oh, I asked what people wanted in it and no one responded!
I was thinking maybe small scale gardening for a start? Home composting?
You make the thread. It'll be a general thread where anyone can throw in things and have discussions whether X or Y is better. If someone knows a lot about home gardening, they can talk home gardening. If they want to just say things like "wash most of your clothes in cold water because detergent will still work just fine and you're probably not getting dirty enough to justify actually using warm water" that's fine too. Once in a while the OP can be edited to add the most useful/easy/effective/whatever notes.
oh, I asked what people wanted in it and no one responded!
I was thinking maybe small scale gardening for a start? Home composting?
You make the thread. It'll be a general thread where anyone can throw in things and have discussions whether X or Y is better. If someone knows a lot about home gardening, they can talk home gardening. If they want to just say things like "wash most of your clothes in cold water because detergent will still work just fine and you're probably not getting dirty enough to justify actually using warm water" that's fine too. Once in a while the OP can be edited to add the most useful/easy/effective/whatever notes.
A similar (and much smaller scale) project is going on in my area to power a new university campus with the structures being built from the ground up for efficiency, recycled building materials, and self sufficiency on power generation. Apparently the project is profitable that the city is planning on updating the code requirements for new block structures and infill to mimic the designs.
Meat is an inefficient use of industrial grain. But industrial grain itself is an inefficient use of fossil fuels, because you need lots of petroleum for the fertilizers, machinery, etc.
OTOH, grassfed beef doesn't require nearly as much petroleum. The cows fertilize the soil, they trample the ground to soften the grass, they eat the grass so you don't need to harvest it yourself, etc.
Grassfed beef is more labor intensive, grain based agricultural is more resource intensive. The industry prefers grainfed beef because it's easier to scale up and give you greater yield per acre. Honestly, I think grassfed beef would kill two birds with one stone: Dropping unemployment while helping the environment.
But the main problem is that since labor is costlier than petroleum, food prices would go up, which means you also need to solve the wealth gap issue. There is a methane problem associated with meet, which is a lot more potent than carbon dioxide. OTOH, it doesn't methane doesn't last in the air nearly as long, so in theory it would stabilize.
Also, I know some farms are converting methane from cows into a power source, so that's a technology we should be investing in.
Also, I know some farms are converting methane from cows into a power source, so that's a technology we should be investing in.
I...what...how?
gather the shit into big pits from the feeding stations, from which its fed into a bacterial digester that breaks it down and releases tons of methane in a sealed environment from which it is compressed and fed into a generator to burn for power.
One critical step to addressing global warming is we need more GMO. Plants that grow faster, plants that absorb more CO2, plants with bigger yields, etc.
We also need to see a shift from annuals (plants that need to be replanted every year) to perennials (plant once, harvest yearly). You have a deeper root system, less erosion, less machinery, less labor, etc. The big problem is that the mean reason we rely so heavily on annual plants in the first place is because they're easier to cross breed for specific qualities. In order to do that with perennials in a timely fashion, you're probably going to need GMOs.
Where as most of the opposition to climate change comes from the right, the GMO issue is one that comes from the left. I wish my facebook hippy friends would spend less time whining about GMOs and more time focusing on problems that actually matter.
Grassfed beef isn't that much better and it uses a crapload of space. There's only so much land that can support grazing cattle, and there's a lot of negative side effects like shit getting into local water sources. Technically, grain fed beef can mitigate a lot of those problems by collecting waste and so-on, and it probably would be easier to dome the entire feedlot and collect / scrub methane than try and hook every cow to some kind of fart catcher.
Going to more natural meat is a positive as well - buffalo is much better adapted than standard beef cattle for open grazing / grass feeding in the US, and I'm surprised there isn't a bigger push that way.
That said, things are done the way they are for reasons. Usually because it's the cheapest and easiest reason. The best answer is government regulation that makes the cheap and easy solution not so cheap and easy. Requiring companies that pollute to buy some sort of pollution credits would probably help...the costs will get pushed onto consumers, who will possibly then make better purchasing decisions because free market.
A win-win solution, and we can use the money that comes from the pollution credits to subsidize lower inco...hahaha, almost got it out.
+1
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Grassfed beef isn't that much better and it uses a crapload of space. There's only so much land that can support grazing cattle, and there's a lot of negative side effects like shit getting into local water sources. Technically, grain fed beef can mitigate a lot of those problems by collecting waste and so-on, and it probably would be easier to dome the entire feedlot and collect / scrub methane than try and hook every cow to some kind of fart catcher.
Grassfed beef requires a lot more space because you're no longer relying on externalities. It's like saying that solar paneling takes up a lot more space than a gas powered generator.
