I just want to know where this originated?

I really want them to explain the process of how their butt holes are converting the sun's energy at a more efficient rate than the rest of their skin.

What is the secret of the butt hole energy efficiency? =)

Clueless question; this style of swimming because it's really energy efficient? Because it makes less wake and is stealthier? Because it's harder to hit someone swimming like this in the water with gunfire?

Sorry, I'm not sure why they settled on this stroke...He says faster and more efficient---but---any engineers/biomechanics/hydrodynamics folks who tell tell me why?

I give you Maru! The world's most energy efficient cat.

Revolutionize, probably not. Be an improved option over 'regular' internal combustion in (apparently) weight, size and efficiency, maybe. This seems to be a great option for a hybrid. Being smaller and lighter is what you want in an energy efficient vehicle, as is fuel efficiency. Since fossil fueled vehicles will be the norm for the foreseeable future, any step towards making them more efficient is a good thing (although not the end goal, true enough). This seemed to have many advantages of Wankel motors (rotaries) without the efficiency problem due to low compression/incomplete combustion. 14:1 on pump gas is INSANE! My offroad race motor is only 12:1 and it needs trick racing fuel.
Also, as far as simplicity, this had no valves and assorted crap, just inlet and outlet ports (from what I understood anyway) like Wankels. That's a HUGE jump in simplicity, with an entire system eliminated, so there's far less to break/wear out/need tuning. IF manufacturing cost can be reasonable, I see this as a great step forward possibly making hybrids more acceptable to many more people.

I'm advocating passivity because I don't recognise overpopulation as a threat, more an inconvenience, and one that we couldn't really prevent even if we wanted to.

I don't see what's preposterous or optimistic about taking widely accepted birth rate data and projecting based off that. Birth rates are predictable and stable sampled over a large population. The data consistently shows that as societies come out of poverty, their birth rates fall. The only assumption here is that there isn't another GFC event that hinders growth which at this point is not particularly likely.

All taken into account we already know it's plateauing, and have known for decades. This isn't a hypothesis, it's happening right now. Unless you can show me why this trend will suddenly and irrevocably reverse, despite population data being incredibly stable and predictable historically, it seems the onus is on you to explain why you're so pessimistic.

Again, I think you're still conflating (1) what I want / whether it's bad versus (2) whether it could plausibly be stopped. I would also rather live in a less populated world. At current rates of technology and resource utilisation, things would be cheaper, there'd be more to go around. Reality is not like that. But as I said before, every policy focus has an opportunity cost. I don't see a plateauing population as a threat and I would rather see that effort devoted to poverty which will help reduce it anyway.

We're nowhere near an economic bubble. Maybe a short term stock market valuation bubble right now, but there's plenty of economic under-utilisation in the US and Europe, and China and other developing countries have decades to grow.

The term technological bubble is a bit nonsensical. You can have a technology sector bubble but actual physical technology which works now, will not magically stop working tomorrow based on inflated expectations. If you're saying instead we'll reach some cusp of innovation, well people have predicting that for decades.

We're nowhere near a peak oil event. Every time people say current known reserves are dwindling, they either (1) discover a huge reserve in under developed countries that were previously not surveyed (Africa and parts of SE Asia at the moment), or (2) something like fraking comes along which unlocks new supply. The US is forecast to be the largest oil exporter by 2020 based on that second point.

Hell, I'll play devil's advocate with you. Suppose we do reach a glut. We'll know this at least a decade ahead based on dwindling new reserve discoveries. The price of energy will leap up far, far ahead of us running out. That will spur innovation in more efficient sources of energy and will incentivise both individuals and businesses to be more energy efficient. A gradual adjustment like I've talked about endlessly here. Why am I wrong?

Environmental damage is a different issue and something that I agree needs to actually be addressed. I'm sure if you search back through my posts you'll see me talking about the economic rationale of addressing this directly when corporations who pollute aren't subject to the negative externalities that they impose in our current capitalist system and that will inherently create issues. Hopefully countries will take note of the smog clouds in China's big cities.

YESSsss! Way to rock that down-vote, CE-
(...always thought the ratio of ups to down-votes should be close to equal here....folks, y'all really need to lose that whole, "But nobody will liiike me!" shit, right?? it's...it's...pussified.

The moral here is, Don't litter, please recycle, and don't be a pussy...OH, and don't drive one of those energy-efficient tin-coffin's posing as a car, cause you look like a gimp goin' down the street bein' in the only one on the road surrounded by ginormous ones, and that shits' just plain dangerous.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Thanks enoch - that article is pretty heavy. It's easy to get stuck in the bad news on the environment - because let's face it, there's a lot of it. But I can tell you - there are a lot of the brightest minds on Earth working on solutions. Everything from space based power generation to energy efficiency through better batteries. We're in a race to find the right solutions before we permanently fuck everything up.

"Over time, we're going to see what works and what doesn't and things will generally settle down"
Illusion and fantasy...total confabulation.

A government is a simple creation really, it uses force to achieve the end goal which is control, not unlike a rapist or a thief-The antithesis of liberty in the example of say, the American government works because force is used by an immoral core of liars and thieves to achieve goals that benefit the few rather than the whole of society. Examples of just how fucked things are at face value VooDooV, why bother to cite the examples that are glaringly obvious to anyone who at their core, is a moral and free individual...pointless and insulting to anyone who can think.

