Tag Archives: given

Republicans Nearing a Dead End on Obamacare

by MaurineLarose Posted on December 3, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Greg Sargent says that although the Obamacare website debacle scared some Democrats, in the end virtually none of them meaningfully abandoned the law:

It’s clear they believe the worst is now over and it is safe to return to the message they always expected to adopt.

I know I’m a broken record here, but folks are overlooking the possibility that no matter how unpopular the law, the Republican stance on health care may prove a liability, too. The basic Dem gamble is that disapproval of Obamacare does not automatically translate into zero sum political gains for Republicans, and that voters will grasp that one side is trying to solve our health care problems, while the other is trying to sabotage all solutions while advancing no constructive answers of their own. Polling shows disapproval of the law does not translate into majority support for GOP attempts to repeal or sabotage it, and Dems think this will only harden as more people enjoy the law’s benefits.

It’s funny that Republicans don’t believe their own propaganda. For years, they’ve been hellbent on repealing Obamacare because they knew that once it was fully implemented in 2014, it would have millions of beneficiaries who would fight to keep it. Once the benefits of a new program start flowing, it’s very, very hard to turn them off.

They were always right about that. By the middle of 2014, Obamacare is going to have a huge client base; it will be working pretty well; and it will be increasingly obvious that the disaster scenarios have been overblown. People with employer health care will still have it and very few will notice even a minor change in their normal routine.

Given all this, it’s hard to see Obamacare being a huge campaign winner. For that, you need people with grievances, and the GOP is unlikely to find them in large enough numbers. The currently covered will stay covered. Doctors and hospitals will be treating more patients. Obamacare’s taxes don’t touch anyone with an income less than $200,000. Aside from the tea partiers who object on the usual abstract grounds that Obamacare is a liberty-crushing Stalinesque takeover of the medical industry, it’s going to be hard to gin up a huge amount of opposition. And that’s doubly true since, as Sargent says, the Republican Party will have no credible alternative for a benefit that lots of people will already be getting.

Maybe I’m missing something. But either Republicans are seriously miscalculating, or else they’re simply betting the farm on the hope that Obamacare will be an epic disaster. Maybe it’s a bit of both. Either way, I think they’re fooling themselves pretty badly.

From – 

Republicans Nearing a Dead End on Obamacare

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republicans Nearing a Dead End on Obamacare

7 Reasons Why It’s Easier for Humans to Believe in God Than Evolution

by EsmeraldaYarnol Posted on November 26, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Late last week, the Texas Board of Education failed to approve a leading high school biology textbook—whose authors include the Roman Catholic biologist Kenneth Miller of Brown University—because of its treatment of evolution. According to The New York Times, critiques from a textbook reviewer identified as a “Darwin Skeptic” were a principal cause.

Yet even as creationists keep trying to undermine modern science, modern science is beginning to explain creationism scientifically. And it looks like evolution—the scientifically uncontested explanation for the diversity and interrelatedness of life on Earth, emphatically including human life—will be a major part of the story. Our brains are a stunning product of evolution; and yet ironically, they may naturally pre-dispose us against its acceptance.

1871 satirical image depicting Charles Darwin as an ape. The Hornet/Wikimedia Commons

“I don’t think there’s any question that a variety of our mental dispositions are ones that discourage us from taking evolutionary theory as seriously as it should be taken,” explains Robert N. McCauley, director of the Center for Mind, Brain, and Culture at Emory University and author of the book Why Religion is Natural and Science is Not.

So what can science tell us about our not-so-scientific minds? Here’s a list of cognitive traits, thinking styles, and psychological factors identified in recent research that seem to thwart evolution acceptance:

Biological Essentialism. First, we seem to have a deep tendency to think about biology in a way that is “essentialist”—in other words, assuming that each separate kind of animal species has a fundamental, unique nature that unites all members of that species, and that is inviolate. Fish have gills, birds have wings, fish make more fish, birds make more birds, and that’s how it all works. Essentialist thinking has been demonstrated in young children. “Little kids as young as my 2 and a half year old granddaughter are quite clear that puppies don’t have ponies for mommies and daddies,” explains McCauley.

If essentialism is a default style of thinking, as much research suggests, then that puts evolution at a major disadvantage. Charles Darwin and his many scientific disciples have shown that essentialism is just plain wrong: Given enough time, biological kinds are not fixed but actually change. Species are connected through intermediate types to other species—and all are ultimately related to one another.

