The capacity factor can only partially assess the real capability because it also depends on the power plants usage strategy. Some types of power plants are not very good in load following and are typically operated at maximum output almost continuously (like most nuclear power plants). Other types are better at load following and their output gets reduced to follow demand even if they could theoretically output more.
"Hiroshimas" are used to make average person (which has no idea what the SI unit means) understand that we are talking of something big. Kinda like sometimes data is measured in "Libraries of Congress"...
It's actually not a new tax, it's the old tax which was supposed to last until the expiration of the license. Then the license was extended, and the tax was extended accordingly:
Supporters of the new taxes said they were designed to replace money the plant paid the state under agreements in 2003 and 2005 that saw the state drop its opposition to the plant boosting its power output by 20 percent and to the plant's plan for storage of more highly radioactive nuclear waste on its grounds.
Those agreements lasted until March 21, the end of the plant's initial 40-year operating license. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved a 20-year license extension last year.
"If they are continuing to operate then they ought to operate under the same conditions that they operated under before," Klein said Tuesday.
Not to mention that it's not a particularly high tax, at least according to this article:
“I firmly believe the tax is reasonable. It is less than the tax rate on wind projects, and it is comparable to the generating tax on nuclear plants in Connecticut.
That is a blatant lie ie a lawyer appointed by a person to carry out their last will and testament is bound by contractual law to honour that contract. Same for leaving estate to pets et al.
Not all contracts can be transferred and the laws concerning digital goods and services are not there yet. A Yahoo Account is most likely non-transferable so when you die it doesn't get transferred to your heirs or whatever. Anyway the site was taken down because Yahoo deemed that it violated the ToS, most likely because it can be interpreted as "advocating or promoting suicide", so it could have been taken down even if transferred and still valid.
Face it Yahoo are a bunch of douche bag shits heads for what they have done and the stink of an ex-google bimbo is all over it.
I actually think they had the legal right to take down the site but had also the option to keep it online if they wanted to. They made a choice, they didn't want the site, had a fine print in the ToS which allowed them to make it disappear from their little world and decided to go for it. That's what I criticize.
That might be but this "bureaucracy" and mismanagement is hurting nuclear power. There are countries which decided to ditch it and others which put in place a stop to new nuclear power plant projects. In my country thankfully nuclear power is still supported and the "renewables" holy grail is seen as some interesting long-term project but not up to the task right now. Still every fuck-up by TEPCO & Co. takes the headlines and gives pretty good ammunition to nuclear power opposers which have already a pretty good game with most people.
TL;DR: whoever manages nuclear power needs to be trustworthy. TEPCO is damaging nuclear power with his continuous fuck-ups.
Well, yeah. The original estimates were made during a crisis situation and based on limited data. Let's all act shocked now that more comprehensive data is available and the estimate has been revised by an order of magnitude.
That's not correct. The estimates the article talks about were made in December 2012 and submitted to the World Health Organization, so well after the crisis. The objections came from Japan's Health Ministry which was concerned that the estimates looked far too conservative. From the article:
TEPCO reported to the World Health Organization in December that only 178 workers at the plant were believed to have received radiation doses to their thyroid glands above 100 millisieverts.
Japan's health ministry voiced concern that the criteria the company used in its estimates of exposure for its own workers as well as for those employed by contractors were too narrow, and called on the utility to re-evaluate its methods.
There were also errors in calculations and differences of interpretation.
TL;DR: the problem was not limited data but wrong methodology.
The alternative here is more likely a payment slip. This can be entered online in the e-banking system but still requires either entering values manually or scanning them, and you need to do this for every payment slip you have received.
Automatic debit means all of this is automatic, and the payment too is automatic, so you only need to check the statement (and you would in any case check your monthly statement, even if you pay manually).
A middle-ground pretty popular is the e-payment. With e-payment you don't receive a physical payment slip but an electronic one in your e-banking. You then need to check and release it, so the payment is not automatic but you don't have the hassle of manually filling the payment slip data.
Both, part of the goal is to relieve the already existing Gotthard Road Tunnel which is more dangerous due to possible accidents and cannot last much longer the increase in traffic expected in the future, not to mention the environment considerations.
Switzerlands generates most of its energy from hydric plants and nuclear plants, but note that hydric energy is not completely environment-friendly because of the damages on the rivers (still probably a lot better of the impact of coal & company).
Slashdot Mirror
The capacity factor can only partially assess the real capability because it also depends on the power plants usage strategy. Some types of power plants are not very good in load following and are typically operated at maximum output almost continuously (like most nuclear power plants). Other types are better at load following and their output gets reduced to follow demand even if they could theoretically output more.
