Thursday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. A commercial hack?
  2. The technology behind carbon fiber, not exactly explained.
  3. Steward on the Sherrod kerfuffle.
  4. Those leaks and a likely consequence.
  5. NaCl and soteriology.
  6. More NaCl here too.
  7. Gallantry … a old fashioned notion, for which the revival of same would not be a bad thing.
  8. Mr Kerry and his taxes.
  9. Like a poll tax?
  10. Kind or clever … and a question begged.
  11. An argument for irresponsibility examined. I reject proposition (b).
  12. Diversity training in action.

53 responses to “Thursday Highlights

  1. I think with industrial emissions you’re missing the point that the carbon sequestering usually takes place over geological timescales while with food its over seasonal ones. Granted wood burning can be a borderline case as some wood can be grown in a year or two making a plant that used such wood nearly carbon neutral over a 3-5 year timeframe. In the long run everything is carbon neutral as the seas will eventually suck all excess carbon from the atmosphere. But for practical purposes I’d say we should look at a very long run of 100 years, long run of around 50 and short and medium runs much less.

  2. Boonton,
    I’m not missing the point. Cap/Trade is. Are you suggesting from a climate standpoint we should turn to burning wood for example?

  3. I’d have to look into it more but I think wood burning is considered carbon neutral. Of course there’s the problem that we just don’t have enough wood, burning causes other types of polution and if you’re going to farm wood that requires non-carbon neutral expenditure. So it’s not scaleable enough as a solution but in limited cases I think it can count as carbon neutral.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>