@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

Treevan

@Treevan@aussie.zone

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

“and, where possible, minimise the removal of trees of a particular size through planning and development processes”

You can tell most trees still would have been removed if the right conditions were there.

They musn’t have read this article before voting. I bet they are going to feel very silly later:

phys.org/…/2024-02-wetlands-botanical-gardens-way…

Treevan, (edited )
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

There was an article a few days back with microplastics working through “untouched by humans” layers of lake silt.

Stay positive, friend.

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

I have no idea what a train track is worth and it seems way too high. I asked a search engine/LLM and it spat this out for the “average cost per kilometre”:

The average cost per kilometer of newly constructed railway track in Australian dollars can vary based on factors such as design speed, materials used, and specific project requirements. Here are some indicative costs based on the provided information:

  • For high-speed rail construction in Australia, the cost per kilometer can range from approximately $700,000 for single track to $1 million for dual track[1].
  • The cost of replacement track was estimated to be around $573,221 per kilometer in a 2007 study by the Australian Rail Track Corporation[2].
  • The Adelaide to Darwin Railway extension completed in 2003 cost approximately $1.056 million per kilometer[2].
  • The Melbourne-Brisbane Inland Rail Corridor had estimated costs of around $660,000 per kilometer for greenfield single track[2].

These figures provide a range of costs for different types of railway construction projects in Australia. It is important to note that actual costs can vary depending on specific project requirements, location, materials used, and other factors.

Citations: [1] hotrails.net/2014/08/track-costs/[2] accc.gov.au/…/Booz Allen Hamilton DORC valuation …[3] …com.au/…/Corrigenda Version - Floor and Ceiling …[4] accc.gov.au/…/GHD Advisory - Draft Public Report …[5] www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=9c5fc107-113…

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

I just got horribly downvoted for summarising a YouTube video but here it is again for the people that just want an overview. Tell me, if you watch it, how accurate is it?:

In the YouTube video “‘Thrown to the wind’ – are wind farms really killing whales?”, the speaker examines the claims that wind farms are causing an increase in whale deaths off the eastern coast of America. Despite government statements denying a proven connection between wind farms and whale deaths, some argue that surveys used for wind farm development and pile driving cause excessive noise that harms whales. However, the speaker challenges these claims, pointing out that shipping boats, cruise liners, warships, and seismic surveys during oil exploration produce even louder noises. The video also investigates the correlation between wind farm traffic and whale deaths in the New England area and concludes that there is no proven link between wind farm activity and whale deaths, as whale deaths are rising globally and there is no increase in whale deaths in areas with more wind farms. The speaker also criticizes those opposing renewable energy based on unsubstantiated claims about wind farms harming whales, urging viewers to support a charity called Health in Harmony instead

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

Every time I see a summarising tool, I give it a go.

But your description has intrigued me so I will give it a watch.

25 mins, OK. Here we gooo.

Treevan, (edited )
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

The summary is quite general and misses the point of the video (the tearing apart of an opposing argument). Like you said, it’s OK though.

I just checked the 5 minute summaries and they are a bit clearer.

www.summarize.tech/www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KfoH3…

Edit: Sponsorblock skipped the last piece.

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

Maybe you need a post submission? Because the title is generalised, it could mean the video is supporting either side of the argument and the people downvoting don’t like the side they think the video is about?

I just got smashed 30 downvotes for answering someone’s question in another thread with the same tool that I used in this thread. Last time I try to help someone. This place can be quite fucked up. Modern downvoting is a scourge.

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

I didn’t want to watch it either so here is a LLM making some stuff up:

In the “Valve Goes Hard: Steam Deck OLED Review & Benchmarks vs. ASUS ROG Ally Z1 Extreme, Deck LCD” YouTube video, the presenter evaluates the Steam Deck OLED, comparing it to the ASUS ROG Ally Z1 Extreme in terms of hardware improvements and performance. Valve made significant alterations to the OLED model, enhancing screen quality, system latency, thermals, acoustics, and gaming performance. The review covers the methodology of comparing the two devices and their respective displays, focusing on latency and frame rate consistency in tests like Red Dead Redemption 2 and Cyberpunk 2077. The OLED model exhibits a slight frame rate advantage and superior frame time consistency, resulting in an enhanced gaming experience. The ASUS ROG Ally Z1 Extreme performs better in graphics benchmarks, but its higher latency negatively impacts the player experience. Both devices have similar input latency, but the OLED model features an overall system latency reduction, longer battery life, and quieter operation. Pricing is also discussed, with the Steam Deck OLED costing $550 and the ASUS ROG Ally Z1 Extreme priced at $600. The video concludes by addressing cons for both devices and introducing the upcoming review of the Lenovo Legion Go handheld gaming device.

Haha, downvotes for a summary. Ouch. Is it wrong? Tell me why it’s wrong.

