the watcher
-
Posts
1,544 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by the watcher
-
-
20 hours ago, bustamente said:
It's amazing how many crazy people there are in this world and I don't mean just the crazy grifters, people that are truly insane and they walk amongst every day.
The difference in today's world than in the past is that the wackos tell everyone about their fantasy driven imaginings and alot of people believe them. Enough to elect some of them. I am truly worried about the world right now.
-
On 2022-03-12 at 7:25 PM, WildPath said:
This is what concerns me about the "open season" on mining that has been declared in Manitoba, including with Snow Lake Lithium. I haven't looked into that project specifically, but it is easy to greenwash projects to get approval, while eventually causing environmental disasters.
I have been paying attention to the CanWhite Sands project they will likely be building near Vivian. They brand themselves as an ESG mining company, but there is quite a bit of dirt when you look under the hood. Approvals being given without environmental reviews, inaccurate science being presented, all with the danger of contamination to the huge Sandilands aquifer that services a large portion of Manitoba.
I'm not against mining per se, nor the Snow Lake project necessarily. I would just like strong regulations, transparent information and real consequences when companies mess with the environment. We've seen many lakes/rivers and even communities being destroyed by mining/logging/hydro development.
Mining destruction discovered in Nopiming Provincial Park | Wilderness Committee
The thing is ANY open pit mine is a butt ugly affair. It is the cost of our modern world. The real trick is getting mining companies to do proper reclamation. I'm not sure if they pay the same government levy for reclaiming that gravel and shale pits do. In those pits the fee is charged as it is sold and the Gov is responsible for the reclamation. I'm not sure about open pit mines. I know if companies are responsible for reclaiming it will be like pulling hens teeth. The other big risk is retention ponds that work and don't leak. The last mine I worked at (lead and Zinq ) still resembles a lunar landscape the last I heard. And I worked there in 1992 when it closed.
I just took a peek on Google Earth and it really doesn't look like it's been reclaimed. You would think 30 years would be enough time.
Edit : But I agree , I don't see a whole lot of reason to start mining our Parks
-
5 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:
Her comments on Tuesday were so thoughtless, and the fact that she took roughly two days to issue what seemed like a pretty generic and insensitive apology speaks to how out of touch she really is. What an embarrassment.
Not just thoughtless but plain stupid. What politician has no ability to address an issue or question with a bit of " political double talk " and not make a target of yourself. She is way, way over her head .
- blue_gold_84, bustamente, Bigblue204 and 2 others
-
2
-
3
-
3 hours ago, Tracker said:
The scary thing is that this is legal- the only hitch would be the Biden cabinet revolting and impeaching Harris. Not likely, but who would have thought that a racist, misogynistic criminal like Trump would have been elected in the first place?
To quote Chris Hedges - " Trump is the face of our collective idiocy. He is what lies behind the mask of our professed civility and rationality ----- A sputtering , narcissistic, imbecilic megalomaniac "
I believe Hedges is right.Trump is a symptom of the inner rot that infects the world right now. He would never have been elected if he didn't mirror the ethos of a large portion of the USA
- Tracker and Bigblue204
-
1
-
1
-
4 hours ago, Tracker said:
Roger Stone unveils a doozy of a plan to install Donald Trump as president
Longtime right-wing political henchman Roger Stone on Thursday revealed his new plan to install Donald Trump into the presidency. Speaking to the Republican Accountability Project, Stone shared his blueprint for, as he sees it, rectifying the crime of Trump's defeat to President Joe Biden in the 2020 election.The three-point plan goes as follows:
First, Stone expects the House of Representatives to elect Trump as its Speaker if they retake control of the lower congressional chamber in this year's midterm elections. This is permitted in the United States Constitution. Literally, anybody whom a majority of the House chooses can hold the gavel as long as they meet the basic qualifications for getting elected, which in the House is any citizen 25 years of age and up.
Next, Stone predicts that Biden's Cabinet will invoke the 25th Amendment to remove him from office. Over what, he did not say.
In the final stage, according to Stone, Congress will impeach and remove Vice President Kamala Harris for refusing to promote ivermectin, a deworming medication used in horses, as an effective treatment against COVID-19. It is not.
At that point, with Biden and Harris out of office, Trump would ascend to the presidency via the line of succession.
https://www.alternet.org/2022/03/roger-stone-install-donald-trump/
There are a great number of staunch defenders of democracy in the USA. ( as long as their candidate and party win )
-
53 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:
Yup maybe not the right thread but I find this discussion really interesting from a learning standpoint.
Someone needs to start a Philosophy Debate thread. I had a period where I voraciously read as many religous texts and books on the history of religion as I could. The history of Christianity is particularly fascinating. Most Christians know very little of it.
