51–60 of 97 posts
I haven't been able to get it out of my mind.
http://outsideinradio.org/shows/ep34
Note, I know this isn't 1:1, not about the communities surrounding mountaintop removal, but there are some good notes in it about modern changes to mining techniques all the same.
The study's budget was only $1m. Seems like the readership of HN could easily pull that money together and donate the funding, if the researchers could accept it.
I'd be surprised if this "community" could gather money for anything remotely useful. Also: I'd like to see the outcome of a fundraising, and the demographics of the donators, to see how many pledge outside of CA, and outside of the USA. This would give me an impression about the extent of the Trump is Satan and the world is about to end mindset. (imho nothing changes, things proceed with trump as before. business as…
The information age is built on gathering raw data and doing pure research, neither of which are profitable activities. The implied threshold for wastefulness here is offensively low; basically any project that might require one moderately competent PhD researcher for a year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be surprised if this "community" could gather money for anything remotely useful. Also: I'd like to see the outcome of a fundraising, and the demographics of the donators, to see how many pledge outside of CA, and outside of the USA. This would give me an impression about the extent of the Trump is Satan and the world is about to end mindset. (imho nothing changes, things proceed with trump as before. business as…
You're not thinking strategically. The US is one of the biggest emitters of CO2, and coal plants are about 1/3 of that. If the study can convince the population to reduce their use, even if with a different argument, that's helpful for the whole planet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not thinking strategically. The US is one of the biggest emitters of CO2, and coal plants are about 1/3 of that. If the study can convince the population to reduce their use, even if with a different argument, that's helpful for the whole planet.
And what different argument? By giving them away money for free in addition to the amounts they ransack from the rest of the world already? (just think about 1$ = 1€ as an example)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was eating dinner with two doctors about a month ago, and they were discussing this. They said it was difficult to prove that coal mining causes things like lung cancer in the miners themselves because it is just about impossible to find a coal miner who doesn't smoke.
So what you're saying is coal mining causes smoking.
The study's budget was only $1m. Seems like the readership of HN could easily pull that money together and donate the funding, if the researchers could accept it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be surprised if this "community" could gather money for anything remotely useful. Also: I'd like to see the outcome of a fundraising, and the demographics of the donators, to see how many pledge outside of CA, and outside of the USA. This would give me an impression about the extent of the Trump is Satan and the world is about to end mindset. (imho nothing changes, things proceed with trump as before. business as…
You're not thinking strategically. The US is one of the biggest emitters of CO2, and coal plants are about 1/3 of that. If the study can convince the population to reduce their use, even if with a different argument, that's helpful for the whole planet.