Here is the video description. Minus the repeated product placement and advertising. Sounds similar:

This deep-dive review of the Steam Deck OLED goes in-depth for gaming benchmarks, thermal testing, battery life of the Steam Deck OLD, LCD, and ASUS ROG Ally, and more. Testing primarily focuses on the Steam Deck LCD, Steam Deck OLED, and the Z1 Extreme edition of the ASUS ROG Ally. We’re still building-out charts of this brand new market, so we hope to next add the Lenovo Legion Go. The non-Extreme Z1 has already been through our testing and is linked below. As a first for our handheld test suite, we added total end-to-end system latency benchmarking as well! This testing will also help answer questions about the differences between the Steam Deck OLED and LCD hardware.

This testing is expensive to conduct and takes sometimes weeks of work just to complete testing, if not months at times. Help support our efforts to provide extremely detailed reviews by heading over to the store and buying something useful that helps us at the same time!

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

In Australia it is. Our kids love playing in it.

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar
Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

Is this rhetorical?

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

There was a radio piece saying that potting mix and cheap “soil mixes” may also be affected. The same thing people put into raised garden beds as cheap soil is wood-based/bark-based.

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

Too counter all the negative comments, I think the idea of making websites low energy (think solar.lowtech as an extreme example) is a good design principle. Yeah, in the big scheme of things it means not much but something is better than nothing.

www.websitecarbon.com

This has been discussed before a while back. When it came up, I measured my page that is an environmental site and blog and it got an A+ rating. My intent in choosing the theme was to make it low data as possible (with my technological illiteracy) and I think the rating reflects that. No one wants or needs heavy webpages for a majority of them, of course exceptions apply. In this day and age, the heavier they are, the more data they are actively stealing.

Treevan, (edited )
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

I’m not saying it isn’t but like said, something is better than nothing. The doomerism involved in saying the individual can’t make any choices doesn’t make me feel solarpunk.

Everyone should be aware of the bleeding obvious but if individuals want to make changes, then let them? I like to plant thousands of trees each year and I definitely know that isn’t going to save the planet but I still do it because it makes me feel good.

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

Your comment is more succinct than mine but that was my intent.

If your webpage doesn’t need to load things for any important purpose, then actively make it lighter. It doesn’t hurt anyone and is one simple act that adds to the whole.

As for eco-certification, at least someone is trying to make it obvious. Good for them.

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

I get you but I’ve already done all those things.

Ordering them by priority is fine but this is more of an ethos than a checklist. Everything that one could do could follow the same philosophy by shaving off energy usage where one can. Doesn’t matter if it’s a hot water tap, a walk to the shops instead of driving, sitting under a tree instead of aircon, or designing a website to send less data. They are all the same because the goal is use less and they all matter. Does that make sense?

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

Already done. Plus all the tree planting and biochar I do.

Perhaps your argument is a foundational one whereas other people are already chasing the diminishing returns. As an ethos, I feel that everything one should do is striving to that lower goal but there is no shame in attacking your agenda as a priority checklist, it makes sense financially.

I still don’t know why we can’t have low energy websites as the norm but certainly there are low-hanging fruit to grab elsewhere. Definitely not denying any of that.

Somewhat related anecdote: When I do my environmental work in the field and biomass needs to be moved, most people tend to move it downhill as that’s easier. I always move biomass uphill as I introduce energy into the system rather than the usual entropy (nutrients flow downhill). Most people don’t understand that argument, it’s beyond them, they think “it doesn’t matter”. Just like low energy websites, it’s the little things…

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

My site has some international visitors. Mostly poor farmers though I guess scale and millions of users doesn’t come into the equation but sure.

theonion.com/how-bad-for-the-environment-can-thro…

Treevan,
@Treevan@aussie.zone avatar

Or anyone that uses Facebook or any other platform of misinformation. There are some fucked up 20 year old climate change deniers at my work and I work in the environmental industry! What are they doing there?!

Apex predators not a quick fix for restoring ecosystems, 20-year study finds (phys.org)

A 20-year experiment conducted by Colorado State University researchers in Yellowstone National Park found that restoring apex predators like wolves was not a quick fix for ecosystems degraded by their absence. While wolf reintroduction lowered elk populations, willows and aspens did not recover as strongly as expected even...

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • bokunoheroacademia
  • Leos
  • DreamBathrooms
  • mdbf
  • osvaldo12
  • magazineikmin
  • Youngstown
  • thenastyranch
  • InstantRegret
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • everett
  • kavyap
  • tacticalgear
  • sketchdaily
  • tester
  • ethstaker
  • cubers
  • cisconetworking
  • khanakhh
  • GTA5RPClips
  • Durango
  • lostlight
  • normalnudes
  • modclub
  • HellsKitchen
  • relationshipadvice
  • littleknowngames
  • All magazines