Tthe nations interests, i think the most important thing for a nation to do, is to provide a level playing-field for all actors (people and organizations), and so that governmental influence is exactly that : ensure that everybody follows the same rules, and those rules should ensure that everybody has the same freedoms(which end where other people's freedoms begin -> the most obvious example is environmental law, which should ensure nobody poisons nobody now or in the future.)
a lot of false positives. I can't imagine they getting a reasonable ratio of true positives to false positives. (and false negatives vs. true negatives.) we're talking about maybe 1 or 2 plane-hijackings per year vs. millions of passengers.
BTW: I was implying the media (and it's readers) are generally lazy, not evil. maybe the journalists are not lazy, but they don't get the time and resources anymore to investigate a story to the bottom ? I point my finger to the beancounters.
the latest generation of windmills produce electricity by wind speeds up to 30m/s, and at higher speeds, they just turn the blades out of the wind, so they won't get damaged.
because solar panels can easily be fitted onto roofs, and looking out of my window, i can still see hundreds that don't have 'em yet, so putting solar panels out into the sea sounds a waste of time.
a journalist ? however i suggest going to 15% wind and solar as fast as possible and see for ourselves really how intermittent wind is (or NOT is) on a large scale.
I've got a solution for that problem : that's called : P-O-W-E-R L-I-N-E-S As of 1980, the longest cost-effective distance for electricity was 4,000 miles (7,000 km) see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission
but the fact that they are intermittent. See my reply (the GP.), where i point out that intermittency can be remedied by exploiting the fact that there is always wind, if you look at a scale large enough - because worldwide zero wind would mean that the sun has stopped shining, the moon has gone, and the earth stopped rotating.
In most areas of the world, the wind blows not steadily. If you add up the energy of all wind over the whole world, the wind blows VERY steadily. My point : if you put up windmills over a length of thousands of miles, your electricity production WILL have a steady baseline. (otherwise that would mean that the sun went out, AND the moon stopped rotating around the earth, AND the earth stopped rotating)
But they will never be 100% reliable. I never seem to find such quotes about nuclear power. I'd rather live next to a windmill burning than a nuclear power plant melting.
no, it's simple: everything you throw away gets into the Food chain, a part of the waste gets burned and other stuff ends up in landfills through which it enters the water... , some poisonous stuff even survives waste burning. see : Bioaccumulation, Biomagnification, Persistent organic pollutant,...
you're probably right. Thinking about it, I'll say the longer it has been a war has raged, the less people will relate to it. probably the reason the EU citizens become more and more right-winged. damn. I don't want to say what this implies... all right... I'll say it : people need another war ?
Slashdot Mirror
a lot of false positives. I can't imagine they getting a reasonable ratio of true positives to false positives. (and false negatives vs. true negatives.) we're talking about maybe 1 or 2 plane-hijackings per year vs. millions of passengers.
first one there wins 20M$ ? This is a race, not a technology competition ...
hahahah ! ... you're serious ... let me laugh even harder HAHAHAHAH !
oh wait
the latest generation of windmills produce electricity by wind speeds up to 30m/s, and at higher speeds, they just turn the blades out of the wind, so they won't get damaged.
because solar panels can easily be fitted onto roofs, and looking out of my window, i can still see hundreds that don't have 'em yet, so putting solar panels out into the sea sounds a waste of time.
a journalist ? however i suggest going to 15% wind and solar as fast as possible and see for ourselves really how intermittent wind is (or NOT is) on a large scale.
Admitting you're wrong is not the end of the world. in fact : stubbornly holding onto your opinion is unscientific.
I've got a solution for that problem : that's called : P-O-W-E-R L-I-N-E-S
As of 1980, the longest cost-effective
distance for electricity was 4,000 miles (7,000 km)
see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission
yeah, when the earth stops, you'll be flattened against the wall between furniture ...
we have removed enough trees to counter that effect
no, it's simple: everything you throw away gets into the Food chain, a part of the waste gets burned and other stuff ends up in landfills through which it enters the water ... , some poisonous stuff even survives waste burning. see : Bioaccumulation, Biomagnification, Persistent organic pollutant, ...
sorry, that's Phthalate : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phthalates
errr ... don't laugh. That exists : http://www.hempplastic.com/
Yep, and after that, they can make them ftalate-free, which causes men to have hormonal problems.
errrm ... when the US and the EU exchange nukes, I think the rest of the world won't like the fluorescent light, if you catch my radioactive drift.
you're probably right. Thinking about it, I'll say the longer it has been a war has raged, the less people will relate to it. probably the reason the EU citizens become more and more right-winged. damn. I don't want to say what this implies... all right ... I'll say it : people need another war ?
The EU does not WANT war. two world wars have taught us that.