Pics that make you smile

today has been dry but unfortunately we have more rain coming apparently, it was still dripping 12 hours after the rain finished, got absolutely soaked, not sure but it may be a side effect of a huge hailstorm that ripped through a few weeks ago, may have some busted tiles
 
There is a excuse to buy a quadcopter. tile inspection.
Danish houses must also have a sub roof / vapor barrier it roofs and exterior walls, which should also catch some fluids the tiles on the roof did not catch.
Actually new houses here get pressure tested to see if then fulfill building codes. as i recall the the loss of air thru vapor barrier on the whole house cant be more than 1 L/s for every SqM
This is tested both by pressurizing the house, but also creating a vacum inside it.

wCs3oBrNnpSpVz_b6pIQJD1qBOjRL4zYPHn1opA1l0hNrXFOl93sU9xXx26H8LvzE9Mah-TPe6weMPprk3sEfC1GYbwKRKQDmB50-IDLmmiTXxxp_zYeH1WuhqTgod1hc3LdvPcV3fNlVyw


The vapor barrier go up on the inside of insulation,,,,, which are of course a must up here, and as far as i know insulation must be at least 200 mm thick.
The vapor barrier are pretty much just plastic.
damp.jpg


The sub roof go up on the outside, just below the tiles or whatever you have for a roof,,,,, you some times install anti flutter springs on this to keep it tight in high winds.
If my memory serve me right every 6 tile in a row on the roof must be secured mechanically / we use a nifty little spring steel contraption that attach to the tile and the horizontal wood they rest on.
Helping my sisters old husband build their roof, we doubled up on those clamps on the tiles, just to make damn sure

Roofoil150_husbillede-1.jpg


I assume you guys down there at least want to keep the heat out of your homes, cold are probably not a issue like up here.


There have been cases where houses have been build too airtight, and so a bathroom ventilator or something can make a vacuum in the house,,,,, this is of course also no good, there have to be a little ventilation.
 
Last edited:
CO2 absorption by living matter such as trees can not work to remove CO2 in the long term. Every living thing will eventually die. After it dies it decomposes and that decomposition releases CO2 back into the atmosphere. The fires only sped up the re-release of CO2 from that vegetation. 5,000 years from now all that CO2 would have been released back into the atmosphere. The fire just sped up the process.
That is not quite true, all our fossil fuels were created by plants storing CO2 permanently, and just a change in land use from desert to rainforest can store a lot of CO2 even though it is being continually recycled through generations of trees, as long as it stays new rainforest then there is a lot of CO2 "locked up".

However, counting land use change for your emissions targets is not useful for sorting the problem, since you can only do it once and you are still emitting the same amount of CO2. As was made clear in the podcasts I linked to, Australia has completely failed in its responsibilities; if you remove the red (change in land use) from the graph then Australia has done nothing but increase emissions throughout the 30 years it has been committed to reducing them:

251%20figure%203%20Australia%20emissions%20by%20sector%20to%202018.jpg


And I don't see any reasonable excuses, back in the 1970s, the UK was built on coal and used more than Australia, but our governments listened to the science and now our coal use is close to zero, we are back to CO2 emissions last seen in the 1850s, today I see that while Queensland electricity is almost entirely coal:
1581327339052.png

Great Britain is 17% fossil fuel:
1581328290726.png

And the Orkney islands, which we use as a test bed for new technologies has the cleanest electricity in the world:
1581327479910.png

All achieved with little cost other than time. Time is something that Australia no longer has, to catch up is going to be very costly, and to not catch up is going to be even more costly, apart from struggling with the heat and floods, in 10 years time it won't just be the EU that does this:

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Commission plans a carbon border tax aimed at shielding European steel producers and other energy-intensive industries against cheaper imports from countries with less strict climate policies.

The package will include a proposed “carbon border adjustment mechanism” for selected sectors to be introduced by 2021, according to a leaked Commission document, although design and feasibility details are still being worked out.
 
Last edited:
this is the ground floor, three bedrooms upstairs have water soaked carpets and it has run down from there and taken out the ceiling, going to be a big one I think

That sucks, even with insurance, it's still a pain.

