@helenczerski@fediscience.org
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

helenczerski

@helenczerski@fediscience.org

Physics, bubbles, oceans, hot chocolate and curiosity. Associate Professor at UCL, writer, broadcaster. Author of Storm in a Teacup: http://helenczerski.net/books-writing/ and Blue Machine (out June 1st, 2023) https://www.waterstones.com/book/blue-machine/helen-czerski/9781911709107 #fedi22 #physics #ocean #climate #bikes

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

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

I think that there should be a law stating that you’re only allowed to call a new development XYZ Gardens if at least 50% of the area is covered in actual publicly accessible gardens, with trees and everything. And there should be a second law that at least 50% of all new developments must be named Gardens.

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

“The bicycle is a simple solution to some of the world’s most complicated problems”
The Cycle Show today was full of two-wheeled enthusiasm (and a very high percentage of e-bikes and e-cargo bikes) but my favourite thing was this quote beneath a brand logo. I agree.

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

@aliveinspace Looks ace! Although I have to say that I’m not a fan of Brooks saddles. They do seem to be a marmite sort of thing.

IanMBrooks, to random
@IanMBrooks@mastodon.world avatar

Highly recommended...

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

@IanMBrooks I found it equally superb and terrifying.

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

I would almost go back on Twitter just to re-tweet this. Almost, but not quite. I love Pam Ayers. Farewell, blue tick…

helenczerski, to climate
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

Last night I remembered about the “Crisis inducer” from the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, which ths brilliant Douglas Adams dreamt up so that a fictional alien population with a perfect & comfortable lifestyle could manipulate the benefits of working under pressure: https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Crisis_Inducer

We need something like this to give our society a kick up the backside about climate change. A long-term slow disaster is easy to ignore. We need a lot more “Come ON, they’re after us! NOW!”

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

We are nearly GO for Fully Charged LIVE: April 28th/29th/30th at Farnborough and May 19th/20th/21st in Harrogate. If you’re ever frustrated that a clean future is slow to arrive, this is for you. It's a massive show of what's already here and what's coming soon: future energy, domestic solar and heat pumps, electric micromobility, electric cars, sustainable food, practical advice on greening your own home and plenty more. Do come! Tickets here: https://fullycharged.show/events/

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

Podcast recording alert! There are still a handful of tickets to attend our new Cosmic Shambles podcast live. Robin Ince and I will invite two guests for a dinner party of ideas. Each guest will invite the people who formed the ideas that have shaped their work, inspiration, creativity and life. Our first guests are Kevin Fong, Monica Grady, Natalie Haynes, Janina Ramirez and Amy Reynolds. Tickets to join us here: https://cosmicshambles.com/theyvemadeus or look out for the podcast soon.

helenczerski, to climate
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

When it comes to energy, wind and solar are the only sensible bet. Nuclear and CCS just aren’t going to cut it, and the evidence is substantial. We need the simple options that work WITH our environment, not the complex & expensive technologies that reflect the same extractive/exploitative attitudes as fossil fuels. There’s a huge amount of helpful information in this IPCC graphic (full version here: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/figures/summary-for-policymakers/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FigureSPM7.png , Guardian article here: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/20/down-to-earth-ipcc-emissions?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other ).

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

@Alienated53 Yes, of course, and that’s shown further down the original IPCC plot (see link above).

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

@LouisIngenthron @Alienated53 We know that there must be far fewer cars, but those that there are must be electric. Switching to electric vehicles isn’t about a like-for-like replacement. It’s about a better technology to replace the combustion engine, but that we must then use sparingly. I’m optimistic that as car sharing becomes easier and cheaper, and public transport improves (because it HAS to), people will see that cars are incredibly limiting most of the time.

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

@LouisIngenthron The full IPCC report does. Nuclear plants are hugely complex and resource-intensive, and there are also the carbon emissions associated with long-term storage of fuel (which has so far NEVER been done - the first real long-term nuclear storage for ANY historical waste will only come online in 2028).

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

@Alienated53 @LouisIngenthron Well, as the US sees other countries do this and starts to feel left behind, maybe that will change. Everyone thinks that the Netherlands just happen to be awesome at public transport and bikes etc, but 30 years ago they were just as bad as any other city. They made a decision, and they changed themselves. Also see Paris in the last few years. The US obsession with big cars is a problem, but generational attitudes really are shifting.

