Evidence? I just went through the AQA combined science specification, which I teach, and made it about 9-0. Unless you’re including things like units, which would be ridiculous. 2 Flemings, Darwin, Woese, Mendeleev, Chadwick, Bohr, Newton, Linnaeus
Replying to @TheBarrenNorth @Mikeachim
I guess, but it’ll need to be removed in order to place new turbines in the same place, right? And then new concrete to replace it? If it can be recycled in situ like someone else suggested then that seems awesome.
Replying to @Mikeachim
I don’t know to what extent concrete would be reusable in that way. Or whether it can be removed and recycled in any way. I have the impression that the embedded concrete in these things dwarfs all these other recycling efforts, sadly.
Replying to @Mikeachim
I wonder about the concrete that anchors them in place. Is that significant? Is it included in this analysis?
Replying to @AdamBlackmore
Just try being a bit less critical of Larin than your stand-in. Never heard a Solent commentator be less supportive of saints.
Replying to @KirstieMAllsopp
Don’t need to follow you to know you hardly ever do anything ambassadorial for KBT. Can see your tweets. Don’t see point of B, there’s a wider world than twitter.
Replying to @SNCFVoyageurs
@SNCFVoyageurs our sleeper from Paris to Perpignan on July 25th was delayed 2 hrs - think we should get some refund, but the form through your app doesn’t seem to work. Please advise.
Replying to @KirstieMAllsopp
Aren’t you meant to be an ambassador for Keep Britain Tidy? Don’t see you mentioning them much.
Replying to @docbrownchem
Great, more questions like that needed as it’s difficult to generate practice versions and hard to find any published. Some that incorporated calculation of empirical formulae and/or some bits of chemical analysis would also be useful. Thanks!