-
4 minutes ago, JCon said:
They're not testing and no one is expected to self-isolate. Even if they did have daily briefings, there is little information they can share except death counts and ICU admissions.
4 deaths today, BTW.
We're are completely on our own with this horrid govt.
I think it's competence level deteriorated since Pallister left........Whoda think it ? Basicly when he baled out the rest just quit trying. Which borders on criminal given the situation.
-
-
18 minutes ago, Tracker said:
I believe that I have posted it here before, but anyone wanting an inside look at the American electrical system should search out the documentary, "Power Trip" by Jonathan and Drew Scott of H&G fame.
Ill add that to my watch / read list. ( Anything delay finishing up my 2021 books )
-
4 hours ago, Wideleft said:
This is from the EPA, so it takes the various forms of power generation in the U.S. into account. Consider that even if the U.S. were to reach 50% adoption of EV's, there is zero chance that they would expand coal energy to help facilitate that. There is no appetite for coal and there are cleaner options that aren't natural gas either that can make up the difference. The nice thing about wind and solar is that it does not require centralized power plants, although there are some interesting solar facilities in production.
Just think how much power could be produced if even 75% of South facing roofs in Winnipeg had solar installations.
The key to all of this is energy storage and that technology is growing by leaps and bounds and has shown that there are innumerable ways to skin that cat. I highly recommend Nova's "Search For The Super Battery" that talks about all sorts of ways to store power at different scales (and is already 5 years old).
https://www.pbs.org/video/search-super-battery-preview-plc6qv/
I'll check it out. I don't know what will happen in the states. Having private power companies and the general attitudes down there in my mind are going to be an issue. I don't know if they get off the coal train soon. Plus they have struggled with transmission as well. Their political situation is bound to enter and grind things to a halt.
Wind and solar are good but I don't know if there are many or any countries where they make up the bulk of electricity production. There's certainly nothing wrong with them as a strong supplement. Again Canada as a whole is situated pretty well with our ability to produce hydro power.
-
23 minutes ago, Mark F said:
Internal combustion engines are extremely inefficient compared to electric.
Using Ice....its like going to a restaurant, ordering a meal, and throwing 2/3 of it in the trash, eating 1/3. Oilco got to love that. When you spend 100 dollars to fill your tank, maybe 30.00 of your cash propels your car. The rest... heat, and smoke. (Greenhouse gases, and many other toxic substances, which are a big public health problem)
any argument about which is better is preposterous.
and as far as this being the only environemtal issue discussed.....
It is the mother of all issues...
And is the only thing, staring us right in the face, (aside from nuclear war) which if not checked, will completely change the world, permanently, (as far as humanity is concerned)
and definitely not... for the better.
surprising number of people here who dont understand this.
It has been explained, in ways anyone can understand, many times.
It's a discussion. It should be discussed and argued. I tell my Grandkids they can have whatever opinion they want but they need to be able to say why. You will note I've never said global warming isn't a massive issue. I've never said we shouldn't wean ourselves off fossil fuels as they are the major cause. I haven't said combustion engines are better than EVs . What I have said is our concern beside EVs should be how we produce electricity. The switch from fossil fuels needs to be done intelligently. And it will be painful. And I'M surprised how many people don't understand that.
-
1 hour ago, GCn20 said:
I thought that the environmentalists were saying that most of the methane was from cows. You mean I substituted refried beans for beef for nothing?
It sure is. Dirty energy is dirty energy. Avoiding one environmental catastrophe by creating another just seems really, really dumb to me. Especially when it can be avoided if people didn't play politics with it and really made an effort to actually, you know...clean up the world instead of peacocking on environmental policy.
All energy sources have their enviromental costs , yes. BUT those costs aren't equal.
On methane from cows :
I have pasture I rent out. I have crop land I rent out. My pasture will be green and removing CO2 from the atmosphere before seeds are in the ground on the crop ground. When my renters are cutting ripe grain in August on the crop ground my pasture will still be removing CO2 for months to come. I don't believe that was ever worked into the calculation of methane removal. AND marginal land is usually used for pastures. It saves it from being grain farmed. On the other hand there is a good argument about the amount of water cows consume and the amount of food a cow consumes to produce 1 pound of tasty beef. Can 7 billion people be sustained when we feed so much to cows and pigs.
Answers are never simple. People who produce studies will always have a point of view they wish to promote. Our age of information it making it increasingly difficult to ferret out what to believe.
-
20 minutes ago, Wideleft said:
Myth #1: Electric vehicles are worse for the climate than gasoline cars because of the power plant emissions.
-
FACT: Electric vehicles typically have a smaller carbon footprint than gasoline cars, even when accounting for the electricity used for charging.