Continue Reading »

Continue reading: 

7 Reasons Why It’s Easier for Humans to Believe in God Than Evolution

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 7 Reasons Why It’s Easier for Humans to Believe in God Than Evolution

The world is still losing its forests, and these beautiful satellite maps tally the toll

by mariawilkerson67 Posted on November 15, 2013

The world is still losing its forests, and these beautiful satellite maps tally the toll

By

Shutterstock

A little more than 300,000 square miles of forest was established or replanted worldwide between 2000 and 2012. Unfortunately, almost 900,000 square miles was destroyed during the same time period — logged, ravaged by fire, or attacked by insects.

Those are the main conclusions of a study that examined hundreds of thousands of images snapped by the U.S. government’s Landsat satellites. Academic researchers partnered with Google staff to produce stunning maps displaying the world’s forests and areas that have been deforested or reforested since 2000. Those maps were used to produce the following short videos:

About a third of the deforestation occurred in the tropics, and half of that was in South America. Logging and clearing of land for farming were responsible for much of the loss. Hearteningly, the researchers found that deforestation has been slowing down in Brazil, where worldwide concerns about the loss of the Amazon have helped spur domestic efforts to save the rainforest. But that slowdown was offset by increasing losses in other countries.

“Although Brazilian gross forest loss is the second highest globally, other countries, including Malaysia, Cambodia, Cote d’Ivoire, Tanzania, Argentina, and Paraguay, experienced a greater percentage of loss of forest cover,” the scientists wrote in the paper, published Thursday in Science. “Given consensus on the value of natural forests to the Earth system, Brazil’s policy intervention is an example of how awareness of forest valuation can reverse decades of previous wide-spread deforestation.”

The tropics lost more forest cover during the study period than any other region. The second-worst hit were the boreal forests of spruce, fir, and larch in and around the Arctic, with fire the leading cause. Previous research has shown that these forests are burning at a rate not seen in at least 10,000 years, with climate change increasing temperatures and drying out the landscape.

That wasn’t the only worrisome climate-related finding in the new paper. The mountains of the American West are losing forests due not only to logging, but also because of fire and disease — with mountain pine bark beetles marching up mountains as temperatures warm, feasting on banquets of ill-prepared pines.

The loss of forests is making it even more difficult for the Earth to suck back up all the carbon dioxide that we’re pumping into its atmosphere.

Here’s a non-interactive version of the online map:

ScienceClick to embiggen.


Source
High-Resolution Global Maps of 21st-Century Forest Cover Change, Science
Global Forest Change, University of Maryland

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Continued: 

The world is still losing its forests, and these beautiful satellite maps tally the toll

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Pines, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The world is still losing its forests, and these beautiful satellite maps tally the toll

Who Was Vivian Maier? These Enigmatic Self-Portraits Only Add to the Mystery

by Toni Tolve Posted on November 8, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

If you open up Vivian Maier: Self-Portraits seeking answers as to who she was, prepare to be disappointed. Even when Maier turns the camera on herself, she doesn’t offer much.

In death, as in life, Maier left few clues about who she was, why she pursued photography, or what she was thinking. Four years after her death, and six years after the discovery of her photos (which author Alex Kotlowitz wrote about for Mother Jones), very little is known about her. She was born in New York in 1926, worked as a Nanny in Chicago, and died in 2009. She spent her life compulsively taking pictures. Most of those who knew her never even realized she was a photographer. Then again, she may not have considered herself a photographer.

May 5, 1955

With this book of Maier’s self-portraits, we hope for clues. We want to be a witness to her life. But we’re really just spectators, seeing only what she lets us—often just her shadow. Sometimes it’s almost like a game of Where’s Waldo: You need to find her in the frame, catching her reflection in the corner of a mirror that’s secondary to an otherwise great street photo. She is usually alone or with children. Rarely smiles. Mostly out in the world, on the street, experimenting with reflections, composition, shadows and shapes. We get more questions than answers.

The book, compiled by filmmaker and street photographer John Maloof, who first discovered Maiers’ work in 2007 while researching a book on the history of a neighborhood in Chicago, contains 60 never-before-published images. Most are black and white, shot with a medium format camera. However, in the ’70s and beyond, we see Maier more in color, shot on 35mm film. In the later work we see an aging Maier, generally even more alone than in earlier photos.

June 1978, Chicago area

It’s tempting to approach the book with a modern sensibility of the self-portrait, thinking of these as Maier’s selfies. That would be a mistake. As Elizabeth Avedon puts it in her opening essay:

So often contemporary photography needs something…It demands an audience, requires funding. It needs someone to like it, share it or comment to it. Images today are not content to exist on their own, they constantly seek opinion and validation…Vivian Maier’s work is extraordinarily different in that it only needed to be made.

