From your link: "Although CO2 gets most of the attention, it accounts for less than half of this warming. Two-thirds come from non-CO2 forcings." So it's much over 5%.
All of transport sector emissions makes up 20%. The other subsectors are decarbonising, but there's no tech solution in sight for air travel in the needed timeframe. And air travel is growing alarmingly quickly (doubled between 2006 and 2019).
All the individual slices of the pie we can tackle are pretty small, aviation is one of the bigger ones. We can't keep subdividing and then concluding for each one that it's too small to matter.
That's true, but of course this is a much slower rate of improvement (30 years to 2x) than the growth of air travel, and has slowed in recent years[1] since seat density and seatu utilization can't be increased much more without radical approaches like sedating people and stacking them like cargo.
While the percentage shows that aviation is not a *priority* for climate change, the required reductions in CO2 emissions for the climate to stabilise are around 99.9%, so aviation-induced emissions will have to come down at some point.
That's awesome thanks. Would be great if it also show'd what the average residential customer was paying as well as the average industrial users cost per kWh so we could get an idea of the cost of manufacturing as far as electricity input goes.
I hear this often, but I'm struggling to understand how taxing the wealthy will build houses, or lower the price of energy?
Taxing the wealthy does one thing very well: transfer money from the hands of the wealthy, who are notoriously good at managing their wealth, in to the hands of politicians and bureaucrats who are notoriously bad at managing other peoples money.
The way the wealthy "manage their wealth" is by buying up assets (including housing, etc) driving up the price for everyone else causing exactly this sort of cost of living crisis you referenced.
Not really that difficult to understand. You should read up on the history of US taxation and how much stronger the middle class was when the wealthy got taxed fairly.
You could not have agreed with my point more clearly. You don’t want to pay more, you want to force everyone richer than you to pay more. That’s the problem.
I want them to pay the same amount I do as a percentage of their earnings. But they don't, they pay far less as a percentage of their earnings. THAT's the problem.
If you seized every billionaire’s money the government would be financed for less than a year. If you want sustainable taxation to finance your climate agenda you need to convince everyone to pay more. But people won’t do it unless you pitch it as a free lunch.
2021 data from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control:
Bulgaria and Croatia had the highest rates of trichinellosis at 0.42 cases per 100,000 population, accounting for 58% of all cases reported in 2021. Taking those two countries gether and extrapolateing to whole US population of 3400 hundred thousand (340 million) would be 1428 cases - definitely much higher that <20, which would be something like 0.0002 per 100,000.
The total number of reported infections in 2021 was 79 cases for the whole European Union / European Economic Area was 79 cases for a total population of 4500 hundred thousand (450 million), an infection rate of 0.02 cases per 100,000.
Discounting the two worst countries would reduce the number to about 40 cases per 4500 hundred thousand population would bring the rate of infection to something like 0.008 - not entirely too far from the US.
You've already got a solution, and often the cheapest solution is the one you already have.
There's no technical reason a generator + battery (and solar?) setup couldn't be configured to run off battery till the battery reaches a preconfigured state of charge then call for the generator.
DO you have commercially available examples of this setup? While I agree there's no technical reason this wouldn't work when doing research for our generator all the hole house generators use a transfer switch so it's either running the entire house completely disconnected from the grid or turned off and running the house from the grid. Solar didn't make sense for us given the costs and our time horizon, but it's always been something I've been interested in. A solar system with a natural gas generator backup to charge the batteries would be nice, especially for shorter outages so we wouldn't need to hear the generator running.
Do those still have a habit of snapping without any prior warning?
Having said that, the chrome moly top tube on my road bike broke without warning. Granted I did get hit by a cop car doing 80kph in a 50kph zone. Strained a thumb too.
I ran into a car that abruptly turned in front of me, impacting at 40 kph, followed by a somersault over the top and landing on the rear wheel. the frame absorbed the impact with the road and nicely snapped both seatstays but otherwise held up rather well.
Yes when CF fails it fails catastrophically but practically no, you do not ride your bike enough for the repeated fatigue to weaken modern CF enough for a catastrophic failure. If you do ride your bike enough, you're almost certainly replacing frequently enough that it will never be an issue.
If you want a bike to give to your grandkids when you die get Ti or some form of steel.
My 80’ Concorde steel frame is still intact -well slightly bend but not failure in sight- despite the daily commute and holidays backpacking/trailer. Grandkid test check.
> If you do ride your bike enough, you're almost certainly replacing frequently enough that it will never be an issue.
True for the light athletes that take care during usage and "upgrade" often. Part of the motivation to upgrade is security.
Be more careful if you ride in urban/outdoor with potholes and like to keep using a piece a hardware when it fits your needs.
As a bike mechanist we checked meticulously every second hand frame we sell and find some cracks time to time. Those happen (CN and Aluminum). Direct to the bin.
More importantly: check your rims, especially as we entered the disk era and don’t change them so often. They also do get cracks and fail catastrophically.
I own a 1992 Specialzied Epic Allez with carbon tubes bonded to aluminium lugs. I had an issue with a bond failing at the chainstay and it was repaired but the carbon tubes themselves are still going strong.
I am familiar with the failure mode of bonded frame, we had a number of vitus bikes in the family and usually they just become so noodly you stop before the bond is giving up totally. To be honest I am more concerned about the fatigue of the aluminum fork legs which is the reason I recently ordered a steel fork for the next time I am riding it.
I find CF poles last at least 400 miles on average through moderately rocky terrain. And rarely catastrophic failure. Lots of collapsible poles tend to start breaking close enough to the sleeve that you can shift the rings and tighten them and buy some time.
I've not seen any issues with random catastrophic failure like that in MTB land. Maybe it's because the parts are generally laid up much stronger than road? Wheels will break if you mash them into a rock, and even then Santa Cruz notoriously has a line of rims that Danny Macaskill had to ride down stairs repeatedly with no tires on to break.
With the ubiquity of frames at the high amateur level, if there were still issues you'd hear more about them.
Re CF frames... one neglected point is that even when you do crunch them into a rock, they're repairable, whereas Al frames aren't worth repairing due to the heat treat needed. My own CF XC MTB has a repaired chainstay.
Aviation accounts for about 2.5% of global CO² emissions.
https://ourworldindata.org/global-aviation-emissions
Rapidly ramping down fossil fuel based air travel will have approximately no effect on climate.