have grafted a cooling tower onto a paper mill. It has three major steps.

Still, considering emissions reductions offsets are usually in the $1-2/MT range, it is still a more expensive option. And there is the usual academic disclaimer of "in 5 years this technology has the potential to...." which never pans out 5 years later, But funding for research in this area should be part of a green deal mix,

Edited by IheartIheartTesla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DMC said:

So this place is both hipster and frequented by a dittohead?  Sounds like the most insufferable coffee shop imaginable.

 

2 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

It's a scarcity issue - only place around with decent offerings in a rural area with a lot of second homes owned by city people.  So it's a mix of rednecks and then weekend city people.  

 

I had assumed Larry was making a mocking reference to Jacob Wohl, the teenage scam artist who tried to fabricate a #MeToo scandal on Mueller and habitually made fatuous points on Twitter by inventing things allegedly overheard at the local hipster coffee shop.

Edited by DanteGabriel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DMC said:

Obviously at least a few people are very pissed at her, but I thought the HuffPo piece was very fair.

It did seem that way.  But so many Dems being targeted all at the same time -- and Bezos too.  Say I have a suspicious mind -- which has nothing to do with whether or not I think, or they are, guilty as charged.  Because if nothing else we should understand from the last two years, is that in every level of every society many, many men have been serial sexual predators and abusers of children, women and other men, and others, if not they themselves, have along the way committed many other crimes and corruptions, just as a matter of course -- while believe they are doing nothing wrong, just doing what's done, if one can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

2.  There are systemic cultural issues that make this a hard question, including the fact that it is not clear that high quality public education for all is (or ever was) a shared common value among Americans.

3.  While money is required, it needs to be money well spent.  Education by fad has been the norm for a while.  The goal should be to create public schools that all wish their children to attend.  We don't have that right now.

These are very valid points. As an anecdotal example, the town I grew up and went to school in has a population of about 32-35k and had, last time I counted, SEVEN superintendents. And these are all public schools; that number doesn't include the private schools. 

And that totally fucked up system is by design, to keep children of color out of what is now the Richie Rich school district (which, full disclosure, was the school I attended, although it wasn't nearly as bad then), while still allowing it to siphon public funds from the city district coffers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I'm a bit surprised the Green New Deal is a bit ambivalent about carbon capture technologies (I think a few of the env. groups are as well). The argument is that the capture technologies will give fossil fuel companies free reign to continue drilling, with the understanding that everything can be captured later. A similar argument is that more fuel efficient cars just make people drive more to get roughly the same fuel usage. 

There are complicated social arguments to be made on both sides, but in my opinion carbon capture technologies should be part of the mix. We can deal with unintended consequences later, but just reducing emissions wont cut it (IMHO). At some point we need scaled up technologies that can actually remove CO2 from the atmosphere (and other GHGs as well)

It's most likely because this is the highest hanging fruit. The easiest and cheapest places to find gains are on efficiency (i.e. spend less energy). This means stuff like better insulation which reduces the need for both heating and air conditioning, LED lightbulbs instead of halogen and so on. It's only slightly more expensive, but you need everybody to buy in (nearly impossible in a capitalist economy, but probably not that hard in, say, China). The next best thing to do is to use the clean technology that is available right now (e.g. solar panels, electric cars, etc.). At the moment this is still quite expensive and is mostly accessible to the upper middle class and higher (there are exceptions for people who live in a few regions where it's either favored by nature or heavily subsidized).

Carbon capture is even worse than that -- it's still in the development stages and even once it comes out of development, it'll still be quite some time before it is economically viable. I'm not saying we shouldn't work on it, but it's not a near term thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been some chatter recently that Trump had an advantage in the GOP primaries because he had a solid 30% or so support early on that seemed to have a ceiling but the clown car of other candidates would just split the vote every which way and hand the state to Trump.

There's been plenty of chatter also, and I'm guilty of this, of saying "well, Bernie did well when he was the only Clinton alternative, but let's see last time."  

But could that be backwards and Bernie might this time around have the advantage that Trump had in that he could always have a solid core and everyone else divides the vote?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Triskele said:

But could that be backwards and Bernie might this time around have the advantage that Trump had in that he could always have a solid core and everyone else divides the vote?  

I don't think so.  If you look at the three primary polls listed by RCP in the last week - two national, one Iowa - Bernie is at 15-16%.  If you're gonna make this argument about anybody, it's clearly Biden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Triskele said:

There's been some chatter recently that Trump had an advantage in the GOP primaries because he had a solid 30% or so support early on that seemed to have a ceiling but the clown car of other candidates would just split the vote every which way and hand the state to Trump.

There's been plenty of chatter also, and I'm guilty of this, of saying "well, Bernie did well when he was the only Clinton alternative, but let's see last time."  

But could that be backwards and Bernie might this time around have the advantage that Trump had in that he could always have a solid core and everyone else divides the vote?  

I read a similar theory about Booker. I guess it could apply to Beto as well. Booker could unite the centrists while everyone else is racing left.

Edited by Martell Spy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

I read a similar theory about Booker. I guess it could apply to Beto as well. Booker could unite the centrists while everyone else is racing left.

Bacon at 538 laid out in an article yesterday why it's very difficult to unite the various moderate demos into a bloc.  I think Biden transcends this because he has unparalleled stature - and would have correspondingly unparalleled institutional support - if he got in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DMC said:

Bacon at 538 laid out in an article yesterday why it's very difficult to unite the various moderate demos into a bloc.  I think Biden transcends this because he has unparalleled stature - and would have correspondingly unparalleled institutional support - if he got in.

