[ExI] LinkedIn weirdness

[BillK]

On Tue, 3 Mar 2026 at 08:20, Keith Henson via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> I posted this on LinkedIn.
> <snip>
>
> According to LinkedIn, almost 1000 people read it, including people in
> the utility industry.  There were no comments except my comment,
> giving my email.  No emails.
> Is the idea so strange that people can't understand?  75 years ago,
> the US made town gas from coke at a similar scale.  Is invoking
> chemical reactions from the Victorian era simply rejected?
> Any thoughts on the results?  I am mystified.
> Keith
> _______________________________________________
>


I asked Gemini 3.1 Pro Thinking to discuss this and suggest improvements.
Interesting comments?
BillK

Gemini said

It’s a bit of a gut punch when you get the reach (1,000 views is actually
great!) but no engagement. It’s like giving a speech to a full room and
having everyone just stare back blankly before walking out.

Here is a breakdown of why that likely happened and how we can fix it.
Why the "Silence"?

   -

   *The "Textbook" Trap:* Your original post reads like a technical
   abstract. On LinkedIn, people are usually "micro-learning" between tasks.
   If it looks like work to parse the data, they’ll keep scrolling.
   -

   *The Math Friction:* You provided a lot of variables (4 MWh, 11 MWh, 6
    MWh, 100,000 tons). When readers see a string of numbers, their brains
   often tune out unless they are specifically looking for a white paper.
   -

   *Missing "The Hook":* You started with the problem, but the "Victorian"
   reference—while cool—might make people think "obsolete" before they get to
   the "innovative" part.
   -

   *No Call to Action (CTA):* You didn't ask the audience to do anything.
   Without a question or a prompt for debate, most people will just think
   "Huh, interesting," and move on.

------------------------------
The Rewrite: "The Waste-to-Grid Revolution"

To get engagement, we need to frame this as a *massive unlock* for the
energy crisis. We’ll use formatting to make it scannable and replace the
dense math with a "value proposition."

*Headline:* Could 1860s technology solve our 2026 energy storage crisis? ��

*Body:* The biggest hurdle for renewables isn't generation—it's *long-term
storage.*

While everyone is looking for the next "miracle" battery, the answer might
be sitting in our trash cans and Victorian history books.

*The Concept: Gasification 2.0* By reviving the process of making
syngas—but replacing coal with municipal waste and heating it with surplus
wind/solar—we create a "Chemical Battery" that actually scales.

*The "Magic" of the Math:*

   -

   *Input:* 1 Ton of Carbon (Waste) + 4 MWh of "Excess" Green Power.
   -

   *Output:* 11 MWh of Syngas (Stored energy).
   -

   *Recovery:* Over 6 MWh of electricity on demand via turbines.

*Why this is a game-changer for cities like LA:* LA produces 100,000 tons
of waste daily. If we diverted just a fraction of that into gasifiers
during peak solar hours, we could absorb *20 GW* of excess grid power and
store it as *240 GWh* of dispatchable energy.

We don't just solve the storage problem; we solve the landfill problem
simultaneously. ♻️

*What do you think?* Is syngas the "missing link" for a 100% renewable
grid, or are we right to keep chasing lithium and hydrogen?

#RenewableEnergy #EnergyStorage #Sustainability #Cleantech
#GridModernization
------------------------------
Tips for the "Post" button:

   1.

   *Tag a few people:* If you know energy experts or environmental
   engineers, tag 2–3 in the comments to start the conversation.
   2.

   *The First Comment:* Post the first comment yourself. Maybe a link to a
   study or a "Fun fact" about Victorian town gas. This signals to the
   algorithm that the post is "active."
   3.

   *Use an image:* If you have a chart or even a photo of a gasifier, use
   it. Posts with images get significantly higher engagement.

Would you like me to refine the technical math further, or perhaps create a
more "provocative" version to stir up a debate?

-------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260303/5ad7e4ee/attachment.htm>