I was just writing to my Senator Mac Middleton (Maryland Senate) that losing the ritual of hand counting ballots means that
we also lose a means of strengthening community ties. You don't actually have one person count all the ballots, it is done
in a group with observes from all campaigns watching for errors. In the end everyone goes to bed late and is civil about the
result. There is a greater level of participation and more human interaction this way.
Maryland's house passed a bill to adopt optical scanners unanimously but now the senate leadership is balking at the cost
which they claim (unusually for infrastructure) is all front ended. However, the last payment for the Diebold systems in use now is due
in 2014 so the leadship's objections seem a little strange since financing is how this kind of thing has been done in the past.
Hopefully my Senator can clear this issue up for them since he chairs the Finance Committee and ought to see the problem with
the leadership's view.
-- Removing finacial risk from Solar: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html
This joke was made pretty well in the Prarie Home Companion movie:
The farmer had a prize bull, got 200 calves a year, the wife said "maybe you should take some lessons." The Farmer said "Yah, he's pretty good but it wasn't all with the same cow."
Actually, the immediate supply problem is coming as a result of some floods and reduced stockpiles. The stockpiles became large because
of the conversion of weapons to fuel. This reduced mining activity. You can read more here http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/28/business/28urani um.html.
On the other hand, there is a limited suppy of ore which makes reliance on nuclear power to avoid further gloabl warming a poor
proposition. Converting current power production to all nuclear runs out the recoverable fuel before the new plants end their
design lifetimes so nuclear would be much more expensive than anticipated at a lower level of use. -- Get Real! Go solar: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html
I agree with your argument. I would object just as much if they had instead been hoovering up how many delegates visited prostitutes.
Oh wait, those were the prosecutors Gonzales kept on board. (Nice picture here, great shot, won't want your wife to see it though. How about
staring an investigation of a democrat. See how useful investigations can be?) --
Solar power at atmospheric pressure: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html
I suppose that thinking oneself polite and well mannered is something even spies do. It is probably needful to pull it off. On the other hand,
a referee who listens in on the huddle of one team and passes it on to the other is nothing but a cad no matter what he thinks about the nobility
of his intentions. It is hard to see how this behavior can be excused. Perhaps just trimming the payroll of the NYPD would clear this matter up.
They clearly have too much time on their hands.
We know this sort of thing costs the nation its soul, but what I can't find in TFA is what all these operations
cost the city of New York. Was the city reimbursed? I thought the Bush administarion was failing to deliver
on promises regarding security for NYC? Why are they helping him then? --
Thank goodness for sunshine: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html
The comparison with Enron was simply that they were also breaking the law. That turns out to not be so good for business. Advancements in both PV
and AI are making quite a lot of news, I think I've mentioned some. The risk to investors in current nuclear facilities is that they may be
more prone to total loss than has been disclosed.
The amount of energy invloved could be just the same as Chernobyl but the spreading broader owing to the containment structure. You need
to build up more pressure to lift the containment structure and this could lead to a higher altitude plume.
Over time, the unlikely coincidences become a certainty. This is what is useful about the list of accidents. We are able to estimate
how often we'll see a big melt down by looking at how often we get close. The actual frequency is likely to be low balled if there have been a few
unreported close calls as now seems more possible given the present cover up.
The accident in Sweden in 2006, for example, is thought to be a very close call.
I'm not sure one can frame that as a good business decision, especially for investor owned facilities. A habit of hiding failure to comply with
regulations is fraudulant. Now might be a good time to divest since it is hard to know how pervasive the cover up mentality is in the industry.
Surely for institutional investors, nuclear power seems like it could be bit risky. Enron's skirting the law cost people a lot of money.
Twitchy folks make mistakes even more often than calm folks. Perhaps the twitchyness has something to do with the recent close calls?
As I said, containment structures can lead to greater dispersion when breached, which is why the scale of disaster could be larger.
Again, you are assuming that the primary coolant is present.