Speaking of solar, we need more of this in the third world:
oh, I asked what people wanted in it and no one responded!
I was thinking maybe small scale gardening for a start? Home composting?
You make the thread. It'll be a general thread where anyone can throw in things and have discussions whether X or Y is better. If someone knows a lot about home gardening, they can talk home gardening. If they want to just say things like "wash most of your clothes in cold water because detergent will still work just fine and you're probably not getting dirty enough to justify actually using warm water" that's fine too. Once in a while the OP can be edited to add the most useful/easy/effective/whatever notes.
And if you won't do it I'll do it myself.
I'll do it tonight after my meeting
edit:
^ah hell, I'm part of the problem!
I'll contribute! I know stuff about power draw and fresh water things!
American Buffalo can jump 6 feet in the air and are very difficult to raise in captivity.
So that's why you don't see farmers raising them.
There is a bison ranch on a back road in Wyoming coming out of Laramie where they use a sheer face cliff and a 12 foot electric fence on the road side to keep them secluded. It seriously looks like a precursor to Jurassic Park, and probably more effective too.
Also they use wind powered generators, solar panels, and at least one hydroelectric generator to power things there. I'm not sure if they are completely off the grid or selling back extra, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were not even connected to the grid.
oh, I asked what people wanted in it and no one responded!
I was thinking maybe small scale gardening for a start? Home composting?
You make the thread. It'll be a general thread where anyone can throw in things and have discussions whether X or Y is better. If someone knows a lot about home gardening, they can talk home gardening. If they want to just say things like "wash most of your clothes in cold water because detergent will still work just fine and you're probably not getting dirty enough to justify actually using warm water" that's fine too. Once in a while the OP can be edited to add the most useful/easy/effective/whatever notes.
And if you won't do it I'll do it myself.
@Mayabird, I've started three posts and they all end up looking like something that should be composted. If you want to make an OP, I'll be more than happy to add a bunch of stuff. I don't have the writing chops to make a decent post that's both informative and entertaining.
It astonishes me that people would rather build expensive, complicated desalination plants rather than just purify black water.
edit
iirc the 95% clean water that gets ejected out of most treatment plants is already a thousand times cleaner than those pristine mountain strips yuppies want to drink out of.
It astonishes me that people would rather build expensive, complicated desalination plants rather than just purify black water.
edit
iirc the 95% clean water that gets ejected out of most treatment plants is already a thousand times cleaner than those pristine mountain strips yuppies want to drink out of.
doesn't that water eventually get back to the underground water table(s) anyway?
It astonishes me that people would rather build expensive, complicated desalination plants rather than just purify black water.
edit
iirc the 95% clean water that gets ejected out of most treatment plants is already a thousand times cleaner than those pristine mountain strips yuppies want to drink out of.
doesn't that water eventually get back to the underground water table(s) anyway?
Nope. usually ejected into rivers and oceans, not back into aquifers.
and aquifers are very very slow to replenish, especially when you are sucking 100 gallons out for every pint that naturally flows into it.
It astonishes me that people would rather build expensive, complicated desalination plants rather than just purify black water.
edit
iirc the 95% clean water that gets ejected out of most treatment plants is already a thousand times cleaner than those pristine mountain strips yuppies want to drink out of.
doesn't that water eventually get back to the underground water table(s) anyway?
Nope. usually ejected into rivers and oceans, not back into aquifers.
and aquifers are very very slow to replenish, especially when you are sucking 100 gallons out for every pint that naturally flows into it.
It astonishes me that people would rather build expensive, complicated desalination plants rather than just purify black water.
edit
iirc the 95% clean water that gets ejected out of most treatment plants is already a thousand times cleaner than those pristine mountain strips yuppies want to drink out of.
doesn't that water eventually get back to the underground water table(s) anyway?
Nope. usually ejected into rivers and oceans, not back into aquifers.
and aquifers are very very slow to replenish, especially when you are sucking 100 gallons out for every pint that naturally flows into it.
=(
To be fair, not all water sources are aquifers, many are lakes and rivers. Still the same problems though, just look at lake mead (while its still there)
0
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
@ Me and Xaquin when you make the thread. We'll contribute some stuff.
Also, Reserve the first and second posts for yourself. Make the first post the master post, make the second post quick links to posts in the thread, and the third post links to other websites that are linked to in the thread.
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
Uh, no...but I did put information up about white/cool roofs. Having a roof other than black tar asphalt absorbing sunlight and becoming blazing hot can reduce household energy usage tremendously (20-40%) in warmer climates and can reduce the heat island effect, further lowering energy usage for cooling. It works for both residential and commercial buildings. Since I'm renting I don't have much control over the roof situation where I live, but I have been trying to get my workplace (especially the more southerly branches of it) to do so.
