When will people stop wasting helium?

alpha particles, my bad
i am a biologist

Can't they recycle it?
Helium isn't used as an evaporative coolant right?
and even it was used as an evaporative coolant, surely you could recapture most of it...

Helium is a worthless gas for worthless industries.

Wouldn't Hydrogen just fuck up your shit? I mean, the nucleus is magnetically active, after all.

*whistles the theme of UP*

MRIs are overused and honestly not every single hospital needs one but theyre all buying it

The problem is even the best reclaimers only get ~90% of boil off. You do the math, youre talking ~50% after ~6 cycles of reclaiming.

hydrogen is no more a hazard than
natural gas in your kitchen, but
people are afraid of it, like this faggot:

Says the person who never had a family member in pain that was only dx because of an mri.

>muh appeals to emotion!

Most hospital tests are regularly over used by a long way.

There's no substantial evidence of sabotage. It's more likely human error, due to the Nazis insisting of keeping to a strict timetable, without understanding that it's better to be safe than sorry when working with hydrogen airships.

If they use it for the purpose they paid for, it's not waste. It's consumption. There's a difference.

Once again, the classic autistic mistake: When people spend money and resources on things THEY want, instead of things YOU want, it's "waste".

You don't own the helium. You have nothing to complain about.

We do have a helium shortage though don't we ? People should be using it a bit more responsibly.

>People should be using it a bit more responsibly.
Not according to the market price. If we needed to be more responsible with it, people would invest in stockpiling it and prices would go up. Then people would buy less of it to put into balloons.

Apparently no one wants to invest in helium storages to profit from the alleged coming scarcity, which reveals that no one really believes it's worth it.

So why should anyone stop enjoying the balloons they paid for?

>Not according to the market price.
The most overrated "argument" in the world. The "hand of the free market" is not in any sense omniscient or even logical.

with that shit

>So why should anyone stop enjoying the balloons they paid for?
If the sales are gonna get regulated and the supply will be tightened for entertainmental purposes, then eventually they will get effected.
When you get water shortage, you don't just throw a supersoaker party and waste everything, you stockpile. And thats what we should be doing with Helium before we regret it

Helium isn't really as scarce as most people seem to think it is.
Still, it would be nice to see the really big consumers like MRI machines trying to reclaim some of their losses.

Helium has no objective value. It's value is derived from the usefulness to people. This usefulness is not objective either, it is measured by the subjective willingness to trade it against other value.

You make it sound like I'm talking about some supernatural force or something. That just shows how moronic and uneducated you are. If we really had a helium shortage coming and balloon use was really underpriced, people would buy the helium and stockpile it so they can sell it later to the people with more valuable uses.

Instead, we see the price we have. Why? Because storage costs money and helium is not worth more than it costs at this time.

You also have to apply time discounting, a balloon now is worth more than an MRI in 1000 years because no one knows what shit will happen between now and then.

>When you get water shortage, you don't just throw a supersoaker party and waste everything, you stockpile
Except the investors don't stockpile until the price goes up, so your shortage theory can't be true.

>Helium has no objective value.
Nothing has any objective value. Simply pointing to the market and saying "nuh-uh, the market disagrees" is being a brainwashed moron. The market is not some end-all-be-all to decision making, and from what I can tell you brought it up for exactly no reason. If it were up to the free market you'd still be breathing lead, you dolt.

You fucking sperg, literally no one cares

Go masturbate with your invisible hand instead of bringing it up as if it's supposed to mean literally anything.

Yes, nothing has objective value, which is why we use market prices instead. Are you retarded or something?

>If it were up to the free market you'd still be breathing lead, you dolt.
Except pollution is an externality, while using the resources you paid for is not. No one is talking about helium poisoning the environment, it's completely harmelss. People here are talking about "waste" and "shortage", which is a fundamental misunderstanding of what resources are and why they are priced the way they are.

Stop talking about prices retard, they are not the indicator of if theres a shortage of danger of obtaining it, it's simply an indicator of demand.

I'm saying that Helium will be wasted faster and it will be much harder to obtain it in near future and it's used it many engineering and medical applications. I'm just saying that it should be used more responsibly, I don't even know why you're opposing to that.

Maybe this is dumb of me, but I thought helium was the second most abundant element in the universe? Is it really that rare?