According to Maloof, Maier almost never showed her work. Most of it she never even saw herself. The pictures “only needed to be made.”

1956, Chicago area

Some people see a particular vanity in photographers’ self-portraits. But with Maier’s, it seems like a case of the photographer trying to figure out her subject. Given that she died with most of her film undeveloped and negatives unprinted, it’s a safe bet that she never found the answers she may have been searching for.

May 1978, Chicago area

Vivian Maier: Self-Portraits by Vivian Maier, edited by John Maloof, is available from powerHouse Books.

Excerpt from: 

Who Was Vivian Maier? These Enigmatic Self-Portraits Only Add to the Mystery

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Who Was Vivian Maier? These Enigmatic Self-Portraits Only Add to the Mystery

Why is Antarctic sea ice expanding?

by Shawanna11 Posted on October 29, 2013

Why is Antarctic sea ice expanding?

By

Bryan Kiechle

While ice cover in the Arctic continues its downward spiral, something counterintuitive is happening in the Antarctic.

The thin crust of sea ice floating around Antarctica expanded this year to cover more of the Southern Ocean than ever before recorded: 7.518 million square miles. That broke the previous record of 7.505 million square miles, which was set just last year, according to NASA.

“We set a record high winter maximum,” Walt Meier, a NASA glaciologist, said in announcing the findings. “Even though it is a record high, it is only 3.6 percent above the 1981 to 2010 average maximum.”

NASAClick to embiggen.

This phenomenon is known as the “paradox of Antarctic sea ice.” It’s the kind of thing that delights climate deniers eager to point blindly at things and say they mean the planet isn’t warming, despite all other signs to the contrary. Unfortunately, nice though that would be, the Antarctic sea ice is not expanding because global warming has magically ended. NASA points out that there are many factors at play:

While researchers continue to study the forces driving the growth in sea ice extent, it is well understood that multiple factors — including the geography of Antarctica, the region’s winds, as well as air and ocean temperatures — all affect the ice.

Increasing snowfall and strengthening westerly gusts are also factors, as University of Tasmania sea-ice scientist Guy Williams explains in The Conversation. And as continental ice and icebergs melt, they may be lowering ocean temperatures, helping the layer of ice form on the sea’s frigid surface.

Willians also points out that it actually isn’t even clear whether the total amount of Antarctic sea ice is expanding. Researchers don’t know how think the layer of ice is or how much volume it holds. At least for now, scientists can only reliably measure its surface area.

“While the increase in total Antarctic sea ice area is relatively minor compared to the Arctic, it masks the fact that some regions are in strong decline,” Williams writes. “Given the complex interactions of winds and currents driving patterns of sea ice variability and change in the Southern Ocean climate system, this is not unexpected. But it is still fascinating to study.”

NASAClick to embiggen.


Source
Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Maximum Extent, NASA
Why is Antarctic sea ice growing?, The Converation

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Link: 

Why is Antarctic sea ice expanding?

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Uncategorized, wind energy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why is Antarctic sea ice expanding?

America wants Kyoto Protocol replaced with peer-pressure campaign

by MatthiasA Posted on May 10, 2013

America wants Kyoto Protocol replaced with peer-pressure campaign

By John Upton

NASA

Can peer pressure save the planet?

America never ratified the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, and it doesn’t want the rest of the world ever signing anything like it again.

As world climate delegates try (not very successfully, mind you) to thrash out a new agreement to replace the protocol, which expired last year, the U.S. is pushing a very different approach to reducing the world’s greenhouse gas emissions: international peer pressure.

Instead of agreeing to a set of emissions goals, America wants each country to set its own targets — in the hopes that the glare of the international community will encourage governments to make those targets meaningful. America’s goal appears to be to agree to not agree.

From The Guardian:

The proposal that a global climate deal by 2015 should be based on national “contributions” gained traction at last week’s round of UN talks in Germany, although China, the world’s biggest carbon emitter, said it wanted far more binding commitments by wealthy countries.

In the first public US statements on the plan, Todd Stern, the US State Department’s special envoy on climate change, told reporters on Tuesday that the US approach was designed to bring as many countries as possible to the table through a form of peer pressure and break the impasse over a successor to the 1997 Kyoto protocol.

“Countries, knowing that they will be subject to the scrutiny of everybody else, will be urged to put something down they feel they can defend and that they feel is strong,” Stern said from Berlin during a summit of environmental ministers focused on ways to advance the UN climate talks. …

Stern said that having each country’s plans and targets “in an environment of intense public interest” may encourage countries to step up their existing plans.

