The European Union loves protecting its citizens from rich corporations (foreign or otherwise). They'll just come up with a price tag in the billion euro's to help them paying for the banking crisis.
that may be true for specific companies, but ON AVERAGE, it doesn't make a difference: that $100 means company A makes $100 less, and company B makes $100 more profit...
You'd have to figure on two builds and two decommissions during the time you'd have 1 install and decommission for a nuke plant
wind turbines are commissioned for 10 years, but they last 20-30 years. after that, you take only the top of and replace that (unless of course in those 20 years turbines have become 20 times more powerful as is now the case...)
have you EVER seen a negative comment about bush on fox ? or a positive about obama on fox ? I have certainly seen negative comments about obama on msnbc...
the total amount of wind blowing is pretty much constant. It varies a bit between places, but because the earth spins at a constant rate, and the sun puts in a constant amount of energy, the total amount of (wind mass)x(wind speed) is constant.
yes, and that certainly goes for 'NOT-AGW', because we know : 1/it was proven more than a century ago that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. 2/humans have put a lot of C into the air under the form of CO2. -->So we need extraordinary evidence proving 'NOT-AGW'
Slashdot Mirror
hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good shouting-match !
she's a breath of fresh air between all those corporate hacks/religious nuts.
The European Union loves protecting its citizens from rich corporations (foreign or otherwise). They'll just come up with a price tag in the billion euro's to help them paying for the banking crisis.
or: You are in IT right ? can you fix my computer for me please ?
that may be true for specific companies, but ON AVERAGE, it doesn't make a difference: that $100 means company A makes $100 less, and company B makes $100 more profit ...
HOW does net neutrality hinder profits ?
FREE SPEECH != NEWS.
Consumers and corporations just have competing interests here.
please explain me how internet neutrality is bad for corporations ?
You'd have to figure on two builds and two decommissions during the time you'd have 1 install and decommission for a nuke plant
wind turbines are commissioned for 10 years, but they last 20-30 years. after that, you take only the top of and replace that (unless of course in those 20 years turbines have become 20 times more powerful as is now the case...)
have you EVER seen a negative comment about bush on fox ? or a positive about obama on fox ? ...
I have certainly seen negative comments about obama on msnbc
That's because Germany is too small.
oops, sorry, I tought you were one of the idiots spouting 'wind is no option'. better wait replying to /. posts to when I'm at least 10 minutes awake.
http://www.sustainabilitycentre.com.au/BaseloadFallacy.pdf
read the part about wind power as base-load.
No wind blowing at the moment?
the total amount of wind blowing is pretty much constant. It varies a bit between places, but because the earth spins at a constant rate, and the sun puts in a constant amount of energy, the total amount of (wind mass)x(wind speed) is constant.
that depends on whether fusion power is still 50 years away by then.
wind, the need for 100% backup of generating capacity
SOURCE
I'll give you some sources to the contrary. please read.
http://www.no-fuel.org/index.php?id=242
http://130.226.56.153/rispubl/reports/ris-r-1608_186-195.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermittent_power_source#European_super_grid
boat
boats ?
http://gizmodo.com/5124265/helicopters-used-to-fix-giant-wind-turbines
and when gas/oil runs out ? how much will the price for energy be ?
I live in a cold climate - it is use energy or freeze
actually, Investing in insulation is ten times cheaper than buying energy. a passive house has been build in very cold climates.
Chemistry is dependent on things like pressure and temperature.
a nuke too ...
financial death you mean?
doing nothing is stopping the change in CO2-levels.
if you're going to ask people in the West to turn over their governments to oligarchs and live like paupers
most of the AGW people don't ask that BS.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
yes, and that certainly goes for 'NOT-AGW', because we know :
1/it was proven more than a century ago that CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
2/humans have put a lot of C into the air under the form of CO2.
-->So we need extraordinary evidence proving 'NOT-AGW'
"When we understand that slide, we'll have won the war."
Seeing that BOTH sides have already lost, we'll never understand the slide.