Arvind P. Ravikumar

@arvindpawan1

Asst Prof studying sustainable energy development and climate policy around the world. Editor , Former , grad.

Philadelphia, PA
Vrijeme pridruživanja: rujan 2014.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @arvindpawan1

Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @arvindpawan1

  1. Prikvačeni tweet
    14. sij

    🚨New Paper Alert🚨In a first study of this kind, we *empirically* show that leak detection and repair programs - a common methane policy tool - are indeed effective at reducing emissions over many years of implementation. We also found a few surprises. 1/

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  2. This is HUGE because it gives us a glimpse into the challenge ahead when it comes to aggressive climate policy. Any deep decarbonization plan without organized labor - with major stake in large fossil energy infrastructure projects - on board is on very shaky ground.

    Poništi
  3. It's quite ridiculous that you need to get selected through an application process even to attend NSF's CAREER proposal workshop. We need an order of magnitude more research funding at NSF & other agencies.

    Poništi
  4. This is preposterous - we have a climate crisis because of a century of unabated carbon emissions from the world's advanced economies. This is why I object when others assert that we shouldn't shy away from discussing population in the climate context. There are better ways.

    Poništi
  5. 4. velj

    At what magnification do you have your word document when writing a manuscript draft?

    Poništi
  6. 4. velj

    In a state with significant gas resources & a divided government, debates around new fossil infrastructure like this cracker plant are common. But can we at least agree that it makes no sense to give $1.6 BILLION+ subsidy for a fossil behemoth like Shell?

    Poništi
  7. 4. velj

    My academic version (and a bad practice): "Never write a script for a thing that can done from the command line".

    Poništi
  8. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    4. velj

    Never use an app for a thing that can be done without an app.

    Poništi
  9. 3. velj

    Everyone's correctly suggesting that this would further tank energy prices. But even without the impact of coronavirus, there is going to be a glut of LNG in the global market based on pace of new export facilities being built (without corresponding growth in import terminals).

    Poništi
  10. 1. velj

    For more, see this tweet & the linked thread on a recent paper:

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  11. 1. velj

    We should talk about fixing methane "emissions" instead of just methane "leaks". While the scientific community often uses the terms interchangeably, it matters a *huge* deal for regulation. This one word will determine policy's effectiveness.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  12. 1. velj

    This is *exactly* how I feel about writing and research, in general. Every task seems like a daunting and insurmountable wall until you dismantle it, brick by small brick (or sometimes, a mild wind). This is very memorably put.

    Poništi
  13. 1. velj

    This twete brought to you by wasting an hour of my time wondering why numbers were off by a factor of 1.0347 (298.15/288.15).

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  14. 1. velj

    Being an academic collaborating with industry and government agencies is just struggling to convert greenhouse gas mass units to volume units until you die. Like, why tf are industry standards at 15 C while STP is at 25 C? Aaarrgghh!

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  15. 30. sij

    This is objectively wrong. If anything, most countries are acting like the “everything is fine” meme. Emissions are still going *up*. No disrespect to anyone but this debate comes off as more about projecting an image of ‘level headed centrist’ than about any actual crisis.

    Poništi
  16. 30. sij

    I feel like the whole RCP 8.5 as BAU is being blown out of proportion compared to the actual fraction of papers that mistakenly use the terms interchangeably. Folks discussing this are much smarter than I but this debate, to me, kinda feels like a mild case of bothsides-ism.

    Poništi
  17. 30. sij

    Tfw you read a paper and keep saying to yourself how well it’s written and how engaging it is to read the research! Definitely worthy of a kind note to the author (a little apprehensive because the author is a senior prod and not a student).

    Poništi
  18. 30. sij

    This is exactly right. Also, if you really wanted something that will last millennia, why not just build good old pyramids, like normal people? H/t

    Poništi
  19. 30. sij

    This is exactly how I thought about RCP 8.5, until the “debate” that erupted here. And based on my understanding, there seems to be a push to redefine BAU as something that’s not as extreme as RCP8.5. Sure, but that’s no consolation when even 3C would be devastating.

    Poništi
  20. 30. sij

    The Philly refinery, clearly visible from the airport, is the largest single source of pollution in the region and a potential safety hazard to the millions who live near it. This bankruptcy is ideal to repurpose the site for clean energy & not double down on fossil boondoggles.

    Poništi
  21. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    Now do tail risk. Same graph, but if, say, climate sensitivity doesn't come in at the currently assumed "most likely" value.

    Poništi

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

    Možda bi vam se svidjelo i ovo:

    ·