Jump to content

AeroHorn

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1096
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AeroHorn

  1. Ahem
  2. The ref was being helpful there.
  3. Oh, I have come across many disciples including Matthew (a very good friend of mine) and John (more than one), Chris, Christo, Jesus, etc. Rose by any other name, etc. etc.
  4. The difference could be Lawrence's zone read plays. He uncorked their running game.
  5. I don't like it that the NC year doesn't match the season year. They should call it the 2019 NC game.
  6. Did you ever experience that dream-like state shortly before waking up where you think you missed an important deadline, wake up fully in panic, and then thankfully realize that there is still time? The opposite happened today morning. I was half-awake and somehow was thinking about football and NFL playoffs while assuming college football being done, and then panicking for not remembering who won the CFP. After couple of moments, I realized that that stupid game still hasn't happened.
  7. Kyle is a robot until it is official.
  8. They did? I thought Vikings called that time out. Yeah, that doesn't make sense.
  9. NFL is all about percentages. They think the percentage of reaching the field goal range is less than something bad happening. In college football, defenses are not as good as compared to offenses, and they get a TO after first down.
  10. I don't understand Iran's position. They should have realized that Trump cancelled the nuclear deal only because it was signed by Obama. Trump has made it clear multiple times, even inviting them to renegotiate. Iranians could have got the same or even a better deal with just a bit of flattery.
  11. Aha. I was at a client and I was wondering why the commode is sloping forward. It was absolutely top end otherwise, with bidet and wireless remote that adjusts seat temperature, jet pressure, direction, pulse frequency, water temperature, etc. Absolutely great except for that slope.
  12. Why do people think Trump winning isn't at least 50% probable? Herd mentality is very well ingrained and will overtake even rational individuals, and we know that rationality is less than 50% in our country (and outside too). Most of the people buy stuff they don't need on credit cards, they chug sugary sodas, and their news is through memes. And these are the educated and employed ones. Rationality has become a rare commodity. I would guess that the majority would look at a few video clips of the presidential election debates and vote according to anything but rational thought (have always voted this way, job is going well so country must be good, Trump is funny, etc.) An incumbent has the advantage of name recognition, and in Trump's case, a lot of shenanigans that are possible to those willing to abuse power, ranging from lying blatantly with a guaranteed wide reach to abusing anything and everything to secure votes, whether pushing coal or pushing kids in cages. I would give Dems the higher chance of winning if they were somehow united and had a simplified crystal clear message. They are far from united; the party prefers Biden and is scared of Bernie because they are too comfortable to rock the boat, and there are 100 messages from 10 candidates. Unless Dems go cold turkey and embrace the 21st century wholeheartedly, there is a good chance that the party that is clinging to the 19th century will win.
  13. I guess it reflects the percentage of student population that actually plays any sport regularly, let alone football.
  14. The girl that won in Dallas was making football throws.
  15. I can see how Georgia lost to Texas last year. And they are the #2 team in SEC last two years.
  16. I hadn't seen Fowler for a while. Wow, he looks old.
  17. The Utah QB is lost. Better they focus on running the ball with occasional pass.
  18. I wonder if the duo want to do something different, and what would that be? Gates was somewhat pushed by the antitrust stuff, and he has found his other vocation. Bezos has Washington Post and Blue Origin. Musk is Musk. They may not be wired like Pichai, Nadella, Cook, etc. who are good at managing huge things, which gets somewhat repetitive year after year. I know they have some outside projects but they are pretty small. I suspect they will go more technology route (Musk) than charity route (Gates).
  19. The world is a complicated place.
  20. That's aggy play, when they lost to OU.
  21. Nix would have run better, not to mention the D would have respected the pass.
  22. I don't understand running into the pile. Why not run wide? I would have preferred the QB rollout for RPO.
  23. good call
  24. Very important question. Thank you to others who have already answered it. I'll just link to an exhaustive summary by NREL based off of their detailed reports for each energy type (renewable or otherwise). https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy16osti/65645.pdf They do the whole life cycle analysis, not only for emissions, but also for the use of other natural resources such as water and land. They also include 2000+ installation sites data, and do quite a bit of statistical normalization. Slide 10 explains their life cycle calculation methodology Slide 29 summarizes the emissions across different energy sources in terms of green house gasses. As mentioned earlier, renewables are a small fraction of natural gas and coal. Slides 46 and 49 summarize water usage. Among renewables, Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) has high recirculating water usage (as expected) but photo voltaic and wind use very little water. Slides 55 and 56 summarize land usage. Since this is uniquely renewable concern, they have listed only these types. As they explain in the text, the very high land use for wind power is not really accurate because the wind turbine has practically no impact on the land and the land can be used for farming, etc. TL;DR: Very exhaustive full life cycle studies for all natural resources show that renewables, especially solar and wind, have very small impact compared to all other types of energy generation.
  25. Why you mad though? For information in easy to understand format, I suggest you get started by perusing the DOE website. https://www.energy.gov/eere/electricvehicles/electric-vehicle-benefits. More online searching would definitely be educational. Personally, I get my electricity from the solar panels on my roof. For my state, California, about 50% is clean/renewable source energy, with 43.5% being solar, hydro, wind and geothermal, and depending on how you see nuclear, add 8.7% to it. Even if 100% is from burning non-renewable unclean sources, burning it at a power plant instead of in the car engine has many advantages, the main ones being much higher efficiency power extraction, emissions kept much lower and handled more efficiently, and those that are released to atmosphere are away from where people live. Texas is not up there yet, but it has tremendous potential for wind and solar. Of course, there are challenges, the main one being the uneven production from solar and wind, but there are many solutions being developed. Any other questions?
×
×
  • Create New...