For the Atlantic for being willing to run it in a format that confuses readers, the Public Utilities Commissions in the states where the Southern Company operates for letting the Southern Company do this kind of thing with ratepayer money, and the Southern Company itself for trying to mislead people.

For sure…but it’s being run as an ad, and people are absolutely awful at telling the difference between this kind of ad and editorial content, even when it’s plainly labeled.

I think that nitrogen is what they’re using now. It’s readily available, cheap, and fairly easily contained.

I’m aware of the LSD and Ketamine, weed wouldn’t surprise me too.

I’ll take electrical power from the heavens any day.

It’s almost like a group focused on climate action isn’t actively working on every other issue.

There are only tiny numbers of billionaires, and we need to get emissions to zero to stabilize temperatures, so we’re all going to need to pitch in, even if that means something like “change how we heat and cook” instead of “switch to sailboats instead of diesel mega-yachts and private jets”

The individual reporters aren’t disreputable at this point; it’s the owner and his interference that’s a problem.

I’ll note that I’ve provided a link to an archived copy above.

Security clearances are nominally the domain of the FBI, rather than the CIA. They tend to see themselves as a right-wing organization though.

That’s ok. Most of the cross-state activism in California right now is people going to AZ and NV to knock on doors for the Harris and Democratic senate candidates.

There has been a ton of modeling on how declining numbers of ratepayers cause methane gas prices to skyrocket. If you actually get rid of almost all the people buying it, the last few are left paying a fortune for what was once common infrastructure shared by many people.

The problem is that informed opinion thinks that Trump has something around a 50% chance of winning there. That’s a kind of risk that regular people can’t put serious money into.

Those commercial and residential emissions - those are largely about the fuels burned in buildings. 14% of the total is enough to matter — and when we’re running out of time to get emissions to zero, we need to cut it all to zero, not pick and choose.

Two options right now:

1. Run new electrical lines to them capable of providing for their actual needs
2. Propane

Definitely could do it that way. But everybody is better off if we do it in a planned way instead of leaving people to deal with that kind of a mess.

No, it’s relevant for the cost of distributing the gas. It’s not cost-effective to run a gas distribution system just to commercial kitchens without the much larger distribution going to heating.

Three reasons:

1. Without the use for space heating, very little gas will be distributed, making the distribution system totally uneconomic for small users.
2. The distribution system leaks methane. It’s ~3% of what goes through it when there is high usage, but the amount of leakage probably doesn’t go down unless you start decommissioning it.
3. You want to protect the workers who have to breathe the fumes

Heat is actually the big one here; it’s a big chunk of emissions.

Getting rid of gas heat makes the gas stoves uneconomic.

It means running new higher-amperage electrical connections to them.

I’m willing to put up with slightly higher prices if it means people live longer as a result.

It’s a problem the whole news industry has. Craigslist took all the classified ads. Facebook took almost all the business ads. So what’s left is subscriptions — and if you don’t charge, the paper goes bust.

Something like 80% of local newspapers in the US have gone under already.