CrimeDad

We've got to do something about these mods, folks.

How long until you retire? If you've still got another thirty to forty years of wage slavery ahead of you then don't worry about it. Just keep contributing and make sure to get all of your employer's match, if any.

I didn't even consider that, but yes if votes can't be private then it's bad to pretend that they are. It looks like there's been some debate on the topic, but the decision was apparently to keep pretending.

Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought the issue was with the follower approval feature. Apparently on Mastodon, users have the option to review all prospective followers. With this setting enabled, no one is supposed to be able to just follow your account with a click. You have to approve each one. Pixelfed wasn't honoring this setting. I think it's a bad feature that gives anyone who uses it a false sense of security.

I don't know why, but I'm just kind of associating it with surgery or an injury or some sort of body horror scene.

Those are fair considerations. However, I think in the context of a massive cargo ship, a penalty on energy density might be worth it to avoid the risks associated with ammonia releases. Of course, a nuclear reactor powered ship would run on the highest energy density fuel and is arguably safer to operate than a ship that runs on ammonia.

Hydrogen is definetly harder to store than ammonia and it takes a lot of energy to compress or liquify it.

It takes a lot of energy to convert hydrogen to ammonia and whatever challenges there are to handling and storing hydrogen, ammonia has its own. At least a hydrogen release isn't a toxic, polluting event.

And I certainly don’t want commercial nuclear ships, because companies will just create “independent” companies that will “mysteriously” go bankrupt once a ship reaches end of life and needs to be decontaminated.

So the taxpayer would have to pay for the decomissioning costs.

Yes. Let's just get ahead of the game and nationalize shipping.

Hydrogen will leak through a latex balloon, but it is not going to leak through the steel wall of a pressure vessel. The leak risk occurs at the various fitting connections in a hydrogen system, which is overcome by using the proper fittings.

That is an interesting article, but the authors are clear that they don't know what to expect for hydrogen leakage in a developed hydrogen economy. Sure, hydrogen might be a greenhouse gas, but you can't really compare it to carbon dioxide because that's a waste product that we actively dispose of to the atmosphere. You can't really compare it to methane either because it's naturally abundant and the LEL is much higher. Relatively leaky valves and fittings are unfortunately acceptable in natural gas service. In other words, hydrogen leakage is barely tolerable, so we have no choice but to employ technology and techniques to prevent it.

It does not leak like crazy. I know because I have experience engineering and operating high pressure electrolysis, storage, and fueling systems for hydrogen. Even when it does leak, what's nice about hydrogen is that it's not toxic to humans or pollutive to the environment, unlike ammonia or fossil fuels. Hydrogen leaks are easily mitigated with proven detection and ventilation techniques.

The serious issues in the articles you linked are essentially red tape and public perception, which have to be surmountable if we're taking global warming seriously.

Why run ammonia when you can just run liquid hydrogen? Why run liquid hydrogen when you can just run a nuclear reactor?