Trams wheels are 8 times more energy efficient than cars. If it takes one horse to pull a tram with steel wheels on rail, it would take 8 horses to pull the same tram with car tires Not true and irrelevant, much of the force goes into accelerating the vehicle, overcoming the rolling resistance is a small factor. The rolling resistance is only a small contributor to the overall efficiency of a vehicle. If that goes from 8% to 1% fine, but it's still only a 7% difference overall. Air resistance, engine/motor/drive efficiency and mass are much, much bigger factors.
If rolling resistance was quite as big a problem as you make it out to be, tyres would overheat and burst into flames on a regular basis as significant proportion of the 80, 100kW+ an engine produces is lost as heat.
Getting stuck without a train and tram system as we hit the final oil crisis simply because trams accelerate and decelerate a lot is not a valid argument. Yes, it is. You should investigate alternatives which are more efficient, more effective and cheaper than trams. If you spend $500 million putting in a tram system which only 5% of the local population can use effectively, that's $500 million which can't then be spent putting in a system which is twice as energy efficient and 30% of the population can use effectively.
Problem with this is that you are attempting to redefine the meaning of an otherwise well-defined and well-understood word. Nope. That'd be what the politician are attempting to do. Successfully it seems.
Rail doesn't necessarily mean heavy. Meh. It pretty much does. It's the nature of the beast. If you're carrying a lot of people in a single vehicle, you need a vehicle which can carry the weight. Trams range from 20-50 tonnes per vehicle.
Then you need an infrastructure which can handle the weight of the vehicles. This is usually also very expensive per mile.
And keep in mind also that rolling friction on steel rails is a lot less than friction from a rubber tire on a roadway. Rolling resistance is secondary to air resistance and the effect on efficiency is much lower than simply going from internal combustion to electric. Trolley buses have most of the advantages of trams without the disadvantages.
I have no problem with rail used appropriately. You get a train carrying hundreds of people up to speed and then let it roll for 200 miles to another city you have one of the most efficient transport mechanisms in existence even if it weighs 200 tonnes. But stop/start that same train every 2 miles and it's a completely different story.
A much better solution in the second case is to use small vehicles which can pull into offline stations allowing other vehicles to continue non stop with no acceleration or deceleration.
or it could be the Fed is incredibly out of touch when it comes up with those low inflation numbers Ignore the CPI and RPI figures... They're political fantasies, designed to be manipulated to a particular view of the economy. Inflation is the measure of the devaluation of the currency, and the Fed produce money supply figures which will tell you what's really going on (M0, M1, M2 and M3)...
However, they stopped producing the most important figure (M3) last year, just as the numbers were hitting around 10% per year.
That's the amount a $1 billion power plant could give us extra.
Of course it is quite clear he meant $1 billion per year in terms of the cost of electricity had it been produced by a power plant ( Nope. It's not clear at all that's what he meant. And $1 billion per year to run a power plant? Is that nuclear, coal, hydro-electric?
That's the amount a $1 billion power plant could give us extra. So each person spends an extra $10,000 on their home instead of a cheap water cylinder and the long term savings for the country are huge. Right... Because 1.4 million households spending $10,000 each to save a billion dollars makes perfect sense...
However, if they can turn 70% of their breaking power in to electrical energy, accelerating the train back up to speed or, apparently, 15Km of crusing can be done absolutely for free. The problem with trams is the same problem any group transport vehicle has... But worse.
Trams in particular have very short distances between stations, often only 500m or so. Great for getting on and off, it makes them very accessible unlike traditional rail which doesn't get used much because the stations are so far apart, but, because the distance is so short, they literally spend all of their time accelerating, decelerating and stopped.
Now, the most efficient way to run a vehicle is at a constant speed, acceleration is expensive in terms of energy, and the more mass you have, the more energy you expend. Trams almost never reach a constant speed and because they're basically rail, they're extremely heavy as well.
Essentially trams are a square peg beaten into a round hole. Hence the battery kludge to try to make them more efficient.
But a tram runs on rails which mean it always follows a known route rather precisely and can therefore be supplied with electricity directly... No batteries required.
Isn't this just solving a problem which doesn't really exist?
1: Publicly funded science where scientists are encouraged to seek grant funding from the state. 2: Privately funded science where Universities would be encouraged to fund research through licensing.
Then answer the same question with respect to society.
Mmm. Nah. The Semantic Web is most useful to remove humans from the loop completely. i.e. When Skynet wants to know which batter had the most RBIs in 1997 it will be able to understand from the XML DTD what a batter is and how that relates to RBIs...
The sun will wake you up, the electricity won't be reliable or cheap enough for you to afford to spend it on an electric alarm clock. You'll stumble down stairs, grab your sickle, go out get on your bicycle and ride to work. You'll spend the day cutting Soya, Willow, Switchgrass, Jatropha or some other energy crop because the product is too expensive to spend fuelling farm machinery. There will be hundreds like you in the fields, the cities will be largely deserted, only the rich able to afford to live there.
Depends if you use them to access an overdraft. Nope, it doesn't.
There are basically 2 sources of money. The mint, and bank loans. Every penny of money in existence comes from one of those two sources. Just because you don't have any debts or overdraft doesn't change the fact that money is either cash, or credit, with a debt.
A check isn't credit, and neither is a debit card, but they aren't cash. All non cash money is or was credit, and every penny or cent of it is backed somewhere by a debt. It's all credit.
