Religious organization campaigning against science and technology? Must be Tuesday.

Such a thing, in principle, is bad, but at the same time, I have little sympathy for anyone who hasn’t bailed on Yahoo yet.

Oh hey Buzzfeed. funny seeing you here.

Hey, I’m just the messenger. This is a pretty well documented phenomenon. Same reason American import tend to trounce domestically made Chinese movies at the Chinese box office. Chinese audiences are still skeptical of the quality of their homegrown film industry.

Weird as it sounds, it could possibly be a play to the growing Chinese market. Chinese audiences want big budget Hollywood-type films, but since they’ve had a lot of homegrown crap in the past, having Big name Hollywood actors on the bill can validate the film as worth going to see. That’s how we end up with things…

I’ll put $20 on “Honda Civic”

Fairness Bias: If house republicans walked in today and said the sky was red, tomorrow’s headline would read “Congress can’t agree on color of sky”

“...Hell Yeah! Zombies!”

Of all the people I’m cool with doing Crazy off the wall research...The DOE is right up there With NASA. I want my fusion reactors and spaceships, damnit!

Portal 2 co-op

Are those insults really called for?

I’m sorry you find my statements arrogant, but I am deeply concerned that we are damaging the planet and that no “renewable” technology is going to be ready to shoulder the majority of the burden of our energy needs in time to make a significant impact. if that makes me humorless, I…

Biomass is far from a clean energy source and Geothermal is great but until we put some money into developing hot dry rock Geothermal Technology, it’s extremely site-limited. I would suggest perhaps it is you that needs to be “learn”-ed something.

Contaminated how? It’s nearly impossible to irradiate water in any meaningful way (which is why heavy hydrogen isotopes are so irritatingly expensive) so please, enlighten me what contaminants you are referring to?

I agree that it’s the people who are fucked, but I think the fragility of nuclear power plants and the danger of radiation are both vastly overstated. Case in point, even with the incidents we’ve seen, per watt, Nuclear power has vastly fewer deaths or injuries than any other power source, including wind and solar. …

Well we’ve got enough uranium to meet our power needs for longer than the earth maintains it’s current relationship with the sun so one could argue it’s more sustainable that solar and wind.

Care to defend that statement? Germany is pumping a hell of a lot of money into such efforts (To the point where they have the most expensive power in Europe) and their coal use went up every time they closed a reactor down. Nuclear heavy France meanwhile has some of the cheapest electricity on the continent and far…

No we can’t. You’re talking about scaling global battery storage from Gigawatt hours to terrawatt-weeks, and given the absurd price of battery storage, The sheer amount of overbuild needed in wind and solar, or the fact that a viable grid scale storage method has yet to even be invented let alone commercialized.

Don’t…

No, very true, It’s not fair of me to ignore Norway and other hydro heavy countries. Hydro is great, but it doesn’t scale particularly well at a global level. Like geothermal, right now sites are limited. With run-of-river hydro and Hot-dry-rock geothermal tech we might be able to expand those sources, but wind and…

As long as the wind is blowing and the sun is shining. When it’s still or cloudy, it’s all fracked gas. There’s a reason the only developed countries with sustainable emissions levels are largely nuclear powered (Looking at you, France)

By “Efficiency” I believe he’s referring to “Capacity factor”, which is “On average what percentage of an assets capacity does it produce” for which wind it about 30% nuclear power and most dispatchable power sources are in the 90% range. The instability of wind and solar remain a major problem because it is…