Apparently, and quite foolishly, you seem to forget that the absence of the father could likely be of HIS own doing. Who are you to judge? You, a parsite to social beneficence as we al are.
Clearly everything in YOUR dim life has gone as planned. Its a shame you lack any realistic regard for those whose lives did not go as planned.
Maybe instead of welfare, those poor moms could start hookin__ that way entitled jerks like you have someon to buy when your wife says no and you still want your way.
Apparently you don't know about the PS3. The OS is built from linux.
The PS3 trails the XBOX360 by only a couple million total in hardware sales, but since the RROD rates are so high on the 360, it is clear that there are more functioning and in-use PS3 than 360.
FEMA is awesome when skilled and appropriate people are at the head. Bush's cronies don't count as competent leaders; at least most of them don't... and the point you are referencing is an example of that. Katrina.
What I am hoping you're doing is understanding the feasibility and potential to roll out major changes. When we started this conversation I'm sure your doubt was much higher and your assumptions much higher as well.
The greatest limitation to this rollout is that it is largely left to the private sector to make the changes, if they want. Socially, we give very little nudge in the direction people want (I would say need, but not everyone agrees we need to).
These limitations are reinforced by people with serious doubts but that have not really done the math to see how much closer we are right now. I recently saw someone confidently claim that the world would need to be almost literally covered in solar panels to power our lives. Having now seen the acres this system uses, and the total land area, you can clearly see how far off that idea is. And if, for example, you know what central valley california is like, you might actually know a place where there is far more abundance of relatively useless land area, far more than necessary to accommodate these plants.
It is also safe to say that once these plants are in place, the maintenance and production costs are extremely low as compared to fossil fuels. You can basically delete the amount you would expect to pay to actually 'get' the fossil fuel. I am also not very skeptical of the cost to upkeep mirrors with cleaning, re-tuning, replacing, etc. Generations ahead of us -- our kids, and their kids -- will be forever grateful for how cheap it would ultimately make electricity.
JC Venter / Exxon built a plant that produces diesel from algae at $55/barrel. It's been a year. I'm gonna go right now and see what news i can dig up...
Lol. Add 2 acres, like it changes my point. The hilarious part of this is how I just smashed you with truth, and then you point at the shoelaces with absolutely now show of having actually learned anything.
Some people can't learn because their ears and eyes are closed... or they're just e-trolls with nothing but popular lies filling their stupid TV addicted heads... You're one of these, so it's clear you're not worth my time. Bye.
These details matter because its the difference between the cost I projected and the cost you projected. One thing we've learned is that the truth is closer to what I said rather than your 'trillions' assumption, and that not all solar energy fields are equal -- some are of more efficient design.
Could you please show a direct link to where you came up with 560M MwH? I looked on your source and found 296,827 GwH (52%).
The link provided prior shows a plant on just over 7 acres that puts out 5mw constant. AFAIK the figures published are not 'peak' but rather sustained average -- the figures that people would expect to see when making calculations, etc.
You're an idiot. Using what is available now to raise awareness is far different than using what is available now and doing nothing. Furthermore, and as your stupid ass is incapable of understading -- the methods by which raising awareness and energy generation itself, are of limited choice. Pretending that I could raise as much awareness living in a tent is as I pointed out, stupid of you.
What I'm saying is that we have something going now, which we are all a part of, including me, and that we need to make drastic changes. What you're saying is that I am wrong to ask for changes because I'm using what there is right now... That's stupid.
Pointing at maintenance when it is due in either case provides no new information to the argument at all; everyone knows that things require upkeep. If you were to demonstrate evidence to show the maintenance would be disproportionately expensive you might have something to say.
Fortunately there are other great sources of energy that are available when you naysayers get to talking. There is also a tidal 5mw outputting kite developed in the netherlands. It is about 12 meters wide, 3 meters deep, and 2 meters high. Since you're relatively coastal, implementing the tidal kite might be more effective. Or hydroelectric.