Mind you, infrastructure and social safety nets enhance freedom, but what should the end-goal be? To enhance the moral framework of a society, which has surely not been done so far with the American form of government, on the contrary, we see the fabric of what makes a society prosper and maintain a fairness for all being eroded to serve the interests of a few, through force and control...through civil liberties being chipped-away at through surveillance and more prisons, more laws, more fines and punishments for more people, etc. Deficit spending pays debt forward to further enslave the recipients of services like roads and social welfare programs, higher education, etc. The freedom to make poor choices at a micro and macro level is what the current government is all about, getting worse every year.

Urban sprawl will continue as folks with pipe-dreams tout more green, less energy usage, cleaner burning cars and factories, etc. One 'problem' is addressed by creating one for another somewhere else.

Ever listen to Buckminster Fuller's idea of a 'green' or 'energy efficient society'? It doesn't use ANY of the current models of societal structure, it pretty much SCRAPS them all for a trans-formative way of moving forward. The old models are shit if they accomplish them through force and control of human activity. YOU don't live in a democratic system, in case you have been asleep for your entire life, democracy is only a fucking word, a concept not unlike any 'ism' created by humans in the past 3000-7000 years.

The financial structure of the United States is inherently evil. It can not be made fair and moral for everyone, it wasn't designed to. It is designed to serve the few at the top, with enforcers and regulators at the bottom-tier of their system. The government is NOT inherently evil but it has been hijacked by cunts.

Just because you think you know how politicians should perform, does not make it happen that way. Sane health care system? Nope. Maybe for the privileged classes-What they hand the masses is complete shit. National debt? Foreign policy? How would YOU do it? Then that's probably saner than the way it's being run, innit? Government is not needed for ANY of these aspects of a civil and moral society to function. All it takes is moral and sane judgement and agreement at solutions and for folks to voluntarily subscribe to these actions, without force, without police, without armies, etc.

Many more examples too many to pontificate upon, many variables of systems, all of which could function to afford everyone freedom and liberty, WITHOUT a government. The government is a construct just like everything else man creates-It takes willing humans to make them either function efficiently, or to scrap them for something new and improved.

I'm no libertarian, no anarchist, just a practical human being.
There are more reasons for scrapping the world system of government than there are for maintaining them, you simply refuse to see any other way THAN systems of government.

Mankind can self-govern if it does so with a formidable and sound moral compass...Is mankind doing that? It can also make the entire planet it's playground if it chooses to do so...Is mankind doing this??
FUCK NO!

Yeah, where's our advanced space travel tech and energy efficient vehicles. Oh right, our noob leaders want to make money, drive cool cars, travel to places frequently where the rest of us cannot afford, and fuck hot women. Got it.

We all get dicked. Big pictures of dicks to the masses!

I think the implications for better energy efficient lights are offset by the cost of keeping nitrogen liquid

SO does the gas make the fishes run cleaner and more energy efficient??

>> ^messenger:

You're right that they're bloodsuckers and always will be. However, when the public votes with their dollars, corporate behaviour changes very quickly, and those who don't get left in the dust. Remember in the late 80s when manufacturers suddenly started making environmentally friendly products even though the profit margins were less? That was a response to public awareness of environmental damage. People voted with their dollars. The market responded, and now almost every product has some kind of environmental symbol or even a rating. All that is necessary for change to come to the insurance industry is for one neutral watchdog group to monitor this kind of behaviour and publish inhuman ratings for each company. It will then become a default resource for information while selecting an insurance company like the Energuide in Canada, which rates how energy efficient appliances are and greatly affects purchasing behaviour.>> ^cosmovitelli:
>> ^KnivesOut:
Was just reading about this yesterday, I hope it balloons into a major PR problem for Progressive.

They won't give a shit.
Even if every human being involved is horrified - it cannot be reasoned with, cannot be bargained with, and absolutely WILL NOT STOP.. At least not for a second longer than it needs to to minimise expenditure.
This is an equation - that's old granny smiths pension money running this place and who the fuck are you to say the letter of the law is insufficient regulation?? YOU'RE FIRED!



You're relying on the interest and attention of the public to outmanoeuvre the machine. Never seems to work in the long run.

Especially when your elected representatives are working for the other side.

You're right that they're bloodsuckers and always will be. However, when the public votes with their dollars, corporate behaviour changes very quickly, and those who don't get left in the dust. Remember in the late 80s when manufacturers suddenly started making environmentally friendly products even though the profit margins were less? That was a response to public awareness of environmental damage. People voted with their dollars. The market responded, and now almost every product has some kind of environmental symbol or even a rating. All that is necessary for change to come to the insurance industry is for one neutral watchdog group to monitor this kind of behaviour and publish inhuman ratings for each company. It will then become a default resource for information while selecting an insurance company like the Energuide in Canada, which rates how energy efficient appliances are and greatly affects purchasing behaviour.>> ^cosmovitelli:

>> ^KnivesOut:
Was just reading about this yesterday, I hope it balloons into a major PR problem for Progressive.

They won't give a shit.
Even if every human being involved is horrified - it cannot be reasoned with, cannot be bargained with, and absolutely WILL NOT STOP.. At least not for a second longer than it needs to to minimise expenditure.
This is an equation - that's old granny smiths pension money running this place and who the fuck are you to say the letter of the law is insufficient regulation?? YOU'RE FIRED!

>> ^legacy0100:

Rolling is so much faster & energy efficient than walking. Maybe that's a concept they should play with lol.


Try rolling up some stairs or through some sand...or loose dirt, legs are awesome! We should totally make all robots have wheels, though, to make sure they don't take over. OUR EMPIRE OF STAIRS SHALL NOT BE OVERTHROWN!

Rolling is so much faster & energy efficient than walking. Maybe that's a concept they should play with lol.