Depends on your coordinates. In regions with less sunny days the requirements for storage are huge and if you don't have some hydro to spare, may as well consider building some nuclear ppts with a closed nuclear fuel cycle
Its an easy mistake to make though. In 2022 many news outlets were reporting the minor fission advancement as a breakthrough that amounted to fission reactors having been "solved".
Well that's strictly limited by square meter. Especially based on your geographical location, time of day, and time of year. Solar power is basically useless in Finland for example. It makes sense why northern Europe would want to invest into fusion. Solar is a better solution for areas with higher solar incidence.
Maybe they could make this sunstuff into something they could sell and ship to the poor sunstarved icedwellers, such as liquid carbonated hydrogen fuel.
Carbon neutral green ammonia and|or methanol are serious contenders for both replacing marine fuels and for being transported to places that long extension cords won't reach.
Although true, it still has nothing to do with the obesity rate. My comment was about the idea that it was a lack of food availability that prevented obesity before about 1980.
I hope we are smart to see their utility as conveying statistical likelihoods, common occurences, and heuristics - while also understanding that some might be deprecated or not accurate (like everything else can be, from scientific studies to census data).
It’s a conundrum. If we start returning things that were stolen in the past, well that includes a lot of stuff.
If you are on the losing side you might sometimes have to return things (see looted nazi stuff), but if you are on the winning side you probably won’t (see pretty much all of the Americas).
You're just re-stating what happens, not why it can't happen.
'Museum attendance might drop a bit so the British Museum of History regrets to inform you and your country that the exhibit is just too popular to return to Tuva. Sorry.'
"Better luck next conquest!" -- is it okay to be that petty with regards to stuff that doesn't necessarily even have 'a winning side', aside from the vultures that profited from the museum work?
We're not talking about landback, that's a different issue. The United States actually has a much better record on repatriation than the British Museum.
>It’s a conundrum. If we start returning things that were stolen in the past, well that includes a lot of stuff.
That isn't a conundrum, it's a hassle.
Britain did the work to plunder the world, they can do the work to return the plunder, or pay rent to the countries they stole from if those countries choose to have their property remain in British custody.
>If you are on the losing side you might sometimes have to return things (see looted nazi stuff), but if you are on the winning side you probably won’t (see pretty much all of the Americas).
The sun set on the British empire ages ago, and it's starting to set on the American empire. In the long term, both will end up on the losing side of history, as all empires do.
Yes! At least a third of the population can’t drive, because too young, too old, handicapped in some way, or too poor. And we have built an environment that requires driving. That’s pretty messed up.
reply