As for energy density, your calculations are way off. Let me straighten that out for you. These figures represent current electricity use, by the way. So considerations of cost should only be compared to electricity part of PG&E bill, etc.
California yearly energy use is: 235,438,000 MwH/year California daily energy use is: 645,035 MwH/day (divide yearly by 365) California constant average is: 26,876 Mw (divide daily by 24 H/day hour time period to get constant flow figure) Each 8 acre plant puts out 5Mw consant. Thus, 5376 plants are required, totaling 43,000 acres. 43,000 acres is about 68 square miles. California has great open areas that are MUCH larger than 68 square miles.
Total cost to do right now is $20m/plant. Thus 107 Billion dollars to do right now. This cost, divided by the number of california residents is $2841/person. California GDP is 1.85 TRILLION dollars. That cost, distributed across 10 years is $284/person.
I'm glad to raise your awareness to actual numbers; I can't stand it when people like you echo the b.s. assumptions and predictions made by paid pundits. You should do the math yourself before you naysay so badly and make such ridiculous claims. It would not be trillions to implement, but rather just over 100bn. It would require a space about 9x9 miles. The cost is actually lower in long term than current energy production.
Bury the whole damn thing in concrete, and be done with it. This crisis would have been resolved two weeks ago if TEPCO wasn't more interested in repairing and reusing the reactor than the public safety.
I keep wondering how things like this and BP's spill are still left in the hands of business. When catastrophic disaster hits, its time for our government to step in and resolve it. It is not a time to leave the decision making in the hands of people whose goals are CAPITAL.
Yes, let them pay the bills that the government accrues in fixing their mess, but *we* (government) should be taking control when things go bad. This is how it is done on the personal level -- if you go wrong and your presence is toxic to others around you (violent, rapist, whatever), the police step in and fix it. You are sometimes forced to pay for this enforcement, too.
Really? I found that even using slashdot takes like 30-60 secs just to load the one page I'm trying to look at... I click something to move forward in my surf, and there goes another 30-60 seconds. Without tor its like 1 second. I'm just too busy/impatient/american to wait so long after each click. Anyway, I just go without and tell myself that I'm not as interesting as I might think I am. This has worked so far.... oh wait, there's a knock at the door... brb.
There is a point where waiting for people to do the right thing on their own is not safe or wise.
Perhaps, but this isn't one of those times, unless you are being hysterically irrational and think the sky is falling. It isn't.
I'm not hysterically irrational. The need to make serious change now is well reasoned with extremely redundant and verified facts published and understood throughout all of science. You may not think the sky is falling, but you've yet to prove that god is holding it up there.
I said it is as important as our national defense. On a global scale, it is more important, but I kept the point at the 'nationalist' level because most people still adhere to nationalism as the limit to economic and serious interest.
Clean energy is *NOT* a free market issue, or even a regulated market issue. It is one of the greatest issues of our time, and it requires complete social support--as we defend our homelands from intruders--as we protect our liberty and freedom--we ought protect our lifesupport, our environmet.
There is a point where waiting for people to do the right thing on their own is not safe or wise.
So says the guy using an coal powered machine to make the rest of us feel guilty about the car we drive.
So says the troll using a coal powered machine, but is too stupid to try to do something about it.
We *SHOULD* use our current energy supply system to convert over to better energy production. This would accelerate the process and get it done sooner. And while I have no choice, I *WILL* use what I need to to get the message across. Dipshit.
All plants, green or conventional, cost money and require maintenance. And I argue a field of mirrors is easier to maintain than large combustion reactors and such.
Its really odd to me that you cannot use your imagination to overcome the theoretical increased demand that you've got in your head.... I'm laughing, really.
1....2....3.... here I go.