Uh, no...but I did put information up about white/cool roofs. Having a roof other than black tar asphalt absorbing sunlight and becoming blazing hot can reduce household energy usage tremendously (20-40%) in warmer climates and can reduce the heat island effect, further lowering energy usage for cooling. It works for both residential and commercial buildings. Since I'm renting I don't have much control over the roof situation where I live, but I have been trying to get my workplace (especially the more southerly branches of it) to do so.
from what I understand green roofs (as in living stuff, not painted green) is even better than just having a nice heat reflective roof.
Uh, no...but I did put information up about white/cool roofs. Having a roof other than black tar asphalt absorbing sunlight and becoming blazing hot can reduce household energy usage tremendously (20-40%) in warmer climates and can reduce the heat island effect, further lowering energy usage for cooling. It works for both residential and commercial buildings. Since I'm renting I don't have much control over the roof situation where I live, but I have been trying to get my workplace (especially the more southerly branches of it) to do so.
from what I understand green roofs (as in living stuff, not painted green) is even better than just having a nice heat reflective roof.
very true, but $texas!
edit:
houses built with it in mind are incredible, but retrofitting is expensive if at all possible.
Uh, no...but I did put information up about white/cool roofs. Having a roof other than black tar asphalt absorbing sunlight and becoming blazing hot can reduce household energy usage tremendously (20-40%) in warmer climates and can reduce the heat island effect, further lowering energy usage for cooling. It works for both residential and commercial buildings. Since I'm renting I don't have much control over the roof situation where I live, but I have been trying to get my workplace (especially the more southerly branches of it) to do so.
from what I understand green roofs (as in living stuff, not painted green) is even better than just having a nice heat reflective roof.
There are cost, weight, structural and drainage issues involved with green roofs. Painting a roof white involves a bucket of white paint.
Could the H/A megathread have vegetarian/vegan recipes in it, or is that outside the scope of the thread? Personally, I'd like to eat healthier, and since growing/raising meat tends to be far less environmentally friendly than gardening, I can see a tenuous connection.
Could the H/A megathread have vegetarian/vegan recipes in it, or is that outside the scope of the thread? Personally, I'd like to eat healthier, and since growing/raising meat tends to be far less environmentally friendly than gardening, I can see a tenuous connection.
I think maybe that'd fall more under the cooking threads in D&D and SE++?
Uh, no...but I did put information up about white/cool roofs. Having a roof other than black tar asphalt absorbing sunlight and becoming blazing hot can reduce household energy usage tremendously (20-40%) in warmer climates and can reduce the heat island effect, further lowering energy usage for cooling. It works for both residential and commercial buildings. Since I'm renting I don't have much control over the roof situation where I live, but I have been trying to get my workplace (especially the more southerly branches of it) to do so.
from what I understand green roofs (as in living stuff, not painted green) is even better than just having a nice heat reflective roof.
It depends on the green, and the environment. In a very wet place like Florida green roofs are a huge nightmare to maintain due to the amount of torrential rains you get. In more temperate areas they are amazing.
I recently bought a home and am holding off on updating the roof until we can switch from rooftar shingle to an white aluminum "cool" roof. They look great,a re incredibly water resistant and durable, and have insane cooling cost benefits. One guy I know had his electric bill drop in half the summer he changed. Thats a lot of power saved, along with money!
Posts
You make the thread. It'll be a general thread where anyone can throw in things and have discussions whether X or Y is better. If someone knows a lot about home gardening, they can talk home gardening. If they want to just say things like "wash most of your clothes in cold water because detergent will still work just fine and you're probably not getting dirty enough to justify actually using warm water" that's fine too. Once in a while the OP can be edited to add the most useful/easy/effective/whatever notes.
And if you won't do it I'll do it myself.
I'll do it tonight after my meeting
edit:
^ah hell, I'm part of the problem!
A similar (and much smaller scale) project is going on in my area to power a new university campus with the structures being built from the ground up for efficiency, recycled building materials, and self sufficiency on power generation. Apparently the project is profitable that the city is planning on updating the code requirements for new block structures and infill to mimic the designs.
Meat is an inefficient use of industrial grain. But industrial grain itself is an inefficient use of fossil fuels, because you need lots of petroleum for the fertilizers, machinery, etc.
OTOH, grassfed beef doesn't require nearly as much petroleum. The cows fertilize the soil, they trample the ground to soften the grass, they eat the grass so you don't need to harvest it yourself, etc.
