Skip to main content
Topic: General Discussions (Read 114676 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #585
If anything, it's exposed the soft underbelly of the Russian military.  Humiliated
I've an Ex. Army mate who states that defeating / stalling the Russian army is as easy as leaving crates of spirits besides the road, the sad thing is he is only half-joking.

I'm not sure that giving a nuclear capable fighting force lots of free alcohol makes sense! :o
The Force Awakens!

Re: General Discussions

Reply #586
Putin has sacrificed his conscripts and kept his best troops away from the street fighting etc.
He has his own version of the infamous SS named the Rosgvardiya which are his elite bodyguards as well as his elite paratroops and Spetsnaz groups including their version of the navy seals who the US green berets rate highly.
Conscripts with 1980's equipment and rations dated 2002 are just the 1st wave.
You know Putin is worried if he commits his best troops and air force with their sophisticated fighter jets.
Those old MIGs that Zelensky wants from Poland won't last 5 mins.
It's just a question of time before Putin has to decide if he wants to escalate this war and go harder or back off and keep what territory he values.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #587
If what I have read is right, and who knows,  Putin's current prime focus is to neutralize the main Ukrainian army in the East by cutting off its ammo, food and fuel supplies. Once that has been done the Russians would be in a very strong negotiating position.  Not sure how this may actually play out though.
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #588
If what I have read is right, and who knows,  Putin's current prime focus is to neutralize the main Ukrainian army in the East by cutting off its ammo, food and fuel supplies. Once that has been done the Russians would be in a very strong negotiating position.  Not sure how this may actually play out though.

It's another Vietnam, Afghanistan etc., in the making. Although the Ruskies might take east Ukraine, the well funded and well supported (Ukraine) 'underground' will be constantly fighting against any occupation. Another thing the Russian 'intelligence' may not have figured on. This very spirited country, even if occupied will continue to fight, resist and provide an on-going headache for Russia and constant drain on their military resources/personnel... then the issue of occupation morale will occur.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17


Re: General Discussions

Reply #590
This is the kind of stuff that makes me piss myself laughing:

From the Carlton FB page
Three Game Changers have been selected in the initial 40-person AFL Women’s All-Australian squad. 🤩
Well deserved.

Are they taking the piss or what?
2017-16th
2018-Wooden Spoon
2019-16th
2020-dare to dream? 11th is better than last I suppose
2021-Pi$$ or get off the pot
2022- Real Deal or more of the same? 0.6%
2023- "Raise the Standard" - M. Voss Another year wasted Bar Set
2024-Back to the drawing boardNo excuses, its time

Re: General Discussions

Reply #591
This is the kind of stuff that makes me piss myself laughing:

From the Carlton FB page
Three Game Changers have been selected in the initial 40-person AFL Women’s All-Australian squad. 🤩
Well deserved.

Are they taking the piss or what?

Yes, it should have been "the initial 40-person AFL non-men’s All-Australian squad."   ::)

It would be interesting to hear Darcy's take on being non-binary in a women's competition.  So much to learn!
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: General Discussions

Reply #592
Interesting:  A cut-and-paste attack on electric vehicle batteries and renewables is spanning the globe. But is it right? The Guardian.

Quote
Across social media, internet forums and some climate science denier blogs, there has been furious cutting-and-pasting of chunks of common text attacking the environmental credentials of electric vehicles, solar panels and wind turbines.

About 200 tonnes of the “Earth’s crust” needs to be mined for each electric vehicle battery, and 11 tonnes of brine are needed just for the lithium, claims the text, which also says solar panels and wind turbine blades can’t be recycled.

Some claims are made definitively and without context, and don’t try to compare electric vehicle batteries to the fossil fuelled cars they are replacing. Solar panels can be recycled and fully recyclable turbine blades are now being produced.

The former resources minister and Queensland senator Matt Canavan was another to share some of the text that sat above a picture of a hollowed-out landscape. It took a few seconds to discover the scary but irrelevant image was of a diamond mine in Canada.

On Facebook, some posts using extracts are being marked with a label saying “Missing context. Independent fact-checkers say this information could mislead people.”

One fact check site categorises one post as a “scare tactic” containing only partial truths.

An Australian climate “sceptics” group posted a version of the essay the extracts come from earlier this year.

Prof Peter Newman, a sustainability expert at Curtin University and a senior author of an upcoming UN climate assessment on mitigation, said the numbers related to the resources needed to produce electric vehicle batteries were “nonsense” because they referred to the early days of lithium battery development.

Newman told Temperature Check the claims around brine and lithium were “based on the fears associated with brine extraction in the Andes’s countries, especially Chile, and human slavery in the Democratic Republic of the Congo over Cobalt.”

But he said lithium extraction was moving away from brine to a mineral called spodumene, with Western Australia now its biggest producer. That mining, Newman said, was “ethical and sustainable.”

The WA government says the state now produces 49% of the world’s lithium – meaning that at least half of the world’s supply comes without processing salty brine in places like Chile.

Commenting more generally, Newman said “rumours about critical minerals” had been spreading for too long.

“Their time is up. The world is replacing oil with sunshine made possible because of the dramatically successful Lithium Ion battery.