That is an incredible stat, a third of Democrats think you must believe in God to be a moral person. Frightening to an atheist like me. Next I will get dumped in with those that dealt pot in school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Next I will get dumped in with those that dealt pot in school.

:)

Well if you look at the breakdown Bacon got from PEW - that 30/22/21% of Dem moderates uneducated whites, blacks, and latinos, I think that God/values item makes perfect sense.  Most of those demos are gonna be pretty religious, and that constitutes most of the moderates in the sample.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

That is an incredible stat, a third of Democrats think you must believe in God to be a moral person. Frightening to an atheist like me. Next I will get dumped in with those that dealt pot in school.

It's truly amazing... as fast as no/non religion is rising in this country, the power of the O.G. zombie --even on the left-- is still pronounced... the USA is the most religious country in western civilization, and --IMO-- it is our undoing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US isn't even the most religious country in north America. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I see on twitter people are starting to fill out their tax returns and finding out they aren't getting a refund this year. Fun times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Triskele said:

There's been some chatter recently that Trump had an advantage in the GOP primaries because he had a solid 30% or so support early on that seemed to have a ceiling but the clown car of other candidates would just split the vote every which way and hand the state to Trump.

Well last time around the Republicans let too many establishment candidates run and the democrats didnt let enough.  They ll probably both over adjust but if the establishment Republicans can settle on one candidate trump will be in trouble because the media will be entirely behind him or her until the nomination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting to see Chris Christie every time I think of Baron Harkonnen from Dune. Not necessarily a fat thing.

Edited by Let's Get Kraken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He actively tried to help in the coverup, it is less cowardice than corruption and ruthlessness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

I'm starting to see Chris Christie every time I think of Baron Harkonen. Not necessarily a fat thing.

I feel ya. It's just a general fucking revulsion. His weight's got nothin' to do with it.

Oh! GUYS! GUYS! GUESS WHAT!?!

Jace learned a new word!!!! Well... not learned. I mean, obviously. But I totes have learned how fun the word can be. 'Cuck' or 'Cucked' is like my new favorite thing to say in my best Alex Jones voice. I growl it at all of my friends and colleagues daily now, it's great!

Obviously I use this... not even 'insulting' insult facetiously, as a mockery of our fellow Nazi Americans, but it's dexterous for a deranged mind such as mine. I see why the Nazis liked it so much.

But can we revisit that 'insulting' thing for a second. Like, I don't get it. I've never gotten it. I mean, I understand the emasculating elements and why that's supposedly such an insult (in 2019? c'mon) but when it first was co-opted by our goosestepping countrymen and I eventually became aware of its prevalence in their limited literary tool bag I just didn't see the gravity. Cuckold, a descriptive of a man whose wife is 'unfaithful' (also, in 2019? c'mon) often assigned as a form of mockery.

I guess from their impossibly convoluted worldview the idea of your possession (wife) betraying you (promiscuity out of expected bounds) is deeply revealing of some weakness on the man's part, no doubt to keep his object in line and respectful. But...

But...

Like, that's not really a thing in American culture. And I'm not sure of a time when it was. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there have been times within someone's living memory when they gleefully whispered 'cuckolded' behind a supposed friend's back when he arrived single to that years' Christmas party. But generally in every experience I've ever seen/heard/read in real life or simulated, a 'cheater' whether male or female (admittedly WAAAY more for the female) is seen as the villain of a story. I have never in my life encountered someone who described with relish cheating on and thereby emasculating their husband or lover. I've known people who 'cheated', but they invariably either saw these activities as shameful to themselves or were on some psychotic rage bend where nobody wanted anything to do with them besides the person(s) they were fucking.

Conversely, the person on whom the 'cheating' was perpetrated is not seen as 'weak' or 'less than', they're seen as having been victimized (I'm not here to tell you what for, exactly, 'cause I don't know) by a nefarious and untrustworthy scoundrel. Friends and family rally around this person to lift their spirits and provide words of condemnation towards the belligerent.

Until the resurgence of this word's usage by our swastika swaddling friends I can recall having heard or read the term used exactly once in recent mainstream culture for the purpose of suggesting derision or humiliation, and that was in HBO's 'Rome', Season 2 Episode... 8 (was right, but I did have to look it up to confirm). A show taking place literally over two thousand years ago. Otherwise, the term generally suggested a mutual sexual gratification arrangement wherein the man (I'd never really heard of a chick being into it) watches his lover get fucked by another dude. Which is totally weird (I mean to general people, I don't give a fuck) and was not seen as 'normal' but pretty clearly on the deviant/perverted side of scandal as opposed to emasculating. <Insert Roger Stone joke here.>

This is a societal observation, one that's pretty fucking basic. I guess I can vaguely imagine some lowbrow Adam Sandler or Kevin James movie where a part of the humor revolves around the idea of the main character being 'cheated on', demonstrating his worthlessness, well enough to believe such examples exist but. Huh! I think I just figured it out. They probably all sit around touching themselves to Kathy Bates' character in 'Waterboy'. I am now prepared to say definitively that Nazis are Adam Sandler devotees, and their disgusting worldviews emerged from that misanthropic fraud's intellectual carbuncles that Sony has (had?) the gall to put in film theaters.

See, it can be fun to do Nazi stuff and just make shit up. That's like 4 good paragraphs of word salad just to get to a fucking Adam Sandler punchline! Isn't the internet delightful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×