The irony is that this is the exact same reason that households in sub-Saharan Africa are installing these little deployments of a solar panel and a small battery storage system that has a few outlets directly integrated into it — grid power is unreliable and diesel generators are too costly and stink.

Why are people so crap at reading comprehension?

Your #1 is *literally* a recapitulation of "using low carbon power to generate the electricity". Your #2 is, as well, just for capex rather than opex.

More fundamentally, you appear to be missing the point I was making to the OP, which was that HVAC, contrary to their beliefs, is (1) inherently low-carbon (using electricity to move heat) and (2) is extremely effective not merely despite this, but because of this.

Nope. That’s not on offer. Left-leaning people understand that AC works and is net zero, just like they know other basic things, such as how to spell broccoli. So they’re not going to fall for this kind of shite, just like they didn’t fall for the shite about vaccines being dangerous or covid not being dangerous or raw milk being safe or gun control being dangerous, etc etc. So you’ll have to do all the shuffling all by yourselves. Toodles!

I appreciate you're trying to make a joke, but it doesn't land well because of course there's no way that Florida Republicans are going to give out free snorkels, masks or fins. They're more likely to ban them, or slap a tax on them, or tell police to shoot people using them.

Given you and I are in basic agreement on this, I don't know why you commented the way you did, as if I hadn't written " It already has a COP of 3 or 4 and runs on electricity, the only thing that can make it less carbon intensive is using low carbon power to generate the electricity."

...persuading De Santis's political base that AC systems are net zero and should be switched off because they use heat pumps and electricity. It's not like the state will be counting excess deaths from heat anyway, and vast swathes of his voting base are elderly multi-morbid, so no-one would really count them or care if they start dropping like flies. Given their sourness, it's really a kindness to help them shuffle off the mortal coil a little earlier. At least it is for their families.

What the fuck is a "net zero" HVAC? Every vapour-compression air conditioner is just an air-to-air heat pump in cooling mode and always has been. What do you imagine is being done to make an HVAC "net zero"? It already has a COP of 3 or 4 and runs on electricity, the only thing that can make it less carbon intensive is using low carbon power to generate the electricity. The AC itself doesn't work more or less well for being an inherently net zero technology, you dumbass.

I don’t think your statement contradicts mine. I said Western militaries are going to have trouble *replicating* what Ukraine achieved.

This is true, but Western militaries are only going to have limited success replicating what Ukraine has been able to achieve. Western defence systems are structurally not set up to support good enough, fast and cheap innovation cycles and they don't have a battlefield to test it on, and they have safety concerns that Ukraine doesn't have the luxury of affording too. And Western militaries aren't yet sold on cheap swarms as a paradigm. There's lots of yes-but reasoning, eg yes-but drone defences will evolve. .The incentives aren't there.

Plus, imagining that all drones are just small FPV anti-personnel drones, when Ukraine has been deploying middle- and long-range drones with great effectiveness over the last several months

Area man fails to discover the concept of bundled and unbundled services. Free as in “no per use fees”, which matters because ordinary humans loathe per use fees for this kind of thing with a passion.

This is just ridiculous cope. The UK has this, with a population of 70m, as does Germany with a population of 84m, and France with a population of 70m. It's nothing to do with size, or any other random factor you can think of. The UK's banking system is much older than the US's, and yet has managed to drag itself into the era of instant free electronic payments.

What are you *talking* about? Why would a check not be "captive to regulations that change" where an electronic transfer would be? Fees don't get charged in the civilised worlld outside the US for electronic transfers. There's no exorbitant interest rates on unpaid balances, the transfer is instant. There's no late payments, the transfer is instant. Quite the opposite: a check can get lost in the mail, an electronic transfer can't.

It's incredible watching Americans talk about systems they know nothing of.

It's amazing how people in the US are so committed to the bit that they dream up these theoretical objections to how something will work despite having had no actual experience using it, while ignoring the actual lived experience of people who do use it. There's no fees. It's secure. Sit down and stop self-soothing in public, it's uncouth

The funny bit is where you assume you have to pay a fee. Not in the rest of the world. For example, in the UK, I can make a payment to any other UK individual or institution without no transaction fee, and it happens instantly.