The range of the bicycle is constrained only by the rider. Assuming that the rider eats, drinks and sleeps (as most of us tend to do anyways for the sake of staying alive), the range is unlimited. You can’t drive a car either if you starve to death.

I’m not disagreeing with you on the rest, I was just talking about dependencies, which the bicycle has the least (apart from walking or skiing for example).

Consider a bicycle. Very low maintenance, simple to fix, no need for fuel, unlimited range. Complete independence, with the sole exception of winter maintenance of paths, but that’s also a problem for cars and public transport.

Certainly

Or maybe they just left it in a cold place for a while. Strong spirits freeze at around -27°C and Jägermeister (35%) freezes at around -19°C.

Sorry, I suppose I’m a bit too used to idiots going off about the smoke plume caused by the rocket carrying an Earth observation satellite or such. When there’s anything to be gained, the costs of the endeavour should be measured up to that. Here there’s no gain for anybody (unless one of those fuckers onboard has enough braincells to be able to appreciate the overview effect enough to affect their future behaviour for the better), so it’s a net negative no matter how much the cost for the planet is. My intent was not to excuse anything about this.

To copy paste an earlier reply of mine:

I was talking about the direct emissions of launching a rocket. The indirect emissions are obviously vastly larger and might as well include everything in the wider economy that enables stuff like this. Just maintaining the necessary industrial capacity is already a huge strain on the planet. That’s what I’m after with these comments. The rich fucker joyride is a largely inconsequential yet overtly visible result of a bloated system hiding in plain sight. The aerospace sector as a whole is just the tip of the iceberg of a global industrial society in ecological overshoot.

I was talking about the direct emissions of launching a rocket. The indirect emissions are obviously vastly larger and might as well include everything in the wider economy that enables stuff like this. Just maintaining the necessary industrial capacity is already a huge strain on the planet. That’s what I’m after with these comments. The rich fucker joyride is a largely inconsequential yet overtly visible result of a bloated system hiding in plain sight. The aerospace sector as a whole is just the tip of the iceberg of a global industrial society in ecological overshoot.

Yes, the comment I replied to is technically right in that there are some tiny countries out there. Or they would be, if the rocket in question would’ve been a vastly larger rocket that burned a carbon containing fuel. The New Shepard tourist joyride is tiny for a rocket and its exhaust is water vapour.

I hate rich fucks as much as anybody, but this particular vehicle uses liquid hydrogen and oxygen for propellant, so no direct carbon emissions from the fuel.

The spacex superheavy is the biggest rocket stage around and has somewhere around 1.7 million kg of methane in it at launch. That results in about 4.7 million kg (4675t) of CO2 when it’s burned. That’s the same as the yearly emissions of 338 average americans, or 962 people at the global average.

Rockets are big, flashy and make a lot of smoke, but the numbers really don’t amount to much when compared to the sheer scale of more mundane economic activities.

I hate ai slop with a burning passion. This channel on the other hand is actual ai art.

To be fair, the surface pressure of Titan is the second most hospitable in the solar system, just 1.5 bars.

4/5 where is Camus?

Robots cost money. Sweatshop slaves work for food.

I didn’t bring it up. The meme posted by OP did because it’s a schizopost implying that the evil lizard people want to genocide the common people to preserve the climate.

Your comment was talking about the fact that humans exhale CO2 as an unfortunate fact. I agree with that in and of itself, but in the context of the post one could definitely get the idea that you’re propagating the malthusian and exaggerated assumption that the meme is built on. That’s how I interpreted it.

If there’s no people exhaling CO2, then who would be left to enjoy the infinitessimally better state of the climate?

Nice schizopost

The CO2 we breathe out is a rounding error compared to the emissions from our fossil fuel use. It’s frankly laughable to even compare the two.

Windy.com is a great site and has a layer for forecasted WBT.

Link to the layer

*Wet-bulb globe temperature (WBGT) warnings.

Wet-bulb is a part of a measurement instrument (the wet-bulb thermometer).

Wet-bulb temperature (WBT) is the lowest temperature that can be reached through evapourative cooling in the present ambient temperature and humidity. A high WBT results in your body starting to overheat as sweating looses effectiveness.

WBGT is an index for measuring heat stress in direct sunshine. It takes into account the effects of wind speed and solar radiation.

Here’s the map for WBT for that timestamp from windy.com using ECMWF data:

The highest WBT I could find there was around 29°C.

Looked up the coordinates so you don’t have to.

A problem of definitions. The word ‘liberal’ has a whole bunch of meanings depending on who you ask. Someone farther on the left usually uses the term to describe people who claim to support freedoms and rights for everyone, but only as long as they themselves don’t have to sacrifice a thing. People who go out to riot and get arrested for it definitely fall outside of that group.