theres more work than we have people to do it. the places with the highest fears of migration are those with the least migration, because they're in decline and people are leaving. the people who own everything are quite happy to get the poor (relatively, thats you) to fight each other.

This doesn't sound right to me. The need for storage has more to do with variable renewable production than it has to do with distribution capacity or variable loads. Certain storage tech works at scale, in which case 100mw/1ghw would reduce costs far more.

Vehicle and battery to grid optimization, where you don't try to maximize self consumption, will make the roi better if grid feed in tariffs are favourable. But then you have to deal with the uncomfortable realisation that grid PV and battery is far better value - will less impacts elsewhere.

I've experimented with some AI floor plans. It generated some of the funniest, most absurd, results. Worth it for the laugh.

There's plenty of blame to go around, but when a bus load of billionaires own more wealth than half of humanity then you have a big problem.

There are few empirical correlations in social science that are as clear as inequality being awful for pretty much everything.

Bregman's effective altruism approach is certainly not the way. But I have noticed some people trying to tread the line despite vested interest. Akshat at Bloomberg is the sort of guy that is on the verge of crossing over. I listen Chris Keefer at Decouple podcast that often pushes back on guests.

However, if there's work to be done, it would be to figure out more effective narratives to encourage elite cooperation. Inequality does not improve the wellbeing of the elites - look at Elon. Very well off people live with a lot of anxiety.

There has been a lot of work on inequality, and it's relationship to sustainability, which has made it into public consciousness. Inequality is now one of the most pressing concerns globally.

I'd add that many of the ventures he has backed, as some sort of benevolent climate saviour, have proven to be fantasies who's main function was to repress the realisation that he is the problem. Billionaires simply cannot coexist on a sustainable planet.

The heat they produce isn't particularly high value, and it helps with their cooling systems and their own energy demand to be lower. It's essentially free cooling. If there's a place where these sorts of data centres should be placed, it would be a cold country connected to a heat network.

In 2023, I interviewed Ian Sinha, a consultant in Liverpool advocating for patients and forcing landlords to sort out mould in their properties: www.bmj.com/content/380/...

It's giving some Soviet/East German vibes. 1980?

I was hoping they'd break down the results to show which buildings are more suitable. UFH with EWI masonry mass wall will be up there. But by how much? And, as importantly, which will be low.

"shifted electrical demand away from peak periods by increasing setpoint temperatures by +1°C during a preheating period, then decreasing setpoint temperatures by -1°C during the peak period."

"We found that, on average, 30% of each home’s space heating electrical demand was shifted away from the peak period between 4 pm and 7 pm."

If there's one place a thin polymer membrane is justified it would be to keep a building dry. An airtight membrane with the right permeability is too good. Assemblies without engineered wood sheathing is something we could do with more of though.

I am a reply guy. I do my best. I'm recovering. But this time, I was more worried I was missing some very clever play on words. Lamella is from the same root as lamina, after all.