[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 12 points 5 days ago

Agreed geoengineering is bad science/engineering IMO. You can't know what the long term effects would be until after its been deployed. The safest bet would be to just ditch fossil fuels but that's not as sexy.

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 11 points 1 month ago

The land barons of CA are no joke. They are a problem that we are going to have to deal with one way or another.

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 24 points 1 month ago

As a born/raised/living Californian I can attest to the fact that its not California that is the problem. But as my ancestors would say it's "El Pinche Gringo's" that tend to be the problem.

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 3 points 3 months ago

IMO its a "meh". Oil production is currently at an energy neutral state(amount of energy needed to extract is equal to the energy provided), in a decade or so its going to hit energy negative(energy needed to extract is more then energy provided). What should be happening is slow/begin halting extraction and storing all of that oil in the ground just in case we might need that energy surplus at some point in the future but that hurts quarterly profit returns so the oil executive solution to it is "suck it dry, not my problem".

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 44 points 4 months ago

Because he is not an actual progressive. Hes just a spoiled rich kid who like to pretend to be a progressive.

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 9 points 6 months ago

There is also the fact that they consume a lot less water. In regions where solar and wind energy are a surplus but fresh water is scarce, indoor farming makes more sense.

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 3 points 8 months ago

I have been studying Doughnut Theory. IMO its all about metrics/measurement and Doughnut Theory gives a robust way to measure the actual health of an economy/society. You got your social foundations which you have to ensure everyone gets, and you have your ecological ceilings which are your limits on natural resource use/extraction. So the challenge is how do you build business, finance and law to do that.

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 7 points 9 months ago

They have a lot of farm land that they buy alfalfa from but water rights are a bit different. Water rights are based on the "doctrine of prior appropriation" which means the water from the river goes to the body that is able to claim first "beneficial" use for that water, beneficial as defined as economically beneficial. Los Angeles and many Imperial Valley farmers primarily used that to build massive water infrastructure projects to divert massive amounts of water from the Colorado for projected growth. Those rights to that water are locked, however because of the crises on the Colorado river system the entire Colorado River compact is coming into question which has the doctrine of prior appropriation as a foundation to the water legal system in the west.

Just for some additional context the Colorado River Compact is essentially the West's version of the constitution. Its a water treaty governing commerce and political power in the West. Keep in mind the American West is a desert and the only real thing of true value in a desert is freshwater. There is an old west saying "whiskeys for drinking, waters for fighting over", and people did fight over water out here.

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 10 points 9 months ago

Its always fun watching the media machine work in real time. COP was a joke to begin with, it was a joke at the end. Nothing in that statement has any real measurements on how/when they are going to stop fossil fuel use and that's because they legitimately don't have one. The profit margins, the societal infrastructure that is built on fossil fuel use make them not want to touch it. They are addicted to constant non-stop GDP growth and nothing gets them there faster then using fossil fuels.

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 year ago

It is being discussed but in the context of Economics. Neo-liberal economic theory presupposes an economy that is infinitely growing and infinitely consuming. That is running head-on to the fact that there are natural limits to our consumption. Politicians, financial/business leaders and mainstream economists have skirted by talking about serious issues when it comes to health, society and equality by saying "growth will even it all out". Now growth hasn't even things out its just made inequality worse, our planets biosphere is collapsing and our leaders have no answers, why? Because they have been brainwashed by sudo-science and fairy tales of infinite growth and wealth.

People are discussing solutions to this within the context of Degrowth, ecological economics and doughnut economics. However those theories are not popular to the mainstream because it accepts limits and advocates for things like wealth redistribution and limits on wealth, and the extremely rich/powerful don't like that.

[-] hotelbravo722@slrpnk.net 18 points 1 year ago

I am a man and I believe yes men should understand menstruation and birth control. Its something humans do and you should have a basic general knowledge of how/why it happens. Also vice-versa, women should understand how/why erections work or don't work. In general we should just be better at understanding each other.

view more: next ›

hotelbravo722

joined 1 year ago