In a reactor, it is all about geometry, and violent explosions tend to rearrange geometry. My thinking is that a crack that allows air into contact
with the primary coolant will only get larger because heat and gas pressure from the combustion will erode it. This allows a greater supply of air and more rapid
combustion to the point where the coolant is rapidly and violently exhausted. If the result of this is to leave fuel in close proximity to itself, then the nuclear reaction will continue until its own energy separates the fuel.
The argument that nuclear accidents are an acceptable cost because of the limited area which is made uninhabitable has some merit though I doubt
that any nuclear power would continue in the US if there were an accident like that here. But, so long as we continue with nuclear power, it is
a matter of time before such and an accident happens. As you read the list of accidents you'll see some that were very close calls. This portion
of the list will continue to be populated as time goes on and eventually a close call will cross over into disaster. The disaster side of this
is not that well populated yet so it is less easy to make projections based on experience but I would suggest that the lack of containment may
have limited the altitude to which material was released at Chernolyl since a containment breach it likely to be hotter and at a higher pressure
when it happens. So, the scale of disaters may be larger than past experience suggests. But, A US accident a quarter of the size of Chernobyl would rule out nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuels so to me we are really down the the question do we wait for the accident to shut down nuclear power or use a little foresight to save lives. With the industry covering up accidents, one is urged to increase efforts to shut it down sooner.
The rate of species loss is a concern. It matches that seen in great extinction events after which ecosystem recovery was slow. So, because we
see the effects of warming now we are concerned to end it now rather than waiting a bit. The ecosystems need to be strengthened as much as
possible to handle the expected demographics so we need to work rather hard on harmonizing human pressures on ecosystems with their productive
capacity.
Hmmm.... Have a second look at this link and see if you read it the same way that I do: 1) The design is good even if primary cooling circulation
is stopped: loss of flow without SCRAM. The design is good even if the secondary cooling is shut down: loss of heat sink without SCRAM.
Some of us feel global warming is a danger to the ecosystems that sustain us. We are trying to persuade more people to this view. Did you like
our Earth Day Report? I mean other than what we propose to do about it? I think our program is politically challanging (very) but we'd have it
go from the grass roots rather than imposed. Stepitup2007.org now has over 1000 events planned. They are a little less urgent on timing
because, I think, they are looking at direct human impacts rather that ecosystem impacts first. We're trying to look at ways that 11 billion people
can live in comfort so we're interested in protecting ecosystem diversity to preserve its resilience. The present rapid climate change is going too
fast for evolution to provide species-by-species adaptation in a number of cases.
Well, the scaling up for WWII took less than ten years so I'm not sure where the impossible part comes in. Renewables are being put into use now so they seem to have a bit of a head start on even planning for new nuclear plants which have to go through public review and legal challanges.
I've noticed that in all your statements about nuclear safety, you are assuming that the primary coolant is present and working.
Especially for Indian Point, it is not at all clear that the coolant would always be present. Containment does not always
work for meltdowns, that is not what it is designed for. It is a bit like the New Orleans levy system: built to withstand some but not all
problems.
Drawing distinctions as to what the Tao is runs into trouble. And, Chuang Tse being the Saint Paul of Taoism, makes what he has to say even more
open to interpretation. Ware's method interpretation, or yours that it is the teachings of the sages that is being discussed as well as Lin Yutang's
moral gloss all seem plausible. In the latter case, because the subject is a robber, one is drawn to reconsider a value judgement. For the method
interpretation their is solid ground as well. The story of the butcher who never dulls his knife suggests Tao's role in the perfection of practice,
and this would also go to you're idea that it is the greatness of the robber that is affected by the Tao. It is also possible to say that being open
to the flow of the Tao reduces all values judgements or that these promptings are like a weather vane in that flow: How do you know the fish are happy?
This last also makes me think that Chuang Tze sees morals and such to be endemic to nature and not limited to humans only.
Our position is to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2016 http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/state-of-earth -report.html which seems to
us to be prudent. There is certainly sufficient borrowing capacity to achieve this goal though it would take us up to the level of indeptedness
experienced just after the second world war. It is worth noting in this thread that a pay out under the Price-Anderson Act for even a moderate scale disaster similar to Cherobyl at, say, the troubled Indian Point reactor could eat up most of this remaining borrowing capacity and we would have to go with more expensive secured credit. Others look for a similar level of emissions reduction by 2030 or 2050. However, we did not win any congressional
seats in the last election, though you might be interested in our spending to votes ratio in my district: http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.asp?ID=MD 05&Cycle=2006 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steny_Hoyer#Election_ history.
