By the sound of the article summary, this 'gas' will also make you thin and get you a job promotion. The article itself is much less rosy. It says its compatible and efficient, but how efficient. It suggests that it is for niche markets like the military ect., aka big spenders. And no you can't produce fuel from plants to offset oil because of land area, for more info see http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/a-skeptic-looks-at-alternative-energy
Great, another over-hyped gutless computer. There are a few problems to this picture. 1)You can only use it if you have an internet connection. 2) This cannot too much more powerful than an atom processor or chrome book, so it will be like a chrome book, but with no screen. You know how popular chrome books are? Dell is doing what the entire industry has been doing for the last 7 or so years. Trying to find something different that consumers will love, while the consumers are stuck on getting every new thing to try it out. In the end we will have stacks of worthless electronics around us.
Turns out that this is very easy to remove from the smoke of coal, at my local plant they've been doing it for years and it get's a lot of it ou. One thing is for sure, as we move more of our manufacturing to China we are essentially 'Sooting' our planet because regulations are much less strict there. I wouldn't be surprised if they just send it straight up in the air. If you've ever been in the western united states and seen the haze, most of it is from China.
If states like California would allow more refining capacity to be built, then the supply end of the market would have more of a 'buffer' to supply problems (if you have a refinery they build these large things called tanks to store petrol in, this boots your supply and you can crank up capacity if you need more). If you don't believe me you can read this: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2004/06/the_great_refinery_shortage.html There hasn't been one built in California for at least 30+ years because of environmental restrictions. I was talking to a VP of an oil distributing company, he said that 10 years ago they were trying to get additional capacity for their oil refinery, each time they were rejected because of these regulations and today it would be prohibitively expensive to add capacity. This is not just a problem for California either... just look at what has been built in the last 40 years and where http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=29&t=6 . We are all to ready to fill up our vehicles, but when you bite the hand that feeds you, it may have a hard time delivering.
If you don't design products you may not see why. First of all fasteners are a big one, you can't just shut off an entire supply chain over night, and who really wants to print 1.27mm on a wrench. "Hey could you hand me that 1.27mm wrench?" Seriously, no rational person would say that. What are you going to do? tell all the manufacturers that they can only make metric sizes?. No one would want a metric speed limit system, trust me on this one. The tickets get rounded off to the nearest 5km/hr, which is smaller than 5mi/hr which is 40% smaller. This leaves a much smaller margin of error when your driving. Guess what the residential speed limits in Canada are? 30km... (25% slower) it makes driving crazy. Circuit board design happens to be in both because of international standards most datasheets are printed in metric. The change of measurement systems will happen gradually for market reasons, if it happens at all.
I won't buy ebooks because they are not mine, I can't store them away on a shelf in the even the service goes down and I can't look up the DRM. If the service goes down permanently, I loose my collection! I can't loan an ebook out to a friend. The worst problem is I cannot resell an ebook. An I still don't understand why publishers are making consumers pay an exorbitant cost for them, the publishers don't even have to pay for the printing anymore. Until all of these problems are solved I will buy very little ebooks.
The quality of life is very much different, if you think of all of the crap you buy vs what people had in 1960. Plus have you ever been in the houses of 1960? people were mostly content with 1500 ft^2, now people wont settle for anything less than 2500 ft^2. http://www.avidhomestudios.com/blog/2009/01/05/the-house-of-tomorrow-from-the-recession-today/. Would you buy a car from 1980? You'd save a lot of money but you wouldn't have the same luxuries.
I'm going to rip on NASA and then politicians. You forgot to add over budget and over designed to the list. almost all of their projects are overbudget, because they don't know when to stop adding features or designing. Take JWST, and many other big projects, they almost don't fly because they miss their goals. This is extremely ironic because NASA has written the book on system engineering and project development (I've studied the subject). This is one of their problems, the other has to do with the political climate. I knew one of the directorates that was on the committee that decided the heliophysics funding. One of his observations was that NASA gets told what to do, but they don't get to set the price and they get told what to do every 4 years. Something like the JWST or a moon mission needs a massive amount of time and funding to develop a successful mission. So lets say a president comes in and tells you that you need to develop moon missions and maybe go to mars. So you get all of your engineers and scientists in a huddle and ask them how much it will cost and what needs to happen to accomplish this goal. So they go out and do some initial costing and go to industry suppliers and figure out what needs to happen. The then come back and tell you it will cost a lot more than your current budget and it will take several years to get started. By the time this has happened a new president is elected and they look at the budget and say, we don't need to go to mars or the moon, it is too expensive and there is not enough benefit, we need to work on science that has to do with the earth and the sun and launch satellites instead, so forget about all of that mars stuff and switch gears. Well the problem is you just blew through a large percentage of your budget to pay your engineers and scientists to work on the preliminary stuff. What NASA needs is to be able to set their own agenda with political oversight, but not political control. And if somebody in Washington needs something from NASA they had better throw some extra money in NASA's direction. Also NASA's budget has never increased, and inflation has increased, so they get less bang for their buck and that hurts too. If you want a wonderful space program, you going to have to fund it and not switch gears every 4 or so years.