It's more rare on earth than in the universe as a whole.

Yes prices are an indicator of whether there's a danger of shortage because if there was investors would stockpile. Unless economic illiterates such as yourself lobby governments to screw everything up with price fixing and bans.

>I'm just saying that it should be used more responsibly, I don't even know why you're opposing to that.
Because it is being used excatly as responsibly as it should be. It is worth exactly what people pay for it.

Is a helium balloon worthless? No, it is worth the cost to people or else they wouldn't pay for it. That IS responsible.

>Yes, nothing has objective value, which is why we use market prices instead. Are you retarded or something?
Except market prices are not the only thing we use to judge value. You have to have a reason for bringing it up besides your rinky-dink economics education.

Do you really have such a one-track mind that when anything concerning "value" is brought up you immediately jump to muh supply and demand?

>Except pollution is an externality, while using the resources you paid for is not.
Good job on the embarrassing attempt to obfuscate. Impending helium shortages are also an externality, and I can rephrase "pollution" to "using the resources you paid for" as well. Are you actually stupid enough to think you made a point here, or are you just that disingenuous?

> "waste" and "shortage", which is a fundamental misunderstanding of what resources are
Where's the misunderstanding, pray-tell? Are you implying that it's impossible to run out of something you would call a resource?

>why they are priced the way they are.
Nobody's interested in the price except you, you god damn monkey. They're priced the way they are because society lacks information and foresight.

>Do you really have such a one-track mind that when anything concerning "value" is brought up you immediately jump to muh supply and demand?
It's the only objective way to value a resource like helium. You have offered no alternative except for fluff words and emotive language. What, according to you, should be the price of a helium balloon? 20 US dollars? $1000? $10 trillion? Surely at some point even a moron like you would agree that the marginal value of a quantity of helium isn't infinite?

>Impending helium shortages are also an externality, and I can rephrase "pollution" to "using the resources you paid for" as well.
That's just plain wrong, and it shows you just don't know what these words mean at all.

>Are you implying that it's impossible to run out of something you would call a resource?
We will run out of all resources in the very long run. That's not the point at all. The question is how we want to use the resources we have, what for, and when. You say that helium balloons are "waste". But the people who buy them disagree. Who is objectively right? Well, if there was a more useful application of helium, other people would pay more for it than the people who buy helium balloons. Then the people who buy helium balloons would settle for a substitute. But this is not happening? Why is it not happening? Because the helium just isn't worth that much, and therefore it's not "waste" to derive joy from floating balloons.

>They're priced the way they are because society lacks information and foresight.
As judged by you, a random idiot on the internet who doesn't know shit about economics. Yeah right.

value is an arbitrary subjective thing
aka a meaningless concept

There is no shortage of helium
There is no impending shortage of helium
Helium can be replaced in all current uses if needed

>You have offered no alternative except for fluff words and emotive language.
The alternative is education. Simply pointing to the market and saying "that's the way it SHOULD be" is the height of insanity. The market does NOT have any normative prescription, it is simply a measure of what society values. Again, go choke on lead with this nonsense.

>That's just plain wrong, and it shows you just don't know what these words mean at all.
Not an argument, friend. Good to know you admit you have nothing to say for your retarded point.

>We will run out of all resources in the very long run.
We're not going to run out of water or energy for as long as human society could conceivably exist. Helium, on the other hand, can be gone in a couple of decades. It's a matter of degrees, something an absolutist like you apparently can't understand.

>Why is it not happening? Because the helium just isn't worth that much
Your whole rambling here is what's called a tautology. "The price is low because nobody values it". Yeah, no shit Sherlock, that's been obvious without your input. When we're talking about why the price is low, we're looking for actual reasons. Maybe people don't actually KNOW the thing they're using to fill balloons is the thing that could allow them an early cancer diagnosis further down the line.

>As judged by you, a random idiot on the internet who doesn't know shit about economics. Yeah right.
Have you actually justified this statement at any point whatsoever, besides sperging about how I supposedly don't understand the terms you're using?

>value is an arbitrary subjective thing
It's hardly arbitrary. It's based directly on human desires.

>aka a meaningless concept
Value is the only thing that has meaning. You came to this statement by evaluating the meaning of the concept.

