'Tis but thy name that is my enemy; Thou art thyself, though not Mexico. What's Mexico? It is nor lake, nor river, nor sea, nor ocean, nor any other body of water. O, be some other name! What's in a name? That which we call a gulf By any other name would be as wet; So Gulf of Mexico would, were it not Gulf of Mexico call'd, Retain that dear perfection which it owes Without that title. Gulf of Mexico, doff thy name, And for that name which is no part of thee Take America. Take thee at thy word: Call me but yours, and I'll be new baptized; Henceforth I never will be Gulf of Mexico.

What is needed is a solar panel with integrated battery and inverter and changes to regulations that encourage DIY installation. That would reduce installation costs which is the biggest obstacle to going solar. Panels are cheap on the order of 50 cents per watt. If we could get an integrated battery inverter solar panel for about the same cost that drops the payback to just a few years. That way people could add panels one at a time and not have to cough up so much in a one time lump sum to get a benefit.

That price is outrageous. Musk believes a whole autonomous robot will only cost about $20,000. It's just one arm. It should be more like $4,000. There is a lot of room to knock some cost out of that thing. Of course there are people out there that will pay $800 for a chunk of plastic shaped like glasses. And $8,000 for tiny audio systems that fit in your ear. Companies have no shame in charging outrageous prices for anything medical.

The first thing is that you must prosecute people for stealing. Identifying thieves can do nothing if there is no punishment. Stealing must become dishonorable and socially unacceptable again. First step is to get rid of welfare entitlements. When people have to work for what they have they understand the pain theft causes.

So literally no punishment for sending 1000's of false takedown notices. An injunction to not do something you should already not do seems totally useless. I'm sure that will really scare them into complying. They did not spend a cent on legal fees have no monetary damages and probably don't even exist as real people. I guess this was just a legal maneuver by Google to avoid some kind of charge of negligence against it for not vetting the takedowns before enacting them. These charges being brought by people harmed by the false takedowns.

Ammonia is liquid at 150 psi and 75 degrees f. So it is not that hard to store and carry compared to Hydrogen. Hydrogen requires a lot of volume, very high pressure or cryogenic temperatures to store. It leaks through nearly everything. Hydrogen makes metal brittle. Shipping is not a high tech industry like rocketery but rocket companies have problems handling hydrogen. Leaks cause scrubs all the time. It would be better to build systems that use solar or nuclear power to take CO2 out of the air and convert it to diesel fuel than use either hydrogen of ammonia. I still believe it will be easier and less costly to adapt to climate change than eliminate all carbon based fuels. There are a lot of other people who believe this too.Read Apocalypse Never or listen to Climate Discussion Nexis for a more balanced view of climate issues.

Ammonia is extremely toxic and under about 150 psi at room temperature. Imagine a fully fueled ship collision exiting a port near a major city. Releasing a giant cloud of toxic gas to spread over the city. We are talking a disaster like Bopaul India in 1984. Thousands die. No thanks.

What is unethical is the fear mongering of the climate change zealotes. We need energy to live and as fossil energy is becoming more difficult and expensive to use we are switching to new energy forms. Those forms are initially expensive but as people work on them the cost comes down. We need to make sure those living in energy poor countries can catch up to the energy rich west. That may mean burning coal and oil and gas for a while yet. But the switch to electric power from solar and nuclear is underway and will happen. The world is safer, cleaner, most healthy it has ever been. If you don't think so you are not looking at the actual data. People live longer have higher standards of living and are safer than ever before. It is the news media that blow minor things all out of proportion. Yes bad things happen but not that often. It was much worse in the past. We just never knew about it because the information was not available until years later if at all. Just look at the headlines. Any bad event is there from anywhere in the world. They have to report on the bad thing happening in Gaza and Ukraine because nothing bad is happening anywhere else. We have some problems but we can handle them. Get a dose of reality go listen to John Robson Climate Discussion Nexus or read Apocalypse Never by by Michael Shellenberger or Super Abundance by Marian L. Tupy or watch some Ted Talks by Steven Pinker and take the edge off that climate change fear.

This reminds me of the Allen Sherman song "Automation" except with real consequences for real people. To error is human to really screw things up you need a computer.