You know this map says to me that Antarctica has warmed up 0.3C (or K) and quite possibly that one station in antartica is out of sync... And since this data is only from the last ~50 years, I don't feel the need to get worked up about it. By the way isn't the global average in the past higher than the 0.3C shown here?
You always hear about the warmest part how about the rest of it? Oh, and I wanted to look up the local climate for my area because I got into an argument with my boss about local climate (I think it is warming up here). I could not download more than several days to 1 year of temperature data anywhere, so where would I find that data? Any guesses? I'm in the states. The best one I could find is weather underground, but that will only let you download a year-ish at a time.
Its all part of those in science who are evil and want to confuse you. I've also wondered the same thing, but if your just measuring a differential temperature 1K is the same as 1C when talking relative temperature.
I was in canada for a few years, I watched a guy pull out his pistol and show it to me (I don't know if this was legal). He did target shooting and speed courses, he explained to me that he always had to have the trigger lock on it while at home. When he wanted to go to the range, he had to call up the range warden to tell him he was coming, drive straight there and straight back after he was done. If he decided to pick up some groceries on the way back and got caught he would end up in jail. About 3 months previous to this about 7 RCMP's died because a guy shot them with an assault rife and a shotgun, these types of guns were not legal so how did this happen? What happens to the average joe when someone like this breaks into his house and he has to get his key out to unlock his gun? You will never be able to eliminate bad people without causing some serious collateral damage to freedom.
Having been on a team that has built and launched two cubesats, I consider myself somewhat of an expert in the area. I'll answer this question to the best of my knowledge, I've been to the cubesat conference for several years now (it's mostly academics but most of the launch companies are there.) The first couple of years as a student I would get all excited whenever companies like this would start up. I noticed quickly that the same company never came around to the conference more than a few years, why? Because they couldn't get the funding, a launch requires some where in the range of 10$ million. There are plenty of companies that start up and claim that they will launch a rocket with a 50-100 (or so cubesats) and that will cover there costs, the problem is they have to find that many people to fill the spots. No one has done that yet. Cubesats were designed as a containerized system to mitigate the testing and integration launch costs. Everything that goes to space has to be thoroughly tested, when you have to do this on a case by case basis, it takes a lot of time (=money). So if you already know your payload will fit in a 10cm x 10cm x 10cm (1U) and has a ~1kg weight then that saves a lot of testing. Another benefit of the container is NASA can slap them all over their rockets and launch 10's of them (currently) at a time. Since every rocket has tons of payload margin (you want to ensure your payload reaches space you size its mass several percent smaller than what the rocket can handle to ensure delivery) and some payloads are in the tons, throwing on a few cubsats won't really do a thing to your mass budget. Now NASA has a program for this: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/smallsats/elana/index.html this has been successful. As far as launching your own, I wouldn't count on it in the near future. Launching a satellite is not trivial, you have to make sure its not going to break apart, or damage other payloads on the way out of its container. Look up ISBN: 047075012X . You have to make sure its not going to outgass because volatile compounds evaporate and can cause problems. You have to use materials that can withstand the rigors of space, atomic oxygen and radiation can be rough on most materials. Plus some materials like PVC will evaporate in a vacuum. Another problem is ensuring you have enough battery and solar power to support your payload. You have to make sure you payload will not shake apart on the way up (rockets are very very bumpy rides). The satellite should have an attributed and control system to make sure it can orient itself in the right direction (for your solar cells and radio). And last but not least is the radio and comm system. A ground station is needed and the appropriate radio frequencies used (if you want anything fast you have to get a license from the gov, this is very difficult). The satellite itself needs to have a good antenna (if you have any nulls in your antenna pattern then you won't be able to communicate with it when the null is pointed at you. Oh, and if you put a camera on it the NOAA has to know about it and approve of your data (really stupid, but that's the way the government is). Anyway I could go on for a long time... Building a satellite requires people from many different disciplines to pull it off. Unless you are going for insanely simple you would have to have a group of people to accomplish the task. If there is available access and launch costs come down I could see a few hobbyists groups pulling it off in 10 or so years if they can clear all of the governmental hoops. I won't believe any commercial venture claiming that they will launch cubesats (or tubesats http://interorbital.com/TubeSat_1.htm) until they actually do.
