I have to agree with you. From my perspective, it comes off that they don't think the Trans/POC portion is important and replace it with their own logo while keeping the rainbow and chevron. They could've easily added their own logo to the right but replacing the other colors is in very bad taste to me.
It looks like the actual number of candidates were 958 and only 15% of that number were reserved for testing, the rest were used in AI training data. So in reality only 144 people were tested with the AI and there's no information from the article on how many people were formally diagnosed of this subset.
I think the key is using argon bubbles as a method of nucleation for the PFAS as well as an efficient medium for the plasma to be carried to the chemical. I'd imagine it would function like a neon light with water and a bubbler in it.
Making something like this likely wouldn't have been high on the list of first things to try, especially when applying it to an entire world of contaminated water.
It seems like they are still researching the actual effect but it's sounds more that it's breaking the chemical bonds apart by using electrical energy on concentrated areas of the chemical. My hypothesis is that it's like how electrolysis breaks the bonds between hydrogen and oxygen in water.
Looks like it's mainly China, India, and Indonesia that are increasing usage for industrial products and power generation. Europe increased a bit last year but is expected to drop and US rates are dropping.
I think you're proving their point even moreso. If there are less issues associated with drugs in this man's death then the police action was consequentially more of a factor.
I think we need to go a step further. The article I linked earlier touches on how several natural carbon sequestration systems rerelease carbon seasonally or have other implications. Seagrasses release carbon when water is warmer than usual. Trees release carbon during forest fires or from natural decomposition, and even potentially cause local atmospheric warming due to a low reflectivity. Artificial methods of sequestration are necessary, whether as systems that directly capture atmospheric carbon and store it or as systems that interrupt the process of natural decomposition or combustion and divert it to storage or further processing.
That's a fair concern. I hope that becomes less of an issue as we incorporate more sustainable energy but unfortunately it seems that coal and gas lobbyists don't want to give up without a fight.
We will likely need both carbon reduction and sequestration to actually be effective in reducing carbon emissions in general. Here's an article that touches on that and as well as goes over concerns about relying too much on carbon dioxide removal.
There's a link within that article that would presumably go to the source of those numbers at "https://recycleutah.org/what-the-styrofoam/" but it seems like that article is broken on that site.
Not to doubt that those numbers are accurate (it's probably worse honestly), but the citation for that quote leads to a broken link on a Utah recycling site. It probably mostly goes to a landfill but they were probably saying that 30% of the total makeup of US landfills is EPS; not that only 30% of all EPS actually gets there.
Good point!