The example of California does show that conservations efforts can work but achieving an 80% reduction in emissions will, I think, require converting
to renewables. Relying on price competition alone may not be fast enough but it does show that the transition could boost our living standard which
is a step that will help to be persuasive towards adopting our position as national policy.
The Tao that can be named (known) is not the true Tao. It was not my insert, it came with the quote. Tao in considered to be the ground of virtue so I'm not all that unhappy with how this one was done. Ware's translation has this as more of a method rather than moral priciples. Considering the
foregoing though that virtue had not preserved the wise from a violent death I think the point that thieves have virutes too is the main thing.
I've always thought that Chuang Tze caught the gist of the biomoralist argument:
An apprentice to Robber Cheh asked him saying, "Is there then Tao (moral principles) among thieves?"
"Tell me if there is anything in which there is not Tao," Cheh replied.
"There is the sage character of thieves by which booty is located, the courage to go in first, and the chivalry of coming out last. There is the wisdom of calculating success, and kindness in the equal division of the spoil. There has never yet been a great robber who was not possessed of these five qualities." It is seen therefore that without the teachings of the Sages, good men could not keep their position, and without the teachings of the Sages, Robber Cheh could not accomplish his ends.
Morality manifests everywhere because it is an aspect of nature.
What I find a little strange is that TFA is not clear about a distinction between morality and ethics and so ends up in a reason vrs. emotion
dillema in the Kant vrs. Hume discussion. Morality always starts from the gut as all teachers have said. Ethics tries to sort out the
various promptings of morality through reason that mimics the gut instincts. So, empathy is modeled with the abstraction of disinterstedness for example. Altruism might emerge as elightened self-interest in some schemes. It seems good to me that the philosphers are taking an
interest because much of what I've read based on the biological approach is very unsophisticated in its appreciation of how morality is
reshaped by ethics and thus seems to run into basic definitional problems.
Sorry that was a joke. 18 months is what it takes to get a plant up to full production so if you are intent on rapid growths
you can start you next plant at the time the revenue from the first plant is coming in full. It is a coincidence that this
looks like the Moore's Law doubling time (or is it?). If you've demonstrated your market, there is no big problem building two
new plants after the first plant, but you want to watch that you're not spreading the expertize too thin.
I don't think that black outs were a reason for reduced consumption in California for the most part. I don't think I've heard of
that kind of thing since Enron went down. I looked quickly at this link http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html
and confirmed that per capita energy consumption went down between 2000 and 2005 using the last column of your link which matches
what I remember from the meeting at the Dirksen Senate office building. So, that's not bad work. They are also increasing milage
standards for cars. Guess California's population is going up faster than the rest of the country because they're making it
a nicer place to live. When everyone else catches up perhaps there will be some flowback. They are also installing quite a lot
of renerwable generation so I doubt we'll see much in the way of new coal there.
File cabinets seem to be blackholes. Once something goes in, it is just a record, not work. So, current projects take up desk space.
This is quite different from the principle "a place for everything and everything in its place." Aboard ship you need to have
everything stowed for safety and the ability to find things in a hurry.
For very big thinkers like Bucky Fuller, a dymaxion file can work, but for me at least I need a dymaxion pile.
For people interested in managing productivity it might be a good idea to think about providing a desk per project rather than
a desk per person. -- Couldn't think of a solar tag for this one.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes your right, selective application. I'm so confused.
You didn't bring any prosecutions of voter fraud in Ohio, Florida or Texas;-)
I was just writing to my Senator Mac Middleton (Maryland Senate) that losing the ritual of hand counting ballots means that we also lose a means of strengthening community ties. You don't actually have one person count all the ballots, it is done in a group with observes from all campaigns watching for errors. In the end everyone goes to bed late and is civil about the result. There is a greater level of participation and more human interaction this way.
s -selling-solar.html
Maryland's house passed a bill to adopt optical scanners unanimously but now the senate leadership is balking at the cost which they claim (unusually for infrastructure) is all front ended. However, the last payment for the Diebold systems in use now is due in 2014 so the leadship's objections seem a little strange since financing is how this kind of thing has been done in the past. Hopefully my Senator can clear this issue up for them since he chairs the Finance Committee and ought to see the problem with the leadership's view.
