As long as you're still overall getting the power cheaper from wind turbines or PV, it doesn't really matter that you sometimes have too much. New nuclear plants are really expensive.
As for the intermittency - how would you handle peaks in a grid with only new nuclear plants? Not by more expensive nuclear plants sitting idle most of the time... So this is actually a (solvable) problem shared between nuclear, wind and PV.
Below you cite the household prices in Germany - but those are high because of taxes.
I disagree with this point. It's my app/website/whatever. If I want to use information that your browser or operating system sends to my server, I don't have to tell you what I'm collecting or how I'm using that information.
And that, my friend, is the reason the EU made the GDPR and will slap a fine on you if you ever practice that kind of thinking towards consumers in the EU.
When people do not expect to be spied on, it's not legal to spy on them.
Just like it's not legal to hide a camera in a public restroom and take a snapshot of your private parts.
Why do you think it's odd? If AIs can be super-AIs because of man-made hardware, then perhaps humans can pull the same trick and not end up with the short end of the stick?
All he's saying is that for this to actually work, we probably need a better hardware interface than eyeballs and keyboards.
Still seems rather unlikely but considering how poorly he seems to understand his obligations as a CEO of a public company, who knows. He doesn't seem to have any understanding of why we made rules about misleading public investors.
If he's been lying all along, he deserves what he gets. But it doesn't actually seem so. We'll see.
What's ironic about this is that Musk is considerably more open and informative than most other CEOs in a similar position, which is a great benefit to the small investor IMHO.
Case in point, the whole going private thing started because he thought he ought to tell the small investors about it too, and not just have private conversations with a few big ones.
You're pulling a strawman. Try looking up the bill the Japanese people are paying so far for Fukushima. Ignoring that and pulling the "look how few deaths I'm aware of" card is ignoring the elephant in the room.
The truth is that you can't buy insurance for a nuclear plant. Instead the way it works is that the government gives a guarantee for everything above a certain amount.
The price of solar has already fallen, and it is still falling. The same for wind.
The thing is that Caroline Lucas is right. Wind and solar are in fact falling in price so rapidly that you have to be extremely biased towards a particular tech to not notice it.
There's a lot of hype going on in nuclear land. The tech itself is appealing to some. But it's just not very practical.
I think you're overthinking it. In my experience, children get lots of fun out of dirty words, even simple words like "fart" or "bottom" and thus have a lot of experience with the concept. "That is not a polite word to use" is probably enough explanation.
Google are where they are because they've built a solid reputation with consumers, not because they did something shady.
... except when they did, and eventually the case was raised within EU, and carefully examined, and yes, found to be shady, and a fine was decided on.
It's not against the law to run a good business and end up in a monopoly situation. But monopolies are generally not a good thing because they come with a special set of powers. So we have a special set of rules governing them. If you run a monopoly and exploit certain of these powers, then you may end up facing the consequences.
You will be using fossil fuel your entire lives. Get over it.
You're underestimating exponential growth. At some point the markets and infrastructure for coal and oil collapse because they can't compete on cost. The gas fracking boom isn't going to continue.
Why? GNOME provides much of the infrastructure these projects are using? How would supporting a non-infrastructure project help the wider Linux community?
Not disagreeing that more of these projects could need funding, perhaps except for Firefox which is funded by Mozilla. Look up their annual budget.
If you're going to nitpick, at least do it properly.
The statement doesn't say there's a profit. When they raise the Supercharger price, they could very well just be losing less money, hence increasing the investment budget, given that they still receive the same subsidies from other branches of Tesla.
There's a bit of difference between knowing that you have bought music X and knowing that you listen to music X at a specific point in time at a specific location.
Given the realities of climate change, it is immoral to oppose nuclear power
Renewables + storage is going to be much cheaper than nuclear + storage.
Ah, you say, just build more nuclear plants, then you don't need storage! True, if price is not an issue. But if price is not an issue, then what's the problem with building renewables + storage?
Electric cars are generally more expensive to buy due to the price of the battery, but cheaper to drive since they don't need fuel. So TCO can be better.
If people were good at math, they would be able figure out such a lower TCO despite a higher initial cost - but most people probably don't so they just lease it instead.
What? The third Alien movie is by far the best. The first is a jump-scare movie, the second is a lame action movie, but the atmosphere in the third - we get much closer to Ripley.
Well, if you want to put it that way, Python has two fundamental datastructures, lists and hash tables. What's a bit peculiar is that classes are (usually) using the hash table. In Java, an object is actually a sort of irregular array - so to get obj.x, you take the obj reference and add to that the offset to x.
