The article isn’t clear enough about this. This pump is nowhere close to the fires, and the water coming out of the pump doesn’t get anywhere close to the fires, either.

The purpose of the pumps is to take water from rivers and send it to wealthy farmers. The farmers didn’t even need the water, anyway, this time of year.

Looks like you are stuck with fruits, grains, herbs, and ornamentals in the front yard, then, lol.

Yeah, just because racism might look different in other countries doesn’t mean that other countries don’t have racism. For Latin America in particular, early colonialism was often perpetrated by single men enslaving the local populace and/or importing from elsewhere. The plurality of people enslaved were sent to Brazil, with additional huge numbers going to carribean nations and the rest of central/south america. Only ~10% went to what is now the US and Canada.

English colonization in north america at the very earliest was also single men, but it quickly became a place where families would immigrate, so the colonists population was bolstered naturally. In Latin America, the colonists “intermarried” (which i don’t think is a responsible word to use in this circumstance) with those under their control. This lead to different class structure than in the English colonies. It’s only natural that this would result in different concepts of race.

It’s like these people forget they have to breath the same air as us.

It’s quasi-public, which is weird. It is subsidized, but just barely (they have like 95% farebox recovery), so i don’t think it’s even responsible to call it subsidized like road and air travel.

I bet if there was enforcement of train priority laws, they could even be a revenue generator. Philosophically, I dont think they should be, though.

I haven’t read the exact statutes, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

Some compounds, like phosphates and nitrates, are well studied, and so experts can put limits in place that they know will result in good outcomes. Unfortunately, there are an infinite number of potential contaminates someone could dump into a body of water, so for anything less well studied, it’s really hard to make limits. The EPA apparently just set a backstop that said something along the lines of “whatever you put in the water has to still result in good water quality”.

Now that the Supreme Court has shut that down, a polluter can put anything in the water that isn’t specifically disallowed. For a (fake) example, maybe Forever Chemical x2357-A is shown to hurt wildlife at concentrations over 2 parts per billion (after lots of expensive, taxpayer funded research), so the EPA rules that they have to keep it below 2 ppb. The company could adjust their process so their waste is Forever Chemical x2357-B instead, and they can release as much as they want.

The EPA basically just gets forced to play whack-a-mole spending lots of money to come up with specific rules to the point that they can’t actually do their jobs.

I think you are missing my point. The Fulbright program was started by the US that does exchange between the US and other countries, and the cost is shared. The trump administration is cutting funding for anything it disagrees with.

If the University of Helsinki advertises to US students to come to Helsinki to research climate change through this US program, the US just won’t fund it. Likewise if they advertise to Finnish students to go research equitable housing policies at an American university, the US just won’t fund it.

The only people hurt by advertising for people to do Fulbrights on topics the trump administration doesn’t like are the people who want to do that kind of research who will fill out applications that will never be funded. If you are asking people to submit proposals on those topics, you are asking them to waste their time.

Obviously, Finland can (and I really hope they do) fund Americans to study in Finland, and Finns to study in the US, independently of the Fulbright program, but the fulbright program itself is subject to the whims of the US govt.

If I’m reading the auto-translated Swedish right, it seems like the issue is Finnish universities are advertising the scholarship program for students who want to go learn in the US, and they are using terms that are leading to programs being canceled in the US.

The US counterparts have asked the Finnish Universities to change how things are advertised because they don’t want the program to be shut down since it is important. If I was in their shoes, I would be asking the same thing.

Seems overall upsetting, but not nefarious like this article makes it sound. I don’t think it’s really a moral victory to keep the advertising the way it is, and just have the program cut off; everyone loses. I suppose that since it’s a program to promote cultural exchange, it’s bound to be shut down by the US govt anyway, so maybe it is best to just go down with the ship (not sure if that’s an idiom that translates to finnish).

My manual says:

DO NOT USE IN CARAVANS, TENTS, MARINE CRAFT, CARS, MOBILE HOMES OR SIMILAR LOCATIONS

So i guess you can use it indoors, but I definitely don’t.

Yeah, I want one of those, too. I think it fits different needs, though. Stove vs grill.

A gas furnace won’t keep you warm when the power is out, either. I will say a camp stove feeds just as well as a regular stove, after all, how often are you using more than 2 burners simultaneously?

I think there are some municipalities with that in code, but it’s definitely not universal in the US.

https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IFGC2021P1/chapter-5-chimneys-and-vents

I live in a house with a gas stove that vents into my kitchen.

I definitely hear you about the coffee roasting. I assumed when they said that it smokes that it would just be like thin wisps, and I definitely smoked out my house. I’m not going to do it inside again.

For a lot of these large scale, epidemiological findings, it’s important to remember that the effects are small enough that you pick them up on a population level over a lifetime. I’d say that if you can, find a way to properly vent your stove outside if you are doing some home improvement. If you are replacing your stove, consider induction instead, and in the meantime, having an air purifier is good. Opening a window is probably also good. Other than that, I wouldn’t be super alarmed. Obviously, if you have little kids or something, you might have a lower tolerance for potential pollution, but it’s good to think about these things in context. Alcohol causes cancer, but everyone still drinks.

