I'd rather shut 4 computers (at least), one refrigerator, some AC and the pool heater down than trying to power all those devices with Solar+Hydrogen. Talking about renewable sources doesn't make sense when you're wasting very high quality energy for doubtful purposes in the first place.
Did you ever care to calculate your carbon footprint or your electricity bill in a few years (if the supplier can still provide so much electricity, that is)?
Yeah, right, it's not like the sun would deliver 168 PW to the Earth at any given time, while mankind "only" uses 500EJ a year. 500EJ/168 PW ~= 50 minutes worth of solar radiation would be enough to power whole mankind for a year.
Geothermal sources can really be interesting, but you need to find good ones, and still dig a few kilometers if you want to get high-quality heat and produce electricity. You don't need to dig an inch to collect solar radiation.
Would you mind explaining us what the "difference in heat between two points" is? Heck, what is the heat of a point? (hint: it's undefined) Make yourself a treat : buy yourself a good thermodynamics book and come back when you're finished.
You can write blogs, mp3 downloader/reader and basic graphical interfaces in a few (Ruby) lines. I wish I had it when I was a kid... GWBasic wasn't so glamour:-/
Yeah, but the pixel density of your camera is around 24 MP/cm, which implies that your pictures are useless at sensitivity above ISO400 because of the noise.
I also got this kind of camera (lumix FZ8). It has the best lens ever (36 mm/432 mm f2.8/3.3) and is really cheap & light thanks to the tiny sensor. At ISO100 and enough luminosity, it can compete with any $10k DSL+lens, but it's a useless crap for anything that moves too fast or is too dark. I never shoot any ISO200+ with it.
The sensor from TFA has a pixel density around 2.9MP/cm, and I'm sure you could take handheld pictures from moon craters without any noise. This could also be interesting for indoor sport events. If you shoot good pictures with it at big events, I'm sure a couple of them would pay your investment back.
"and usually use higher energy fuels than gasoline as well"
I call this bullshit. Could you please elaborate, and give us an example? With around 10kWh/l for gasoline, there's not so many "higher energy fuels" except uranium.
Even $50/gallon would still be cheap for so big an energy density. 4$/gallon is virtually free, and only takes into account extraction/distribution costs, not the real energy value of gasoline.
You know that Mozilla get paid by Google for every single request coming from the Google search integrated in Firefox, right? AFAIK, no official figures yet, but it already represents a few M$.
but the password hash is set to a single bang (!), which is impossible to match. Apparently, a Debian developer commented this ComputeHash(password) useless command two years ago. With Debian/Ubuntu, just typing "!" as root password will do!:)
I plan to buy some mini-ITX like desktop (http://linitx.com/viewproduct.php?prodid=12065) soon, and would love to try OSX86 on it.
I doubt it would work with this example (VIA processor), but does someone have any experience with a small desktop that works out of the box with OSX86?
Talking about temperature differences : 1K=1ÂC "10 degrees Celsius above absolute zero" is exactly the same as "10 degrees Kelvin above absolute zero."
So... what's the difference between a communist in the McCarthy-era government and a terrorist in the Bush-era government? Ever heard about Guantanamo or Patriot Act?
It seems like the US government always needs a vague foe (be it a with mustache in Russia or with a beard in an Afghanistan cave) to scare the population and keep it under tight control.
You seem to know a bit more about energy and be a little more reasonable than the ones that modded me Troll/Flamebait for just saying an "inconvenient truth":).
And you at least have the merit of thinking about you say, even though I don't think you realize the amount of required energy we're talking about.
- Yes we will soon be running out of oil. Be it 10, 20 or 30 years, oil will be too expensive for Joe NextGuy to fly from LA to NY. This is a good thing. Too bad we wait till we don't have any other choice before we consider decreasing our consumption.
- I didn't talk about oil running out. Just "depleted enough". Do you have any source for the 100 years you're talking about? Even Shell managers don't dare lying this much!
- Well, with a few percents increase every year, it won't be long before jets do get a decent proportion of our oil consumption.
- Too bad electricity and hydrogens aren't primary resources!
- Flying is inefficient, no matter what you use to power it. Bio-fuels are a bad and dangerous joke, especially talking about jets. And no, the amount needed would'nt be minimal. You say there's no other alternative. Yes, there is. But it involves being reasonable and stop flying to much!
- We use too many cars and too many jets. Powering them all with nukes would be yet another environmental disaster. I do prefer seeing nukes than coal power plants, but it's not a reason to put them everywhere instead of thinking a bit more , consuming less and being more responsible.
Slashdot Mirror
Kind of remove the environmental benefits, though.
When we have the possibility to produce less, better & more efficient, why on hell do we produce more and as dirty as before???
Scary comment.
I'd rather shut 4 computers (at least), one refrigerator, some AC and the pool heater down than trying to power all those devices with Solar+Hydrogen.
Talking about renewable sources doesn't make sense when you're wasting very high quality energy for doubtful purposes in the first place.
Did you ever care to calculate your carbon footprint or your electricity bill in a few years (if the supplier can still provide so much electricity, that is)?
Well, with your definition of "being right", I suppose Bush's government could deserve both peace and physics Nobel prize.
