It's really easy to carbon with plants and biofuels.
The growing plant captures carbon. Burning the plant or letting it rot releases exactly the same amount of carbon. No more, and no less.
There is no magic. No 'carbon capture'. No disappearing carbon.
Burning coal is taking solid carbon and releasing it as CO2. Burning oil and gas is taking hydrocarbons and releasing somewhat less CO2 for the same energy. Not tremendously less, just somewhat less. Both are taking carbon previously tucked safely away, and putting it into the atmosphere.
Should they succeed here, and get the money back, I imagine it'll be quite interesting to watch the DoJ scramble around to come up with an excuse for why they can't use it to either buy outright, or at least pay the maintenance fees for the servers that the DoJ are hoping to have wiped.
I happen to work for Cool Planet in Colorado. I hate to rain on your parade, but praising them is a little like praising intellectual ventures. Cool planet has no finished technology, and currently produces no products.
Not so much as 1 drop of fuel has exited a Cool Planet project.
Save the praise for when we actually accomplish something. First plant startup should be sometime in 2015.
I could agree more! Good lucking with that one holding up in court. If Vedder says he said it verbatim, there'd be no dispute. You could play it over and over again, and you'd never know exactly what he said. I like pearl jam, but I think Eddie wings it sometimes.
The difference is: he was an American who won the Tour de France seven times in a row and his competitors cried fowl, even though they doped themselves.
In fact, it was other dopers who were caught that were promised reduced penalties if they could implicate Lance as well. Turns out they were right about the doping, but why strip Lance of his titles if the next competitor was guilty of the same thing?
The officers you don't have to worry about(at least directly) almost certainly don't want that, for them, being a cop is about helping people, not making them fear the police.
However, to the 'officers' that you do have to worry about, lest you find yourself eating asphalt or perforated, fear from the public is just another perk of the job; to those sociopaths having people fear them is yet another reason they took the job.
And to a point, fear does work to cow people and make them compliant, the problem comes if the fear gets to such a degree that people start fearing for their lives(already true in some areas), in which case they're likely to defend themselves if it comes to it, and should they be armed when they do so... well, things are likely to get messy, and the police are likely to find out that when fear reaches that point, the distinction between officer and 'officer' vanishes to those that believe their life is at stake.
So in other words it's legally impossible for a cop to assault someone in those states, that's just grand. /s
After all, 'self defense' implies that someone was attacking you, and if that's not allowed as a defense, then it follows that what happened wasn't the defendant being attacked, no matter how 'similar' the action is to assault.
"The officer didn't 'slam the defendant against the ground', he was 'helping them to admire the details of the asphalt'. "
"The officer wasn't 'beating' the defendant, they were 'demonstrating how effective their exercise regime was at building muscle'. "
"No no, the officer wasn't 'kicking the defendant in the chest while they were prone on the ground', they were 'demonstrating the quality of their footwear'. "
I think it is perfectly normal for a woman to run away from someone who is stalking and harassing her, especially if they are likely to assault and kidnap/falsely imprison her when they catch her. What did you expect her to do, stand there and let him do what he wants to her? Also she was forced to run on the wrong side of the road (a citation, not criminal offense) to get away from her stalker, making it a matter of her personal safety at stake.
The officer had no justifiable reason to detain or arrest her as no crime by her or probable cause implicating her had been witnessed, nor any warrants against her issued.
The police can stop, cite or arrest you for any reason they damn well please. If you're not actually doing anything illegal, well then they can always make something up... gotta fill those quotas. It isn't enough to just abide the laws, you have to go out of your way to avoid attracting the attention of the police.
For all we know this pig had every intention of having his way with this poor woman... maybe he thought better, maybe he forgot his pills, who knows?
All I know is if this happened to me, I would be very very disturbed... and I'm a guy.
"Ignorance is repairable." NOT when it is willful, and a lot of these cases are willful, they (Lawyers,Judges,Politicians) "Pay/have paid for" assistant to do that "internet" thing. It's a sign of affluence.