From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: OT Why do people make fun of trump?
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 09:49:23 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 2024-10-04 01:33, Dhu on Gate wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 08:49:47 -0700, Alan wrote:
>
>> On 2024-10-03 08:23, Dhu on Gate wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 17:53:49 -0700, Alan wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-10-02 16:48, Mittens Romney wrote:
>>>>> Dhu on Gate wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 12:49:02 -0600, Mittens Romney wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is increasing concern that energy generation from fossil fuels
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hydrocarbons are the safest, densest (not counting radio-isotopes)
>>>>>> energy transport mechanism we have: so far batteries *ain't* up
>>>>>> to snuff either way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> True.
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's the "fossil" part that's a problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dhu
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Only because we insist on deadnaming abiotic oil.
>>>> Oh...
>>>>
>>>> ...it completely makes sense that you're one of those.
>>>
>>>
>>> The actual "origin" of "fossil carbons" is of no account:
>>> they are buried an' diggin' them up to burn as a source
>>> of Electric Power is the underlying problem the industry
>>> faces: you lose 60% offa the top no matter whut in conversion
>>> (usually closer to 2/3) either way.
>> Why did you put quotes around "origin" and "fossil carbons"?
>
> Because they could just as well be _non_ fossil carbon and it's
> of no account to the here and now. "Fossil" implies some living
> source origin, and there's always the (distinct) possibility
> that some buried carbons originate with the planets original
> accretion from stardust.
No. They really couldn't be non-fossil carbon.