"Hiroshimas" are used to make average person (which has no idea what the SI unit means) understand that we are talking of something big. Kinda like sometimes data is measured in "Libraries of Congress"...
It's actually not a new tax, it's the old tax which was supposed to last until the expiration of the license. Then the license was extended, and the tax was extended accordingly:
Supporters of the new taxes said they were designed to replace money the plant paid the state under agreements in 2003 and 2005 that saw the state drop its opposition to the plant boosting its power output by 20 percent and to the plant's plan for storage of more highly radioactive nuclear waste on its grounds. Those agreements lasted until March 21, the end of the plant's initial 40-year operating license. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved a 20-year license extension last year.
"If they are continuing to operate then they ought to operate under the same conditions that they operated under before," Klein said Tuesday.
Not to mention that it's not a particularly high tax, at least according to this article:
“I firmly believe the tax is reasonable. It is less than the tax rate on wind projects, and it is comparable to the generating tax on nuclear plants in Connecticut.
Why aren't you freaking out about that?
Because you're confusing global vs local contamination. This leak is local contamination which is a completely different scenario.
The warning level was actually raised to level 3: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23776345
Japan's nuclear agency has upgraded the severity level of a radioactive water leak at the Fukushima plant from one to three on an international scale.
That is a blatant lie ie a lawyer appointed by a person to carry out their last will and testament is bound by contractual law to honour that contract. Same for leaving estate to pets et al.
Not all contracts can be transferred and the laws concerning digital goods and services are not there yet. A Yahoo Account is most likely non-transferable so when you die it doesn't get transferred to your heirs or whatever. Anyway the site was taken down because Yahoo deemed that it violated the ToS, most likely because it can be interpreted as "advocating or promoting suicide", so it could have been taken down even if transferred and still valid.
Face it Yahoo are a bunch of douche bag shits heads for what they have done and the stink of an ex-google bimbo is all over it.
I actually think they had the legal right to take down the site but had also the option to keep it online if they wanted to. They made a choice, they didn't want the site, had a fine print in the ToS which allowed them to make it disappear from their little world and decided to go for it. That's what I criticize.
You are under no obligation to honor a contract to a dead person.
You are under no obligation not to honor it either, which is the point of the "at least show some respect to a dude's last wish" argument.
TL;DR -- Bureaucracy is the same everywhere.
That might be but this "bureaucracy" and mismanagement is hurting nuclear power. There are countries which decided to ditch it and others which put in place a stop to new nuclear power plant projects. In my country thankfully nuclear power is still supported and the "renewables" holy grail is seen as some interesting long-term project but not up to the task right now. Still every fuck-up by TEPCO & Co. takes the headlines and gives pretty good ammunition to nuclear power opposers which have already a pretty good game with most people.
TL;DR: whoever manages nuclear power needs to be trustworthy. TEPCO is damaging nuclear power with his continuous fuck-ups.
Well, yeah. The original estimates were made during a crisis situation and based on limited data. Let's all act shocked now that more comprehensive data is available and the estimate has been revised by an order of magnitude.
That's not correct. The estimates the article talks about were made in December 2012 and submitted to the World Health Organization, so well after the crisis. The objections came from Japan's Health Ministry which was concerned that the estimates looked far too conservative. From the article:
TEPCO reported to the World Health Organization in December that only 178 workers at the plant were believed to have received radiation doses to their thyroid glands above 100 millisieverts.
Japan's health ministry voiced concern that the criteria the company used in its estimates of exposure for its own workers as well as for those employed by contractors were too narrow, and called on the utility to re-evaluate its methods.
There were also errors in calculations and differences of interpretation.
TL;DR: the problem was not limited data but wrong methodology.
The alternative here is more likely a payment slip. This can be entered online in the e-banking system but still requires either entering values manually or scanning them, and you need to do this for every payment slip you have received.
Automatic debit means all of this is automatic, and the payment too is automatic, so you only need to check the statement (and you would in any case check your monthly statement, even if you pay manually).
A middle-ground pretty popular is the e-payment. With e-payment you don't receive a physical payment slip but an electronic one in your e-banking. You then need to check and release it, so the payment is not automatic but you don't have the hassle of manually filling the payment slip data.
Are these teachers valuable due to their English degree?
In this case it's not even true. The offending part lacks the quotation marks but actually comes from the original article.
Both, part of the goal is to relieve the already existing Gotthard Road Tunnel which is more dangerous due to possible accidents and cannot last much longer the increase in traffic expected in the future, not to mention the environment considerations. Switzerlands generates most of its energy from hydric plants and nuclear plants, but note that hydric energy is not completely environment-friendly because of the damages on the rivers (still probably a lot better of the impact of coal & company).
http://xkcd.com/705/
"described in a paper" can mean anything and doesn't mean the patent is automatically invalid.