Everything is concrete here. We got our entire roof waterproofed 1.5 years back with a latex polymer. Still got a minor leak here and there last monsoon.
 
There have been cases where houses have been build too airtight, and so a bathroom ventilator or something can make a vacuum in the house,,,,, this is of course also no good, there have to be a little ventilation.
I'm surprised nobody has suffocated yet!
There also has to be reasonable ventilation to avoid moisture build up.
 
Yes of course, but first it must be proven it is not bad house design or building that it the reason for heat loss.
Then you of course open up with passive and active ventilation, ( vents over stove in kitchen - vents in bathroom ) and nowadays it seem like all windows come with passive ventilation in the frame.

I also assume much of this are automated, cuz i cant see how modern people are supposed to keep track on what vents they have opened and why.
In this block where i live there is a exhaust fan on the bathroom ventilation, cuz i can hear that kick in when i take a bath, just too bad for the people living above me cuz its just 1 fan up there near the roof ridge line.
But its loud enough that i can hear it 1 floor below ( thru the vent in my bathroom, fortunately for the people above me its not so loud i can hear it in my hallway or kitchen, still as i am a nice considerate guy i avoid taking very early or late baths.

be a headache


It can be for sure if the wrong things start to grow in the moisture, it can even get deadly.
 
In this block where i live there is a exhaust fan on the bathroom
If I had one of those then my first task would be to disconnect it, how can you have a relaxing bath with a noisy fan in the room!

It can be for sure if the wrong things start to grow in the moisture, it can even get deadly.
Yes, that is a very good use for fans, as many as possible and as big as possible until it dries out 100%. To dry things out you need air movement in every room, if you don't do it fast enough then you have big problems even with insurance, do it fast and most things can be saved, especially when it is reasonably clean rain water that caused the problem.
 
@jokiin You probably have done the research and acted already, but if not look up what to do after a flood. Photos, books, and paper goods are time-critical items as to saving from the water. Special techniques for each of those give best results. A wet/dry shop-vac is a good start on carpets. Hate to hear of the damage :(

Phil
 
That is not quite true, all our fossil fuels were created by plants storing CO2 permanently, and just a change in land use from desert to rainforest can store a lot of CO2 even though it is being continually recycled through generations of trees, as long as it stays new rainforest then there is a lot of CO2 "locked up".
When plant matter is buried the CO2 is encapsulated and if we are lucky turns into petroleum.

I have no idea what the answer is to this question: How do trees compare to tall grasses in the ability to capture CO2 over time? The grasses rot each spring. The trees do not. Rotting grass (and tree) matter increases organic matter in the soil but also releases CO2. Do trees or tall grasses really remove more atmospheric CO2 over a few centuries?
 
When plant matter is buried the CO2 is encapsulated and if we are lucky turns into petroleum.

I have no idea what the answer is to this question: How do trees compare to tall grasses in the ability to capture CO2 over time? The grasses rot each spring. The trees do not. Rotting grass (and tree) matter increases organic matter in the soil but also releases CO2. Do trees or tall grasses really remove more atmospheric CO2 over a few centuries?
The making of petroleum takes tens of millions of years, that is not a practical timescale!

If you weigh your grass, and then weigh your trees then I think you have the answer to your question, although in some places the grasses turn into peat bogs instead of rotting, in which case a vast amount of carbon gets stored over time and then the grasses will easily outperform the trees.

However, this is not the answer to the climate change problem, the only realistic answer is to stop burning the fossil fuels, something that is perfectly possible to do and in many places economically sensible even if you ignore the cost of climate change. Norway generates electricity almost entirely from water power, it is cheaper for them than fossil fuels, Iceland generates their electricity from geothermal power, again cheaper than fossil fuel, for UK and Denmark wind power is the biggest electricity source, again cheaper than coal. China has 130 gigawatts of solar panels, 4x the power Australia uses, France runs mainly on nuclear power, UK has almost got tidal power to the mass production stage. So plenty of choices for zero CO2 power, yet Australia sticks to the dirtiest of fossil fuels and subsidies it to make sure nobody invests in cheaper alternatives!

The IMF estimates that annual energy subsidies in Australia total $29 billion, representing 2.3 per cent of Australian GDP. On a per capita basis, Australian fossil fuel subsidies amount to $1,198 per person.
 
