sethoflagos

I bow to your greater experience in this area, but I think we're saying the same thing aren't we? In passing, I don't see the cases for the falsity of b) and d) being quite so clear cut. Does b) fall on the isothermal constraint and d) on catalyst dependency, or am I barking up the wrong tree(s).

a) is correct by definition. dG = RT ln(Keq) so dG=0 implies Keq=1 Remembering that Keq is also by definition the ratio of reaction rate constants for forward and reverse reactions, we have to remember that the rate constants are functions not only of the concentrations of chemical species (either reactants or products respectively) but also the reaction mechanisms. In general the mechanisms for the forwards and reverse reactions will be different, and therefore simultaneous equality of both reactant and product concentrations and forwards and reverse reaction rates could only occur under very special conditions (if ever in real life). Therefore, in general, statement c) is incorrect. I hope this is what you were looking for. Your question isn't perfectly phrased in English.

Nigeria mostly.

Another possibility might be from opening a buoyancy tank that had been sealed for long enough for SRBs to poison its air contents. During my apprenticeship in the paper industry we had several fatal incidents due to personnel entry into poorly ventilated secondary water tanks without appropriate breathing apparatus. Concentrations as low as 0.1% v/v are often immediately lethal. It doesn't take much in a confined space.

About as much as you would expect of an organisation under the direction of someone like Therese Coffey I guess. I can see what the written responsibilities of these organisations are, but a non-resident is perhaps not best placed to judge whether or not they meet those obligations,

My understanding is per: The full article is archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20070626204942/http://www.defra.gov.uk/environ/fcd/defrafm.pdf

UK Coastal Defences are managed by the Environment Agency, currently sponsored by DEFRA. You can browse activities by area at https://www.gov.uk/check-coastal-erosion-management-in-your-area

As @Endy0816 says, it depends. Typically, mustard or cumin seeds are fried (or dry roated over a medium heat) until they pop, at temperatures that would burn the likes of fresh coriander or parsley. And much depends on whether the spice is fat- or water-soluble.

Just spent a while staring in puzzlement at the 'Unread Messages' notification half a dozen posts in on the first page of the thread. ... but I did eventually get around to checking the date a little more carefully.

I'm not inclined to. 4th Dynasty Egypt lifted some pretty impressive pieces of masonry at Giza. Elevators typically account for 3% to 5% of the energy consumption of a modern high-rise office block (ref: Elevators and Escalators Energy Performance Analysis: Patrao et al.). Even this relatively low energy usage could be significantly reduced by appropriate technological improvements (same reference). Plus people capable of using staircases should do so for the health benefits as much as power saving. Hence: I see that @TheVat has kindly just fielded the rest of your post so no point in me restating his explanations.

I was excused Eng. Lit,. PE. & RE. for most of my school career in favour of trumpet practice. However, I do recall two literature texts from those times. I was young for my year, and arguably young for my age too, but I found Shane to be banal and The Tempest to be both hilarious and spiritually upliftiting (ie 'magical'). Independently, I'd read my mother's cherished Lord of the Rings at around 13, and that had a big impact. Then later, through college years I was introduced to the classic political works: Animal Farm, 1984, Brave New World etc. Interesting but not life changing. Four works I read in my mid-twenties stand out as being character forming. Sartre's Roads to Freedom trilogy; Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita; Sholokhov's And Quiet flows the Don; and (particularly) Canetti's Auto da Fe. All four of which tore deeply into my soul but left me stronger for it. I wouldn't recommend any of these works for school curriculum. Children don't need horror, but adults need to be ready for it.

The technical/economic challenges and energy costs of heavy lifts to oto 1000 tonnes are trivial. This was demonstrated in the bronze age. You lift when you have the relatively small amount of required power available (think counter balances). Non sequitur argument. Blizzards in southern California? And at the other extreme we have various reflective coating options to avoid absorptive overheating. Design so escape is unnecessary. Who mentioned steel and concrete? That's a strawman of your making. We have thousands of these in Africa. The structure is ready built. Just mine out the living spaces using long established room and pillar mining methods. Extract the excavated stone as ashlar and use that to construct other 'termite mounds'. The pillars can be any dimension they need to be - 5 metres/10 metres diameter: whatever is necessary to withstand the imposed forces (earthquakes, hurricanes, bombs and even snow load(!)). It's just engineering. Fail to see your point. Is it one of those 'not invented here' arguments. If so then I don't claim precedence over the termites. Or the Pueblo Indians for that matter. And yet you feel inclined to post. At length. How ironic.

I was unaware of this body of work, so thanks for that. Googling, it seems that the sci-fi novels were inspired at least in part by practical concepts developed by architect Paolo Soleri, so no flux capacitors or time portals required. Just finance and willpower.