If you aren't creative or lack the desire to work, then that is your own fault. With the internet you can sell products to anyone in the world, and anyone can potentially use their skillset to come up with things that other people can use. If your skillset isn't good enough, there are plenty of ways to pick skills up, the potential to learn and develop with other people are limitless with the internet. So figure it out and make yourself useful in todays economy.
When Illinois goes completely broke and the taxpayers refuse to pay the burden, we'll see if all this crap in their system doesn't get cleaned out. But we don't have to worry about that today, that is somebody else's problem.
We don't need a program like this. We already have plenty of launch vehicles for cubesats... every rocket that goes up has some mass margin for at least a few cubesat. The money would be better spent prepping rockets for launch, not on some contest that is not guaranteed to produce results. http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/heo/home/CubeSats_initiative.html
Slashdot Mirror
Half life of DNA is 500 years, http://www.nature.com/news/dna-has-a-521-year-half-life-1.11555 myth busted. So you can forget about dinosaurs, neanderthals and the like.
No, we have tons that we can't access due to environmental restriction. But we are gaining more access to oil as technology improves. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/business/energy-environment/report-sees-us-as-top-oil-producer-in-5-years.html?_r=0. This is partially due to shale reserves. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/american-oil-find-holds-oil-opec/story?id=17536852. We have even more if we can hydrofrack. In short, we will be fine energy-wise as long as people allow us to access it.
By the sound of the article summary, this 'gas' will also make you thin and get you a job promotion. The article itself is much less rosy. It says its compatible and efficient, but how efficient. It suggests that it is for niche markets like the military ect., aka big spenders. And no you can't produce fuel from plants to offset oil because of land area, for more info see http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/a-skeptic-looks-at-alternative-energy
Great, another over-hyped gutless computer. There are a few problems to this picture. 1)You can only use it if you have an internet connection. 2) This cannot too much more powerful than an atom processor or chrome book, so it will be like a chrome book, but with no screen. You know how popular chrome books are? Dell is doing what the entire industry has been doing for the last 7 or so years. Trying to find something different that consumers will love, while the consumers are stuck on getting every new thing to try it out. In the end we will have stacks of worthless electronics around us.
Don't you think it would be easier to get it in your backyard, considering that the US has tons of it?
Turns out that this is very easy to remove from the smoke of coal, at my local plant they've been doing it for years and it get's a lot of it ou. One thing is for sure, as we move more of our manufacturing to China we are essentially 'Sooting' our planet because regulations are much less strict there. I wouldn't be surprised if they just send it straight up in the air. If you've ever been in the western united states and seen the haze, most of it is from China.
If states like California would allow more refining capacity to be built, then the supply end of the market would have more of a 'buffer' to supply problems (if you have a refinery they build these large things called tanks to store petrol in, this boots your supply and you can crank up capacity if you need more). If you don't believe me you can read this: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2004/06/the_great_refinery_shortage.html
There hasn't been one built in California for at least 30+ years because of environmental restrictions. I was talking to a VP of an oil distributing company, he said that 10 years ago they were trying to get additional capacity for their oil refinery, each time they were rejected because of these regulations and today it would be prohibitively expensive to add capacity. This is not just a problem for California either... just look at what has been built in the last 40 years and where http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=29&t=6 . We are all to ready to fill up our vehicles, but when you bite the hand that feeds you, it may have a hard time delivering.
Hey, if your a camera hoarder, you need the next model.