Grass are one of the most successful plants, there are people here extracting protein from in instead of soy oil, that get planted instead of burned rain forest.
It is not yet in full scale but look promising, next to find something to replace our beloved palm oil, which are also the cause of a lot of grief for the lovers of a green / blue earth.
 
I have occasionally received complaints on inflammatory political comments and images on the forum. This thread occasionally goes down that path as well. Since there are many other places on the internet to have political discussions, I am implementing a rule to not allow inflammatory political comments or imagery.

Rule # 9 on the forum now reads: "Since this an international forum, "bashing" of any nation, people, individuals, ethnic groups, race or minorities is prohibited (even your own country). This includes any insulting imagery of any people(s) or nation. Inflammatory political comments and imagery is also not allowed on the forum."

 
Inflammatory political comments and imagery is also not allowed on the forum."
Could you give some generic examples of inflammatory comments?

Something like??
Politician A is an idiot because...
Politician B is violating rights when he...

The problem for me is "inflammatory" comments will depend on who hears it. Some general examples of what to avoid would help everyone to stay within the guidelines intention.
 
Any negative comments or insults regarding a politician, political party or political philosophy will be deleted. Both the examples you listed above would qualify.

That being said if the political discussion relates to dash cams (government regulations on cams, political stance, legal items) that is fine even if a strong point of view is taken.

Best bet is to avoid off topic political discussions at all since the primary purpose of the forum is dash cams.
 
I might need a slap on the wrist in the future, thinking about the like Danish have for cartoons illustrations of events or persons. really for us nothing are sacret, and it is rare it is done with a intent to hurt anyone.
If i inadvertently insult anyone i assume people would say ( PM me ) , if so i will gladly remove / edit a post of mine, and so not require administrator intervention.
I understand some people have thin skin in regard to some things, i have too though it seem mine are in areas pretty much disregarded by the rest of the world.
I have also at times commented on some one who in my perspective using a harsh wording in a comment, you can still speak your mind and be polite.
Regarding the environmental debate i see no need to debate the problems, i would much rather talk about the solutions ( technical or cultural ) people / nations come up with.

I just read in the news that the politicians here like for electrical cars to drive over toll bridges for free or at least with a significant discount,,,,, and i think thats a okay idea,,, probably not one that will make sales of EV cars explode here, but still.
 
I just read in the news that the politicians here like for electrical cars to drive over toll bridges for free or at least with a significant discount,,,,, and i think thats a okay idea,,, probably not one that will make sales of EV cars explode here, but still.
I guess with the new rules, I can't point out that politicians are the most likely people to have a new electric car and so it is expected that they would like free tolls for themselves while the poorer people with older cars have to pay! Does seem like a "negative comment" about politicians?

I think our new PM has banned schemes like that and has sorted the problem by simply banning the sale of new fossil fueled cars, including hybrids, although not immediately. Now that is a positive comment so must be OK ... except some people, especially the climate deniers, are bound to see it as a negative!
 
O no the Danish ministers drive large Audi and BMW & MERC, even bulletproof models if you are one of the "high" ministers, but of course they don't have to pay the high taxes, and if they are lucky they even get a driver.
Some years ago EV cars was heavily subsidized so suddenly you saw a lot less big German cars and a lot of Teslas, and yes IMO those should have been lesser subsidized and the small "affordable" EV cars should have been the dirt cheap ones.
Cuz the people buying Teslas back then, well if it wasent cuz they was trending and a lot cheaper, they would have gone for the big German cars and gladly paid upwards of 2X the price of a Tesla back then.
i think they put a last sale date on gas cars here too, but i doubt they can keep to that deadline, it is pretty rare they keep to any deadline here.

Our parliament are also more or less "fenced" in now, you can not get near it with a car or truck, so much for being in solidarity with the population.
Though someone did throw a molotow ****tail at a door on the parliament a few days ago, but it barely got smoke damage.

If i was MP i would not drive a LUX car and have a driver, with what they ask of the rest of uss that's just an outrage in my book, it would have to be public transport for me.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
DashcamDPR Off Topic 4
DrekiTech Off Topic 2
Back
Top