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

@LouisIngenthron In this congressional report: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/RS22858.pdf you can see how the historical subsidies (at least from the DOE) stack up. Over the last 71 years, 48% of the total has gone to nuclear, and 13% to renewables. The problem with nuclear is not lack of subsidy - it’s been almost entirely bankrolled by governments throughout. And although it may be able to deliver low carbon energy, it’s extraordinarily expensive compared with anything else.

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

@LouisIngenthron You can see for yourself in the table (at least for the last 40): still twice as much for nuclear as renewables. Even in the last ten years it’s still 50% more. The latest figures (from other sources) are the first to show anything even close to parity.

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

The obligatory photo of what I’m up to today: recording the audiobook of Blue Machine. It turns out that someone wrote a LOT of words.

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

@MikeHar94962844 ALL of them!

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

A current worry: The only people with existing deep expertise in things like how the atmosphere/ocean/geosphere work are academics, who are ace at giving impartial evidence-based advice. But as lots of climate “solutions” companies spring up, these academics are consulting with them & in some cases leaving academia to work for them (often much better pay & working conditions) & are then limited in what they can tell the rest of us. So the public source of open unbiased expertise is at risk.

helenczerski,
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

I have interviewed many hundreds of scientists for the BBC, Fully Charged and others over many years, and I can tell you that however nice, capable and well-intentioned they are, the ones working for companies ALWAYS have their boss and the company’s investors at the back of their minds. It’s never the same sort of conversation. So what happens when we, the public, need expertise and realise that we don’t have access to it any more, even though we paid for it to develop?

helenczerski, to climate
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

In 1968 & 1972, NASA’s Apollo missions gave us two photos that defined Earth for us: Earthrise and the Blue Marble. From that far away, we could see our blue planet for the first time, a blue jewel alone in a black universe. We have talked about that for 50 years without ever thinking about the blue itself. Artemis is coming up, and NASA will go back to the Moon. This time, we need to see and understand the message we broadcast to the rest of the universe: We Are Ocean.

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

There are no sea shells in the deepest parts of the ocean (at least not big enough for us to see). Shells are mostly made out of calcium carbonate, and beneath 4-5 km depth in the ocean (the Challenger Deep is ~10,902m) the pressure makes the calcium carbonate dissolve. Marine snail shells falling from above will never reach the seafloor – they’ll just dissolve on the way. Anything living in the depths will never see a snail, and only silica-based shells will survive.

helenczerski, to books
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

Properly jaw-dropping moment this evening: an e-mail from my US publisher saying that "since it's a science book", they'll publish Blue Machine WITH METRIC UNITS. So I don't have to convert everything to foot pounds per square elephant. In YEARS of writing for the US, this is the first time I have ever had a hint that there is a world outside feet and inches. Progress!

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

From my earlier post about larger cars, my proposed solution (inspired by @markusl with reduced speed limits for big cars) is that we should set momentum limits for the roads. If you've got a bigger car, your maximum speed is lower automatically because mass x velocity is capped. So if the motorway speed limit was 70 mph for a 1300 kg Ford Focus, it should be 40 mph for a 2250 kg Range Rover.

Also, 🙄 to all the mansplainers who replied to the rhetorical question.

helenczerski, to random
@helenczerski@fediscience.org avatar

For so many things in our lives: phones, computers, domestic appliances, music players etc, it's been absolutely accepted that smaller is better, and that the unquestioned aim for decades has been to make things the minimum size needed to do their job. So why are cars the exception? And how do we shift that narrative? It's ludicrous just to accept the more wasteful and dangerous solution as the better one.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • Leos
  • mdbf
  • magazineikmin
  • Youngstown
  • everett
  • rosin
  • slotface
  • thenastyranch
  • ngwrru68w68
  • PowerRangers
  • kavyap
  • cisconetworking
  • tsrsr
  • DreamBathrooms
  • anitta
  • tacticalgear
  • khanakhh
  • Durango
  • ethstaker
  • vwfavf
  • InstantRegret
  • modclub
  • tester
  • cubers
  • GTA5RPClips
  • osvaldo12
  • normalnudes
  • provamag3
  • All magazines
    •