Profane vicissitude dwells beneath the barren land, doomed to mortal peril. Drinking upon our own demise in reckless cheer, humanity wastes the promises of the black blood of the earth, a curse spelled out through eons of rot.
I sell profane and profane accessories.
Hank Hell
That sounds exactly like something Logan Cunningham would narrate.
I heard my boy Wayne June, of Darkest Dungeon and other such fame
Exactly who I heard in my head reading it haha
Return the Earth to its primordial state by burning the effluvial rot and releasing the souls of the vanquished back into our world, so that they can draw energy from the radiation of our Cosmic Creator and use it to bake us in the infernal flames of greed and hubris.
I’m going to be the person who does this I guess. Fossil fuels are mostly from plant matter, not dinosaurs, or other animals, like is often said. Still dead I guess, but not what people would think when reading this.
I’m going to be the person who does this I guess. Fossil fuels are mostly from algae/zooplankton , not plant matter, or other animals, like is often said. Still photosynthesise I guess, but not what people would think when reading this.
I’m going to be the person who does this I guess. Algae is an alternative term outside of the standard domain/kingdom taxonomy, so it actually spans multiple kingdoms. Most green, red, and brown algae are in the plantae kingdom, i.e. plants. Other algae can be protists or bacteria. The shared trait is that they are non-land photosynthetic organisms. Fossil fuels can be divided into coal (mostly formed from land plants), oil (algae/plankton), and natural gas (algae/plankton). Still classification I guess, but not what people would think when reading this.
While we often gravitate towards putting things precisely into categories, it’s important to remember that classifications systems are structures imposed on continuous and complex phenomena for pragmatic purposes. They should not be conflated with the phenomena itself.
It’s good to correct misconceptions, but sometimes over focusing on categories distracts from the meaning or sentiment being conveyed, in which case it may be better to be generous with partially correct statements and let it go.
monophyletic terminology is so much easier to handle than paraphyletic ones.
both make sense regardless of use, but it’s so annoying when a term has a monophyletic and paraphyletic definitions that are used interchangeably depending on context, all my homies hate that
Lol. Thanks. Yeah, I was grouping that in mentally but I guess I didn’t use the right term.
but algae are plants
algae are evolutionary distinct to plants
alright
I think in this context the distinction is single cell vs multicellular
either case, plants is a kingdom of life. algae are separate from them. they are not plants.
alright
it depends on what book you look into. some authors define plants as being eukaryotic beings who have accepted photosynthetic symbionts, called chloroplasts.
by that definition, no, algae (bacteria) are not plants.
alright thanks this is fascinating
it is
Not only that but people will fight wars for the privilege of digging it out of the ground.
I don’t think “ichor” is the right word here. Lovecraft would probably use “effluvial rot” or something.
“Slowly” is a strong word.
Turns out even slow things progress quickly when the rate is multiplied billions of times over.
The magic of exponentials
And it’s also greasy and highly poisonous if spilled.
Just like cum.
Such fowl eldritch liquid. Thou shalt prefer to be propelled by lightning contained, if you can spare the coin that is.
The order of holy transport
- bike
- e bike
- walking
- electric motorcycle/moped
- electric car
(Ebike might have a lower co2 emissions than a bike. Depends on what you eat and where you live)
Stick 60-160mpg ICE motor bikes between e motorcycles and electric cars.
No.
EVs are more efficient than the low range for the motorcycle. If you charged your EV with a portable gas generator, your efficiency is comparable to an ICE motorcycle. Most grids at this point are quite a bit less CO2 intense than a personal generator. That cuts significantly on the CO2 impact.
The only upside to a motorcycle is the reduced energy requirements for manufacturing. But lifetime, an EV will be the clear winner.
Google tells me powergrid emissions for ecars is 60-200gC/mile.
1 gallon of gas contains 8900gC.
A Honda NC750 gets 70mpg, a Honda wave gets 160.
8900/160=55
8900/70=120
Bike is above walking?
Yup, this is perhaps surprising to some.
