Long term followers will be delighted to hear that my cycle to work now has a temporary ramp in it again.
Even worse when you look at (a) Google's climate target and (b) the trajectory if it just *continues* current growth (imagine if it accelerates....) Google's carbon *intensity* is rising, which is a key story: it isn't just 'more customers'. Their wastefulness and inefficiency is worsening!
"Why are there two cycle lanes on Park Lane?" is a really weird question to ask when there's only one cycle lane on Park Lane. A better question would be why aren't there two! It's a huge dual carriageway. www.standard.co.uk/news/politic...
The Mayor of London sits down with Dylan Jones for a chat about politics, traffic â and his status as an unlikely sex symbol
Folks y'all are sleeping on how funny this is
"Amsterdam like every other city is slowly being strangled by the motor car" A trial of a docked electric car hire system from the 70s - which, er, didn't catch on. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witkarwww.youtube.com/watch?v=G9vK...
YouTube video by BBC Archive
If you stop looking at the Robovan pictures and just repeat âA bus, but it can only carry 20 passengersâ over and over again, eventually you start to understand the intellectual bankruptcy of not just Musk but most of Silicon Valley.
A related note here on the real-world use of IPCC scenarios - I read *a lot* of fossil co transition plans, scenarios, comms materials and reports etc Most of them *actively include* a comparison to IPCC scenarios: "See, even the scientists agree" vibes Below is Shell, Exxon and British Petroleum
The notion that climate science in some way chose overshoot over massive immediate cuts and then convinced the world's policymakers to opt for the former over the latter is totally ass-backwards. Scientists are simply not that powerful.
As a 'mainstream climate scientist' I find this kind of article intensely annoying. First, the authors intended target (IAM scenario designers) is far smaller than 'mainstream climate science' & second, assuming that running a scenario implies you think it's likely or good or preferred is nonsense.
In which immutable atmospheric physics was sacrificed on the altars of diplomacy, industry, and "feasibility" by climate scientists who caved to fossil fuel lobbying pressure theconversation.com/how-mainstre...
Surpassing 1.5°C of warming can be undone at a later date â using tech, land and resources that donât exist.
1: AI is hallucinating events, historical figures, entire concepts on Wikipedia 2: a task force of Wikipedia editors is detecting and deleting this stuff www.404media.co/the-editors-...
WikiProject AI Cleanup is protecting Wikipedia from the same kind of misleading AI-generated information that has plagued the rest of the internet.