>There is no shortage of helium
>There is no impending shortage of helium
>Helium can be replaced in all current uses if needed
>[citation needed]

Hello friend! How is helium produced and why should we worry about conserving it? I read once that the Hindenburg was lifted by hydrogen because at the time, the US controlled most of the worlds helium supply and weren't trading it with the Gnatsies. Is it only naturally occurring and can it not be fabricated?

>The market does NOT have any normative prescription, it is simply a measure of what society values.
Thanks for making my point. Society values helium balloons at market price.

>Not an argument, friend.
Actually, it is. I mean it, look up what an externality is. You like education, right? Educate yourself.

>Helium, on the other hand, can be gone in a couple of decades.
No, because there are still quantities underground, substitutes to be developed, and when it becomes actually more scarce, market prices will go up and balloons will become more expensive. If you think this will happen sooner than most informed people, you can make money by investing in stockpiles now.

>Maybe people don't actually KNOW the thing they're using to fill balloons is the thing that could allow them an early cancer diagnosis further down the line.
Of course people know this. For example, you know this. If you thought it was really relevant, you could buy helium now and stockpile it for later medical use, making money off it. Maybe you have no money to invest, but professional investors sure as hell know about this too.

>Have you actually justified this statement at any point whatsoever, besides sperging about how I supposedly don't understand the terms you're using?
You have not yet given an alternative to market prices, and you have not yet told us what a helium balloon "should" cost in your world, let alone why. You're basically telling us you know better what helium is worth than the people who actually buy and sell it, and you've provided nothing to back that up.

Helium is obtained mostly as a by-product of the natural gas industry. It is not so much produced as it is dug up from underground. Helium is a very stable unreactive element. It can be created through radioactive decay and fusion, bu t most of what we have is natural reserves.

>Thanks for making my point. Society values helium balloons at market price.
Your point is not a point. It is the opposite of a point.

You are simply describing the current situation and declaring that this is the way things SHOULD be. It is the ultimate anti-thought. You're ridding your worldview of any normative prescription and turning yourself into a literal slave to "muh free market". Going by your infantile argumentation, if this were the seventies and there's still lead paint and asbestos fucking everywhere, your opinion on it is that "that's what the invisible hand decided, therefore it's right". Or are you going to disagree with my assessment?

>Actually, it is. I mean it, look up what an externality is. You like education, right? Educate yourself.
I know what it is, friend. Again, acting like I don't know only serves to show that you have no point to even make. If you want to tell me I'm wrong on something, don't just assert it but actually prove it.

>No
Do you have any facts to back that up? I said "CAN", not "WILL". There's wisdom in caution.

>and when it becomes actually more scarce, market prices will go up and balloons will become more expensive
When it actually becomes more scarce, we'll have fewer early diagnoses of life threatening diseases.

>Of course people know this.
Sure. Everyone knew asbestos and lead were fucking poison too, they just liked their paint so much they didn't care about bleeding lungs and brain damage. Silly me.

>You have not yet given an alternative to market prices
That's because I don't have to. I never implied a government should fix prices or anything of the sort. What I said is that your referral to the market as a normative force is fucking asinine. The way the market is now is not necessarily the way it SHOULD be. If you disagree, again, choke on lead.

>Helium is obtained mostly as a by-product of the natural gas industry. It is not so much produced as it is dug up from underground. Helium is a very stable unreactive element. It can be created through radioactive decay and fusion, bu t most of what we have is natural reserves.

and those natural reserves are the by-products of underground radioactive decay...

fwiw, the Iranians are sitting on a gas field that also happens to be a huge, if not the hugest source of helium in the world. WTF do you think that implies, and how does it relate to demonization of Iran by western governments?

>When it actually becomes more scarce, we'll have fewer early diagnoses of life threatening diseases.
Perhaps. Perhaps not. You don't actually know that because you don't know all the substitutes that will be developed.

But it doesn't matter anyway because we don't care infinitely much about future life expectancy. That's why we use time discounting when we make decisions. A balloon now is worth more than a potentially life-saving diagnosis in 2200.
>I know what it is, friend.
No, you don't. You're embarrassing yourself by pretending otherwise.

>>You have not yet given an alternative to market prices
>That's because I don't have to.
Then go fuck yourself with your idiotic empty rhetoric. You have not even attempted to make an argument how we should actually behave and why.

