Comments for The Post-Human Condition

Comment on ‪Another CO2-Absorbing Building Material by Maroun George Rahme

Maroun George Rahme — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:23:34 +0000

Our company Nu-Rock Corporation SARL has perfect this process but using all the ash from coal fired power stations and we can use all 30 million tonnes from power station in Japan. We can turn all the ash from fly ash to bottom ash into Silica Cement.

We can make a product including cement and sand, aggregate, blocks panels pipes, which is half the weight and the same strength and acid and salt attach resistant.

The cost is 50% cheaper than Portland cement products.

Like to know more please contact me on nrcorp@bigpond.com.

We are building two 500,000 tonne plants at power stations in Australia

Comment on Climate Hawks Put Pressure on Obama by unclesam1776

unclesam1776 — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 23:40:21 +0000

Do you like driving? Do you enjoy eating? Do you not have any plastics in your house? Oil is a resource that greatly increases the ease and efficiency that we live.

Comment on Tim DeChristopher: Setting the Right Example by A Letter from Tim DeChristopher « The Post-Human Condition

A Letter from Tim DeChristopher « The Post-Human Condition — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 14:24:26 +0000

[...] DeChristopher (thank you Grist.org for publishing) for an inspirational breath of fresh air. Tim, as I’ve written before, was imprisoned just last month for his role in bidding up prices on federal oil and gas lease [...]

Comment on Straight from the Source: Tim DeChristopher’s Statements to the Court by Bidder70: I’m not saying any of this to ask you for mercy, but to ask you to join me. « Vegan Animal Liberation Alliance

Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:59:25 +0000

[...] The Post-Human Condition -30.448674 143.789062 Share this:ShareTwitterRedditFacebookStumbleUponPrintDiggEmailLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. from → Activism, Capitalism, Civil Disobedience, Civil Rights, Direct Action, Earth Liberation, Justice ← 100 songs of protest, rebellion and direct action for earth-animal-human liberation No comments yet [...]

Comment on Tim DeChristopher: Setting the Right Example by David Roberts on “Doing Civil Disobedience with Style” « The Post-Human Condition

Tue, 09 Aug 2011 19:33:48 +0000

[...] I know, it’s incredibly lame to keep regurgitating stuff from other blogs, but David Roberts has done some great analysis on why chaining yourself to trees or holding a critical mass bike rally no longer gets attention, but bidding up oil and gas leases does. Generally, some great post-mortem on the Tim DeChristopher case. [...]

Comment on Tim DeChristopher: Setting the Right Example by Straight from the Source: Tim DeChristopher’s Statements to the Court « The Post-Human Condition

Wed, 27 Jul 2011 17:59:25 +0000

[...] a post yesterday, I indicated that climate activist and environmental leader Tim DeChristopher was barred from [...]

Comment on Holy Solar Collectors in the Stratosphere, Batman! by Ed Kelly

Ed Kelly — Wed, 20 Jul 2011 02:49:05 +0000

1200kWh/m^2/yr is a high number. Average sunlight on the ground varies from about 800kWh/m^2/yr to about 2000kWh/m^2/yr depending on location. For the US NREL has gathered and published this data for decades. If you assume 20% efficiency, that’s 160 to 400kWh/m^2/year of electricity. Actual panels aren’t that good and also suffer from dirt and electrical losses etc. Solar PV is a low energy density game.

Floating tethered is not flying. Its pretty simple and passive. A 10MWp ground PV plant uses 6,000 to 10,000 tonnes of material, mostly glass, steel and aluminum. A 10MWp StratoSolar plant uses 500 tonnes of material. Its the same solar cells, aluminum and plastics. Our cost analysis expects it to be cheaper, but our $/kWh numbers assume it costs the same.

Comment on Holy Solar Collectors in the Stratosphere, Batman! by mayosten

mayosten — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 15:17:36 +0000

Thanks. See the updated post. There is clearly an uptick in sunlight availability by placing your panels more or less at the edge of space. Perhaps I didn’t understand some of the accounting presented in the economic analysis. Regardless, I’m finding that your sunlight availability even at altitude has to be somewhere south of 6,000 kWh/m2/yr. Given that and with current conversion efficiencies in solar panels, the total production from high-altitude sites would have to be less than about 1,200 kWh/m2/yr.

Comment on Holy Solar Collectors in the Stratosphere, Batman! by Ed Kelly

Ed Kelly — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 01:18:27 +0000

You are comparing StratoSolar solar kWh/m^2 to a hypothetical electrical kWh/m^2.

To handle the fact that the electrical power output from a PV panel depends on variable sunlight with location, panels (and collections of panels) are specified in peak Watts (Wp) which is the electrical output for a 1kW/m^2 standard solar input. Multiplying the panel or plant Wp by the average solar kWh/m^2/day gives the daily electrical kWh output for the chosen site.

Alternatively multiplying the rated Wp by the utilization gives the average electrical Watts output, which can be multiplied by the daily or yearly hours to get the kWh number desired. This is a useful standard way to compare different technologies.

StratoSolar uses the same solar cells as ground based PV. The cells just get exposed to considerably more sunlight, and so generate more electricity and hence more revenue. The StratoSolar site home page has a very informative graph that compares PV electricity costs for different locations and current and future capital costs.

Comment on Withholding Bulb Efficiency Standard Funds: Classic GOP Buffoonery by mayosten

mayosten — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 21:15:57 +0000

Interesting… I’m all for a carbon tax rather than a patchwork of regulations, but energy efficiency standards make good economic sense even in the absence of a changing climate. Well before climate change was on the national political radar, efficiency regulations still had their place. Alas, in the current political climate I’m afraid anything related to a carbon tax is dead in the water, simply because it includes the word tax. In terms of our taxes in general, I’m for taxing consumption rather than income, but that’s another story entirely. Thanks for the discussion.