Bikes win hands down by being the most efficient form of energy usage for transport. Walking requires a lot more calories to travel the same distance you can go on a bike. Those calories come from farming and that (diet dependent) very quickly can outpace any lifetime savings from using a bike. A bike is about ~99% efficient at converting energy into motion.
In terms of distance over energy? Damn right.
Where does rail transit fall within this hierarchy?
Pretty hard to guestimate as it’s anywhere from bike efficiency to more than ev efficiency.
What makes it hard is capacity. A fully packed electric train will be the most efficient transport mechanism. A mostly empty fossil fuel train can be as bad or worse than ICE vehicles.
If you have one available, then it’s probably your best bet to lowering impact.
Hmmm its got me thinking. How many mommoths does it take to fill up my car? How much biomass was it before it turned into oil?
Like maybe 10 mammoths? Maybe just 1? Or maybe 1000?!
Maybe we can use dead people to start making new oil? I mean, grave yards usually take up very valuable real estate anyway, and they are growing in size exponentially all the time. We need to start being realistic about the dead. How long does it take for someone to turn into gas anyway? Like 1000 years?
Relevant xkcd https://what-if.xkcd.com/101/
It’s not dinosaurs, oil is mostly sea stuff like plankton and algae. Coal is mostly land vegetation, trees.
Dinosaurs didn’t really contribute much to this pool.
Still, people can be good for Soylent Green though.
Edit: /s
Dinosaurs didn’t really contribute much
I guess maybe not by comparison, but imagine all the millions of years and millions of generations of gaint (and small) dinosaurs that lived lived and died. Thats a Hella Lotta biomass biodegrading.
Compared to algae and plants it’s a rounding error.
I think it’s more plants than animals.
Oh?? Well how many trees does it take to fill up my car? Like is it like 1000 trees, and half a mommoth? Maybe 100,000 fully mature 50 foot tall trees? Im very curious about this now…
I don’t know the answer. But somehow I feel like someone on the internet has attempted this calculation.
i think it was mostly plankton
Your use of the word “exponentially” triggered my inner math teacher: no, the growth is not exponential but more than linear since the industrial revolution.
Is it not exponential? Dont human births exponentially increase? And if thats the case, dont death increase exponentially?
Or am I wrong about births too?
If a couple have 2 children, then in an ideal condition the population is constant, so the death/birth is linear. Human birth can be exponentially if every couple have more than 2 children and they also have more than 2 and so on in this ideal scenario with no early deaths.
In reality you need 2+some fraction to balance out the early deaths, other couples with no children, unmarried, etc.
Plus with limited resources, population can’t grow a lot because you’ll start having a lot of death due to starvation, conflicts, accidents, etc.
Problem is due to industrialization, we can now support higher number of humans compared to the past, and due to vaccines and medicines we have smaller numbers of early deaths, so we have a population growth problem. But as we hit our limits it’ll stabilize, or if we overshoot, it’ll go down.
There is an additional element to it: along human history the birth rate has been usually significantly higher than 2, but that was compensated by a significantly higher death rate too. So the number of deaths definitely did not increase a huge lot over the last hundred years.
Couldn’t anything O() of linear be modeled as exponential?
Exponential would be O(x^n) for any n. X^2 is O(x) but not exponential.
There’s a ‘legit’ theory out there that posits that oil is sentient.
“legit”
A bunch of carbs ain’t sentient.
Best Regards, A Breadeater
Hence the quotes.
Can someone please provide a tl:dw so my YT algorithm doesn’t get fucked by watching this?
you can go into your history and delete things you don’t want the algorithm to use
Ok then actually I just want to read and not watch videos
Theory has a definition, when we stretch it this far we end up with pedants saying things like “but gravity is just a theory”.
I theory is the most highly respected type of ‘conclusion’(those don’t really exist in science) because it is Based on rigorous testing. This isn’t even a hypothesis, this is just a bonkers guess.
Benziiiiiin. Gib mir Benziiiiiin!
deleted by creator
Burning the ancient ooze releases ancientness in the air
Also, someday someone’s meemaw could power someone’s car