Electric vehicles (EVs) have no tailpipe emissions. Generating the electricity used to charge EVs, however, may create carbon pollution. The amount varies widely based on how local power is generated, e.g., using coal or natural gas, which emit carbon pollution, versus renewable resources like wind or solar, which do not. Even accounting for these electricity emissions, research shows that an EV is typically responsible for lower levels of greenhouse gases (GHGs) than an average new gasoline car. To the extent that more renewable energy sources like wind and solar are used to generate electricity, the total GHGs associated with EVs could be even lower. Learn more about electricity production in your area.EPA and DOE’s Beyond Tailpipe Emissions Calculator can help you estimate the greenhouse gas emissions associated with charging and driving an EV or a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) where you live. You can select an EV or PHEV model and type in your zip code to see the CO2 emissions and how they stack up against those associated with a gasoline car.
Myth #5: Electric vehicles are worse for the climate than gasoline cars because of battery manufacturing.
-
FACT: The greenhouse gas emissions associated with an electric vehicle over its lifetime are typically lower than those from an average gasoline-powered vehicle, even when accounting for manufacturing.
Some studies have shown that making a typical electric vehicle (EV) can create more carbon pollution than making a gasoline car. This is because of the additional energy required to manufacture an EV’s battery. Still, over the lifetime of the vehicle, total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with manufacturing, charging, and driving an EV are typically lower than the total GHGs associated with a gasoline car. That’s because EVs have zero tailpipe emissions and are typically responsible for significantly fewer GHGs during operation (see Myth 1 above).For example, researchers at Argonne National Laboratory estimated emissions for both a gasoline car and an EV with a 300-mile electric range. In their estimates, while GHGs from EV manufacturing are higher (shown in blue below), total GHGs for the EV are still lower than those for the gasoline car.
My information was from a DW documentary which is Germany's public broadcaster.
"FACT: The greenhouse gas emissions associated with an electric vehicle over its lifetime are typically lower than those from an average gasoline-powered vehicle, even when accounting for manufacturing."
That's not what I was challenging. I said it depends on your energy source, how you produce your electricity.
" FACT: Electric vehicles typically have a smaller carbon footprint than gasoline cars, even when accounting for the electricity used for charging."
Do you know what type of electricity generation is being used to calculate that ? If it is hydro I % 100 agree. So if it's in Canada , I agree. If it's nuclear let's say in France, I agree. If it's in countries that rely on Coal generated power (especially older plants ) I disagree. If it's a world wide average, I have no idea.
-
FACT: Electric vehicles typically have a smaller carbon footprint than gasoline cars, even when accounting for the electricity used for charging.
-
16 minutes ago, GCn20 said:
I thought that the environmentalists were saying that most of the methane was from cows. You mean I substituted refried beans for beef for nothing?
It sure is. Dirty energy is dirty energy. Avoiding one environmental catastrophe by creating another just seems really, really dumb to me. Especially when it can be avoided if people didn't play politics with it and really made an effort to actually, you know...clean up the world instead of peacocking on environmental
Apparently EVs cost the environment more to both make and destroy. If your source of electricity is coal then combustion engines will cost the enviroment less than EVs. If your source of electricity is hydro/ nuclear/ wind / solar.... then EVs will cost the environment far less.
But none of that might effect whether or not EVs become the norm. 10 or 15 years ago I was listening to a car show ( which I never do ) and the interviewer asked the " expert " if he thought EVs would ever become popular. His tone was dismissive and obviously he didn't think much of them. To his surprise the expert said they would push combustion engines off the market. Not because of a desire for a greener world but because they have far less moving parts, will cost far less to produce and the profit margins will be far greater.
-
2 hours ago, Noeller said:
Pinawa guy here...raised with the idea that nuclear is great. There's issues with the disposal of waste, but for the most part it's a really safe alternative. It's unfortunate that Atomic Energy Canada mostly pulled out of Manitoba in the late 90s, but "SMR's" (Small Modular Reactors) are becoming a thing now, and Pinawa has been courting a company pretty heavily over the last several years to hopefully come there and set up shop.
My understanding of Thorium salt reactors is that the waste is inactive after only 150 years which is a game changer . Most reactor disasters have been due to coolant issues which they don't have as well. It's been a while since I've read and watched about them but they look so promising to me.
-
-
7 minutes ago, Mark H. said:
Meanwhile: the majority world's electricity is generated from fossil fuels and non - renewables
36% coal; 23% gas; 10% nuclear; 16% hydropower; 5% wind; 11% other sources
And, Hydropower creates issues with mercury level and flooding
The world could be 100% EV, and we would still need almost as much fossil fuel as we ever did
I don't see EVs as the way to put fossil fuels behind us - that is just not realistic
What EVs WILL DO, is create a system where fossil fuels are burned only in certain areas, as opposed to all over the highways, the way they are now
There will be a much greater ability implement the latest and best CLEAN TECHNOLOGIES, such as scrubbers for coal and biomass, burning oil at higher temperatures, etc.
