It is worth noting that the scientists expect hydrogen fuel cells to play a role in transportation. I expect that they are wrong and the Sabatier reaction or Fischer-Tropsch process-like methods will be used owing to problems with hydrogen storage. But, very cheap renewable energy makes these kinds of efforts better than conventional fossil fuel extraction. Unfortunately, it also makes unconventional fossil fuel extraction attractive such as shale oil extraction because energy costs are the big deal there.
We have quit a lot invested the current way of doing things so some prodding is justifies. But, if you look at new generation, renewables do pretty well. Wind has been playing tag with natural gas for several year and solar put in 16 GW of capacity in 2010 while nukes did less than 3. Both wind and solar will be getting cheaper still so eventual replacement is inevitable as the old stuff breaks. But inertia is expensive. The cost of using coal is much higher than what turns up on your electricity bill, about $0.178/kWh in extra costs. http://climateprogress.org/2011/02/16/life-cycle-study-coal-harvard-epstein-health/
By law, the president must appoint an administrator for the Economic Regulaltory Administration withing the DoE: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00007136----000-.html
We'd be in a much better position to deal with this kind of thing if President Obama would do his duty.
Young fool. Only now, at the end, do you understand. Your feeble skills are no match for the power of the Dark Side! You have paid the price for your lack of vi.
Used to have a jar opener that gripped the jar lid as I twisted the handle. Worked great for those pickle jars with too much vacuum. Can't find a new one anywhere. Now I have a great bulky electric contraption that does the same thing using 400 times the storage space. The other day it asked me 'Do you want me to sit in a corner and rust or just fall apart where I'm standing? ' How depressing.
This looks a lot like what I remember from the protests in TianAnMen in Beijing. Then is was for democratic reform rather than an entirely new government but if Egypt is successful, things might change quickly in China too. I remember the horror people in Taiwan felt when the army attached the protesters. Probably made reunification impossible for decades to come unless the communists go. People with Peace Prizes under arrest seems pretty similar in both Egypt and China.
All the same, my comment got modded down. The main US interest in Egypt is peace, and this guy seems to like it so I think you are right. But, it can be dangerous. Sadat was killed for accomplishing peace.
I moderated you interesting and saw your score go up and my remaining points go down using firefox. Now I'm commenting to see if it goes down. I notice that in a series of replies, scores are not showing up on the abbreviated comments which is a pain for moderating.
Be a little careful. You need daughter elements that end up higher on the curve for fission to be exothermic. You can not say that tearing off a proton would be exothermic because one of the daughters, the proton, ends up a the bottom of the curve. Actually, adding protons remains exothermic for quite a ways along the curve. Adding alpha particles does not.
There are no protons available as a fuel in the core, so it is alpha particle fusion that sets the iron limit. You can keep on going for a bit with protons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_burning_process
Not so. It is the addition of alpha particles that is endothermic. You can keep going with protons for a bit. They are just not present as an available fuel in the core. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_burning_process
Oops, forgot the crazy carbon 12 offset. both are exothermic by about the proton mass excess of 0.007 amu. When we say fusion is exothermic up to iron, we are thinking of stellar conditions where the alpha process dominates the final stage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_burning_process The rp process can contribute to the formation of heavier elements.
This is incorrect. Fusion is exothermic up to iron, not just up to helium. There are two possibilities for stable isotopes of Ni to go directly to stable isotopes of Cu via addition of a proton. 62Ni+p->63Cu appears to be endothermic and 64Ni+p->65Cu appears to be exothermic. 64Ni has low abundance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_copperhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_nickel
Actually, if you read the paper, you'll see that they are taking the proper approach. Another decade may indicate what the timescale is based on current melting. But they also examine past behavior finding cases of meter/decade sea level rise in the past.
When people move, often they vacate a house that someone else moves into. They aren't just fleeing disaster. The exchange of housing doesn't destroy value, disaster does. How bad could it be? Hansen and Sato have a draft paper out talking about exponentially growing mass loss from ice sheets. They are talking about several meters of sea level rise this century. http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20110118_MilankovicPaper.pdf
Slashdot Mirror
It is worth noting that the scientists expect hydrogen fuel cells to play a role in transportation. I expect that they are wrong and the Sabatier reaction or Fischer-Tropsch process-like methods will be used owing to problems with hydrogen storage. But, very cheap renewable energy makes these kinds of efforts better than conventional fossil fuel extraction. Unfortunately, it also makes unconventional fossil fuel extraction attractive such as shale oil extraction because energy costs are the big deal there.