Lists in Python are lists of references. However, there is an array module that makes you make lists/arrays of values. But the thing is - if you need a ton of numbers, you probably also need to do operations on them efficiently and the standard Python interpreter can't do that because it always boxes/unboxes everything. That's why people are using numpy.
It doesn't have to be this way, though. PyPy (alternative Python interpreter) has a smarter list implementation that dynamically chooses whether to use a list of references or a list of values. And it can also take Python code operating on those lists and dynamically translate it into machine code that operates directly on the underlying values instead of going through the reference boxing/unboxing circus.
You seem to imply we are using offshore companies to defeat the intent of the law. But that's not the case.
Never the case? Or just sometimes not the case? I think people have a problem with the latter, even if they only occur for one out of ten of these empty shell companies.
Also, there are sometimes conflicts of interest. For instance, if your company has an operation in Africa, it's probably of interest to the locals that you pay taxes there too, even if it's more work for you.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, but it's not a pipe dream.
As long as you're still overall getting the power cheaper from wind turbines or PV, it doesn't really matter that you sometimes have too much. New nuclear plants are really expensive.
As for the intermittency - how would you handle peaks in a grid with only new nuclear plants? Not by more expensive nuclear plants sitting idle most of the time... So this is actually a (solvable) problem shared between nuclear, wind and PV.
Below you cite the household prices in Germany - but those are high because of taxes.
They're finally tossing Musk under the bus.
He paid Tesla's part of the previous fine himself. If you think they're throwing him under the bus, you're not understanding the situation correctly.
Most of the backlash against systemd isn't because it's *bad* per se, but because systemd is in so many ways the opposite of the Unix philosophy.
That, my friend, is a shallow analysis.
If you take a closer look, systemd is actually the init software itself and then a bunch of simple tools.
The reason why people hate it has more to do with the fact that Lennart Poettering takes the crufty old parts of the Unix landscape personal.
He wants to see things move. And he somehow has the energy to make it happen, where others have failed.
This in turn means that parts are moving that didn't use to move, which causes a fair amount of breakage.
IMHO this is something we tolerate for the coming generations whose daemons will be babysit for free without having to lift a finger.
Not saying that systemd is perfect.
I disagree with this point. It's my app/website/whatever. If I want to use information that your browser or operating system sends to my server, I don't have to tell you what I'm collecting or how I'm using that information.
And that, my friend, is the reason the EU made the GDPR and will slap a fine on you if you ever practice that kind of thinking towards consumers in the EU.
When people do not expect to be spied on, it's not legal to spy on them.
Just like it's not legal to hide a camera in a public restroom and take a snapshot of your private parts.
Why do you think it's odd? If AIs can be super-AIs because of man-made hardware, then perhaps humans can pull the same trick and not end up with the short end of the stick?
All he's saying is that for this to actually work, we probably need a better hardware interface than eyeballs and keyboards.
Still seems rather unlikely but considering how poorly he seems to understand his obligations as a CEO of a public company, who knows. He doesn't seem to have any understanding of why we made rules about misleading public investors.
If he's been lying all along, he deserves what he gets. But it doesn't actually seem so. We'll see.
What's ironic about this is that Musk is considerably more open and informative than most other CEOs in a similar position, which is a great benefit to the small investor IMHO.
Case in point, the whole going private thing started because he thought he ought to tell the small investors about it too, and not just have private conversations with a few big ones.
You're pulling a strawman. Try looking up the bill the Japanese people are paying so far for Fukushima. Ignoring that and pulling the "look how few deaths I'm aware of" card is ignoring the elephant in the room.
The truth is that you can't buy insurance for a nuclear plant. Instead the way it works is that the government gives a guarantee for everything above a certain amount.
The price of solar has already fallen, and it is still falling. The same for wind.
The thing is that Caroline Lucas is right. Wind and solar are in fact falling in price so rapidly that you have to be extremely biased towards a particular tech to not notice it.
There's a lot of hype going on in nuclear land. The tech itself is appealing to some. But it's just not very practical.
That problem has been solved in the end, thanks to Bobby Tables.
Ah, so you Bobby Tabled them, and now only the working ones are still in business?
I think you're overthinking it. In my experience, children get lots of fun out of dirty words, even simple words like "fart" or "bottom" and thus have a lot of experience with the concept. "That is not a polite word to use" is probably enough explanation.
Google are where they are because they've built a solid reputation with consumers, not because they did something shady.