Pretty much as I saw it. Hobbit holes! Nice idea in a middle England bucolic nostalgia sort of way but a little too low density for dealing with the bulk of the population. Taking the original OP scenario of high ambient temperature, low humidity. It would be nice if we could make use of the general principles, but construct them above ground in multi-story medium to high density accommodation units each suitable for populations oto 10,000 individuals. Basically a version of a scaled up termite mound. Let's run with it a while. Since hot, dry areas tend to have cool nights, natural convection can exhaust the internal heat of the structure (and critically, a large central water supply also) out through a central 'chimney' by (in principle) natural draught alone if you get the engineering right. During the day air inflow reverses (due to the reversal of thermal gradient) and is tempered by the high thermal inertia of the structure itself augmented by, say, underfloor cooling by the cooled water store, and further augmented by evaporative cooling which can also up the humidity into an appropriate comfort zone. In principle, temperatures within the structure will float between somewhat above the night time low and somewhat above the daytime wet bulb temperature without recourse to heat pumps at all. At least this is should be sufficient for people to exhaust their body heat without sweating like the proverbial christmas goat. Where does the cooling water come from? Recycled effluent plus a structure of this scale has potential for economic condensate recovery via eg. gas/gas heat exchange etc. In 'the best of all possible worlds', the community would not have individual cooking stoves, refrigerators, freezers etc, but centralised communal facilities that exhaust their waste heat directly outside of the structure (ie not overheating the living/working spaces). It looks to have possibilities. If you don't mind the termite social model. But then they have had well over 100 million years of practice and seem to be doing okay..

Btw... Why has this hijack thread been shifted to the Politics forum rather than say Climate Science? Are these concerns now solely the province of the political left? I sincerely hope not.

As regards having a major rethink on architecture and lifestyles, I couldn't agree more. There's nothing like committing some serious public money into upgrading the housing stock for giving a much needed boost to GDP. Maynard Keynes for the environment yay! (not totally a joke) Our ancestors built stone vaulted rooves that could last a millenium and more. It's just a matter of raising the building codes to what is easily achievable by appropriate engineering. Razor wire topped security wall with a tented fabric roof. Standard Lagos approach.

Lagos matches your Kansas July daily high pretty well 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Plus our humidity is higher. And yet I've grown habituated to it and can manage mainly without aircon albeit at the cost of an occasional outbreak of prickly heat (solution = cold showers). My pool hall (Tipsy Bar, Bodore Road, Ajah) has no aircon, but a two foot gap between the walls and the ceiling stop it from becoming too stifling. I can't help thinking that the OP is asking the wrong question. It assumes as a given that the OP has a right to enoy optimal comfort in a location where the ambient conditions are beyond his comfort zone. Relax that assumption and ask why the majority of the world's population (who manage to survive within the range of their own cimate variations without undue resource consumption) should bear the brunt of the OP's disproportionate demands for fossil fuels and fresh water. Should he not consider relocating to a location more in tune with his own particular physical requirements? It's easy to pick on the southern end of California because it is such an ecological disaster zone for so many reasons, but one must question whether any of these most hostile high population density areas (eg northern end of the Persian Gulf that can reach 500C near saturated in August-September) are worth maintaining as areas of human settlement. Better to put survival of the most before optimal comfort of the privileged I think.

Having just finished reading Richard Dawkins' The Ancestor's Tale for I think the third time, I think that he would express a subspecies as something along the lines of: The term 'fixed' distinguishes subspecies from 'morph' which would apply to a phenotypic character that only occurs in a part of a given population.

How comfortable are you with poverty? A salutary lesson for me was that I earned the same hourly rate designing drainage systems for oil refineries etc as the guys designing the most high-tech refinery units. Only while their technologies were aging, drain systems stayed as they were and I stayed employable while their speciality areas were eclipsed by more advanced technologies. If you cement yourself into a rigid specialisation in the current technological spectrum, you risk graduating into a field that is obsolete. The key exit from this trap is flexibility. I'd recommend graduating with a general technological degree and adding a BA in microeconomics or business administration. It's a crappy ladder, but every project needs a project accountant and at least you remain relevant to your field of interest even if everyone hates you. If you can show real technical abilities in the field, you have as good a chance as anyone of slipping back into the more academic realm simply by being there. It's a cynical view I know, but you do have to earn a living whilst realising your dreams.

And yet the policy seemed to be 'working' with Urals holding steady at around $57/bbl for the first six months of the year. Granted, Japan seemed to have forgotten they agreed to the measure almost as soon as they left the meeting.

Rather depends on the type of meat and whether or not you like it dry and tough. I found rather a good (imho) article at https://www.theculinarypro.com/meat-and-poultry-cooking-methods.

Back in December last year to much western media trumpeting the G7 nations imposed a price cap of $60/bbl on Russian crude oil exports to be policed by the once all-powerful shipping insurers Lloyds of London (see here). Today I notice on https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/urals-oil that Urals Crude - Russia's flagship product - is quietly trading at $73.26/bbl yet we hear not a whisper of indignation or explanation from the powers that be (ie Rupert Murdoch). Why suddenly so shy about such a bold inspirational policy.

Yes and no to both. There's a spectrum here between a simmer and a roiling boil. Simmering is frequently a little (sometimes a lot) below boiling point, with correspondingly extended cooking times, but less thermal damage to proteins especially. Hence stews are finished on a lengthy slow heat. At the other end of the spectrum, an extreme roiling boil can raise the base of the pan quite a bit above boiling point with the liquid contents only partially insulated from this by a thin vapour film. This does definitely shorten cooking time but seems mainly to be used where the contents need to be broken apart by strong agitation.