The number of words in a passage does not make the reading level the same. From a quick skim, this is a highly dense piece of material and isn't a quick read like paperback fiction written for kids...
There is a reason that the old saying is "reduce, reuse, recycle". The effectiveness is in that order: reduce consumption, reuse what you have, and recycle what you can no longer use.
There is a very straightforward opportunity here for Apple to enable "reuse". They absolutely should be doing that.
I can't even name one other than an iMac that I would want to use. The whole reason to want to use the older 27" 5k iMac is that it's an incredible display. Better than you can buy, other than the 27" Apple Studio Display.
Not sure if you're kidding, but around 2014 on campus we all got reusable water bottles, and I still of course have mine, as they're useful (and less wasteful).
I hope more companies start recycling their own products. It makes me sad to see so much valuable electronics, so many "totalled" cars just thrown away on the same heap as other rubbish (and old cars respectively). Such a waste of resources is surpassed only by war.
Consumer electronics have a negative recycling value - the raw materials are worth significantly less than the extraction cost (in both financial and carbon terms), making recycling nothing but environmental theatre. If electronics manufacturers actually care about sustainability, they must extend the working life of the product by designing for longevity, repair and reuse.
Apple have a very mixed track record in this respect. iMacs used to work as an external monitor when the in-built computer became obsolete, but that feature has been removed. Most components in an iPhone are locked to that device, preventing their re-use as spare parts. Apple computers are almost entirely non-upgradeable, greatly limiting their potential useful lifespan.
Recycling electronics basically means crushing them and extracting some of the minerals inside. A lot of them can't really be recovered, and of course all the electricity that was used to create it is still gone and the water used is still tainted.
If you make electronics you should be forced to do everything humanly possible to extend its useful life.
> Their claim is that this method is still yet cheaper than drilling/fracking.
They claim the green way to go is converting hydrogen into methane....check out the link for a company claiming the green way to go is converting methane to hydrogen:
I rather suspect that taking an energy detour through methane either way is a red herring. I mean....the OP says that their whole process is powered by solar energy. So they are presupposing that solar energy is going to be WAAAYYYY cheaper than methane. Why not just use the solar power directly?
The cost of natural gas on the Henry Hub is somewhere around $300/ton. A ton of natural gas requires 2.75 tons of CO2, so the cost of CO2 capture has to be well below $110/ton (and that ignores the cost of the hydrogen and the equipment for doing the methane synthesis.)
They must be assuming large increases in natural gas prices or large CO2 taxes.
I think it will be much easier to get the price/BTU of H2 down below the current price of natural gas than it would be to get synthetic methane down that cheap.
(If they are assuming large CO2 taxes then it's probably a better business model to just collect CO2 from the air and sequester it.)
I went to double-check your math and I don't see $300/ton on Henry hub.. the units are a little weird as it looks like the price is per million btu which is... 50 pounds? of lng, so to get the per-ton price we take the Henry hub price and multiply by 40 (2000 pounds per ton divided by 50 pounds per million btu)? with a 52-week high of 3.63, this would get to $177 per ton, which seems short of your $300/ton? Anyway, I ask because id love to learn where I went wrong with the math (my result makes your point stronger, not contradicts it...)
> so the cost of CO2 capture has to be well below $110/ton
they say $250/t in the article, but could you expand how you came to "A ton of natural gas requires 2.75 tons of CO2"? Where 1.75t of CO2 is disappearing in result?
Can confirm, working in auto insure-tech field, I've seen one of the major carriers stop buying leads for car owners shopping for new policies for specific Kia and Hyundai model-years over the past month.
This feels like a dumb question, but I can't find dimensions of the Notecard anywhere and I can't quite judge the scale from the pictures. How big is it?
Keep in mind that’s he card with a M.2 edge connector on one end. Mostly you’d be plugging that into something, at least to hook up the power/data lines. They sell “Note Carriers” for that, which end up making the combo bigger than that.
Here’s a pic of the note card plugged into their Raspberry Pi note carrier. That’s a standard 40 pin 0.1” spacing connector on the left, so it’s 2” plus the mounting holes in that dimension. 65x57mm and about 20mm tall for the stackable 40 pin socket+pins.
