Unfortunately, a lot of these schools will end up going bankrupt over the next few years. Enrollment is already down and they are on the threshold of a demographic crisis.

Compared to what? Natural Gas? Both derived from seas of dead plankton, though Natty Gas is 50% cleaner. But, Natty Gas generation in MWh now surpasses coal, and soon will have equal emissions just by volume of generation.

Agree with OP, scrubbed coal at the volume we burn it isn't a pressing issue....

Agreed. I prefer slow and steady over decades vs alarmist knee jerk reactions.

A genuine question on this. What do you do at night? I see a lot of people quoting these percentages, but I speculate they are averages. A grid with drastic, short term load swings won't be stable for long. This has played out in a few regions. Multi GW capacity plants cannot throttle that quickly. Unless you live in a region that has abundant pumped hyrdo......

In my experience, when someone says, "Scientists say" or "Science says" in casual, they usually mean "What I watched on youtube", or they are referring to something they read in an article, or what they saw on the news. It doesn't matter if it exists in a factual matter or not. It only matters that the person associates it with science. Very few outside of the fields actually reads the studies or papers from the source. Hence the first line of the post. I'm simply presenting a reasoning for why trust is down. Any agenda I have is simply implied by you reading too deeply into the post.

I agree with that statement.

20 years, possibly. 10, I personally don't believe anything on a huge scale. We can't replace all the vehicles that fast. Even at 100% electric production. Nor do I believe we could build out the infrastructure that fast (we are facing a large recession). I do believe, in 10 years, we will see the first short haul electric commuter airline go into service, but the changes will be slow and incremental.

"Scientist" in that context means what they read and hear. Which links back to the first sentence of the post.

As an electrical engineer I've been following battery development for decades. Once a month there's "a new breakthrough" that will "revolutionize" battery storage. Lately, they're all the rage on youtube. Current tech (lithium) has certainly advanced a lot in the last decade, but it's been via incremental changes that are not pure fantasy once outside the laboratory. Hence, whenever someone wants to discuss the "new breakthrough", I almost immediately discredit it....

The drop in trust could be due to the incredible amount of immediacy presented with the science. Whether that is from the media, research teams trying to get sustained funding, or politics, is unknown.

I don't think the general public disbelieves in science per say. They just hate it when scientist say we should give up our primary mode of transportation, ignore the issues with food stability (fertilizer and GMOs be damned), ignore grid stability, demand 100% renewable everything. And if we don't, we'll all be dead in 10 years!

Sensible folks are wondering how in heck we are going to pay for all of this without bankrupting the country. Engineers are left wondering if an achievable roadmap will ever be laid out. Everyone else thinks the media sensationalizes these subjects as pure click bait...

Op was correct, you cannot neglect the startup and manufacturing carbon costs. They are steeper than you think

Yes, electric vehicles emit less net carbon from an operational standpoint. But everyone ignores the construction of the vehicles. Making those batteries is very intensive. A typical gas sedan requires 6 - 8 tons of CO2 to build. A Tesla Model S requires over 28 tons (due to the battery). You won't offset in a Tesla until you've driven over 200,000 miles.

If you were really hell bent on doing the best for the environment, you would buy a plug in hybrid. Those are the best carbon offset we have currently. The truth is that a Tesla Model S isn't really a "green" vehicle.

source

For anyone reading, all of the responses in this thread are valid and on point. It's all relative to where you are. I grew up in rural Ohio and general police response could easily be 30 or more minutes away. We always assumed that every property had a gun for protection. Property thieves out there don't fear police, they fear the property owner. Stealing tools and vehicles from farms is a popular target. Prosecutors out there also respect the right to protect your property and safety. Doing a stupid thing and collecting a dense prize is tolerated.

I now enjoy living in a very safe community. I can have 3 cruisers in front of my house in 2 minutes or less. I don't currently have a home defense weapon, but if I relocate to a rural area, you bet I would. It's a different world.

It's my opinion that folks who only know urban/suburban life don't understand these aspects of the argument... The last thing I will say is, I never met a rural gun owner who never respected nor knew how to use a gun. Many are taught from a young age. In contrast, I've met plenty of urban CCL holders who I would never trust to carry or draw their weapon.