1) Conventional and molten salt plants will always have a maximum output. 2) Conventional and molten salt plants will be employed where they are not usually at maximum output. 3) Conventional and molten salt plants can adapt to increased demand by increasing current output to approach maximum output until demand is satisfied. 4) So if you need a few extra molten salt plants to ensure this, so be it. The "molten salt" is the energy store, which can be tapped to be used slow or fast, up to the maximum.
So your point is actually just a mental block between seeing how both plants have similar operational capabilities... and your exaggeration that maintenance will blow costs through the roof, even though you don't have to go mining for sunlight (costly) or make efforts to undo the inclusion of fossilized CO2 into the atmosphere (costly).
Since you agreed with that poster, you should note that his figures were 24 times that of the actual costs, land, etc. He didn't understand the difference between a MW and a MWH and how those values factor in. I'm reply to you to hopefully ensure you get this information because I don't need more people walking around voting against good ideas with bad information in their heads. My math was correct, his was not.
You forgot to divide the daily use by 24 hours. 5mw is a constant averaged available output. Energy use is measured in hours. So the station puts out 5x24hrs, or 120mwh a day. Or you could divide the 2500mwh by 24h and get the average required load.
Furthermore, I just saw another pub about a 5mw salt parabolic fitting on 7 acres.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're into positive & conscious hip hop, my crew puts out a 4 track EP for free.
go to www.areasoundmusic.com and go to media--music --- then select the left album "Seeds of Change EP".
or this link for zip file...
http://www.liquidmathematics.com/areasound/Area%20Sound%20-%20Seeds%20of%20Change%20EP.zip
Enjoy. (We also have a 15 track album for sale via cdbaby, linked on site)
Apparently, and quite foolishly, you seem to forget that the absence of the father could likely be of HIS own doing. Who are you to judge? You, a parsite to social beneficence as we al are.
Clearly everything in YOUR dim life has gone as planned. Its a shame you lack any realistic regard for those whose lives did not go as planned.
Maybe instead of welfare, those poor moms could start hookin__ that way entitled jerks like you have someon to buy when your wife says no and you still want your way.
Please grow up or shut up.
... foreign courts are being used for foreign nations to extort money from business they did not produce and had little connection to its success.
You mean like the EU fining Intel and Microsoft? *ducks*
Thats exactly what I mean. $800M for something that is easily forgotten.... Bs
... foreign courts are being used for foreign nations to extort money from business they did not produce and had little connection to its success.
Google should stop providing links to Italian businesses.
That's called "lets just keep blowing money because we don't wanna think of anything changing."
It is commentary/opinion. Why would it matter that it be biased or not? And even if biased, it doesn't mean he is wrong.
Apparently you don't know about the PS3. The OS is built from linux.
The PS3 trails the XBOX360 by only a couple million total in hardware sales, but since the RROD rates are so high on the 360, it is clear that there are more functioning and in-use PS3 than 360.
FEMA is awesome when skilled and appropriate people are at the head. Bush's cronies don't count as competent leaders; at least most of them don't... and the point you are referencing is an example of that. Katrina.
What I am hoping you're doing is understanding the feasibility and potential to roll out major changes. When we started this conversation I'm sure your doubt was much higher and your assumptions much higher as well.
The greatest limitation to this rollout is that it is largely left to the private sector to make the changes, if they want. Socially, we give very little nudge in the direction people want (I would say need, but not everyone agrees we need to).
These limitations are reinforced by people with serious doubts but that have not really done the math to see how much closer we are right now. I recently saw someone confidently claim that the world would need to be almost literally covered in solar panels to power our lives. Having now seen the acres this system uses, and the total land area, you can clearly see how far off that idea is. And if, for example, you know what central valley california is like, you might actually know a place where there is far more abundance of relatively useless land area, far more than necessary to accommodate these plants.