Grassfed beef is more labor intensive, grain based agricultural is more resource intensive. The industry prefers grainfed beef because it's easier to scale up and give you greater yield per acre. Honestly, I think grassfed beef would kill two birds with one stone: Dropping unemployment while helping the environment.
But the main problem is that since labor is costlier than petroleum, food prices would go up, which means you also need to solve the wealth gap issue. There is a methane problem associated with meet, which is a lot more potent than carbon dioxide. OTOH, it doesn't methane doesn't last in the air nearly as long, so in theory it would stabilize.
Also, I know some farms are converting methane from cows into a power source, so that's a technology we should be investing in.
I...what...how?
This is not from the Onion:
gather the shit into big pits from the feeding stations, from which its fed into a bacterial digester that breaks it down and releases tons of methane in a sealed environment from which it is compressed and fed into a generator to burn for power.
We also need to see a shift from annuals (plants that need to be replanted every year) to perennials (plant once, harvest yearly). You have a deeper root system, less erosion, less machinery, less labor, etc. The big problem is that the mean reason we rely so heavily on annual plants in the first place is because they're easier to cross breed for specific qualities. In order to do that with perennials in a timely fashion, you're probably going to need GMOs.
Where as most of the opposition to climate change comes from the right, the GMO issue is one that comes from the left. I wish my facebook hippy friends would spend less time whining about GMOs and more time focusing on problems that actually matter.
Going to more natural meat is a positive as well - buffalo is much better adapted than standard beef cattle for open grazing / grass feeding in the US, and I'm surprised there isn't a bigger push that way.
That said, things are done the way they are for reasons. Usually because it's the cheapest and easiest reason. The best answer is government regulation that makes the cheap and easy solution not so cheap and easy. Requiring companies that pollute to buy some sort of pollution credits would probably help...the costs will get pushed onto consumers, who will possibly then make better purchasing decisions because free market.
A win-win solution, and we can use the money that comes from the pollution credits to subsidize lower inco...hahaha, almost got it out.
Modern agriculture, powered by cow farts.
That is so awesome.
Grassfed beef requires a lot more space because you're no longer relying on externalities. It's like saying that solar paneling takes up a lot more space than a gas powered generator.
Speaking of solar, we need more of this in the third world:
I'll contribute! I know stuff about power draw and fresh water things!
At least around these parts you can get buffalo in the grocery store and at butchers. It's fairly expensive relative to beef, but it's really good.
Buffalo burgers are delicious.
So that's why you don't see farmers raising them.
There is a bison ranch on a back road in Wyoming coming out of Laramie where they use a sheer face cliff and a 12 foot electric fence on the road side to keep them secluded. It seriously looks like a precursor to Jurassic Park, and probably more effective too.
Also they use wind powered generators, solar panels, and at least one hydroelectric generator to power things there. I'm not sure if they are completely off the grid or selling back extra, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were not even connected to the grid.
@Mayabird, I've started three posts and they all end up looking like something that should be composted. If you want to make an OP, I'll be more than happy to add a bunch of stuff. I don't have the writing chops to make a decent post that's both informative and entertaining.
edit
iirc the 95% clean water that gets ejected out of most treatment plants is already a thousand times cleaner than those pristine mountain strips yuppies want to drink out of.
doesn't that water eventually get back to the underground water table(s) anyway?
Nope. usually ejected into rivers and oceans, not back into aquifers.
and aquifers are very very slow to replenish, especially when you are sucking 100 gallons out for every pint that naturally flows into it.
=(
To be fair, not all water sources are aquifers, many are lakes and rivers. Still the same problems though, just look at lake mead (while its still there)
@ Me and Xaquin when you make the thread. We'll contribute some stuff.
Also, Reserve the first and second posts for yourself. Make the first post the master post, make the second post quick links to posts in the thread, and the third post links to other websites that are linked to in the thread.
from what I understand green roofs (as in living stuff, not painted green) is even better than just having a nice heat reflective roof.
very true, but $texas!
edit:
houses built with it in mind are incredible, but retrofitting is expensive if at all possible.
but boy are they pretty and helpful
There are cost, weight, structural and drainage issues involved with green roofs. Painting a roof white involves a bucket of white paint.
I think maybe that'd fall more under the cooking threads in D&D and SE++?
It depends on the green, and the environment. In a very wet place like Florida green roofs are a huge nightmare to maintain due to the amount of torrential rains you get. In more temperate areas they are amazing.
I recently bought a home and am holding off on updating the roof until we can switch from rooftar shingle to an white aluminum "cool" roof. They look great,a re incredibly water resistant and durable, and have insane cooling cost benefits. One guy I know had his electric bill drop in half the summer he changed. Thats a lot of power saved, along with money!