--
Removing finacial risk from Solar: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
The request by Diebold to block Massachusetts from buying from another vendor was blocked: http://computerworld.com/action/article.do?command =viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=hardware&articleId= 9014518&taxonomyId=12&intsrc=kc_top
s -selling-solar.html
--
The proper use of a silicon ballot: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
This joke was made pretty well in the Prarie Home Companion movie:
The farmer had a prize bull, got 200 calves a year, the wife said "maybe you should take some lessons." The Farmer said "Yah, he's pretty good but it wasn't all with the same cow."
Bad jokes, lord I luvem.
Actually, the immediate supply problem is coming as a result of some floods and reduced stockpiles. The stockpiles became large because of the conversion of weapons to fuel. This reduced mining activity. You can read more here http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/28/business/28urani um.html.
s -selling-solar.html
On the other hand, there is a limited suppy of ore which makes reliance on nuclear power to avoid further gloabl warming a poor proposition. Converting current power production to all nuclear runs out the recoverable fuel before the new plants end their design lifetimes so nuclear would be much more expensive than anticipated at a lower level of use.
--
Get Real! Go solar: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
Judging by the pollution content of the atmosphere, I believe we have arrived at the late 20th century. -Spock
s -selling-solar.html
Hummm... can "intelligent" life change the structure of an atmosphere? Doesn't sound so smart to me....
--
Go solar: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
I agree with your argument. I would object just as much if they had instead been hoovering up how many delegates visited prostitutes.s -selling-solar.html
Oh wait, those were the prosecutors Gonzales kept on board. (Nice picture here, great shot, won't want your wife to see it though. How about staring an investigation of a democrat. See how useful investigations can be?)
--
Solar power at atmospheric pressure: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
I suppose that thinking oneself polite and well mannered is something even spies do. It is probably needful to pull it off. On the other hand, a referee who listens in on the huddle of one team and passes it on to the other is nothing but a cad no matter what he thinks about the nobility of his intentions. It is hard to see how this behavior can be excused. Perhaps just trimming the payroll of the NYPD would clear this matter up. They clearly have too much time on their hands.
In this case, not exactly gentlemen I think. Foxes perhaps?
We know this sort of thing costs the nation its soul, but what I can't find in TFA is what all these operations cost the city of New York. Was the city reimbursed? I thought the Bush administarion was failing to deliver on promises regarding security for NYC? Why are they helping him then?s -selling-solar.html
--
Thank goodness for sunshine: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
The comparison with Enron was simply that they were also breaking the law. That turns out to not be so good for business. Advancements in both PV and AI are making quite a lot of news, I think I've mentioned some. The risk to investors in current nuclear facilities is that they may be more prone to total loss than has been disclosed.
The amount of energy invloved could be just the same as Chernobyl but the spreading broader owing to the containment structure. You need to build up more pressure to lift the containment structure and this could lead to a higher altitude plume.
Over time, the unlikely coincidences become a certainty. This is what is useful about the list of accidents. We are able to estimate how often we'll see a big melt down by looking at how often we get close. The actual frequency is likely to be low balled if there have been a few unreported close calls as now seems more possible given the present cover up.
The accident in Sweden in 2006, for example, is thought to be a very close call.
I'm not sure one can frame that as a good business decision, especially for investor owned facilities. A habit of hiding failure to comply with regulations is fraudulant. Now might be a good time to divest since it is hard to know how pervasive the cover up mentality is in the industry. Surely for institutional investors, nuclear power seems like it could be bit risky. Enron's skirting the law cost people a lot of money.
Twitchy folks make mistakes even more often than calm folks. Perhaps the twitchyness has something to do with the recent close calls?