“Compare [this] with the numbers on air pollution deaths at 10,000 a day, the wars created over oil and the climate change impacts.”

But what are the origins of the text extracts?

Versions have appeared on Facebook and LinkedIn, many crediting the work to a different writer – including the version promoted by Canavan.

But it appears those versions were taken from an essay written last November by a US-based writer.

Temperature Check asked the writer where he had sourced his facts. He said he “tried to find at least two credible sources for each of the things I claim” and said “all of the statements are readily available on the internet.”

His work was “designed to be fun to read and to get people thinking”, he said.

It’s worth saying here that most people appreciate any new purchase – whether that’s a fossil-fuelled car or an e-bike – has an environmental cost and that raw materials have to be mined.

But electric cars are not permanently tied to fossil fuel production and the associated greenhouse gas emissions in the same way that internal combustion engines are; Australia’s motor vehicles burn 33bn litres of fuel every year.


Re: General Discussions

Reply #593
Interesting:  A cut-and-paste attack on electric vehicle batteries and renewables is spanning the globe. But is it right? The Guardian.
Actually, I think the battery situation is much worse than even the message tries to portray.

You can look into the longevity of Lithium Ion batteries and solar cells and find out what happens to them at the end of life and work this out for yourself. Also, for your peace of mind investigate the Lithium Ion battery MTBF, and note this MTBF accumulates just from a battery existing in time and space and has nothing to do with operation or duty cycle.

A car battery is made up of thousands of individual cells, how many have to fail (MTBF considered) before the battery performance is reduced or shuts down due to risk of overload?

Solar PV; In Victoria there are now warehouses overflowing with unrecycled redundant solar panels that have been replaced or removed from roofing due to problems well before the claimed design life is reached. The companies that sold them are long gone, having cashed in on the subsidies and departed.

Batteries in cars are fundamentally no different to the batteries in your phone, laptop or power tools, how many of them still hold a full usable charge a decade later. What do you do when the battery you installed no longer holds enough charge to meet the demand, replace it, what happens to the old ones, will you have a garage full of old car batteries like you probably have a drawer full of old device batteries?

It's why up in Qld and NT where conditions suit the government is now preferentially sponsoring Green Hydrogen for small scale power generation(Up to 3000 homes) ahead of Solar PV Battery, in a bid to replace Diesel power generation which is ubiquitous in the top end. This will be coupled with Hydrogen powered vehicle subsidies, to give the residents the very same usability as the current Diesel Power / Transport combination. Unfortunately, at this stage it still does not address the issue of Solar PV longevity, which ironically is even worse in areas that deliver peak performance.

I'm afraid I'm very cynical, I expect the Solar PV / Battery industry to go full Nicotine in response to the risk that their subsidies might be cut.
The Force Awakens!

Re: General Discussions

Reply #594
Given you're a fan of nuclear power which creates waste that's dangerously radioactive for 10,000 years, it's interesting you see discarded Li-ion batteries & solar panels as the real boogeymen.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #595
Given you're a fan of nuclear power which creates waste that's dangerously radioactive for 10,000 years, it's interesting you see discarded Li-ion batteries & solar panels as the real boogeymen.

I think LP makes a fair point.

Your response is as emotive as the article you quoted.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/06/19/stop-letting-your-ridiculous-fears-of-nuclear-waste-kill-the-planet/?sh=6293328b562e

Lets put this in terms that are simpler to understand.

Which technology gives the most bang for buck, in terms of energy produced vs waste and toxicity in the atmosphere?

Nuclear energy waste is evolving too.  They are finding ways to reuse spent fuel, rather than simply store it.

Green waste has a simple issue and it isnt necessarily to do with the production of it.  Mining the materials is the same as it is for nuclear/coal etc.  Thing is, the volumes required to pump out the same amount of energy are way different, and the environmental impact similarly different and much smaller in nuclears favour.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson


Re: General Discussions

Reply #597
Given you're a fan of nuclear power which creates waste that's dangerously radioactive for 10,000 years, it's interesting you see discarded Li-ion batteries & solar panels as the real boogeymen.
I'm not really a fan, I'm just not in fear of it, in fact most of our modern life is indebted to it. You wouldn't have a mobile, cancer treatments, modern TVs, computers or fire detectors without it.

How do the anti-nuclear brigade explain the already hugely diminished radioactive background levels around Chernobyl or Fugkushima? 10,000 years is really an emotive claim, because even in a natural disaster like a Tsunami it's really just the hot zone that becomes the issue. The half life of most reactive debris has a half-life measured in 10s or dozens of years, and the bulk of it never leaves the immediate vicinity with the radiation diminishing by the inverse square law, so twice as far away 1/4 the danger, 10 times further away 100 times less danger.

The paranoia about nuclear is not much short of the same fear applied to 5G, vaccines or fluoride in your drinking water.
The Force Awakens!


 

Re: General Discussions

Reply #599
I'm not really a fan, I'm just not in fear of it, in fact most of our modern life is indebted to it. You wouldn't have a mobile, cancer treatments, modern TVs, computers or fire detectors without it.
Yep, Madame Curie was a genius. How did she die again?