But have you heard of quokka

well pepeople get anxious and drepress over evrery lil thing nowadays so yea why not air pollution

[removed]

Is this why men typically go to war?

Hence why women and children are saved first.

I also came here for this question. It's about 5x denser than air, wouldn't it just settle to the ground?

One ironic addition to this is another common issue is people often don't dig a big enough hole. They dig a small hole and put the tree as deep in it as they can. In truth, you want a big hole that can allow the roots to spread out the same way they naturally grow, but still have the boundary of the root/tree at the surface of the ground.

My parents, who have planted enough trees on their 40 acres, that it has affected their microclimate significantly, say if you buy a $10 sapling, dig a $100 hole. It needs to be both deep and wide. And if you have hardpan, you need to break through it.

Which, even it biologically makes sense, is hypocritical. Can't have one without the other.

This is also the reasoning some people use to bemoan female promiscuity while defending male promiscuity.

[removed]

The biggest problem would be find a gas that do all that and isn't so problematic for greenhouse effect.

I think you're making an error in the implied assumption that the aforementioned land is all equal. It isn't. For example, there's a county of roughly 10000 square miles in southeastern oregon that has arouns 7000 people in it. It's got a little bit of protected area, but the VAST majority of it is cattle rangeland interspersed with hay/alfalfa fields. There's occasionally other crops, but not much. There's a lot of meat coming out of that country, but it's not dense. Every cow needs a massive amount of space to graze enough to slaughter, but that's because there's just not much out there. There's not enough water to sustainably grow food crops, but a cow can wander a few miles a day munching on bunch grasses and be fat and happy.

Additionally, a lot of rangeland is far closer to wild than farmland. Cattle are grazed on huge swaths of BLM land in the western US, that is essentially just wild land. To convert even 20% of that to any other use would be a massive ecological disaster. And the cows do some damage, too, but nothing like clearing forest and planting crops.

This use would DRASTICALLY affect any such statistics like the one you're quoting. Meat production on factory farms fed by monoculture feed crop field have their own problems, but they are far more space efficient than the story your numbers paint.

Nurosky headset is a little over $100, Muse are a little over $200. Open-source EEG devices ( OpenEEG) are under $100.

[removed]

Ah ok, and that makes perfect sense. You can feel alone in a room of people and feel great by yourself. Perception vs reality sort of argument. I think I’ll actually read this one, thanks!

The intensive ones are awesome to see, but not practical. Thd extensive ones won't have near the impact on local temperature of trees.

It’s much heavier than air, so does it just like, stay close to the ground?

Ever walk into a smelly washroom? Changes your personality in 1 second.

Anybody else find this discussion of voles, moles and quolls to be taking a toll?

Let's take a poll, do you think it's droll?

One of the big selling points of SF6 equipment has been that it's more compact size and higher electrical efficiency, actually results in lower global warming, because the CO2 savings from improved efficiency outweigh climate effects from escaping SF6.

The counterpoint is that unless properly maintained the equipment may develop unacceptable rates of leakage - and that this may be happening in a widespread fashion.

That SF6 is a serious problem is well known - in the 1997 Kyoto protocol, it was named as 1 of the 6 main greenhouse gases, and it is regulated by governments across the world because of this. Extensive research into alternatives has also been performed since that time.

That SF6 is so good is part of the problem - it has proved extremely difficult to find alternative gases which have similar performance, and which could be used in similar equipment. The last 2 or 3 years have seen some significant progress, with a number of potentially viable alternatives being named such as 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl)propanenitrile which is approaching commerically ready. The alternatives are much better, but have the disadvantage of toxicity, significant GWP (but nowhere near as high as SF6), and as perfluoro-compounds are potentially "forever chemicals".

The problem with green roofs is cost and potential failure. It's actually very difficult to seal them, and when a leak does show up, it's difficult to fix. Trees tend to also be absolutely excellent at breaking through even concrete, so planting trees on roofs is asking for a problem.

Green medians can be a much more cost effective way to green up a city. Small rooftop gardens with potted plants or shallow beds with shallow rooted plants could help.

I would love to see 80' tall sycamores and maples on top of skyscrapers, but i don't think it's practical.

It is high! I was surprised too!

Good question, I'm not sure. They assess "perceived a d factual social capital" (how lonely do you feel vs. How often do you confide in ppl close to you" , which is along the same vein as your question. In this paper, feeling lonely, rather than actual loneliness, is more associated with Alzheimer's risk

Hey now, country folk here are quite familiar with the notion of rootin' around.

It's difficult for me to plant more trees when I don't want to block solar panels (espalier ftw!)