Riiight. The undercoat seems like a great idea. Actually in some cases a black or metallic looking undercoat and a few details would do the trick.

Indeed. It takes time.

And there needs to be an actual alternative to driving. You can’t just make driving worse and expect results. I’ve found that even small positive changes in alternative methods of commuting can have disproportionately positive effect. For example at work we simply installed better and more bike racks and it seems that after a while we have maybe twice the number of people regularly cycling compared to before. Basically because cycling accommodations got nicer a few more people started cycling and then others saw that it is not only feasible but also enjoyable so they started cycling… If we could only fix few sections of the road leading to our facility… Once can dream.

But yes, change takes time.

Generally for extended periods you would pedal with something like 100 - 200 W while small electric compressors seem to be in > 1 kW region (and don’t get tired as quickly :D).

So basically with pedal power you could feasibly run some led lights and portable electronics but anything beyond this is not practical.

Indeed. Nicely worded.

And couple this with the fact that we are actively being conditioned that it is up to us to change things: “it’s your personal footprint that matters”, “vote with your wallet”… It’s not even that I disagree that personal action is important. It’s mostly that these narratives are a way for the corporations and governments to shift the blame from systemic to personal. And then we end up with feelings of paralysis because you can only do so much and guilt about not doing enough.

“It worked so far. I wonder what I’m doing wrong now. I’m probably slipping. I just need to try (to be an asshole) harder.”

Why are you comparing fossil fuels and nuclear “per tonne” that makes no sense. You replace tens of tones of nuclear fuel per year any you burn millions of tones in a comparable fosil fuel plant.

And regarding the carbon emissions from enrichment… Just use nuclear to power your enrichment plants. This way your emissions are extremely low because you don’t need much fuel and you use nuclear energy to produce nuclear fuel. French example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricastin_Nuclear_Power_Plant

(Established) scientists have a long history of ignoring new theories not science itself. But that’s because at the end of the day scientists are still human.

Science is not great at working on a very short time scales. But give it enough time so more evidence is gathered and possibly some stubborn influential people (that can’t accept a new theory) die and generally we get closer and closer to truth.

I think it’s an error. It’s should likely be Nissan Quashqai. Or Hyundai ix35/Tucson.

Homo sapiens also doesn’t originate from Europe.

How far back does it count? Humans originate from Africa so everything we do can be seen as Africans doing things with stuff from all over the planet. Or perhaps even that is not far enough. What’s the origin of the first mammal… The only contestant is change and life is good at mixing things up.