"solar probably can't deliver the wattage".
Yeah, right, it's not like the sun would deliver 168 PW to the Earth at any given time, while mankind "only" uses 500EJ a year.
500EJ/168 PW ~= 50 minutes worth of solar radiation would be enough to power whole mankind for a year.
Geothermal sources can really be interesting, but you need to find good ones, and still dig a few kilometers if you want to get high-quality heat and produce electricity. You don't need to dig an inch to collect solar radiation.
Please mod this guy down!
Would you mind explaining us what the "difference in heat between two points" is? Heck, what is the heat of a point? (hint: it's undefined)
Make yourself a treat : buy yourself a good thermodynamics book and come back when you're finished.
Thank you.
It actually works right away, but works better with high/low filters.
Sorry about that, but this guy clearly didn't mean to be funny... and that's just frightening in itself. :(
http://hacketyhack.net/ is the answer!
You can write blogs, mp3 downloader/reader and basic graphical interfaces in a few (Ruby) lines. :-/
I wish I had it when I was a kid... GWBasic wasn't so glamour
Hey BTW, how did the Egyptians build their pyramids?
We're all idiots/noobs in some fields!
This website : http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/ could answer your questions and some more.
Yeah, but the pixel density of your camera is around 24 MP/cm, which implies that your pictures are useless at sensitivity above ISO400 because of the noise.
I also got this kind of camera (lumix FZ8). It has the best lens ever (36 mm/432 mm f2.8/3.3) and is really cheap & light thanks to the tiny sensor.
At ISO100 and enough luminosity, it can compete with any $10k DSL+lens, but it's a useless crap for anything that moves too fast or is too dark. I never shoot any ISO200+ with it.
The sensor from TFA has a pixel density around 2.9MP/cm, and I'm sure you could take handheld pictures from moon craters without any noise. This could also be interesting for indoor sport events. If you shoot good pictures with it at big events, I'm sure a couple of them would pay your investment back.
Right tool for the right job!
"and usually use higher energy fuels than gasoline as well"
I call this bullshit. Could you please elaborate, and give us an example?
With around 10kWh/l for gasoline, there's not so many "higher energy fuels" except uranium.
Even $50/gallon would still be cheap for so big an energy density. 4$/gallon is virtually free, and only takes into account extraction/distribution costs, not the real energy value of gasoline.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
Nuclear district heating does exist, but is not so widespread.
Still:
http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/200607/000020060706A0175205.php
No need to.
You know that Mozilla get paid by Google for every single request coming from the Google search integrated in Firefox, right?
AFAIK, no official figures yet, but it already represents a few M$.
You might be right, but the sad fact is that it doesn't exactly matter in today's world.
Good points.
Methane only has 22 times the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide though (averaged over 100 years)
Exactly. You don't format your text, so its content clearly must be wrong.
I plan to buy some mini-ITX like desktop (http://linitx.com/viewproduct.php?prodid=12065) soon, and would love to try OSX86 on it.
I doubt it would work with this example (VIA processor), but does someone have any experience with a small desktop that works out of the box with OSX86?
Talking about temperature differences : 1K=1ÂC
"10 degrees Celsius above absolute zero" is exactly the same as "10 degrees Kelvin above absolute zero."
Righhhhttttt....
http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=1997083
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0213/p03s03-usju.html
So... what's the difference between a communist in the McCarthy-era government and a terrorist in the Bush-era government? Ever heard about Guantanamo or Patriot Act?
It seems like the US government always needs a vague foe (be it a with mustache in Russia or with a beard in an Afghanistan cave) to scare the population and keep it under tight control.
Too bad it takes you 50 years to realize it!
Yes, but http://xkcd.com/384/
I tried this before, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone!
see http://bp0.blogger.com/_PkdazQ4sRLY/RzJXv0odEGI/AAAAAAAAByA/euxVapQwx6E/s1600/costumes_penises.jpg
You seem to know a bit more about energy and be a little more reasonable than the ones that modded me Troll/Flamebait for just saying an "inconvenient truth" :).
And you at least have the merit of thinking about you say, even though I don't think you realize the amount of required energy we're talking about.
- Yes we will soon be running out of oil. Be it 10, 20 or 30 years, oil will be too expensive for Joe NextGuy to fly from LA to NY. This is a good thing. Too bad we wait till we don't have any other choice before we consider decreasing our consumption.
- I didn't talk about oil running out. Just "depleted enough". Do you have any source for the 100 years you're talking about? Even Shell managers don't dare lying this much!
- Well, with a few percents increase every year, it won't be long before jets do get a decent proportion of our oil consumption.
- Too bad electricity and hydrogens aren't primary resources!
- Flying is inefficient, no matter what you use to power it. Bio-fuels are a bad and dangerous joke, especially talking about jets. And no, the amount needed would'nt be minimal. You say there's no other alternative. Yes, there is. But it involves being reasonable and stop flying to much!
- We use too many cars and too many jets. Powering them all with nukes would be yet another environmental disaster. I do prefer seeing nukes than coal power plants, but it's not a reason to put them everywhere instead of thinking a bit more , consuming less and being more responsible.