Carbon capture is useful for making aviation fuel, and hopefully eventually plastic. But I’m guessing these people were suggesting carbon capture from polluting power plants?

We need ranked choice voting so people can vote for who they actually want without throwing away they vote. The problem is opposing ranked choice voting is one of very few issues both parties agree on, since it hurts both of them.

Don’t worry, that rocket is new shepherd, so you can eat him when it comes back down in 30 min. New shepherd doesn’t get to orbit, it just does 100km hops straight up.

You’re saying it was not targeted at combatants, or that there was a lot of collateral damage?

Crimea would be realistic if the US didn’t hold back with their aid.

With how small feature sizes are on chips, I wonder what sort of easter eggs the designer have hidden in them.

Yeah, my parents actually close all their apps regularly, whereas I have dozens of apps not doing anything in the background since it doesn’t really make a difference.

Almost all of these emissions in the headline are from the businesses they own shares in. So this is saying business emissions, just in a non-intuitive roundabout way.

You could assign company emissions to the consumers, the employees, or the owners. Without any one of those the company wouldn’t emit. I just wanted to make it clear that this study assigns it to the owners.

If you don’t include investment emissions, they’d emit more in 22 days than the average person does in their life.

Here’s the actual study

https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/621656/bp-carbon-inequality-kills-281024-en.pdf?sequence=1

This number is almost entirely investment emissions, how much the companies they own emit.

Oxfam’s analysis found that investment emissions are the most significant part of a billionaire’s carbon footprint. The average investment emissions of 50 of the world’s richest billionaires were around 2.6 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents (CO2e) each. That is around 340 times their emissions from private jets and superyachts combined. Each billionaire’s investment emissions are equivalent to almost 400,000 years of consumption emissions by the average person, or 2.6 million years of consumption emissions by someone in the poorest 50% of the world.44

Also, if you’re still in Russia, are you okay with taking over neighboring countries? If not, are you able to leave, or have they shut down travel?

It’s kinda crazy that another county just joined the war on the ground for Russia and there hasn’t been a huge response. I hope Ukraine’s allies can really step up the support, maybe even responding in kind by sending engineering forces.

Their recent launches have been using field Russia more commonly uses, so they might be getting Russian engines.

That’s what 1c means. If it were designed to provide 25GW but only lasted 1hr, then it’d be 25c.

They’re equal if they’re running at a 1c discharge rate. Lfp, which are stable and good for safety, can have higher discharge rates of 5c up to 25c. Which would mean the capacity would be much less. To compare apples to apples, it’d be much better if they gave both the GW and GWh numbers.

Energy capacity is in kWh, discharge capacity would be in W.

I thought it was taking about Boeing Defense, Space and security, which also wouldn’t really make sense.

The former might not be true either. China has 1.7M listed, but if you include 1M to 3M in forced vocational education and training centers, the count would be higher than the 1.8M in the US. The rate would still be lower though.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/01/china-documents-uighur-genocidal-sterilization-xinjiang/ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-concentrationcamps/china-putting-minority-muslims-in-concentration-camps-us-says-idUSKCN1S925K/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200728165111/https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/01/china-documents-uighur-genocidal-sterilization-xinjiang/

Yeah, it would make them a lot harder to spot on infra red cameras.