As I said, containment structures can lead to greater dispersion when breached, which is why the scale of disaster could be larger.
Again, you are assuming that the primary coolant is present.
In a reactor, it is all about geometry, and violent explosions tend to rearrange geometry. My thinking is that a crack that allows air into contact with the primary coolant will only get larger because heat and gas pressure from the combustion will erode it. This allows a greater supply of air and more rapid combustion to the point where the coolant is rapidly and violently exhausted. If the result of this is to leave fuel in close proximity to itself, then the nuclear reaction will continue until its own energy separates the fuel.
The argument that nuclear accidents are an acceptable cost because of the limited area which is made uninhabitable has some merit though I doubt that any nuclear power would continue in the US if there were an accident like that here. But, so long as we continue with nuclear power, it is a matter of time before such and an accident happens. As you read the list of accidents you'll see some that were very close calls. This portion of the list will continue to be populated as time goes on and eventually a close call will cross over into disaster. The disaster side of this is not that well populated yet so it is less easy to make projections based on experience but I would suggest that the lack of containment may have limited the altitude to which material was released at Chernolyl since a containment breach it likely to be hotter and at a higher pressure when it happens. So, the scale of disaters may be larger than past experience suggests. But, A US accident a quarter of the size of Chernobyl would rule out nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuels so to me we are really down the the question do we wait for the accident to shut down nuclear power or use a little foresight to save lives. With the industry covering up accidents, one is urged to increase efforts to shut it down sooner.
The rate of species loss is a concern. It matches that seen in great extinction events after which ecosystem recovery was slow. So, because we see the effects of warming now we are concerned to end it now rather than waiting a bit. The ecosystems need to be strengthened as much as possible to handle the expected demographics so we need to work rather hard on harmonizing human pressures on ecosystems with their productive capacity.
Hmmm.... Have a second look at this link and see if you read it the same way that I do: 1) The design is good even if primary cooling circulation is stopped: loss of flow without SCRAM. The design is good even if the secondary cooling is shut down: loss of heat sink without SCRAM.
r #Safety.
All bets are off (literally: Price-Anderson) if the primary coolant oxidizes rapidly imparting large amounts of kinetic energy to to structure of the reactor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_Fast_Reacto
You might be reading it another way.
Some of us feel global warming is a danger to the ecosystems that sustain us. We are trying to persuade more people to this view. Did you like our Earth Day Report? I mean other than what we propose to do about it? I think our program is politically challanging (very) but we'd have it go from the grass roots rather than imposed. Stepitup2007.org now has over 1000 events planned. They are a little less urgent on timing because, I think, they are looking at direct human impacts rather that ecosystem impacts first. We're trying to look at ways that 11 billion people can live in comfort so we're interested in protecting ecosystem diversity to preserve its resilience. The present rapid climate change is going too fast for evolution to provide species-by-species adaptation in a number of cases.
Well, the scaling up for WWII took less than ten years so I'm not sure where the impossible part comes in. Renewables are being put into use now so they seem to have a bit of a head start on even planning for new nuclear plants which have to go through public review and legal challanges.
I've noticed that in all your statements about nuclear safety, you are assuming that the primary coolant is present and working. Especially for Indian Point, it is not at all clear that the coolant would always be present. Containment does not always work for meltdowns, that is not what it is designed for. It is a bit like the New Orleans levy system: built to withstand some but not all problems.
Drawing distinctions as to what the Tao is runs into trouble. And, Chuang Tse being the Saint Paul of Taoism, makes what he has to say even more open to interpretation. Ware's method interpretation, or yours that it is the teachings of the sages that is being discussed as well as Lin Yutang's moral gloss all seem plausible. In the latter case, because the subject is a robber, one is drawn to reconsider a value judgement. For the method interpretation their is solid ground as well. The story of the butcher who never dulls his knife suggests Tao's role in the perfection of practice, and this would also go to you're idea that it is the greatness of the robber that is affected by the Tao. It is also possible to say that being open to the flow of the Tao reduces all values judgements or that these promptings are like a weather vane in that flow: How do you know the fish are happy?
This last also makes me think that Chuang Tze sees morals and such to be endemic to nature and not limited to humans only.
