Proud Links: | Thanks Ant and Acleacius. |
Play: | Wake Up the Box 5. |
Links: | We are raising a generation of deluded narcissists. |
Stories: |
Brandon Sanderson Completes Wheel of Time Fantasy Series. Thanks nin. Boston declares health emergency amid U.S. flu outbreak. Wireless mesh networks at 65MPH—linking cars to prevent crashes. |
Science: |
A simple biotechnology that could prove once and for all whether fracking is safe. Thanks nin. US spots $120M for lab to tackle rare earth shortages. |
Media: |
Celebrities Read Mean Tweets #3. Thanks nin. Most Insane Halo 4 Killstreak Ever. |
The Funnies: | Savage Chickens. |
Orphic Resonance wrote on Jan 11, 2013, 05:40:
there are much much cleaner methods to generate energy, less dangerous to people and the environment and much much cheaper to produce... but these kinds of methods dont make enough money for the big corps who already have billions invested in older technology infrastructure, as it would be another huge investment with much less return - not to mention the other markets of machinery and devices that are powered by fuel from these older technologies
so you can be damn sure that any sort of big changes wont be happening... at least, not until millions of people die in some sort of catastrophe - then there might be a massively concerted effort
not until then
InBlack wrote on Jan 11, 2013, 04:06:
The real question is how much energy is needed to get a fracking operation up and running? Once they get it up and running how much natural gas can be extracted vs the energy put into the fracking process itself.
Basically what Im interested in is efficiency. Im guessing its a very unefficient operation but with the big oil involved they are going to push it for all its worth. (Burning Coal or Oil is also highly inneficient for example when compared to Nuclear or Natural Gas which is not extracted through fracking)
Also, the rhetoric against fracking is 99% just that: rhetoric. It's a bunch of michael moore conspiracy theorists who've found something new to whine about while they wait for a non-democrat president to take office again.
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:35:I haven't seen that movie, so I couldn't comment on that. Most of the antifracking stuff I've heard about has been in the news: groundwater pollution, earthquakes, that kind of stuff. I've not heard how widespread or dangerous it is compared to other industries. I have heard that fracking is one of the least regulated industries, and that does concern me, given the history of oil and coal production in the US.
In any case, the movie "Gasland" really brought it all about, and it's basically full of panic-rhetoric. The whole "it sets your faucets on fire!" bullshit was debunked by the ACTUAL WATER COMPANY IN QUESTION who stated that normal methane buildup was the cause for that single, isolated incident. Yet everyone worried about fracking always immediately bleats "AW MY GAWSH IT SAWTS AWR HAWSES AWN FAWR!"
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:35:
This is really the big one. Investing in green energy is fine, but it will take 20-30 years before enough production is online to meet the majority of demand. Such investment would also tally somewhere around a trillion dollars, which isn't money the US has lying around somewhere.
So barring that, you can either have Coal, Oil or Nuclear as your alternative power source. Nobody will engage in Nuclear right now, we want to get rid of our Oil dependence, so that leaves coal. And for everyone who complains how dirty a fracking site is, have you SEEN what a coal mine does to the environment around it?
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:35:I've never heard a pro enviroment person say anything pro-coal. Ever. Not even about jobs. I've read anti-fracking comments, but never "Let's do more coal instead of fracking."
(And the eco hippies will reply by saying "yeah, but a coal mine brings local jobs!" What do you think a fracking site brings?)
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:35:
Economically, taking advantage of the US' natural gas reserves has the power to take the US out of its slump and likely even out of its debt, there is that much money involved in it. I'm not saying that money takes precedence over environmental concerns, but until such environmental concerns have actually been scientifically proven, I'm going to say that fracking is about the best thing we can do to keep our energy supply up to par.
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:20:Dmitri_M wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 15:06:
In South Africa, a fairly rough country at the best of times, my grandmother had surgery under our universal health care system. She had no health insurance. It was done in a government run hospital. The surgery cost 3 dollars. In a private hospital with better conditions and higher staffing she would have paid 10 000 dollars. I guess from what I've read here all American hospitals are essentially "private"?
