Nice to have it here, but due to the practical nature of the demonstration, I think this video could have flown better on c/technology or c/diy - or something of that sort. :)

But yep, moving heat is a lot smarter than creating it. :)

Nice and thorough overview. :)

The article is mostly correct. :)

Notes: out of the three, Latvia has serious energy storage - a 4 billion cubic meter (at normal pressure) underground gas store, sufficient to carry all three countries over the winter. So far, it’s filled with fossil natural gas - but some day it could be filled with synthesized methane.

As a backup option, Estonia has oil shale - probably the worst fuel on Earth, so the price of emitting CO2 keeps those plants out of the energy market during summer. During winter, they come online though.

As for solar, we aren’t planning to rely much on that. Solar capacity has of course skyrocketed, but only because it’s very easy to install. For me, it provices a nice way to charge my car from April to October. But at latitudes 55 to 60, days are really very short in midwinter, so wind and waste wood are the likely candidates in future - after oil shale leaves the scene, but before synthetic gas becomes feasible.

Regarding pumped hydro - it can stabilize a day, but can’t stabilize a week or month. Lithuania has a biggish (~10 GWh) pumped storage facility. The rest of Baltics don’t have suitable terrain. Estonia has limestone banks, but they’re under various forms of protection and even if one built a lot of pumped hydro, the low elevation difference (up to 50 meters) means one couldn’t support the electric grid through more than a few days.

Regarding hydrogen - maybe. But hydrogen is difficult to store, so I’m betting on wind, and on sourcing technology from Germany to produce synthetic methane from excess power during summer, and pumping it to Latvia for storage.

Finally - connecting to the continental EU power grid allows importing energy when local wind isn’t strong enough, and exporting any surplus. So far, all three countries are still in the ex-Soviet synchronization area (common with Russia and Belarus, but with no trade, just synchronization), and thus unable to connect with the EU synchronization area. Local power companies have been building synchronous compensators (devices that steer grid frequency) for the past 2 years to drop this dependency.

If things go as planned, Baltic countries will sever those connections and join the EU grid via Poland in winter 2025. Undersea cables already go from Estonia to Finland and Lithuania to Sweden, but in the current political conditions, I don’t think anyone counts of them for sure (a Chinese-owned but Russian-crewed ship broke the Estonia-Finland gas pipeline last autumn when dragging its anchor during a storm - it’s still unsure if the damage was accidental or not).

But that’s not what we found. In fact, experimental manipulations that reduced support for the protesters had no impact on support for the demands of those protesters.

We’ve replicated this finding across a range of different types of nonviolent protest, including protests about racial justice, abortion rights and climate change, and across British, American and Polish participants (this work is being prepared for publication). When members of the public say, “I agree with your cause, I just don’t like your methods,” we should take them at their word.

Wow, that is both new (at least for me) and interesting - thanks for sharing this article. :)

I note a potential weakness in the method of analysis: if negative framing (e.g. by the media) reduces support for the protesters as persons (but not their cause), it may still somewhat harm their ability to bring about change, since it probably reduces people’s willingness to team up with them - but not another group which has the same cause but different methods.

So, if the goal is mass action (which has a component of mobilizing like-minded people to join) I would strongly recommend a protester to choose non-controversial methods (so that even grannies can join). :)

The Ugandan military playing security guards for a China-controlled oil project… I think explaining human rights over there will have to start from zero - and may have to be backed with “or else” statements - if there exists an institution in a suitable position to issue them. :o

I would add:

• if you wanted direct and low-latency access to cameras (for machine vision)

1 C more temperature -> air can hold 7% more water vapour

…but the peaks of fringe events are quite a bit taller than +1 C. Raising the average by 1 C raises the peaks considerably more.

Summary:

But then, in the geologically abrupt space of only a few decades, this great river of ice all but halted. In the two centuries since, it has moved less than 35 feet a year. According to the leading theory, the layer of water underneath it thinned, perhaps by draining into the underside of another glacier. Having lost its lubrication, the glacier slowed down and sank toward the bedrock below.

/…/

“The beauty of this idea is that you can start small,” Tulaczyk told me. “You can pick a puny glacier somewhere that doesn’t matter to global sea level.” This summer, Martin Truffer, a glaciologist at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks, will travel to the Juneau Icefield in Alaska to look for a small slab of ice that could be used in a pilot test. If it stops moving, Tulaczyk told me he wants to try to secure permission from Greenland’s Inuit political leaders to drain a larger glacier; he has his eye on one at the country’s northeastern edge, which discharges five gigatons of ice into the Arctic Ocean every year. Only if that worked would he move on to pilots in Antarctica.

It’s not wild at all. :) The plan makes sense from a physical perspective, but should not be implemented lightly because:

• it’s extremely hard work and extremely expensive to drain water from beneath an extremely large glacier
• it doesn’t stop warming, it just puts a brake on ice loss / sea level rise

If the motor mount is hackable with reasonable effort, and the motor controller’s interfaces are open, then in principle… yes.

Yet in reality, companies build extremely complicated cars where premature failure of multiple components can successfully sabotage the whole. :(

I’ve once needed to repair a Mitsubishi EV motor controller. It took 2 days to dismantle. Schematics were far beyond my skill of reading electronics, and I build model planes as an everyday hobby, so I’ve seen electronics. Replacement of the high voltage comparator was impossible as nobody was selling it separately. The repair shop wanted to replace the entire motor controller (5000 €). Some guy from Sweden had figured out a fix: a 50 cent resistor. But installing it and putting things back was not fun at all. It wasn’t designed to be repaired.

