Wasn't there a report of a "lagoon of mercury" in the Merrimack in Nashua? Thought I saw that in the UL long while ago. From the mills upstream

It lasted 3 years.

After I reached equilibrium I sealed the tank. Only input was light and an external heat source. Maybe some sloshing around from a magnet scrubber

If I had time I would. Closest I have is accidental, with my 75g aquarium and losing 1 of my 4 grow lamps. But since it wasn't controlled, the results are speculative. It had been at equilibrium for 3 years after 5 of trying to reach balance. All that work thrown out of whack and ended when the algae and plants weren't able to produce more than they were fed upon. They died out, and then the tank starved from the bottom up. Can it be transferred to scale? Probably not. But cutting out energy from a system will not have zero effect, it just can't.

Isn't it also accepted if it's oem? Like if purchased or of state and moved here

Last time I went to Chillis half my steak was a blood clot, never again.

Culver's was barely a half step above mcd

I'm asking legit questions, not putting forth conspiracy theory. Quick easy solutions are what got this mess started to begin with.

Photovoltaic is not the solution. It's not there yet, but idiots think it's the best. It's made with hazardous materials, except for the really expensive stuff made in the US, takes a ton of space, has a short half life with no feasible way to recycle it. And please don't bitch about least intrusive to the environment like you don't benefit from ecological destructup on and human slavery used to get the materials for lithium batteries, rare earth magnets, and photovoltaic cells.

So my questions are "fake news"? Got it.

Have their been any replicated studies? Because the overall math doesn't track. One scientific paper does not equal scientific proof. Has there been studies monitoring the bodies of water with systems like this installed for longer periods? Are these individually engineered for the environment they will be left in? What happens when they are cheap hazmat panels and they fall into the water? Can they be retrieved if they sink into muck?

Removing 30% of the energy input of an ecological system? Reducing the base of the doors chain by now than a quarter? Doesn't quite track

Covering a pond or lake seems like the worst gimmick to make a dead body of water

And these announcements never cover the co2 cost of clearing the land, creating the panels, shipping the panels, and when they are no longer fructose, disposal of the panels. I don't know this company, but I've worked with a bunch that cut a ton of corners to get the things up and violate NEC, such as the array in bedford on the Goffstown line. They put on paper that they are charging for and getting the expensive, recyclable panels, and ends up using the cheap hazmat disposal ones. Solar power just isn't there yet. Not to make it worth while to destroy habitats. Covering parking lots and schools? That's a start, but why not roads?

Logic won't change their minds, in their hearts, they know its wrong because they use pro choice instead of pro abortion. They want it as birth control, so they don't have to worry about being responsible for remembering to take a pill or use a condom. The purpose of sex throughout the history of life is to procreate, but no one wants the responsibility, just the pleasure. If they put into law that the father could "abort" the financial responsibility, you would hear them saying all this stuff about a baby is a natural consequence of sex and they agreed to the risk when they agreed to sex. Double standards are rife when it comes to being pro abortion. And the reasoning they use to try and justify it are smoke screens, try and compromise by saying "to save the mothers life" or "for instances of rape and/or incest" doesn't satisfy them because they know that's only a token amount of the numbers. Vast majority are for selfish reasons, even the word convenience shouldn't be accepted. If you are in a situation where you can't afford or handle or want a baby and you don't want to use, can't afford, or can't use the myriad of other forms of birth control, you should abstain. Oh, they want to protect women from getting back alley abortions because they are going to find a way, even if image and illegal? That's their choice, they don't make a robbery legal to protect the life of a criminal do they? And you can't forget the racial component, I think the count reached 20 million black children being aborted? FFS, planned parenthood was started by a eugenics enthusiast.

At the end of the day, pro abortionists are selfish narcissists, using the same faulty logic they used during slavery to dehumanize a class of people to make it ok to murder them. They will spin whatever they can to make a "right" out of not having to take responsibility for their actions.

>in the eye of the law, a fetus is not a person.

If you kill a pregnant woman, don't you get charged for both murders?

Lol

"Hey, you mind shaking the shit out of that fairy all over my cone?"

Really? If heard that term the most in Berlin

The worst is always assumed. Better than those baby shaped chocolates

Don't forget servicing and flooding of those concrete tubes

Wtf

There's more factors than that. Not arguing in either side of this specific case, but if the one with knuckles is much younger or faster, you don't want to turn your back and get hit in the head. You might have your own perspective on it, but even if you can run away, if you don't think you can get away, and think that your life is in danger, shoot, and let the court sort it out.

Brass knuckles are illegal for a reason. Again, not on either side of this as I haven't been able to look into it too much.

Not running? If he knew the threat was over, no reason not to stay and wait for the cops

I don't think you've seen the damage they can do.