If the world can get over the " eww factor " of the word nuclear and invest heavily into thorium salt reactors most of the issues of powering our society can be overcome. They need to be a part of a more green society.
-
On 2022-02-21 at 9:42 AM, Mark F said:
"Based in Manitoba, Canada, Snow Lake Lithium is ideally located to serve the North American automotive industry with access to the US rail network via the Artic Gateway railway, which reduces transportation from thousands of miles by road and boat to just several hundred by train.
Snow Lake Lithium’s 55,000 acre site is expected to produce 160,000 tonnes of 6 percent lithium spodumene a year over a 10 year period. Currently, Snow Lake Lithium has explored around 1 percent of its site and is confident that this will expand over the course of the next year. Snow Lake Lithium’s mine will be operated by almost 100 percent renewable, hydroelectric power to ensure the most sustainable manufacturing approach.
The Manitoba region has a rich history of mining giving Snow Lake Lithium access to some of the most talented and experienced miners in North America."
I missed this . That's awesome.
-
20 hours ago, Wideleft said:
Since when is anything done until the entire world is ready for it?
Same person who complains that EV's aren't a solution because they can't be built fast enough ignores the reason they can't be built fast enough is due to high demand from consumers.
I think the world is certainly ready for evs for passenger vehicles. Charging stations will eventually come . In my mind the biggest issue in weaning off fossil fuels Is food production and long distance transportation. That issue will eventually be hammered home to all consumers. 99% of what you buy has been in a truck. Everyone is in a panic when they fill their car ( it should be a car not unneeded SUVs and oversized pickups) but it will cost far more when transportation and food prices rocket. Canada because of our size and weather will be particularly hard hit. I believe we will rue the day our rail system was dismantled.
-
15 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:
You're not an ignorant dummy at all. I'd say that's a pretty valid set of questions to ask.
IMO, it'll probably a combination of both (hybrid fuel/charging stations) as ICE vehicles get gradually phased out in the coming decades. I'm not sure of the environmental implications and disposal requirements of fossil fuel infrastructure (holding tanks, piping, pumps, etc.) but it would likely make the most sense to reuse those existing locations where feasible and install EV charging infrastructure.
Plenty of moving parts involved but this isn't reinventing the wheel, so I see it being a relatively smooth transition.
This seems like a practical approach. I fully expect The Pas and Thompson to get EV charging infrastructure sooner than later. It only seems like a logical step to put that in remote hubs as we see more EVs on the roads.
I watched a good report by DW documentary ( German ) on the switch from fossil fuels. Part of it was about Norway who has built up a huge slush fund from their North Sea oil . They are now using that fund to move away from fossil fuels. The Gov there is building or at least supporting the building of charging stations. They have also removed the sales tax from electric vehicles.
Meanwhile our oil money has been frittered away.
-
15 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:
Pretty rich commentary from someone who was quoted as saying the following:
"Madame Speaker, a silent genocide has slipped beneath the conscience of America. Precious works of our creator formed and set apart meet death before they breathe life. Eternal souls, woven into earthen vessels, sanctified by Almighty God, and endowed with the miracle of life are denied their birth by a nation born of freedom. God's breath of life blown away by the breath of man."
What a ******* jerkstore.
The man needs a biology lesson.
- Tracker and blue_gold_84
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, JCon said:
Thlng is, if Kenney beats out Poilievre, Poilievre's votes will swing to Kenney. Who ever comes out ahead, will win it on the next ballot, if the CPC swing full populist.
----
There are a lot more Reeves signs around me, thak Khan. It's early but this might be a race.
But it still depends on how the vote shakes out. I have no feeling anymore about the % of hard right people in the party but if it's around % 50 you can get a spit of that vote and have a moderate sneak in. ( ala Joe Clark ) The question then becomes an a moderate control the party.
If the hard right numbers are over % 50 then you are absolutly right. A final vote would likely be a combined right wing vote. Again I can't see a Kenny or Poulievre winning a General election although you never know. I also think having a hard right opposition leader is really divisive for this country.
-
On 2022-03-03 at 9:14 PM, Noeller said:
I've read stuff on Twitter suggesting Kenney hopes to lose the confidence vote next month in Red Deer, get tossed and then free to run for the federal leadership. Not sure how much merit there is to it, but crazier things.....
Having Kenny come in could quite likely spit the right wing vote with Poilievre. It could allow a more moderate Conservative ( Charest ) to slip in, depending how the vote shakes down. I can't see either Kenny or Poilievre winning an election. I doubt either could pull the center vote their way.
Trade deadline thread.
in Winnipeg Jets Discussion
Posted
If Chevy is trading Copp he is playing the game right to the end. He doesn't have long.