toaster

joined 10 months ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

@thatsTheCatch Looks like you accidentally posted the same comment twice.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Imo what you're saying is reasonable not just for kids but for everyone - we need spaces for outdoor recreation and sport. And that includes some amount of native grasses. That being said, if you go through a suburb, most lawns are not used for that purpose and certainly, almost every boulevard is wasted. Many neighbourhoods either lack public parks, or the parks are not safely accessible by bicycle.

That's where the whole nolawn discussion comes in: to stop making lawns the default. They have a place, but we're overdoing it to the point of pushing out native species and pollinators such as bees and butterflies.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

I found this image online and now that I see it was created by AI, the hypocracy is obvious.

 
 

Edit: ugh, the creator made this with AI

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 days ago

This was a great, succinct article. Here are a few key points that I noticed:

The important result here is that the efficiency of your air conditioner decreases as ∆T increases — e.g., as the outside temperature goes up.

the work required to keep your house at a fixed temperature Tc increases with the square of the temperature difference between inside and outside temperature, ΔT².

Let’s use the same numbers from the previous example: you want to keep your house at 75F. If climate change has increased the outside temperature from 96F to 100F, the energy your air conditioner consumes increases by (100-75)2/(96-75)2 = 252/212 — this is an increase in energy consumption of 42%!

Averaged over an entire day, the increase will be less than this because ∆T is smaller for much of the day (e.g., at night) But the result is robust: climate change is driving exponentially increasing energy demand for cooling.

People with financial means, who work in air-conditioned offices and live in climate-controlled homes, can handle rising temperatures by simply paying for more electricity.

However, a significant portion of the global population lives the hot life. These people live in homes without air conditioning, work outdoors or in warehouses or kitchens with no climate control.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Nice! That's a heck of a lot of potatoes! Watch out PEI, there's a new farmer in town. ;)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Looking forward to seeing it! :) consider posting on [email protected]

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

Also, OP may want to consider x-posting this to [email protected]

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Nothing to add other than this rules!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

In my opinion, there are greater influences than voter turnout on climate policy. The corporate lobbying, aggressive PR, and disinformation has influenced the state more than any vote. There have historically been no candidates to even vote for that cared about global warming.

And the oil and gas corporations themselves have influenced voters in the same way. Embedding oil into masculinity, lack of global warming discussion in the monopolized media outlets, etc.... Attempts to keep information and awareness from the average voter and make us doubt global warming and even defend oil companies.

IMO, the American state's impulse to protect capital and monopoly is the primary reason the climate response has been so poor.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This may be off-topic for Solarpunk Farming.. What do OP and others think?

 
-6
Car Insurance is Too Cheap (thewaroncars.org)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Any reason for the downvotes or is it a reaction to the title?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Also, CyclOSM.org shows bike infrastructure.

view more: next ›