Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)DE
Posts
22
Comments
1,057
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Seeing a lot of down votes. Tell me why it’s not please, don’t just dismiss me.

    Because you were just fishing for validation. Not asking a legitimate question and wanting to hear answers.

  • While strictly true (calories being a measure of energy and valid for both heat and fuel potential), the difference is - unsurprisingly - small :)

    Eating a large pizza (1200 kcal) straight from the freezer instead of heating it, gives you roughly 25 less kcal.

  • I always imagined travelling back in time 100 years and trying to explain our tech.

    -"We have personal communicators available at all times, that we can use to instantly communicate with anyone on Earth."

    -"Wow! But I guess language barriers make it impossible?"

    -'No, actually. A surprising amount of people in the world understand English. Also, we have instant translators in our communicators. I could contact someone in China right now and have a conversation about anything."

    -"Incredible!! What sort of topics do you talk to them about?"

    -"...I don't. It's kinda impolite to just start talking to strangers. I mostly talk to old friends from school. And my family."

  • We burn carbon-based stuff like oil, coal and gas to give us energy and fart co2. It takes even more energy than we gained to convert X tons of co2 back to solid form.

    Every single joule of energy spent on capture would have mattered more if it was used for electricity directly, and reduced fuel consumption for a power plant by the same amount.

    It's hard to see this as anything else than a greenwashing distraction intended to instill an illusion that emissions production can remain at its current level.