Prices of the electricity we use to charge

[lenny]

 

[lenny]

Water bills to rise by £123 a year in April

Water bills to rise by £10 a month in April

Figures reveal a jump for billpayers in England and Wales despite questions over firms' performance.

www.bbc.co.uk

Thames Water confirms £158m dividends despite debt and sewage leaks anger

Thames Water says it has cash to last until May 2025 and if it fails to find investment, Sir Keir Starmer will face a decision on measures that would effectively see it nationalised

www.independent.co.uk

Thames Water – do consumers take priority over bond and shareholders?

This blog is about the competing interests for the long-term revenues of Thames Water. JP Morgan have furnished the FT with a chart showing who owns what at Thames Water. It shows USS owning 9.1% o…

henrytapper.com

 

[lenny]

Scientists leave Elon Musk’s X for ‘nicer’ Bluesky

https://cybernews.com/news/scientists-leave-musk-for-nicer-bluesky/

Bluesky's popularity is skyrocketing, with the number of users of its main competitor Twitter/X surpassing 30 million people

The number of Bluesky users has doubled in just three months

gagadget.com

 

[Woosh]

Trump seems to blame air traffic controller for the accident.

 

[matthewslack]

The thing about planting trees to remove carbon is that it makes no difference. In the end - at some future time - probably in about a hundred years that tree will come down and liberate all of its sequestered carbon. This would be fine if all carbon emitted to the atmosphere was from the biological carbon cycle.

It isn't. WE have been digging up fossilised carbon and liberating it. Two thousand, billion tones so far. Fossilised carbon release can not be counteracted by tree planting. Tree planting carbon sequestration is temporary only unless we cut down the trees and bury them permanently.

In the complicated self delusional world of carbon accounting, it all depends on where the boundary is drawn. That's roughly how wood burning power stations get away with it.

If woodland / tree planting / other biofuels are dedicated to a particular purpose, then the emissions of one can be set against the carbon absorption of the other. Net zero.

 

[Woosh]

The thing about planting trees to remove carbon is that it makes no difference. In the end - at some future time - probably in about a hundred years that tree will come down and liberate all of its sequestered carbon. This would be fine if all carbon emitted to the atmosphere was from the biological carbon cycle.

At the rate we are replacing gas power stations with solar and wind, the problem with burning fossil fuel will be gone in a generation. Over population will be the problem of the day because automation driven by ai will make 9/10 of us more or less redundant.

 

[soundwave]

Trump seems to blame air traffic controller for the accident.

video of the radar said crash warning for about 30 seconds prob out side for a fag

 

[Ghost1951]

At the rate we are replacing gas power stations with solar and wind, the problem with burning fossil fuel will be gone in a generation. Over population will be the problem of the day because automation driven by ai will make 9/10 of us more or less redundant.

Think back to December, when for a month the rather splendid installed wind generating capacity of around 30 Gigawatts averaged an actual generation of about 10 gigawatt. Of course, at that point in the year, solar was negligible. There were many days when the actual wind output was as low as 1 Gwatt. I check almost every day and it was obvious and is obvious that we can never be free of gas turbines at least as a backup.

Methane is a low carbon fuel. When you burn methane you get 2 molecules of water and one molecule of co2 (methane is CH4). Compared to coal or oil it is very low carbon.

You are right about the population. the Utopian sort think that automation and AI will usher in a heavenly period where people will spend their days in delightful leisure, supported by the wealth generated by giant general AI. Dream on. All that wealth generated by AI will be in the hands of giant corporations headed up by people like Musk and governed abroad by the likes of Trump. They are not going to hand over that wealth to support Utopian projects then, anymore than they do now.