• 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 24th, 2023

help-circle
  • In 2000 the Afghani was worth 75,000 to 1 USD. During ISAF occupation it was fixed at 50 to 1. It is now at 70 to 1 and dropping. Let’s stick to one argument at a time rather than playing the whataboutism game. You said the USA destroyed their economy, yet the evidence strongly says otherwise. Before 2001, Afghanistan was the second poorest country in the world. When ISAF pulled out it was ranked at about 40 (I say ‘about’ because it was still growing and changing faster and the rankings were uptated). In the short time of Taliban rule they have dropped back down to sub 33 with exact number still to be determined. (The sub 33 ranking is important because there are only 33 countries on the UN “least developed countries” list).

    I would spend time debating topics like this with educated people and those that are open minded, but you do not seem like you fit either group. Do not expect a reply.




  • MrEff@lemmy.worldtoTechnology@lemmy.mlPrice of solar dropped 89% in ten years
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I can see that critical thinking isn’t your strong suit, but I’m willing to comment it out with you instead of just down voting.

    If the price of solar is already the lowest -and still dropping- then how is the most expensive option that takes about a decade to implement a better option for right now? This apparent point of diminishing returns is only beginning to manifest in even lower prices than this 2019 chart. And this diminishing returns point is only in the cost of the panels dropping; they are still getting better in technology and improving efficiency while maintaining low prices. If your argument is “solar can’t continue on this trend forever” -no one expects anything to consistently drop almost 90% every decade. Of course it will level out. And when it does, it will STILL be the cheapest option.


  • Huge up front costs.

    https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx

    “On a levelized (i.e. lifetime) basis, nuclear power is an economic source of electricity generation, combining the advantages of security, reliability and very low greenhouse gas emissions. Existing plants function well with a high degree of predictability. The operating cost of these plants is lower than almost all fossil fuel competitors, with a very low risk of operating cost inflation. Plants are now expected to operate for 60 years and even longer in the future…”

    “World Nuclear Association published Nuclear Power Economics and Project Structuring in early 2017. The report notes that the economics of new nuclear plants are heavily influenced by their capital cost, which accounts for at least 60% of their LCOE. Interest charges and the construction period are important variables for determining the overall cost of capital. The escalation of nuclear capital costs in some countries, more apparent than real given the paucity of new reactor construction in OECD countries and the introduction of new designs, has peaked in the opinion of the International Energy Agency (IEA). In countries where continuous development programmes have been maintained, capital costs have been contained and, in the case of South Korea, even reduced. Over the last 15 years global median construction periods have fallen. Once a nuclear plant has been constructed, the production cost of electricity is low and predictably stable.”

    TLDR: If you weren’t already on the nuke train when it was going, the upfront costs are too much to make it worth it this late in the game. You are better off just getting solar/wind + battery. If you already invested in nuke, then you are good to keep updating them.



  • Death toll as of yesterday was reported around 8,000. The US/coalition 20-year war in Afghanistan was (rounding UP) 50,000. That puts it at an average of 2,500 civilian deaths per year. Even THAT number was high enough for people to call for war crimes investigations. Now Israel has reached over 3x the yearly average in only 3 weeks. On track to pass 10,000 by the one month mark, too. I’m not saying that Isreal doesn’t have the right to defend its self, or even defense through offense, but there is a point that we need to agree is too far; and I think we are a bit past it.




  • Unlike the othe comment, this DOES sound like it could be BPPV, where something like the epley maneuver would work. Typically we would use the Semont-plus maneuver (same idea, slightly different). Or there is a fun half somersault maneuver the person could try on their own.

    Bppv will be brief but intense episodes lasting seconds with lasting nausea for minutes and exasterbated by head movements. You will also see their eyes jumping or flicking (nystagmus).


  • The epley maneuver is to treat BPPV- where an otolith becomes dislodged and then finds its way into a semicircular canal (normally the latteral canal). If it was causing vertigo it would have to be the posterior canal. Not to say it isn’t possible, but it is the statistically least common canal to happen in. Not only that, but the epley wouldn’t treat it. Even then, this strongly doesn’t sound like BPPV, whose episodes would last seconds to minutes. If the episodes are lasting minutes to hours it is a short list of other possible things. best case this is vestibular migraine of it was vestibular related. More likely this is central involve ment and the person needs to see a neurologist. I have seen patients like this before for balance accessments. We will do the testing on them(VNG and caloric testing), but then have to tell them to go to a different department because it isn’t part of the vestibular system causing the problem. I would push to see an ENT/neuro/PCP sooner than later because worst case is it is a developing vestibular schwanoma (non cancerous tumor) and the sooner the better to take care of it or at least monitor it.