Peer pressure often takes hold in the playground. Given that delegates have been squabbling and dithering like children as they try to reach a worldwide plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, I guess the hope is that it will work here too.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Link:

America wants Kyoto Protocol replaced with peer-pressure campaign

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Pines, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on America wants Kyoto Protocol replaced with peer-pressure campaign

Insurance companies on climate change: ‘What climate change?’

by Louise6qy Posted on March 11, 2013

Insurance companies on climate change: ‘What climate change?’

By John Upton

SandyRelief

Too many insurance companies aren’t connecting the dots.

Insurance companies have been paying out big bucks of late, funding cleanup in the wake of wildfires, hurricanes, and other extreme weather events likely made worse by global warming. Superstorm Sandy caused an estimated $50 billion in economic losses, and it was just one of 11 American catastrophes in 2012 that wrought more than $1 billion worth of destruction.

So one would logically think that insurance companies would be among the most clued-in businesses when it comes to understanding and bracing for humanity’s horrendous effects on the weather.

Not so, according to the results of an industry-wide survey of 184 insurance companies that operate in California, New York, and Washington state.

From a report published by CERES [PDF], the nonprofit that administered the survey:

In general, almost all companies responding to the survey show significant weakness in their preparedness to address the effects climate change may have on their business. However, a small subset of industry leaders are evolving their business strategies to remain competitive as the impacts of climate change unfold. Given the strong scientific consensus on climate change, the rest of the industry would be well advised to follow the lead of these innovative companies.

Two of the biggest laggards in acknowledging climate reality: Allstate and Travelers, which “express strong ambivalence about the state of the science — specifically, the existence of climate change and what is causing it,” CERES says.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Originally posted here – 

Insurance companies on climate change: ‘What climate change?’

Posted in ALPHA, Amana, G & F, GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Insurance companies on climate change: ‘What climate change?’

NYC’s public transit system will raise fares — because what choice does it have?

by RubinkJoseph Posted on December 19, 2012

NYC’s public transit system will raise fares — because what choice does it have?

By Philip Bump

New York’s Metropolitan Transit Authority and its director Joe Lhota received broad (and largely deserved) praise for the speed with which the city’s transit system was brought back online after Sandy. One of the things that made that recovery remarkable was how expensive it was, with the agency tallying $5 billion in expenses linked to the storm. That cost came on top of the MTA’s ongoing budget problems.

MTAPhotos

An empty, dry tunnel under the East River.

Unsurprisingly, then, the MTA today announced plans to increase fares. As reported by The New York Times:

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority voted unanimously on Wednesday to raise the base fare on subways and buses by a quarter, to $2.50, and increase the cost of a 30-day MetroCard by $8, to $112. …

The cost of a seven-day subway or bus pass will also rise by $1, to $30. And the bonus on pay-per-ride MetroCards will decrease to 5 percent, from 7 percent, but will be available to anyone who places at least $5 on a card. Currently, the bonus applies only to purchases of at least $10.

Those increases are 11 percent for a single ride, 8 percent for a 30-day card, and 3 percent for a 7-day pass. Sounds steep — particularly when you consider that fares have consistently increased faster than the rate of inflation. Then again, so has the number of bus routes and subway lines.

Wikipedia

Click to embiggen.

Given that we’re talking public transit, it’s tempting to label the hikes regressive, disproportionately affecting lower-income users. But it isn’t that simple. According to the most recent subway and bus rider data, the demographics of public transit users in the region are probably not what you’d expect.

In each of these charts, the data presented is the percentage of ridership meeting a particular criterion, or, in the case of the yellow columns in each, the percentage of all New Yorkers.

While the bus (as one would expect) has more lower-income riders and riders of color, the plurality of riders of both the bus and the subway earn over $75,000 a year. The MTA does have a reduced fare structure, but it is predicated on age and disability, not ability to pay. And what’s not depicted in the graphs above is how much of the riders’ income goes to transit. So, yes, the fare increase is regressive — but perhaps less than it may at first seem.

This is the challenge of an institution that is dependent on flat-rate public financing. At some point, the cost of maintaining or expanding service outpaces the revenue that is coming in. (See also: the federal government.) Hikes are unpopular and often unduly burdensome to lower income levels. But they’re also necessary.

Earlier today, Chair Lhota announced that he was leaving the agency. Many expect that he’ll announce a (doomed) bid for mayor of New York. It’s a weird note to go out on: After receiving praise for handling Sandy, he’ll certainly be remembered for this fare hike, even though it doesn’t go into effect until March.

