The last time I was there there were wildfires filling the entire valley/basin with thick smoke. That was gawdawful.

25 years ago when I went it was still 1/2 that thick and brown with no fires. Ugh.

Interesting, but not surprising.

Fireworks (and bbqs) took LA air from poisonous to deadly on the fourth. It was already pretty ruined on the third. Last I read living there was like being a heavy smoker on the lungs. As I recall, the LA basin air quality was the main reason California enacted our own emission standards decades ago. That was my point, not that fireworks don't pollute, but that LA air quality is legendarily awful.

completely bogus demonstration: if you look carefully, you will see that the water in the basin for the first demonstration was completely still - and drained straight down. But for the north and south demonstrations, she poured the water into the basin at one side of the basin - setting up circulation in the basin - and immediately pulled the plug. What she was demonstrating was conservation of angular momentum, not the coriolis effect.

Yes...but what that means to Trump and you is the last bit of clean water is being removed leaving a stinking, feculent basin of ooze and rot inhabited by gators, snakes, and bugs.

This guy is just a cool drink of water, one of the last.

Hilarious that you could possibly disagree with him, that's proof you are anti American and likely Russian, and that's exactly how I'll treat you Dimitri, like just another dumb Putin stooge. Sad. Go eat some borscht you pinko.

Hadn't heard of that, but I get the concept. Cool idea.

Off the top of my head, I'm concerned about pump and generator efficiency. You're going to use some amount more energy to pump a volume of water up to the high basin than you will get back by gravity feeding it through generators. To be fair, efficiency is a problem with using and recharging chemical batteries as well, but the limited amount that I remember from college engineering courses tells me that efficiency in the electrical / solid state world tends to be more easily obtained than in the mechanical world.

And as another "to be fair", efficiency is a bigger concern for things like fossil fuels, where burning one unit of fuel produces a set amount of energy and you have to improve efficiency to get the most value out of that energy. With things like solar and wind being "free" energy when active but requiring storage for when the source is inactive (night / calm winds), efficiency still certainly matters, but not as much as with a scarce / non-renewable source of energy.

Anyway, I'd like to see concrete numbers comparing the utility and efficiency (in various metrics) of your hydro storage vs battery storage.

Ok....they start with a few mistaken premises.
Most importantly, the premise that energy is best stored in a chemical battery. It sounds good, but it's simply wrong. The best way to store large amounts of energy is in a hydro/gravity storage system. This is a two basin system, with two basins at different heights with a pump/generator linking them. When you have excess power, you pump water uphill. When you need more power, you let it flow back down. It's ecologically friendly, cheap, and effectively never wears out like batteries all do, it can work on any scale, and unlike most hydro doesn't impact a living river system. It's proven technology that's head and shoulders above battery banks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region)
I admit I was wrong about the 8% figure, I got the columns crossed, recalculating, it was about 11% in 22, 17% in 31, and 32% in 47. That still sounds like a pretty huge influx by my standards, almost tripling the per capita population in 25 years (and more than tripling the actual population) compared to others in the region, mostly by imigration.

You said they stood along side the Nazis " upon the UN mandating a two state solution to the whole mess" (I think you've edited what you originally stated, that they then stood along side the Nazis, and clarified what you meant, that the leaders that turned down the 47 proposal had stood with the Nazis in the past, which I don't disagree with...too bad I erased the quotation for space). The U.N. mandated a two state solution in 74...in 47, they 'mandated' a 3 state solution that took massive territories from the Palestinians and handed it to Jewish immigrants, it turns out the Palestinians should have accepted because they've lost far more since then, but it sounded terrible at the time.

What points? Are these universal points? Can I redeem them for trips to the store by the universe...it owes me some milk.

In 48, when the illegal immigrants became land thieving invaders, the U.N.partition plan was to split the territory 3 ways, and for the U.N. to control Jerusalem. It would be like the U.N. agreeing today with illegal Mexicans in Texas and California that the southern 1/2 of all border states was now a new country because they are now a majority in many areas, with the U.N. taking control of the LA basin....we might say "no thanks" like the Palestinians did...at least I hope so.

The 37 British plan for Partition came before 47.
WIKI-The first proposal for the creation of Jewish and Arab states in the British Mandate of Palestine was made in the Peel Commission report of 1937, with the Mandate continuing to cover only a small area containing Jerusalem. The recommended partition proposal was rejected by the Arab community of Palestine,[8][9] and was accepted by most of the Jewish leadership.

You said they stood with the Nazis when the two state solution was proposed...which was actually 74, but I'll give you leeway and say you meant 47, which is still ridiculous, the Nazis were long gone in 47.

They didn't seize it as payback for the holocaust, but many allies went along, seemingly out of guilt for not stopping it sooner (a valid complaint about the US, but no reason to help take Palestinian territory and hand it away).

Yes, there was Jewish hatred in Europe before the Nazis, that's one reason why they were able to grab so much power, they had a ready made scape goat. Your point?

No, not every Jew in Palestine was a Zionist, but enough of the 11% were that they tripled their presence in 25 years....and far more importantly, today it's near 100%, and they are violent, expansionist, ruthlessly inhuman, and zealous.

I refuse to call it a civil war when one side was made nearly completely of immigrants....that's called an invasion.

I do agree, the inability to assimilate is not 100% the immigrants fault, but it is 100% their responsibility. Refugees, that are not expected to stay, so not expected to assimilate, are kept in camps. These people did not go to camps, so they were, at best, illegal immigrants, and many were coming with the goal of stealing inhabited territory for their own, which makes them invaders. The VAST majority of them came after the war ended, so could not be war refugees. During the war, Jews had an incredibly hard time traveling in Europe.

The few actual refugees there that the axis created were absorbable by the Palestinians. It's their multitudinous militant expansionist friends that continue to immigrate there to this day that are the problem, IMO. I'll continue to call them violent invaders, you've said nothing to convince me otherwise.

wow, was the perfectly placed shovel and water basin part of the kid's plan? He really understands applied physics well for his age.

While Apple River is close to the places in Minas Basin which hold the record for highest tides (over 50 feet) this has everything to do with wind and nothing to do with tides.

Well, there's the reasons he mentioned, speed and energy to pump water, and the third reason, the water itself. Old school locks use lots of water. Since the canals don't seem to have much, if any, flow, and pumping a set of locks full of water uses a lot of it as each basin must be filled to the top just to get to the next level, it could be a serious problem to keep the canals at the proper levels with the 'regular' method. This method raises the same amount of water as it lowers (minus the boat tonnage), so there's very little taking from one channel and adding to the other.

I think what they're calling "new" is the idea to draw/pull the object out of the liquid (instead of the old way where you 'print' from above and sink the object into the bath of liquid.) This "new" way of doing it does mean you can make things as long/large as you like instead of being limited by the depth of your liquid basin, but I don't see anything else new or particularly exciting about it.

Holy hell, I just decided to watch a couple of his old streams (he's offline right now).

I watched a video of him hauling ass in Diablo, Single handedly (or..mouthily..) holding the mine in Arathi Basin (World of warcraft) vs literally 3-4 other people, and bottom lane support (as taric) in league of legends.

He's a better fucking gamer than I am, dude's actually amazing.

Sam Cooke - Basin Street Blues has been added as a related post - related requested by Norsuelefantti on that post.

Sam Cooke - Basin Street Blues has been added as a related post - related requested by Norsuelefantti on that post.

Sam Cooke - Basin Street Blues has been added as a related post - related requested by Norsuelefantti on that post.