We have quit a lot invested the current way of doing things so some prodding is justifies. But, if you look at new generation, renewables do pretty well. Wind has been playing tag with natural gas for several year and solar put in 16 GW of capacity in 2010 while nukes did less than 3. Both wind and solar will be getting cheaper still so eventual replacement is inevitable as the old stuff breaks. But inertia is expensive. The cost of using coal is much higher than what turns up on your electricity bill, about $0.178/kWh in extra costs. http://climateprogress.org/2011/02/16/life-cycle-study-coal-harvard-epstein-health/
By law, the president must appoint an administrator for the Economic Regulaltory Administration withing the DoE: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00007136----000-.html We'd be in a much better position to deal with this kind of thing if President Obama would do his duty.
Young fool. Only now, at the end, do you understand. Your feeble skills are no match for the power of the Dark Side! You have paid the price for your lack of vi.
Used to have a jar opener that gripped the jar lid as I twisted the handle. Worked great for those pickle jars with too much vacuum. Can't find a new one anywhere. Now I have a great bulky electric contraption that does the same thing using 400 times the storage space. The other day it asked me 'Do you want me to sit in a corner and rust or just fall apart where I'm standing? ' How depressing.
Yes, but in Taiwan it was on TV non-stop. Kind of like 9/11 here but for much longer.
This looks a lot like what I remember from the protests in TianAnMen in Beijing. Then is was for democratic reform rather than an entirely new government but if Egypt is successful, things might change quickly in China too. I remember the horror people in Taiwan felt when the army attached the protesters. Probably made reunification impossible for decades to come unless the communists go. People with Peace Prizes under arrest seems pretty similar in both Egypt and China.
All the same, my comment got modded down. The main US interest in Egypt is peace, and this guy seems to like it so I think you are right. But, it can be dangerous. Sadat was killed for accomplishing peace.
It is worth noting that the guy who told us ahead of time that there were no WMD in Iraq, Mohammad ElBaradei, is getting hit with water cannons now. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/29/world/middleeast/29unrest.html Wonder if he is right again?
Naw, this is about getting high.... Higher than the fence anyway.
So, your score went down when I commented. But my reply did not show up abbreviated until I clicked on your post. Strange.
I moderated you interesting and saw your score go up and my remaining points go down using firefox. Now I'm commenting to see if it goes down. I notice that in a series of replies, scores are not showing up on the abbreviated comments which is a pain for moderating.
Looks like it was repeatable last time http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BarnhartBtechnology.pdf
You might want to read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rp-process
That is the case for alpha particles, but you can go on from iron quite a ways exothermically when adding protons.
Be a little careful. You need daughter elements that end up higher on the curve for fission to be exothermic. You can not say that tearing off a proton would be exothermic because one of the daughters, the proton, ends up a the bottom of the curve. Actually, adding protons remains exothermic for quite a ways along the curve. Adding alpha particles does not.
There are no protons available as a fuel in the core, so it is alpha particle fusion that sets the iron limit. You can keep on going for a bit with protons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_burning_process
Not so. It is the addition of alpha particles that is endothermic. You can keep going with protons for a bit. They are just not present as an available fuel in the core. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_burning_process
Oops, forgot the crazy carbon 12 offset. both are exothermic by about the proton mass excess of 0.007 amu. When we say fusion is exothermic up to iron, we are thinking of stellar conditions where the alpha process dominates the final stage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_burning_process The rp process can contribute to the formation of heavier elements.
This is incorrect. Fusion is exothermic up to iron, not just up to helium. There are two possibilities for stable isotopes of Ni to go directly to stable isotopes of Cu via addition of a proton. 62Ni+p->63Cu appears to be endothermic and 64Ni+p->65Cu appears to be exothermic. 64Ni has low abundance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_copper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_nickel
Actually, if you read the paper, you'll see that they are taking the proper approach. Another decade may indicate what the timescale is based on current melting. But they also examine past behavior finding cases of meter/decade sea level rise in the past.
Others have been looking into the details physics of a rapid ice sheet response. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2010/2010GL044397.shtml
I have. Greenland is not the only source.
That strikes me as your claim not his.
Might want to consider the meaning of exponential I think.
When people move, often they vacate a house that someone else moves into. They aren't just fleeing disaster. The exchange of housing doesn't destroy value, disaster does. How bad could it be? Hansen and Sato have a draft paper out talking about exponentially growing mass loss from ice sheets. They are talking about several meters of sea level rise this century. http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20110118_MilankovicPaper.pdf