Its sad she was literally worked to death. I wonder if she ever told her friends and family that she had gotten a killer job ot Wells Fargo. Of course they thought it was a dead end job. In this case they were both right. ..... Too soon?

Co2 levels follow warming they do not lead warming. How do you explain that? You cannot push a rope. If Co2 was the cause it must precede the effect unless you believe in psychic global warming. Co2 increases greening. Data is unequivocal the earth has greened due to higher levels of co2. This is in stark contrast to predictions of desertification.

Population is Up. Life expectancy is up. What is false about that? You have to power the trains. They run on coal or oil or electricity made by coal or oil. To have stuff to move around you have to produce it. You are poorly informed about how food is produced and moved. If you shut down oil there would be no fertilizer to maintain crop yields or fuel to transport it to processing or your local grocery store. You would starve in a few months. Train tracks can only be used by trains. They go from station to station depot to depot. Building a train track to every grocery store in every town by every farm how absurd an idea. We cannot even build a high speed rail system in CA. Billions spent and nothing built. You would trade profits for oil companies for profits for rail companies that would have an absolute stranglehold on the economy. With highways and trucking you have competition and lower costs. Also the freedom to go whenever and wherever you want not limited by the train schedule. I like freedom. You seem to like control.

Weather is a chaotic system. Small changes in initial conditions have big effects on the later state of the system. They say flapping butterfly wings in Argentina cause a hurricane to hit Miami. Absorbing more sunlight by the low albedo of solar panels causes local heating that disturbs weather patterns. Pulling energy out of the wind slows the wind speed disturbing air circulation patterns. These effects are not necessarily local and inconsequential. We just do not know. We have been building these things without studying the potential effects on weather patterns. Just like we built a bunch of dams without understanding the effects on fish populations and river health.

Climate predictions and scare mongering do not have a good track record. So many bad predictions like melting glaciers (they are still there) Melting polar ice caps (they are still there) Rising sea level (same slow rate as historical records show)

Without the use of fossil fuels we would still be living as subsistence farmers instead of living in cities. Life as a subsistence farmer sucked. Just go ask those still living that life in some of the energy starved regions of the world. They want to live in nice cities too. Have cheap food, clean water, entertainment, health care, a good life. Guys like you want them to have an energy poor life while you enjoy your Starbucks coffee and cushy warm dry home. I want them to have the benefits of cheap fossil fuels until we have something better and cheaper.

This is extortion by lawsuit. There is still a lot of uncertainty about co2 causing harm. The data that John Robson presents in the Climate Change Discussion Nexus does a pretty good job of showing how the harms are just not what the alarmists claim. If you consider the benefits we get from coal, oil and gas like keeping 3/4 of the people on earth alive is worth any efforts we need to expend to mitigate climate change. Even if it is man made or natural. We keep building where things can be broken by nature. We have more people but we are healthier longer lived than ever before. Most of this was only possible through the use of fossil fuels. Yes switch to nuclear,solar and wind but do it as those technologies get cheaper. I believe we are moving into solar and wind without understanding how they affect the weather. There is such a thing as unintended consequences. I think we will find solar and wind have some and are not the perfect solution many believe they are.

It's only as carbon free as the energy used to make it. Most energy still comes from carbon based sources. This might be a good process for living in space where we will not have the room for cows. Also a byproduct would be oxygen something we will need in space. Any space station or ship in the inner solar system will most likely get nearly all their power from solar. Not very practical or cost effective here on earth. We should stick with cows.

Just try surviving without the oil, gas and coal and all the products these sources of energy make possible. These products and their derivatives are the only thing keeping billions of people in the world alive. Without these products food production would drop by 50% or more. The food produced could not reach the cities where people live. People would die from heat and cold due to lack of air conditioning. The "settled science" of global warming is not as settled as some claim. The dire consequences claimed in the press is not supported by the facts. The climate has always varied do to things outside of the control of man.

All solar, wind (green) energy systems have a payback time. Without government subsidies which are not "Free Money" the payback time is on the order of 10 years. Most of this stuff did not exist 10 years ago so it's not saving us anything yet. If you include the cost of all the failed solar and wind and wave power systems that did not survive their expected life or make money over operating costs we are a ways from breaking even on this stuff.