Sounds like a lot of bad planning. Have seen a lot of that at places I've worked. Windows XP end-of-life has been known for years; Windows 7 went RTM in July 2009 which means that betas were available for a couple years before that.
So anyone whining about not having enough time, almost 4 years on, is a moron. Sadly, that's true of where I worked not so long ago - a 15000 user organization that only completed their Win 2000 - XP migration 2 years ago.
And overall, by far, the change is WARMING. That's one reason why were seeing such a dramatic fall in the volume of polar ice, why the majority of glaciers are shrinking and why the ocean heat content down to great depths is rising. It takes a LOT of heat to melt ice - for the same amount of energy expended in just melting a quantity of ice, which would change only its physical state, not its temperature, you could raise the temp of an equivalent amount of water by 80C
There are plenty of mouth-breathers on both sides and Fox is probably worse than CNN. If you're interested in the SCIENCE, follow the SCIENTISTS or the people who actually spend time with them or do more than a superficial analysis.
RealClimate.org may be too difficult for most laymen; SkepticalScience.com is easier to digest. Greenman3610's videos on YouTube are both entertaining & informative but Potholer54's work is probably a better example of science journalism as he's been doing it for 30 years.
I don't know but very unlikely to have been affected by MAN-MADE causes. However, 1910 was the start of a warming trend of several decades probably due to solar influences
Climate scientists do NOT make those claims and have been explicitly stating that no single weather event can conclusively be linked to AGW.
Also, the "G" in AGW stands for GLOBAL, which seems to be a difficult concept for some North Americans to grasp.
While the polar vortex was wreaking havoc in America, much of Scandinavia was having an unusually warm winter, with flowering plants & bears coming out of hibernation.
If you're referring to the polar vortex, it actually does "jibe with the narrative" or doesn't contradict it. And for quite a long time, every time there's been a cold snap, there's someone on Fox News making snide remarks about "we could use some global warming right now".
If the new ones are built according to strict standards like Passivhaus, that would be a huge improvement. You don't want too many being built with new concrete as that's a huge source of CO2 emissions.
Better storage solutions are on the way but will take a decade at least to be viable on the commercial scale. Using EVs for V2G might arrive sooner but you'll need a lot of them. But even so-so batteries are more efficient than the best coal plants.
Nuclear is baseload and quickly loses efficiency if you try to ramp it up and down and makes up most of Ontario's energy production. Wind's nameplate capacity in Ontario is under 2GW and they also have plenty of hydro & gas.
In 5 years of tracking the output from IESO I can't recall nuclear falling below 9.5GW. Yes, the wind farms have "must-take" but if they are not producing, they don't get a penny. Ontario has tried several times to price out building 2 new nuke plants and every time the bill gets much higher & the timeline longer.
When the nuke industry finds a way to build faster & cheaper without compromising reliability, they'll do very well.
Then those old coal plants should be closed if they can't be brought up to modern emissions standards. China has a mandate that ALL coal plants have until Summer 2014 to meet the tougher standards that took effect in Jan 2012 or shut down. Of course, it'll have to be enforced to have teeth but given the terrible smog over major cities of the past few years, I think this will be taken seriously.
Take a look at today's ramp-up curve for solar in California - http://www.caiso.com/Pages/TodaysOutlook.aspx#SupplyandDemand That's quite a bit of MWh from other sources that doesn't need to be used during the daytime and solar in CA is quite predictable. So while it doesn't match the evening peak, it can be planned for in advance, which reduces the spot pricing.
Also, this is December so the demand curve is shifted later than during the summer where it can reach nearly 50 GW in the mid-afternoon
Nope. You misread and misunderstood. The understanding was not and was never dependent on Pinatubo; it was merely a test of accuracy. Water vapor is not a "complete unknown effect", like any other feedback or forcing, it has a range of uncertainty.
The history of healthcare in America is a combination of fear of the AMA and bait-and-switch.
The AMA proposed "Medicredit" in opposition to a modified Nixoncare and then dropped that a couple years later and proposed a plan that was almost identical to Nixoncare!! And year after year, the population has been getting older, fatter & sadder while per-capita spending has rocketed to 40% above most of the best universal coverage systems. Obamacare is a long way from perfect but it's much better than the status quo; if the GOP had a heart and a brain, they'd embrace it and work to implement single-payer - or maybe just wait for California to impose it on the nation.
The UK spends only 44% of what America does - that's 56% LESS. Norway, the most expensive of the EU countries, is still 32% less. Are there masses of Brits, Norwegians & Canadians pouring in for medical services? Tens of thousands of Americans have been scamming the Canadian system for several decades and over 1/2 a million go to India, Thailand, Singapore & Costa Rica for more affordable surgeries. That's billions leaving the economy - you'd think the fiscal conservatives would have grasped that yeaes ago. If Canada or any of the top EU nations were able split the difference between their per-cap spending & America's, every cancer patient would have a private room & personal chef. If America split the diff between them and Norway, they would save over 400 billion every year. If they were to match the Norwegians, the US public debt would be erased in under 20 yrs if all other spending were to remain the same.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like a lot of bad planning. Have seen a lot of that at places I've worked.
Windows XP end-of-life has been known for years; Windows 7 went RTM in July 2009 which means that betas were available for a couple years before that.
So anyone whining about not having enough time, almost 4 years on, is a moron. Sadly, that's true of where I worked not so long ago - a 15000 user organization that only completed their Win 2000 - XP migration 2 years ago.
That's a ridiculous request to make of a layman. But you may find it worthwhile to take a course; here's one I'm following:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge3DEKVhsJ8
And overall, by far, the change is WARMING. That's one reason why were seeing such a dramatic fall in the volume of polar ice, why the majority of glaciers are shrinking and why the ocean heat content down to great depths is rising.