The costs of US hospitals are so out of control because their insurance cost is ridiculous. An average hospital probably pays 100 million dollars in insurance a year. They have to, because if a surgeon makes a genuine mistake that leaves someone with a chronic health issue, courts will award truly insane amounts of money to the victim.
(I'm not saying someone isn't entitled to compensation, but I fail to see why a small scar on your knee somehow needs to be rewarded with enough money to set up the victim's entire family for life.)
Creston
Dades wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 20:35:
They're not the only one who has observed that behavior though and you are not exactly an unbiased source here. I'd like to see the actual studies so I can make my own mind otherwise I'm going with the literal video demonstration and independent study commissioned by the government instead of taking some guys word on the internet, no offense.
In any case, the movie "Gasland" really brought it all about, and it's basically full of panic-rhetoric. The whole "it sets your faucets on fire!" bullshit was debunked by the ACTUAL WATER COMPANY IN QUESTION who stated that normal methane buildup was the cause for that single, isolated incident. Yet everyone worried about fracking always immediately bleats "AW MY GAWSH IT SAWTS AWR HAWSES AWN FAWR!"
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:20:Dmitri_M wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 15:06:
In South Africa, a fairly rough country at the best of times, my grandmother had surgery under our universal health care system. She had no health insurance. It was done in a government run hospital. The surgery cost 3 dollars. In a private hospital with better conditions and higher staffing she would have paid 10 000 dollars. I guess from what I've read here all American hospitals are essentially "private"?
The costs of US hospitals are so out of control because their insurance cost is ridiculous. An average hospital probably pays 100 million dollars in insurance a year. They have to, because if a surgeon makes a genuine mistake that leaves someone with a chronic health issue, courts will award truly insane amounts of money to the victim.
(I'm not saying someone isn't entitled to compensation, but I fail to see why a small scar on your knee somehow needs to be rewarded with enough money to set up the victim's entire family for life.)
Creston
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 15:45:
You keep mentioning these studies. Could you provide links?
"Everything is dirty" isn't an a good defense, since there are different levels of dirty.
Right now, everyone is anti-nuke, but coal kills more people per year than nuclear ever did(although nuclear does have the POTENTIAL of killing thousands of people its just that catastrophic failures are rare).
Wind isn't included in the list, but certainly wind has many times fewer deaths as a power source than coal, no (how DOES wind power kill people prematurely?
3. The benefits are strong: natural gas is a much cleaner and more efficient fuel source for electrical production vs. coal, so there's an argument for switching to it short term to meet electrical needs while preventing pollution and global warming until even cleaner sources come online.
Dmitri_M wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 15:06:
In South Africa, a fairly rough country at the best of times, my grandmother had surgery under our universal health care system. She had no health insurance. It was done in a government run hospital. The surgery cost 3 dollars. In a private hospital with better conditions and higher staffing she would have paid 10 000 dollars. I guess from what I've read here all American hospitals are essentially "private"?
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 16:02:
Yeah, that rant goes off the rails at the end into typical Fox hate of Obama and "Liberal" culture, but I've read this part elsewhere:Using computer games, our sons and daughters can pretend they are Olympians, Formula 1 drivers, rock stars or sharpshooters. And while they can turn off their Wii and Xbox machines and remember they are really in dens and playrooms on side streets and in triple deckers around America, that is after their hearts have raced and heads have swelled with false pride for “being” something they are not.
It is something to be concerned about in children, IMO (not that I think there's evidence that it makes people narcissistic). I have no idea if gaming has a negative effect on the developing mind, but I think it's a valid research topic. Your brain enters a different alpha state compared to doing other activities and it would be interesting to know if that has an effect or not if you do it as a child for hours a day. We already know that TV watching correlates strongly with ADHD incidence. Brain wave patterns are different game playing vs. TV watching, but are there any negative effects? I think it's an interesting question.
Research found that playing video games helped boost self-esteem and mental development as well as physical activity levels. The lady anchor seems kind of pissed at the prospect, but the research seems sound! The government currently recommends children spend no longer than an hour a day in front of a screen. According to Dr Daniel Johnson of the Queensland University of Technology though, the right child playing the right game could spend 3 or 4 hours playing and still be considered a healthy amount.