It is also safe to say that once these plants are in place, the maintenance and production costs are extremely low as compared to fossil fuels. You can basically delete the amount you would expect to pay to actually 'get' the fossil fuel. I am also not very skeptical of the cost to upkeep mirrors with cleaning, re-tuning, replacing, etc. Generations ahead of us -- our kids, and their kids -- will be forever grateful for how cheap it would ultimately make electricity.
JC Venter / Exxon built a plant that produces diesel from algae at $55/barrel. It's been a year. I'm gonna go right now and see what news i can dig up...
Cheers
Lol. Add 2 acres, like it changes my point. The hilarious part of this is how I just smashed you with truth, and then you point at the shoelaces with absolutely now show of having actually learned anything.
Some people can't learn because their ears and eyes are closed... or they're just e-trolls with nothing but popular lies filling their stupid TV addicted heads... You're one of these, so it's clear you're not worth my time. Bye.
Also, on your own link, the data is far closer to what I sourced than what you said was in that link.
http://www.energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/total_system_power.html
These details matter because its the difference between the cost I projected and the cost you projected. One thing we've learned is that the truth is closer to what I said rather than your 'trillions' assumption, and that not all solar energy fields are equal -- some are of more efficient design.
Could you please show a direct link to where you came up with 560M MwH? I looked on your source and found 296,827 GwH (52%).
California electricity consumption:
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/ene_tot_ele_con-energy-total-electricity-consumption
The link provided prior shows a plant on just over 7 acres that puts out 5mw constant. AFAIK the figures published are not 'peak' but rather sustained average -- the figures that people would expect to see when making calculations, etc.
You're an idiot. Using what is available now to raise awareness is far different than using what is available now and doing nothing. Furthermore, and as your stupid ass is incapable of understading -- the methods by which raising awareness and energy generation itself, are of limited choice. Pretending that I could raise as much awareness living in a tent is as I pointed out, stupid of you.
What I'm saying is that we have something going now, which we are all a part of, including me, and that we need to make drastic changes. What you're saying is that I am wrong to ask for changes because I'm using what there is right now... That's stupid.
Done with you.
Pointing at maintenance when it is due in either case provides no new information to the argument at all; everyone knows that things require upkeep. If you were to demonstrate evidence to show the maintenance would be disproportionately expensive you might have something to say.
Fortunately there are other great sources of energy that are available when you naysayers get to talking. There is also a tidal 5mw outputting kite developed in the netherlands. It is about 12 meters wide, 3 meters deep, and 2 meters high. Since you're relatively coastal, implementing the tidal kite might be more effective. Or hydroelectric.
As for energy density, your calculations are way off. Let me straighten that out for you. These figures represent current electricity use, by the way. So considerations of cost should only be compared to electricity part of PG&E bill, etc.
California yearly energy use is: 235,438,000 MwH/year
California daily energy use is: 645,035 MwH/day (divide yearly by 365)
California constant average is: 26,876 Mw (divide daily by 24 H/day hour time period to get constant flow figure)
Each 8 acre plant puts out 5Mw consant. Thus, 5376 plants are required, totaling 43,000 acres.
43,000 acres is about 68 square miles. California has great open areas that are MUCH larger than 68 square miles.
Total cost to do right now is $20m/plant. Thus 107 Billion dollars to do right now.
This cost, divided by the number of california residents is $2841/person.
California GDP is 1.85 TRILLION dollars.
That cost, distributed across 10 years is $284/person.
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/molten-salt-takes-one-step-further-in-solar-thermal/
-------
I'm glad to raise your awareness to actual numbers; I can't stand it when people like you echo the b.s. assumptions and predictions made by paid pundits. You should do the math yourself before you naysay so badly and make such ridiculous claims. It would not be trillions to implement, but rather just over 100bn. It would require a space about 9x9 miles. The cost is actually lower in long term than current energy production.
Good luck out there.
Bury the whole damn thing in concrete, and be done with it. This crisis would have been resolved two weeks ago if TEPCO wasn't more interested in repairing and reusing the reactor than the public safety.
