gh0stwriter88 t1_j756q02 wrote

Not sure where you mean CA? I'm not aware of anywhere else in the Us that is famous for rolling blackouts? Thier power is pretty high there also.

I mean a few cents of of 50cent per kw.... is no different than saying a few cents off $4 gas is falling prices... its objectively true, but it still doesn't mean the prices are equitable.


gh0stwriter88 t1_j4x6tug wrote

That's a bald faced lie. Also people produce emissions... If you hardline everything to that point...

Emissions on modern gas and diesel engines are ultra low except for CO2..... And this can be completely recovered via carbon cycle so long term will nullify thier carbon footprint (within a growing season, 1 years worth of automotive CO2 is insignificant as a load to the ecosystem.... constantly adding more is not).


gh0stwriter88 t1_j4teaiz wrote

The correct ICE fuel would be biofuels... With genetically engineered plants increase yield. We already have plants designed that would roughly replace 25% of existing US fuel consumption and make ICE engine emissions almost entirely a moot point. I get my 25% number from working back from the 50million acres currently used for corn and soy that are grown strickefly for biofuel (both are terribly inefficient compared to the possibilities)

See lipidcane and lipidshorgum. Which currently yield about 10x the oil of soy and double the ethanol per acres relative to corn from one crop.

Pretty much all gasoline vehicles can be converted to ethanol...and biodiesel is in many ways superior to petroleum diesel.

Hydrogen is one of the worst ICE fuels in everything except emissions.

Also opposed piston diesels can do 50% better than next generation ultra stringent emissions again why no traction on real solutions?


gh0stwriter88 t1_j4ll5do wrote

Actually there are probably a lot more of these with sterling engines than TECs... since that's the Amish solution. It acutally makes way more sense than running electric motors to move the heat too since you arent' wasting electricity to do something that the motion of heat can do for you.... and all the heat is going into the room anyway.


gh0stwriter88 t1_it8g3yl wrote

Withing the context of emergent behavior theory that would be a valid conclusion I think.... I'm a creationist myself so I have different ideas but, as I said in the earlier comment it would probably be some gnawing behavior due to teeth (but that gets into the discussion of did long growing teeth or gnawing occur first etc.. if you aren't a creationist anyway).

Also I believe rodents aren't the only genus to have long growing teeth or tusks that are maintained by wear and instinct. (which implies potential for parallel evolution or design)