When global climate change first came to broad attention about three decades ago, the conservatives predicted it was absolutely certain that renewable energy would always remain so extremely expensive that no one would every adopt it unless the government forced them to.
Is it your view that this set of ideas is mistaken? If so, kindly present some arguments.
Or perhaps you know they are correct but don't want to admit it, so you are trying to divert people's attention from the ideas to the question of the NYT'S intentions.
Is it your position that, since the Islamist government of Iran is the enemy of Israel, we can be certain it is good in both its foreign and domestic policies?
Here is my question to string theorists: suppose some physicists came up with an alternative theory of everything and were able to use it to make unique empirical predictions. Would you accept it as true and abandon string theory?
I think the larger problem is that as citizens we have to have views about many different topics that are very far outside our direct experience, so we have to figure out who to trust among various claimed experts that we also don't know personally. Doing this is something that the human mind is not naturally designed for, and so not surprisingly people often get it wrong.
I seem to recall from an article I read about this technology a few years ago that it's efficient partly because when the gas is compressed, they are able to store the heat that is produced, and then later use the stored heat for expanding the gas.
That seems important. I wish we knew how. I found an article that did mention the heat was "stored", with no further detail. The animation down on this page suggests it's stored in water somehow: https://energydome.com/co2-battery/
Mathematicians can do mathematics without a knowledge of foundations because the human brain and organism are highly organized, but in a different manner than a formal conceptual system. That human thinking and understanding is, on the whole, not a matter of logically manipulating formalized ideas is generally accepted in philosophy today, as in the later Wittgenstein.
About a decade ago, I became a fan of the remarkable Japanese child prodigy drummer Kanade Sato. That lead to me to learn the surprising fact that Japan has 4 writing systems: kanji, hiragana, katakana, and romanji.
Here's the video that got me interested in Sato www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYpFL08m5fQ&list=RDXYpFL08m5fQ&start_radio=1
reply