It takes a LOT of heat to melt ice - for the same amount of energy expended in just melting a quantity of ice, which would change only its physical state, not its temperature, you could raise the temp of an equivalent amount of water by 80C
There are plenty of mouth-breathers on both sides and Fox is probably worse than CNN.
If you're interested in the SCIENCE, follow the SCIENTISTS or the people who actually spend time with them or do more than a superficial analysis.
RealClimate.org may be too difficult for most laymen; SkepticalScience.com is easier to digest. Greenman3610's videos on YouTube are both entertaining & informative but Potholer54's work is probably a better example of science journalism as he's been doing it for 30 years.
I don't know but very unlikely to have been affected by MAN-MADE causes.
However, 1910 was the start of a warming trend of several decades probably due to solar influences
Climate scientists do NOT make those claims and have been explicitly stating that no single weather event can conclusively be linked to AGW.
Also, the "G" in AGW stands for GLOBAL, which seems to be a difficult concept for some North Americans to grasp.
While the polar vortex was wreaking havoc in America, much of Scandinavia was having an unusually warm winter, with flowering plants & bears coming out of hibernation.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jan/10/polar-vortex-us-mild-weather-scandinavia
So whose narrative does that jibe with?
If you're referring to the polar vortex, it actually does "jibe with the narrative" or doesn't contradict it.
And for quite a long time, every time there's been a cold snap, there's someone on Fox News making snide remarks about "we could use some global warming right now".
He has absolutely no idea and really doesn't care except that your ideology is different from his.
If the new ones are built according to strict standards like Passivhaus, that would be a huge improvement.
You don't want too many being built with new concrete as that's a huge source of CO2 emissions.
Better storage solutions are on the way but will take a decade at least to be viable on the commercial scale.
Using EVs for V2G might arrive sooner but you'll need a lot of them. But even so-so batteries are more efficient than the best coal plants.
Nuclear is baseload and quickly loses efficiency if you try to ramp it up and down and makes up most of Ontario's energy production. Wind's nameplate capacity in Ontario is under 2GW and they also have plenty of hydro & gas.
In 5 years of tracking the output from IESO I can't recall nuclear falling below 9.5GW.
Yes, the wind farms have "must-take" but if they are not producing, they don't get a penny.
Ontario has tried several times to price out building 2 new nuke plants and every time the bill gets much higher & the timeline longer.
When the nuke industry finds a way to build faster & cheaper without compromising reliability, they'll do very well.
Then those old coal plants should be closed if they can't be brought up to modern emissions standards.
China has a mandate that ALL coal plants have until Summer 2014 to meet the tougher standards that took effect in Jan 2012 or shut down.
Of course, it'll have to be enforced to have teeth but given the terrible smog over major cities of the past few years, I think this will be taken seriously.
Adopt advanced homebuilding standards along the lines of Passivhaus is long overdue and can minimize both heating & cooling requirements
If that's really true, Libertarianism needs a re-think.
Also the CAISO stats are missing up to 3GW of PV as the 150,000 rooftop units already deployed are only passing along net metering data.
Since California intends to put up a million solar roofs, this is a rapidly growing problem
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/07/californias-invisible-solar-problem
Take a look at today's ramp-up curve for solar in California - http://www.caiso.com/Pages/TodaysOutlook.aspx#SupplyandDemand
That's quite a bit of MWh from other sources that doesn't need to be used during the daytime and solar in CA is quite predictable.
So while it doesn't match the evening peak, it can be planned for in advance, which reduces the spot pricing.
Also, this is December so the demand curve is shifted later than during the summer where it can reach nearly 50 GW in the mid-afternoon
Nope.
You misread and misunderstood.
The understanding was not and was never dependent on Pinatubo; it was merely a test of accuracy.
Water vapor is not a "complete unknown effect", like any other feedback or forcing, it has a range of uncertainty.
The history of healthcare in America is a combination of fear of the AMA and bait-and-switch.
The AMA proposed "Medicredit" in opposition to a modified Nixoncare and then dropped that a couple years later and proposed a plan that was almost identical to Nixoncare!!
And year after year, the population has been getting older, fatter & sadder while per-capita spending has rocketed to 40% above most of the best universal coverage systems.
Obamacare is a long way from perfect but it's much better than the status quo; if the GOP had a heart and a brain, they'd embrace it and work to implement single-payer - or maybe just wait for California to impose it on the nation.
Look at the per-capita estimates - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_(PPP)_per_capita
The UK spends only 44% of what America does - that's 56% LESS. Norway, the most expensive of the EU countries, is still 32% less.
Are there masses of Brits, Norwegians & Canadians pouring in for medical services?
Tens of thousands of Americans have been scamming the Canadian system for several decades and over 1/2 a million go to India, Thailand, Singapore & Costa Rica for more affordable surgeries.
That's billions leaving the economy - you'd think the fiscal conservatives would have grasped that yeaes ago.
If Canada or any of the top EU nations were able split the difference between their per-cap spending & America's, every cancer patient would have a private room & personal chef.
If America split the diff between them and Norway, they would save over 400 billion every year. If they were to match the Norwegians, the US public debt would be erased in under 20 yrs if all other spending were to remain the same.
Please read and understand the info linked here.
That should clear up what's a very common misconception
Big company bureaucracy - 13000 users, lots of compliance to meet, rules to follow.
Pretty sure the corporations and banks had a lot to do with it.
These are RDIMMs, not UDIMMs.
Besides it's the company's money and we can only buy from approved buyers or we don't get reimbursed.
Except that the corporations haven't chosen to go where taxes are LOW; they've chosen the places where taxes are ZERO.
I root for the team that provides sustainable wealth creation and jobs.
But in which country is the wealth & jobs being created?
"Spare ECC bits" - what??