I have a whole rant about “waterproof” stuff that I should really just have at the ready for pasting in places.

Basically, people used to use waxed/oiled cloth like canvas. When fresh, it is effectively “waterproof” since the wax/oil is hydrophobic, but as you move, brush up against stuff, etc., paths open up to the hydrophilic underlying fabric, and some moisture can make it through. This leakiness isn’t necessarily a bad thing, because it also lets some moisture out. Over time, you can re-wax/oil the cloth to restore water resistance.

When petrochemicals started getting produced (and/or natural rubber chemistry got better), they made plastics/rubbers that were properly waterproof and flexible: think about rubber gloves. It sounds good to be properly waterproof, but not so much once you understand how it all works as a system.

When you sweat, which you are always doing to some extent, but especially while exercising, your sweat needs to evaporate to dry you off. If you have a waterproof layer on you, your sweat can’t evaporate, so you even without any water making it through your clothing, you end up wet. This is still worth it in some applications like commercial fishing, where the water that hits you would be really cold, while the water (sweat) on the inside is at least warm. Commercial fishing gear is also usually baggy so you can get some evaporation out the waist. That type of clothing is also bulky.

These issue were addressed by the use of non-waterproof synthetics, like nylon weaves, coated with hydrophobic compounds of various degrees of environmental toxicity (these usually just say “treated with DWR”). Better versions have multiple layers, so you could have a layer of a water resistant membrane, a stronger synthetic, and a coating (referred to as 2 layer). The best versions have a third layer to provide backing to the membrane since it’s pretty fragile.

The important thing is these new, lightweight, packable fabrics are not “waterproof”, they are “water resistant”, so they can allow water to evaporate from your body through the fabric. This works because when it rains, the air is at 100% relative humidity (I’m simplifying transient effects), but you are hotter than the surrounding air, so inside the jacket, humidity % is lower, and the water vapor can diffuse through the fabric to outside. The more heat you are generating, the more you can push water vapor out, but you need the jacket to be more permeable. This is a tradeoff, so a jacket designed for running will end up getting soaked through easily if you use it for casual wear, while a jacket designed for casual wear will soak you with sweat if you run in it. The problem is, lots of people want to wear gear meant for hiking cause it’s trendy, but it actually sucks for casual wear. Good brands actually report the permeability of jackets so you can purchase according to your needs.

In my mind, a really good technical jacket would use different fabrics for areas like the tops of your shoulders that need to really shed water vs other areas, but from a manufacturing perspective, it’s not as easy as just grabbing a big roll of 1 material. You could even have volumetric mesh underneath the waterproof fabrics to allow sweat to flow to areas that can let water vapor out.

I think in most cases, people would be better off using either old-school oilcloth/waxed canvas or newer jackets that are actually waterproof for their casual wear, and save the “performance” fabrics for performance. Biking is tough, though. I don’t bike in downpours, so I think my ideal biking rain pants would just be waterproof on the top of the thigh to the knee, something abrasion resistant on the butt, and water resistant everywhere else.

I think the people who claim gas stoves are best likely grew up either not cooking much, or had a decent gas stove, so their first exposure to an electric stove was super cheap, crappy electric coil stoves in student housing, or wherever they first lived as a young adult. Then when they were able to afford better, they got a better gas stove.

I have a really crappy gas stove, and it makes me yearn for the cheap electric coil stoves of my youth.

People say that gas stoves are more powerful and responsive, when the truth is that more powerful stoves are more powerful, and “responsiveness” is a fake concern. My crappy gas stove takes forever to get a pot of water boiling, especially compared to coil stoves. Yeah, you can turn a gas stove to 100% quickly, but that’s only better if it can put out more power. It won’t heat up any faster than an electric stove if the electric stove takes double the time, but also has double the power. There’s also not many cases where “time to maximum heat” is what you care about, I can’t think of any.

Responsiveness the other way (hot to cool) doesn’t matter when you have a high thermal mass in the pan (or the pan itself has high mass), it only matters when the pan and contents are light, in which case, you just take the pan off the heat.

I’ve never seen a gas stove with temp control. I’m not even sure how that would work. Controlling the amount of gas, sure, but not the temperature. In an induction stove, you can set it to 150 degrees, and it will hold that.

Or they have a fan that just redirects the exhaust into the house

A $50 dual burner camp stove solves that (or even cheaper, a $12 single burner backpacking stove if you have less space).

Never seen something like this?

It’s a pain in the butt cause all it does is suck up any smoke and direct it towards your smoke detector.

Yeah, a coleman (or equivalent) 2 burner camp stove combined with the adapter to use a full size propane tank is super handy. Combine it with a cast iron griddle, and you can functionally replicate a Blackstone for much much cheaper. It’s also way better for high heat cooking if you don’t have a good stove fan that actually vents outside.

Also, sometimes when power goes out, gas does too (it’s still a grid that can fail).