The US had a similar program back in the 50s but shelved it because of how much radiation it emitted. Those would have been supersonic though. Burevestnik is subsonic. Still sorry af and had not done so great in testing.

Damn. I used to frequent that site all the time from my teenage years up through college and even relatively recently. Their articles were always very in-depth and well written.

Yeah…none of that is true. Onshore wind is the cheapest power generation. Photovoltaic is second cheapest. Methane is leaky and raises your risk of asthma and cancer. You do not need to be tied to an electrical grid for anything with solar panels and batteries for energy storage.

Let me ask you this since you do not appear to be arguing in good faith and are using strawmen: do you believe humans are most of the cause of climate change?

They are using a strawman and trying to claim victory. They are not arguing in good faith.

I enjoy that you are making a strawman. Nobody ever said batteries have no negatives. You asked how they were cleaner than natural gas. I answered. Sorry that the answer hurt your feelings.

mining rare earth minerals

Are you under the impression that we use NMC batteries for grid energy storage?? LOL

Mostly because natural gas is a one and done thing when it is used. Batteries can be recycled. Production of natural gas is largely done through racking which destroys the groundwater. While batteries often require mining (excluding mechanical ones), they often can be broken down and reused in new batteries. And of course there is the greenhouse gas emissions from methane that are horrible. Methane is extremely leaky. Methane usage emits about as much greenhouse gas emissions as coal does.

You know what pumped storage hydro is? A battery. Unfortunately that is not an option everywhere and takes up a massive amount of space. The space portion is not a huge issue for grid energy storage for the most part but it can definitely limit where you can do it and its capacity.

As for the amount of lithium available, there is absolutely more than enough considering it is one of the most abundant materials on our planet. Not that we need to use lithium for grid energy storage. Lithium is very high density energy storage which you are correct that is not a high priority for grid energy storage.

Basically there is no one solution for grid energy storage. There are mechanical batteries, medium density chemical batteries, and even “depleted” EV batteries. We just need to apply what is right for each particular scenario.

I’m not disagreeing with you overall. But I figured more info and context is helpful.

Solar/wind + battery storage is cheaper than natural gas and a hell of a lot cleaner. It makes no sense to go for a more expensive, dirtier form of energy.

I’m sure Carl Pei will always be in office. /s

I’m aware. However, it is good exercise and may help others fight ridiculous arguments.

The $100+ billion per year comes from an analysis of Sanders’ Medicare for All plan by the libertarian think tank Cato Institute. So basically the worst case scenario that is very unlikely.

The $7 tax vs $10 date insurance is hypothetical to make a point. But if you want a real world example, you can compare our largely private system with countries that have socialized systems. 19% of our GDP goes towards healthcare costs vs 11-12% how other developed countries. So if we had something like theirs, most people would get a 10% raise in their income.

It would not be Medicare for All nor a better deal if people could simply opt out. Republicans would simply whittle it down to being worthless otherwise.

If your “taxes” go up by $7 but your health insurance costs go down by $10, why the hell would you care? There are several more dollars in your pocket. Or if you are concerned about tax amount, let’s rename current health insurance fees to taxes and we can simply market Medicare for All as a massive tax cut that increases service.

We could switch to Medicare for All and save a couple hundred billion a year to do it.

What do you mean we can’t afford either? Are you telling me that somehow all other developed countries are able to afford free or cheap higher education but somehow the US cannot? We could also slowly start to cancel current student debt. Sure, it is at $1.77 trillion right now but that does not have to be wiped away all at once. Prioritize getting rid of predatory loans, then those those with financial hardship, then go from there.

¿Por qué no los dos?

I too prefer free tertiary education. But that also does not relieve the millions saddled with predatory loans.

It honestly took me a while to figure out why people were criticizing him. I read his remarks as a positive and didn’t realize he thinks having a work-life balance is a bad thing. Odd coming from someone who is fucking retired. “You work, I live. Things are balanced.”

I wish this was possible to use on YouTube.

I mean he renamed Twitter to X. It is assumed his actions will be cringy.