Then again, championing unpopular causes to preserve public priorities is ideally what politics is all about. The problem for Lhota is that you have to get elected first.

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Cities

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

From: 

NYC’s public transit system will raise fares — because what choice does it have?

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on NYC’s public transit system will raise fares — because what choice does it have?

Tiny twisters could power your town — someday

by Myrna Posted on December 14, 2012

Tiny twisters could power your town — someday

By Susie Cagle

You thought you were cool with your wind turbines, hippies? Canadian inventor Louis Michaud sees your wind turbines and raises you a freaking tornado.

m_bridi

Yes, climate change may be unleashing monster tornadoes upon us now, but those aren’t the tornadoes Michaud wants to “control and exploit.” Today the inventor won a grant through the Thiel Foundation’s “revolutionary” Breakout Labs to develop power-generating twisters.

The Toronto Star reports:

[B]y today’s measure, Michaud’s idea is the definition of radical. Through his company AVEtec — the AVE standing for “atmospheric vortex engine” — the long-term plan is to take waste heat from a thermal power plant or industrial facility and use it to create a controllable twister that can generate electricity.

Here’s how it works: Waste heat is blown at an angle into a large circular structure, creating a flow of spinning hot air. We all know heat travels upward and as it does it spins itself into a rising vortex.

The higher the twister grows, the greater the temperature differential between top and bottom, creating stronger and stronger convective forces that act like fuel for the vortex, eventually allowing it to take on a life of its own.

The result is that hot air initially blown into the bottom of the structure starts getting sucked in so forcefully that it spins electricity-generating turbines installed at the base …

Given the destructive history of naturally formed tornadoes, many people might be freaked out by the thought of having man-made tornadoes intentionally scattered near cities and power plants.

Michaud assured that his twisters are much safer to operate and control than, say, a nuclear plant. And because they’re fuelled by the waste heat that’s initially supplied, all the operator has to do is throttle back or cut off that heat to weaken or stop the vortex.

True to its self-proclaimed radical spirit, Breakout Labs has also backed meat and leather 3D printing from Modern Meadow. Essentially it funds magic.

So hey, is anyone out there working on a protective forcefield for cyclists …?

Susie Cagle writes and draws news for Grist. She also writes and draws tweets for

Twitter

.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

View post:  

Tiny twisters could power your town — someday

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Tiny twisters could power your town — someday

Tiny twisters could power your town — someday

by biglermyrta910 Posted on December 14, 2012

Tiny twisters could power your town — someday

By Susie Cagle

You thought you were cool with your wind turbines, hippies? Canadian inventor Louis Michaud sees your wind turbines and raises you a freaking tornado.

m_bridi

Yes, climate change may be unleashing monster tornadoes upon us now, but those aren’t the tornadoes Michaud wants to “control and exploit.” Today the inventor won a grant through the Thiel Foundation’s “revolutionary” Breakout Labs to develop power-generating twisters.

The Toronto Star reports:

[B]y today’s measure, Michaud’s idea is the definition of radical. Through his company AVEtec — the AVE standing for “atmospheric vortex engine” — the long-term plan is to take waste heat from a thermal power plant or industrial facility and use it to create a controllable twister that can generate electricity.

Here’s how it works: Waste heat is blown at an angle into a large circular structure, creating a flow of spinning hot air. We all know heat travels upward and as it does it spins itself into a rising vortex.

The higher the twister grows, the greater the temperature differential between top and bottom, creating stronger and stronger convective forces that act like fuel for the vortex, eventually allowing it to take on a life of its own.

The result is that hot air initially blown into the bottom of the structure starts getting sucked in so forcefully that it spins electricity-generating turbines installed at the base …

Given the destructive history of naturally formed tornadoes, many people might be freaked out by the thought of having man-made tornadoes intentionally scattered near cities and power plants.

Michaud assured that his twisters are much safer to operate and control than, say, a nuclear plant. And because they’re fuelled by the waste heat that’s initially supplied, all the operator has to do is throttle back or cut off that heat to weaken or stop the vortex.

True to its self-proclaimed radical spirit, Breakout Labs has also backed meat and leather 3D printing from Modern Meadow. Essentially it funds magic.

So hey, is anyone out there working on a protective forcefield for cyclists …?

Susie Cagle writes and draws news for Grist. She also writes and draws tweets for

Twitter

.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Original post: 

Tiny twisters could power your town — someday

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Tiny twisters could power your town — someday