Search results

let's check some science: https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2436/co2-is-making-earth-greenerfor-now/#:~:text=Studies%20have%20shown%20that%20increased,increase%20photosynthesis%2C%20spurring%20plant%20growth. Studies have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis...

wouldn't anything applied on the glass inhibt the sunlight going to plants? though this reminds me of some paint product, perhaps the same stuff, that could be painted on building turning them into low level solar panels cheaply.

this is what scares me. battery tech cant just overcome physics, which tells us there is limited energy density in chemical batteries, even if some tech can change how fast you charge/discharge. comparisons to IT are desperatly misguided, for decades compute density miniturised as technology...

probably the wisest and most important point made on the subject. are they talking about serious storage alternatives such as hydrogen, or hitching everything on the battery wagon? the pyhsics show the energy density isnt there, engineers say it's not feasible for periods in order of few...

starting from that basis, large focus should be on carbon capture to reverse CO2, alongside reducing emissions.

depends what you're being asked to give up, if you have to make the sacrifices that will make a real benefit.

you jolly well can. it's the art of selecting what you want to include in your data, discard things you know will disagree, alter the precision of data, overweight those that will correlate with intended results. get data suppressed or considered inconsistent and unsuitable. then when you run...

now add Hunga Tonga eruption in the mix :thumbsup:

:lolol: i'd like to tell Lucas that one, see her reaction. seriously though, does highlight the best way to reduce emissions is to remove industry and commerce. who wants to accept the economic and social outcome of that though? governments are trying to say they can balance off reductions...