If you don't design products you may not see why. First of all fasteners are a big one, you can't just shut off an entire supply chain over night, and who really wants to print 1.27mm on a wrench. "Hey could you hand me that 1.27mm wrench?" Seriously, no rational person would say that. What are you going to do? tell all the manufacturers that they can only make metric sizes?. No one would want a metric speed limit system, trust me on this one. The tickets get rounded off to the nearest 5km/hr, which is smaller than 5mi/hr which is 40% smaller. This leaves a much smaller margin of error when your driving. Guess what the residential speed limits in Canada are? 30km... (25% slower) it makes driving crazy. Circuit board design happens to be in both because of international standards most datasheets are printed in metric. The change of measurement systems will happen gradually for market reasons, if it happens at all.
Check out nikonrumours.com, nikon is slated to release the D5200 around that time.
I won't buy ebooks because they are not mine, I can't store them away on a shelf in the even the service goes down and I can't look up the DRM. If the service goes down permanently, I loose my collection! I can't loan an ebook out to a friend. The worst problem is I cannot resell an ebook. An I still don't understand why publishers are making consumers pay an exorbitant cost for them, the publishers don't even have to pay for the printing anymore. Until all of these problems are solved I will buy very little ebooks.
The quality of life is very much different, if you think of all of the crap you buy vs what people had in 1960. Plus have you ever been in the houses of 1960? people were mostly content with 1500 ft^2, now people wont settle for anything less than 2500 ft^2. http://www.avidhomestudios.com/blog/2009/01/05/the-house-of-tomorrow-from-the-recession-today/. Would you buy a car from 1980? You'd save a lot of money but you wouldn't have the same luxuries.
Yeah, science accepts fact, but as soon as politicians get a hold of it they twist it to their advantage.
I'm going to rip on NASA and then politicians. You forgot to add over budget and over designed to the list. almost all of their projects are overbudget, because they don't know when to stop adding features or designing. Take JWST, and many other big projects, they almost don't fly because they miss their goals. This is extremely ironic because NASA has written the book on system engineering and project development (I've studied the subject). This is one of their problems, the other has to do with the political climate. I knew one of the directorates that was on the committee that decided the heliophysics funding. One of his observations was that NASA gets told what to do, but they don't get to set the price and they get told what to do every 4 years. Something like the JWST or a moon mission needs a massive amount of time and funding to develop a successful mission. So lets say a president comes in and tells you that you need to develop moon missions and maybe go to mars. So you get all of your engineers and scientists in a huddle and ask them how much it will cost and what needs to happen to accomplish this goal. So they go out and do some initial costing and go to industry suppliers and figure out what needs to happen. The then come back and tell you it will cost a lot more than your current budget and it will take several years to get started. By the time this has happened a new president is elected and they look at the budget and say, we don't need to go to mars or the moon, it is too expensive and there is not enough benefit, we need to work on science that has to do with the earth and the sun and launch satellites instead, so forget about all of that mars stuff and switch gears. Well the problem is you just blew through a large percentage of your budget to pay your engineers and scientists to work on the preliminary stuff. What NASA needs is to be able to set their own agenda with political oversight, but not political control. And if somebody in Washington needs something from NASA they had better throw some extra money in NASA's direction. Also NASA's budget has never increased, and inflation has increased, so they get less bang for their buck and that hurts too. If you want a wonderful space program, you going to have to fund it and not switch gears every 4 or so years.
You know this map says to me that Antarctica has warmed up 0.3C (or K) and quite possibly that one station in antartica is out of sync... And since this data is only from the last ~50 years, I don't feel the need to get worked up about it. By the way isn't the global average in the past higher than the 0.3C shown here?
http://phys.org/news/2012-12-rapid-west-antarctic-ice-sheet.html, look at the picture...
This is a better link, and has more info: http://phys.org/news/2012-12-rapid-west-antarctic-ice-sheet.html
You always hear about the warmest part how about the rest of it? Oh, and I wanted to look up the local climate for my area because I got into an argument with my boss about local climate (I think it is warming up here). I could not download more than several days to 1 year of temperature data anywhere, so where would I find that data? Any guesses? I'm in the states. The best one I could find is weather underground, but that will only let you download a year-ish at a time.
Its all part of those in science who are evil and want to confuse you. I've also wondered the same thing, but if your just measuring a differential temperature 1K is the same as 1C when talking relative temperature.