Needless to say, replacing a headlight bulb on the same car requires removing the front plastic cover, starting from the wheel wells, undoing six bolts, taking out the front lantern, and then you can replace the bulb. I curse them. :P

But it drives. Hopefully long enough so I can get my own car built from scratch.

Thanks for the news, but also - thanks for posting a proper summary. :)

(So many videos have only the YouTube-compiled summary, which is typically totally off topic.)

Interestingly, warfare also has the effect of:

• causing houses to be abandoned, necessitating houses elsewhere while the abandoned ones likely get bombed

• decreasing the number of future consumers, whose future footprint would depend on future behaviour patterns (hard to predict)

• changing future land use patterns, either due to unexploded ordnance or straight out chemical contamination (there are places in France that are still off limits to economic activity, because World War I contaminated the soil with toxic chemicals), here in Estonia there are still forests from which you don’t want trees in your sawmill because they contain shrapnel and bullets from World War II

I have the feeling that calculating the climate impact of actual war is a difficult job.

But they could calculate the tonnage of spent fuel and energy, that would be easier.

Nice to hear. :) The process seems doable in a suitably equipped factory. :)

Well, a heat wave cannot last forever. And in terms of cold storage - it’s +30 C over here currently already for a week, it has been 1.5 months since the last snowfall - and the last pile of snow on the local airport is still melting. Darkened, not recognizable as the substance it used to be, but existing, without people making the slightest effort to protect it. :)

what the hell are we going to do?

In the very long term, stop climate change.

In the long term - dig in and design heat shelters, most likely. Because it’s cooler underground and heat waves will pass. When a bad one comes, people would stop working and find shelter from it. One can even accumulate cold in a thermal store during cool periods and distribute the cooling effect to premises during heat waves.

In the short term - those who can (there will be an equality and access problem) and those who must (who cannot stop working) would install air conditioners and similar stuff.

I don’t even want to imagine 50 C. In sauna, it’s is dry and you manage 30 minutes by sweating. But living in a sauna sounds bloody awful.

Also, almost anyone with a med / bio background will say - emergency rooms will be full at 50 C, and morgues will be crowded a few days after the event. :(

Also, seaweed is at the bottom of the food chain -> lots of biomass supported by the ecosystem, less chance of accumulating anything toxic.

“Europe produces 0,2% of algae in the world,” he said. "But we import 500 million worth of algae every year.

Yup. I like seaweed, but most of the seaweed I like comes from Asia. Transporting it from far is not a smart move.

The transfer to electricity could be done by using the heated mass to heat a hot pumped liquid or using transfer rods made of a solid material with a high heat transfer coefficient.

Alternatively, heat can be extracted by pumping liquid metal (sodium, tin, low-temperature eutectic alloys) in a pipework of copper (if there is chemical compatibility with copper). But handling liquid metal with a magnetic pump isn’t typically done on the DIY tech level.

To be honest, I tried a fair number of experiments on the subject, including low-temperature Stirling motors. They’re difficult to build well. I would recommend plain old steam turbine. Steam means pressure, pressure means precautions (risk of bursting, risk of getting burned), but modern approaches to boilers try to minimize the amount of water in the system, so it couldn’t flash to steam and explode.

I have superficially researched both options (with the conclusion that I cannot use either, since my installation would be too small, and would suffer from severe heat loss due to an unfavourable volume-to-surface ratio - it makes sense to design thermal stores for a city or neighbourhood, not a household).

I’d add a few notes:

1. A thermal store using silicate sand is not limited by the melting point of the sand, but the structural strength of the materials holding the sand. You can count on stainless steel up to approximately 600 C, more if you design with reserve strength and good understanding of thermal expansion/contraction. Definitely don’t count on anything above 1000 C or forget the word “cheap”. I have read about some folks designing a super-hot thermal store, but they plan to heat graphite (self-supporting solid material) in an inert gas environment.

2. Heat loss intensifies with higher temperatures, and the primary type of heat loss becomes radiative loss. Basically, stuff starts glowing. For example, the thermal conductivity of stone wool can be 0.04 W / mK at 10 C, and 0.18 W / mK at 600 C.

3. Water can be kept liquid beyond 100 C. The most recent thermal stores in Finland are about 100 meters below surface, where the pressure of the liquid column allows heating water to 140 C.

4. However, any plan of co-generation (making some electricity while extracting the stored heat) requires solid materials and high temperatures.

True, but toppling over can leave them intact. One of my foolish neigbours didn’t anchor his panel carriers properly and thought a thick fir hedge would protect them enough. A storm from unexpected direction threw four panel carriers (9 panels each) face down and severed the cables, so everything had to be disconnected and there was a safety risk (but not during night). I helped with the recovery work and not a single panel was broken.

…and that is why I no longer mount any solar panels horizontally. Not a chance in hell of withstanding that, and one of such storms hit within 150 kilometers last year. Within 30 years, I bet I’ll experience this effect.

Meanwhile, vertical panels can be up-armored (e.g. wooden beam running on top) to withstand such events.