... except when they did, and eventually the case was raised within EU, and carefully examined, and yes, found to be shady, and a fine was decided on.
It's not against the law to run a good business and end up in a monopoly situation. But monopolies are generally not a good thing because they come with a special set of powers. So we have a special set of rules governing them. If you run a monopoly and exploit certain of these powers, then you may end up facing the consequences.
There's nothing new in this.
Except it takes a couple of years for the Google car to come back next time...
While you have a point, you're also wrong:
But the capacity factor is low
... doesn't matter in itself. What matters is overall price and how well it fits into the energy market/matches the consumption.
... and the O&M cost is not free
True. But low, and improving as far as I'm aware.
The land required is not free.
But typically very cheap.
The capital cost is not free.
Solar and wind is currently on an exponential curve of falling costs. Interest rates are low at the moment.
The owners cost is not free.
Are you talking about the investors? Wind and solar is considerably less centralized than other power plants, so competition is not a problem.
The cost of T&D is not free.
True, transmission looks like it will be more expensive, especially in the transition phase.
Levelized cost means renewables still cannot compete with natural gas.
Except they can, since some time ago. Things are moving, my friend.
You will be using fossil fuel your entire lives. Get over it.
You're underestimating exponential growth. At some point the markets and infrastructure for coal and oil collapse because they can't compete on cost. The gas fracking boom isn't going to continue.
Why? GNOME provides much of the infrastructure these projects are using? How would supporting a non-infrastructure project help the wider Linux community?
Not disagreeing that more of these projects could need funding, perhaps except for Firefox which is funded by Mozilla. Look up their annual budget.
If you're going to nitpick, at least do it properly.
The statement doesn't say there's a profit. When they raise the Supercharger price, they could very well just be losing less money, hence increasing the investment budget, given that they still receive the same subsidies from other branches of Tesla.
There's a bit of difference between knowing that you have bought music X and knowing that you listen to music X at a specific point in time at a specific location.
Given the realities of climate change, it is immoral to oppose nuclear power
Renewables + storage is going to be much cheaper than nuclear + storage.
Ah, you say, just build more nuclear plants, then you don't need storage! True, if price is not an issue. But if price is not an issue, then what's the problem with building renewables + storage?
Nuclear is a bad complement to renewables.
Electric cars are generally more expensive to buy due to the price of the battery, but cheaper to drive since they don't need fuel. So TCO can be better.
If people were good at math, they would be able figure out such a lower TCO despite a higher initial cost - but most people probably don't so they just lease it instead.
What are those standard you speak of?
I can understand if you just don't want to think about it at all, but then... why are you here? Please hand in your geek card.
Perhaps you can get a new card from the I've-seen-the-world crowd down the main stream.
What? The third Alien movie is by far the best. The first is a jump-scare movie, the second is a lame action movie, but the atmosphere in the third - we get much closer to Ripley.
And it pisses me off when we refuse to consider smaller and far more modern (read: safer) designs to offset the "scary" bullshit.
You can't buy 'em - all you can do is fund a research prototype.
Meanwhile, other sources of energy keep falling in price.
Oh, give a rest. Nuclear isn't cheaper than wind and solar in South Australia, not by a wide margin. And both wind and solar are falling year-by-year.
I don't think you're going to see lots of new nuclear plants in the US either. It's just too expensive.
Unfortunately we cannot build them, because they are so expensive.
Well, if you want to put it that way, Python has two fundamental datastructures, lists and hash tables. What's a bit peculiar is that classes are (usually) using the hash table. In Java, an object is actually a sort of irregular array - so to get obj.x, you take the obj reference and add to that the offset to x.
Lists in Python are lists of references. However, there is an array module that makes you make lists/arrays of values. But the thing is - if you need a ton of numbers, you probably also need to do operations on them efficiently and the standard Python interpreter can't do that because it always boxes/unboxes everything. That's why people are using numpy.
It doesn't have to be this way, though. PyPy (alternative Python interpreter) has a smarter list implementation that dynamically chooses whether to use a list of references or a list of values. And it can also take Python code operating on those lists and dynamically translate it into machine code that operates directly on the underlying values instead of going through the reference boxing/unboxing circus.
You seem to imply we are using offshore companies to defeat the intent of the law. But that's not the case.
Never the case? Or just sometimes not the case? I think people have a problem with the latter, even if they only occur for one out of ten of these empty shell companies.
Also, there are sometimes conflicts of interest. For instance, if your company has an operation in Africa, it's probably of interest to the locals that you pay taxes there too, even if it's more work for you.
In any case, thanks for writing these comments.