I was in canada for a few years, I watched a guy pull out his pistol and show it to me (I don't know if this was legal). He did target shooting and speed courses, he explained to me that he always had to have the trigger lock on it while at home. When he wanted to go to the range, he had to call up the range warden to tell him he was coming, drive straight there and straight back after he was done. If he decided to pick up some groceries on the way back and got caught he would end up in jail. About 3 months previous to this about 7 RCMP's died because a guy shot them with an assault rife and a shotgun, these types of guns were not legal so how did this happen? What happens to the average joe when someone like this breaks into his house and he has to get his key out to unlock his gun? You will never be able to eliminate bad people without causing some serious collateral damage to freedom.
Having been on a team that has built and launched two cubesats, I consider myself somewhat of an expert in the area. I'll answer this question to the best of my knowledge, I've been to the cubesat conference for several years now (it's mostly academics but most of the launch companies are there.) The first couple of years as a student I would get all excited whenever companies like this would start up. I noticed quickly that the same company never came around to the conference more than a few years, why? Because they couldn't get the funding, a launch requires some where in the range of 10$ million. There are plenty of companies that start up and claim that they will launch a rocket with a 50-100 (or so cubesats) and that will cover there costs, the problem is they have to find that many people to fill the spots. No one has done that yet. Cubesats were designed as a containerized system to mitigate the testing and integration launch costs. Everything that goes to space has to be thoroughly tested, when you have to do this on a case by case basis, it takes a lot of time (=money). So if you already know your payload will fit in a 10cm x 10cm x 10cm (1U) and has a ~1kg weight then that saves a lot of testing. Another benefit of the container is NASA can slap them all over their rockets and launch 10's of them (currently) at a time. Since every rocket has tons of payload margin (you want to ensure your payload reaches space you size its mass several percent smaller than what the rocket can handle to ensure delivery) and some payloads are in the tons, throwing on a few cubsats won't really do a thing to your mass budget. Now NASA has a program for this: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/smallsats/elana/index.html this has been successful. As far as launching your own, I wouldn't count on it in the near future. Launching a satellite is not trivial, you have to make sure its not going to break apart, or damage other payloads on the way out of its container. Look up ISBN: 047075012X . You have to make sure its not going to outgass because volatile compounds evaporate and can cause problems. You have to use materials that can withstand the rigors of space, atomic oxygen and radiation can be rough on most materials. Plus some materials like PVC will evaporate in a vacuum. Another problem is ensuring you have enough battery and solar power to support your payload. You have to make sure you payload will not shake apart on the way up (rockets are very very bumpy rides). The satellite should have an attributed and control system to make sure it can orient itself in the right direction (for your solar cells and radio). And last but not least is the radio and comm system. A ground station is needed and the appropriate radio frequencies used (if you want anything fast you have to get a license from the gov, this is very difficult). The satellite itself needs to have a good antenna (if you have any nulls in your antenna pattern then you won't be able to communicate with it when the null is pointed at you. Oh, and if you put a camera on it the NOAA has to know about it and approve of your data (really stupid, but that's the way the government is). Anyway I could go on for a long time... Building a satellite requires people from many different disciplines to pull it off. Unless you are going for insanely simple you would have to have a group of people to accomplish the task. If there is available access and launch costs come down I could see a few hobbyists groups pulling it off in 10 or so years if they can clear all of the governmental hoops. I won't believe any commercial venture claiming that they will launch cubesats (or tubesats http://interorbital.com/TubeSat_1.htm) until they actually do.
If you aren't creative or lack the desire to work, then that is your own fault. With the internet you can sell products to anyone in the world, and anyone can potentially use their skillset to come up with things that other people can use. If your skillset isn't good enough, there are plenty of ways to pick skills up, the potential to learn and develop with other people are limitless with the internet. So figure it out and make yourself useful in todays economy.
Aren't they a few days early? This 2012 thing is turning out to be more like Y2K
When Illinois goes completely broke and the taxpayers refuse to pay the burden, we'll see if all this crap in their system doesn't get cleaned out. But we don't have to worry about that today, that is somebody else's problem.
We don't need a program like this. We already have plenty of launch vehicles for cubesats... every rocket that goes up has some mass margin for at least a few cubesat. The money would be better spent prepping rockets for launch, not on some contest that is not guaranteed to produce results. http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/heo/home/CubeSats_initiative.html