I keep wondering how things like this and BP's spill are still left in the hands of business. When catastrophic disaster hits, its time for our government to step in and resolve it. It is not a time to leave the decision making in the hands of people whose goals are CAPITAL.
Yes, let them pay the bills that the government accrues in fixing their mess, but *we* (government) should be taking control when things go bad. This is how it is done on the personal level -- if you go wrong and your presence is toxic to others around you (violent, rapist, whatever), the police step in and fix it. You are sometimes forced to pay for this enforcement, too.
Really? I found that even using slashdot takes like 30-60 secs just to load the one page I'm trying to look at... I click something to move forward in my surf, and there goes another 30-60 seconds. Without tor its like 1 second. I'm just too busy/impatient/american to wait so long after each click. Anyway, I just go without and tell myself that I'm not as interesting as I might think I am. This has worked so far.... oh wait, there's a knock at the door... brb.
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/molten-salt-takes-one-step-further-in-solar-thermal/
7 acres.
... and it was too slow to do anything at all.
meh...
There is a point where waiting for people to do the right thing on their own is not safe or wise.
Perhaps, but this isn't one of those times, unless you are being hysterically irrational and think the sky is falling. It isn't.
I'm not hysterically irrational. The need to make serious change now is well reasoned with extremely redundant and verified facts published and understood throughout all of science. You may not think the sky is falling, but you've yet to prove that god is holding it up there.
I said it is as important as our national defense. On a global scale, it is more important, but I kept the point at the 'nationalist' level because most people still adhere to nationalism as the limit to economic and serious interest.
Clean energy is *NOT* a free market issue, or even a regulated market issue. It is one of the greatest issues of our time, and it requires complete social support--as we defend our homelands from intruders--as we protect our liberty and freedom--we ought protect our lifesupport, our environmet.
There is a point where waiting for people to do the right thing on their own is not safe or wise.
So says the guy using an coal powered machine to make the rest of us feel guilty about the car we drive.
So says the troll using a coal powered machine, but is too stupid to try to do something about it.
We *SHOULD* use our current energy supply system to convert over to better energy production. This would accelerate the process and get it done sooner. And while I have no choice, I *WILL* use what I need to to get the message across. Dipshit.
All plants, green or conventional, cost money and require maintenance. And I argue a field of mirrors is easier to maintain than large combustion reactors and such.
Its really odd to me that you cannot use your imagination to overcome the theoretical increased demand that you've got in your head.... I'm laughing, really.
1....2....3.... here I go.
1) Conventional and molten salt plants will always have a maximum output.
2) Conventional and molten salt plants will be employed where they are not usually at maximum output.
3) Conventional and molten salt plants can adapt to increased demand by increasing current output to approach maximum output until demand is satisfied.
4) So if you need a few extra molten salt plants to ensure this, so be it. The "molten salt" is the energy store, which can be tapped to be used slow or fast, up to the maximum.
So your point is actually just a mental block between seeing how both plants have similar operational capabilities... and your exaggeration that maintenance will blow costs through the roof, even though you don't have to go mining for sunlight (costly) or make efforts to undo the inclusion of fossilized CO2 into the atmosphere (costly).
Since you agreed with that poster, you should note that his figures were 24 times that of the actual costs, land, etc. He didn't understand the difference between a MW and a MWH and how those values factor in. I'm reply to you to hopefully ensure you get this information because I don't need more people walking around voting against good ideas with bad information in their heads. My math was correct, his was not.
Your post should be modded "bad at math" because all your calculations forgot to divide by 24 and thus are 24x as high.... lol.
You forgot to divide the daily use by 24 hours. 5mw is a constant averaged available output. Energy use is measured in hours. So the station puts out 5x24hrs, or 120mwh a day. Or you could divide the 2500mwh by 24h and get the average required load.
Furthermore, I just saw another pub about a 5mw salt parabolic fitting on 7 acres.