cries in enviro. sci

When danger reared its ugly head, Brave Sir Robin turned his tail and fled

Unfortunately, it’s vital for steel production since it’s a reducing agent and used in blast furnaces. There are other options out there but they are pretty far from being implemented AFAIK

The thing that we don’t consider in the current models is storage time when it comes to cost/credits. There’s no distinction between storing new carbon and old carbon.

I think your point still holds water in that storage is not the answer, but reduction is

No the truck is 240T I think

We Haaaaateesss it!

Honestly, I was mildly apprehensive about posting this here, since mining is generally frowned upon by environmental orientated groups. However, mining is central to renewables, whether we like it or not. It’s also been around as long as humanity. I’m not defending it’s environmental issues by any stretch. I’m very much for responsible mining and more regulation.

However, electrification of mining vehicles is a win. In some cases, it’s not going to make much difference on net emissions, but in other cases, where to have a greener grid, it most certainly will. If you have a network of solar or wind power generators nearby, it’s a no-brainer. In some cases, old waste rock piles or TSFs can be progressively reclaimed and green power generators and installed on them. While electrification doesn’t solve emissions or env. Impact on the whole but it gives the opportunity to harness other sources of power than just fuel

I go with Datums to really stick the screws in

No. Nothing, that’s my point. Agriculture itself is based on manipulation of genetics

laughs in giant hogweed

Just wait til you tell people about GMOs…

Parenting in a nutshell

Carrex spp. And Salix spp. Watch menacingly from the distance

I do, and I adore fossil. The commentary is not directed towards them, but the overall trend.

I don’t know why you were downvoted; you are right. Plant based is the way to go, and I say this as your typical omnivorous white dude. Until we get more buy in from people (changing diets) and from corporations, it’s unlikely to change, though.

I hate the trend of censoring profanity. It’s the internet you fuck-cakes

A few points I would like to make:

1. Soil degradation of corn:soy systems is largely due to tillage. No till is better, but perhaps not as good as agroforestry

2. Proponents of agroforestry often gloss over the changes required to actually practice it. Where a farmer can use large combines to harvest corn and soy relatively easily, he now has trees interrupting harvest, or its harder to harvest the diverse cropping systems (e.g., food bearing trees). While the benefits of argo forestry are real, so are the challenges.

3. Soil C sequestration from these systems is most likely temporary, and net neutral, but will reduce input costs

4. We need to switch away from beef - eat more chikn

That, and parroting makes it sound like you don’t know what they want, or that you’re stupid, and the best that you could come up with is their own text with slight variation

My industry is three-letter-acronym (TLA) heavy

It doesn’t have to be like that. Sure, context is important, but parroting phrases or other crap that the client has in the RFP is bullshit. They don’t want you blowing smoke up their ass, they want a technically sound product that addresses the exact issues they asked you to address. They also want you to show them how you’re going to get there, and achieve the objectives they set out.

I realize you’re on the tech side; I’m just venting my frustrations with the corporate/PM spheres.