Hey, thanks for ignoring my point about your worldview. I'll just ask you again so you can ignore it some more.

You are simply describing the current situation and declaring that this is the way things SHOULD be. It is the ultimate anti-thought. You're ridding your worldview of any normative prescription and turning yourself into a literal slave to "muh free market". Going by your infantile argumentation, if this were the seventies and there's still lead paint and asbestos fucking everywhere, your opinion on it is that "that's what the invisible hand decided, therefore it's right". Are you going to disagree with my assessment?

>Perhaps. Perhaps not. You don't actually know that because you don't know all the substitutes that will be developed.
I don't know, but I know there's a possibility of it running out, and there is no substitute for cooling MRI machines yet. You're just assuming everything will be hunky dory for no reason.

>No, you don't. You're embarrassing yourself by pretending otherwise.
'Kay. Whenever you have an actual point to make besides unsubstantiated assertions, you're free to do so.

>But it doesn't matter anyway because we don't care infinitely much about future life expectancy...
And it didn't matter in the 70's because the paint was just so much cheaper to make using lead.

>Then go fuck yourself with your idiotic empty rhetoric. You have not even attempted to make an argument how we should actuy behave and why.
What we should do is use less helium for frivolous nonsense. This is the point of the thread. How we get there is at the very least by educating people on its uses, as I pointed out a couple of posts ago.

Besides, I don't know where you get the idea that in order to point out that something is wrong, I immediately have to come up with a perfect policy solution.

> and why
For the thirteenth time, because MRI's are fucking magic.

>lead, asbestos
The negative externalities were not known beforehand. When they became known, there was regulation.

But a helium shortage isn't even an externality. It just means helium becomes more expensive. And people know the alternative uses, so if it were true that a shortage is likely, and the alternative uses were really so much more valuable, then it would be profitable to invest in stockpiles. Of course a stockpile costs storage money and you have to apply time discounting.

I really don't know what your problem is here. The most charitable view I can come up with is that you think people should apply less time discounting than they actually are, or perhaps that everybody except you is an idiot and therefore only you know what helium is really worth, and unfortunately you're not in a position to invest in it yourself. I think that's delusional arrogance, but okay.

>It just means helium becomes more expensive.
It "just" means there's less helium available for medicine. It "just" means people are going to die because of it.

Do you honestly think the only possible form of externality is directly harmful inhalant?

>I really don't know what your problem is here. The most charitable view I can come up with is that you think people should apply less time discounting than they actually are, or perhaps that everybody except you is an idiot and therefore only you know what helium is really worth, and unfortunately you're not in a position to invest in it yourself. I think that's delusional arrogance, but okay.
My problem is the entirety of your slave-to-the-market posts in this thread. I pointed this out several times already. I find this servile groveling to the status quo to be nothing short of repugnant. If you want to make arguments about why helium is not ACTUALLY as valuable as the thread posits, those arguments are welcome, but simply pointing to the fact that the price is low is the trench of intellect.

It's like saying that the fact that humanity's carbon footprint keeps rising and making a whole lot of money in the fossil fuel and coal industries is an indication that global warming is not really a thing or a threat.

>The negative externalities were not known beforehand. When they became known, there was regulation.
So now you're dropping the "free market" shtick. Good, the entirety of your posts in this thread are null and void because the market DOES NOT in fact indicate a normative prescription as all your frivolous posts suggested. I'm out.

>slave-to-the-market
>servile groveling
>repugnant
And here we have your problem, emotions instead of rational thought.

>It "just" means people are going to die because of it.
People are also going to die if you don't donate all your money to charity. So what? We don't care infinitely much if people die.

>If you want to make arguments about why helium is not ACTUALLY as valuable as the thread posits
First of all, you have outright refused to say how valuable you think helium should be, so you're not actually positing it at all.

Second, I already mentioned a multitude of points:
1) We apply time discounting when we talk about future uses, for a variety of rational and inevitable reasons.
2) Storage costs money.
3) When prices go up, substitutes may arise that you don't anticipate and more of the helium underground may be uncovered.
4) People actually value their balloons. This doesn't mean that helium isn't valuable, it can mean that helium balloons are more valuable than you give them credit for (to other people).
5) Investors can invest in stockpiles, but don't. If you were rational, that would tell you something.