Come on Slashdot, don't you love polls? SCO should have made the prelims.
Our position is to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2016 http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/state-of-earth -report.html which seems to
us to be prudent. There is certainly sufficient borrowing capacity to achieve this goal though it would take us up to the level of indeptedness
experienced just after the second world war. It is worth noting in this thread that a pay out under the Price-Anderson Act for even a moderate scale disaster similar to Cherobyl at, say, the troubled Indian Point reactor could eat up most of this remaining borrowing capacity and we would have to go with more expensive secured credit. Others look for a similar level of emissions reduction by 2030 or 2050. However, we did not win any congressional
seats in the last election, though you might be interested in our spending to votes ratio in my district: http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.asp?ID=MD 05&Cycle=2006 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steny_Hoyer#Election_ history.
The example of California does show that conservations efforts can work but achieving an 80% reduction in emissions will, I think, require converting to renewables. Relying on price competition alone may not be fast enough but it does show that the transition could boost our living standard which is a step that will help to be persuasive towards adopting our position as national policy.
The Tao that can be named (known) is not the true Tao. It was not my insert, it came with the quote. Tao in considered to be the ground of virtue so I'm not all that unhappy with how this one was done. Ware's translation has this as more of a method rather than moral priciples. Considering the foregoing though that virtue had not preserved the wise from a violent death I think the point that thieves have virutes too is the main thing.
http://www.engineers.auckland.ac.nz/~snor007/docs
Morality manifests everywhere because it is an aspect of nature.
What I find a little strange is that TFA is not clear about a distinction between morality and ethics and so ends up in a reason vrs. emotion dillema in the Kant vrs. Hume discussion. Morality always starts from the gut as all teachers have said. Ethics tries to sort out the various promptings of morality through reason that mimics the gut instincts. So, empathy is modeled with the abstraction of disinterstedness for example. Altruism might emerge as elightened self-interest in some schemes. It seems good to me that the philosphers are taking an interest because much of what I've read based on the biological approach is very unsophisticated in its appreciation of how morality is reshaped by ethics and thus seems to run into basic definitional problems.
Sorry that was a joke. 18 months is what it takes to get a plant up to full production so if you are intent on rapid growths you can start you next plant at the time the revenue from the first plant is coming in full. It is a coincidence that this looks like the Moore's Law doubling time (or is it?). If you've demonstrated your market, there is no big problem building two new plants after the first plant, but you want to watch that you're not spreading the expertize too thin.
l
and confirmed that per capita energy consumption went down between 2000 and 2005 using the last column of your link which matches
what I remember from the meeting at the Dirksen Senate office building. So, that's not bad work. They are also increasing milage
standards for cars. Guess California's population is going up faster than the rest of the country because they're making it
a nicer place to live. When everyone else catches up perhaps there will be some flowback. They are also installing quite a lot
of renerwable generation so I doubt we'll see much in the way of new coal there.
I don't think that black outs were a reason for reduced consumption in California for the most part. I don't think I've heard of that kind of thing since Enron went down. I looked quickly at this link http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.htm
NIAC has been involved in looking at much larger space and lunar based telescopes. With much of the on the books missions now already off the books, one could see why planning for the future would be getting a lower priority. If you're not really planning on flying the missions you've already spent money on, why dream up new ones. NIAC has also been involved in evaluating some pretty novel propulsion systems as well. Here are a couple http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004AIPC..699..553M and http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/exploration/mmb/ antimatter_spaceship.html.s -selling-solar.html
--
Aim for the Sun: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
The only thing missing is the bill paying desk. I divide by which computer is good for what.
File cabinets seem to be blackholes. Once something goes in, it is just a record, not work. So, current projects take up desk space.
This is quite different from the principle "a place for everything and everything in its place." Aboard ship you need to have everything stowed for safety and the ability to find things in a hurry.
For very big thinkers like Bucky Fuller, a dymaxion file can work, but for me at least I need a dymaxion pile.
For people interested in managing productivity it might be a good idea to think about providing a desk per project rather than a desk per person.
--
Couldn't think of a solar tag for this one.