A ruckus in the church and other tidbits

The Christian kerfuffle in the teapot

Newsweek writes:

Thousands have signed a petition launched by a Christian organization condemning Donald Trump's 2024 bid for the White House.

The morning after Trump's announcement, Faithful America launched a petition that has since amassed more than 14,000 signatures.

The petition says that Trump announced his latest presidential campaign with a speech "laced with fearmongering and lies" and made it clear he "intends to double down on the fascist tactics" that led to the "Christian-nationalist" attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

"We don't know much yet about how the 2024 election will play out, but one thing is certain: Another Trump presidency would be a disaster for our country," it adds. "Multiple power-hungry pastors and Christian-nationalist leaders like Mike Huckabee, Mark Burns, and Eric Metaxas are already lining up to stand with him, falsely pretending they speak for all Christians."

Guess I’m not the only one who is calling out Christian nationalism and fascism on America’s radical right. A few other folks see the same thing. And I do mean few. 14,000 signatures is barely a drop in the bucket. It’s a little droplet. 

The news here is not that there are thousands of Christians in open opposition to Trump. Unfortunately, there are tens of millions of Christian who are not. That’s the real news here.

On sustainable energy production

Over at Neurologica blog, Steve Novella writes:

What is the potential of advanced geothermal? I read different estimates, but they range from 4-6% of current US electricity production by 2050. Here is a map of the US showing the temperature at 7 km. Current drilling technology is good to get down to about this depth but not beyond. But in the 3-7 km range, drilling is expensive and takes time. Even if we take the high end of the estimates, 6% of energy production in the US by 2050 is nice, but also is not going to be a major solution for decarbonization.

Hydroelectric power is currently at about 6% in the US, with a potential to increase to 9% by 2050. That assumes static demand, which is not likely to be true, so these figures will likely be lower. In fact, hydro capacity may only increase enough to keep it at 6% or so as demand increases. Wind and solar have the greatest potential for significant growth. Wind is currently at 9.2% and solar at 2.8%. There are two issues with these sources, they are land-use intensive, and they are intermittent. Without getting into the same debate about the upper limit of wind and solar, let’s just say there is a range of estimates where they can get by 2050.

If, then, by 2050 we have 6% hydro, 4% geothermal, 20% solar, and 30% wind, that leaves 40% unaccounted for. Right now nuclear is 18.9% and fossil fuel is 61%. Many of our nuclear power plants are set to retire so that 18.9% can decrease if we don’t extend their lifespan and replace them. This is why I say that our real choice for the next 30 years is between nuclear and fossil fuel.

If we can get significant new nuclear online in 10-30 years, they will replace fossil fuel plants and hold us over until deep drilling for geothermal comes online, or massive grid storage, or even fusion. These are more realistic for the second half of this century, not by 2050.

The IPCC agrees – there is no solution without nuclear. The numbers simply don’t work. Any other projection is incredible wishful thinking that we simply cannot risk. Otherwise that 40% or so will be provided by fossil fuel, and we will blow past 1.5 C.

We have no choice but to go all in on nuclear power. That has been clear for years. And for years most our political and business leadership has been undermining nuclear power and/or advocating for more carbon energy. Among the culpable prominent political and business leadership are the entire Republican Party leadership and oil and other carbon energy corporations, e.g., Exxon-Mobile. 

From the Humans Can Be Stupid files

Law and Crime writes:

Man Robbed Bank Using Back of His Birth Certificate as Note to Teller While Wearing Ankle Monitor from Another Case — All to ‘Prove a Point’ to His Lover: Feds

A Missouri man has pleaded guilty to robbing a local Bank of America branch using a demand note written on the back of his own birth certificate and while he was wearing an ankle monitor related to a previous case. That device easily placed him at the scene, according to court paperwork.

He did it all, he admitted to the authorities, to “prove a point” to his lover — though it’s unclear from court records precisely what “point” he was trying to make.

 Wonder who his lover is.

The surprised culprit: Michael Conley Loyd

Police nabbed him after leisurely pursuit

“How did they find me so fast?”