One of these skills is keyboarding, and honestly, how many typing training packages have you seen on 'nix? Or even Mac? Well. I counted 8 on Ubuntu, including one Dvorak. In the package respositories... To access these you click on Applications. Then you click on Add/Remove. Then you wait for about 10 seconds. Then you type "typing" into the search box and... Wait... I see your problem... Catch 22. Damn, why didn't they think of that?The fools! The fools! You have to know how to type before you can find a typing tutor application. OH NO! Linux is doomed! DOOMED!
Where's the equivalent of your doodling software, trivia games, and all that stuff you would find in a primary school computer lab? Edubuntu?
Cash makes up only about 5% of US money, about 3% of UK money. All the rest is credit, created from loans. Which means it is easy to make the argument that a disproportionately large number of criminal activities use cash and that the restriction of cash would make criminal activity more traceable.
Even on Windows printing is a disaster. Getting anything more than an A4 printout is an exercise in frustration on virtually every platform I've ever used.
Why do you not change your party to Republican for the primary? Unless it is already past your states deadline to switch, if your state has a deadline. Stack the Jury. They have absolutely no qualms about doing the same.
Politics in the US is outright pathetic. That may sound crass - but really, where is the candidate that doesn't have a stick up his ass and his hand in the cookie jar. Here
Slashdot Mirror
If rolling resistance was quite as big a problem as you make it out to be, tyres would overheat and burst into flames on a regular basis as significant proportion of the 80, 100kW+ an engine produces is lost as heat. Getting stuck without a train and tram system as we hit the final oil crisis simply because trams accelerate and decelerate a lot is not a valid argument. Yes, it is. You should investigate alternatives which are more efficient, more effective and cheaper than trams. If you spend $500 million putting in a tram system which only 5% of the local population can use effectively, that's $500 million which can't then be spent putting in a system which is twice as energy efficient and 30% of the population can use effectively.
e.g.
http://www.atsltd.co.uk/prt/spec/
Trams are the square peg in a round hole.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inflation
e.g.
http://www.edinburgh-tram.co.uk/tram.htm
http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/sheffield-tram/specs.html
Then you need an infrastructure which can handle the weight of the vehicles. This is usually also very expensive per mile. And keep in mind also that rolling friction on steel rails is a lot less than friction from a rubber tire on a roadway. Rolling resistance is secondary to air resistance and the effect on efficiency is much lower than simply going from internal combustion to electric. Trolley buses have most of the advantages of trams without the disadvantages.
I have no problem with rail used appropriately. You get a train carrying hundreds of people up to speed and then let it roll for 200 miles to another city you have one of the most efficient transport mechanisms in existence even if it weighs 200 tonnes. But stop/start that same train every 2 miles and it's a completely different story.
A much better solution in the second case is to use small vehicles which can pull into offline stations allowing other vehicles to continue non stop with no acceleration or deceleration.
However, they stopped producing the most important figure (M3) last year, just as the numbers were hitting around 10% per year.
You realise that 1.4 million multiplied by $10,000 is $14 billion? Which is much, much bigger than $1 billion. In fact, it's 14 times as big.
And no $20million/mile rails required...
Trams in particular have very short distances between stations, often only 500m or so. Great for getting on and off, it makes them very accessible unlike traditional rail which doesn't get used much because the stations are so far apart, but, because the distance is so short, they literally spend all of their time accelerating, decelerating and stopped.
Now, the most efficient way to run a vehicle is at a constant speed, acceleration is expensive in terms of energy, and the more mass you have, the more energy you expend. Trams almost never reach a constant speed and because they're basically rail, they're extremely heavy as well.
Essentially trams are a square peg beaten into a round hole. Hence the battery kludge to try to make them more efficient.
But a tram runs on rails which mean it always follows a known route rather precisely and can therefore be supplied with electricity directly... No batteries required.
Isn't this just solving a problem which doesn't really exist?
I thought the new analogue format was laser encoded ceramic...
How about instead.
Which is better for science:
1: Publicly funded science where scientists are encouraged to seek grant funding from the state.
2: Privately funded science where Universities would be encouraged to fund research through licensing.
Then answer the same question with respect to society.
Mmm. Nah. The Semantic Web is most useful to remove humans from the loop completely. i.e. When Skynet wants to know which batter had the most RBIs in 1997 it will be able to understand from the XML DTD what a batter is and how that relates to RBIs...
So... What's an RBI then when it's at home?
The sun will wake you up, the electricity won't be reliable or cheap enough for you to afford to spend it on an electric alarm clock. You'll stumble down stairs, grab your sickle, go out get on your bicycle and ride to work. You'll spend the day cutting Soya, Willow, Switchgrass, Jatropha or some other energy crop because the product is too expensive to spend fuelling farm machinery. There will be hundreds like you in the fields, the cities will be largely deserted, only the rich able to afford to live there.
There are basically 2 sources of money. The mint, and bank loans. Every penny of money in existence comes from one of those two sources. Just because you don't have any debts or overdraft doesn't change the fact that money is either cash, or credit, with a debt.
Cash makes up only about 5% of US money, about 3% of UK money. All the rest is credit, created from loans. Which means it is easy to make the argument that a disproportionately large number of criminal activities use cash and that the restriction of cash would make criminal activity more traceable.
Also... People want more, but harder next time.
Didn't they get like 70% in the elections? Which would mean that they do represent their people.
Fox is a privately owned broadcaster...
Says it all really.
Even on Windows printing is a disaster. Getting anything more than an A4 printout is an exercise in frustration on virtually every platform I've ever used.