Yea, because an Airbus has never had disasterous outcomes from pilots fighting automation. Or... maybe you own Airbus stock?

Define "mostly". Deep tissue signal loss in the 400Mhz medical band is about -7dB. 2.4ISM band is upward of -12dB. Your wifi doesn't stop working because you have plenty of signal margin to spare or are taking advantage multipath propagation. Plus, the difference in performance at -60dBm and -72dBm to the average phone wifi user is not noticeable.

The OPs question depends mostly on how much power this device needs. Hopefully in the micro watt range...

Correct, instead of splitting the subnet, you can cable the cameras direct to the NVR if a) you have one (the cameras will record to sd cards) b) you can reach them all via cable. Additionally you could just allocate another subnet on the same physical segment. The end results is the same. No VLANs required. Many ways to skin this cat. I went with the split at the firewall to simplify, no other reason.

My setup had an NVR for 24/7 recording, but I did not cable the cameras direct to the NVR. They were on surplus dlink unmanaged PoE switches and half of them were in an outbuilding 50 yards away via direct bury cable.

The reason I did now wire direct to the NVR is I wanted the cameras accessible at all times. I am now writing an OpenHAB binding to control them. Cheap Chinesium cameras work, but somethings they don't do well on their own. Aka, it's not easy to shutoff alarms when 'home' presence is detected. They don't switch to night mode very well (tend to oscillate back and forth for an hour or so). They false alarm on bugs and spiders, etc, etc. I also want to integrate the camera motion triggers with PIR and MW sensors to reduce/eliminate false alarms (multiple sensors contributing to a single alarm event).

These were Dahua cameras and NVR btw.

Slashdot mutilated that post?

Agreed, don't need a vlan. Most cameras don't support vlan tagging anyway. Plus managed PoE switches may blow a budget. As someone who setup an 8 camera setup for a rural property recently, here's how I did it.

Get a signage computer like this [shuttle.com]. Find a model that has dual ethernet. They can be found on ebay for $150 USD or less. You don't need a lot of horse power here. I went with a CeleronU model with low power requirements (30W). One port goes to the dsl/cable modem, other to the internal lan.

The key is to split your usual class C subnet in to two, 192.168.10.1/31. This gives you two useuable ranges.

192.168.10.1 - 192.168.10.126
192.168.10.128 - 192.168.10.254

Setup your iptables/nftables rules to only masquerade the lower subnet, the upper subnet has no internet routings. Assign your IP addresses based upon if the device is restricted (APs, Cameras, NVRs go to the upper range). But, give them a full class C so they all share the same default gateway. The devices are non-the-wiser that the subnet is split at the firewall. With a common default gateway, the upper range is still reachable over a VPN.

Setup Wireguard VPN and you now have full access to everything on mobile.

As a side note, I do monitor when the restricted devices phone home, which they do with frequency. Could be just checking for firmware updates, etc. But it's good to know they can only connect when I enable them in iptables/nftables.

Agreed, don't need a vlan. Most cameras don't support vlan tagging anyway. Plus managed PoE switches may blow a budget. As someone who setup an 8 camera setup for a rural property recently, here's how I did it.

Get a signage computer like this. Find a model that has dual ethernet. They can be found on ebay for $150 USD or less. You don't need a lot of horse power here. I went with a CeleronU model with low power requirements (AND all devices can be accessed from a VPN since they share the same default gateway.

Setup Wireguard VPN and you now have full access to everything when on mobile.

As a side note, I do monitor when the restricted devices phone home, which they do with frequency. Could be just checking for firmware updates, etc. But it's good to know they can only connect when I enable them in iptables/nftables.

No, leave it as is. For one reason, ethernet cables are often hand made or hand terminated. I've terminated 1000s of cables in my career, various lengths and runs. The current connector, while not perfect, is just about the right size for hand termination without expensive or specialized equipment. My bag always has a crimper and spare connectors in it. I can easily whip up a cable on a moments notice. If you go to a mini or micro connector, more specialized equipment will be involved that may not allow one to hand terminate a cable easily. If we lose that, we lose the versatility of the connector in general.