> who doesn't place their finger on the back of their phone
Me. I hold it with my thumb on the power button on the right, my first three fingers around the left side of the frame, and my pinky curled up so its on the bottom holding it up. None of my fingers is near the location of the sensor found on other phones.
> Even after puffing on just one electronic cigarette with nicotine, healthy non-smokers were found to have a biological marker known to increase the risk of heart disease in tobacco users
> adding a third dimension to travel would make a lot of sense coming next... you mean global climate change? You're saying a transport system that uses perhaps 5 to 10 times as much energy as existing technologies is what we need at this point?
Sure, we solved the pilot problem. Call me when you figured out the problem about how to make VTOL use less energy than a wheel.
Construction time - JUST construction time - on Darlington B was 6 years. The fastest modern build I can think of was Qinshan Phase III, which was in China where regulation is "different", the site was already prepared, the work crew shifted from another project at the same site, and the Canadian taxpayer footed $2 billion of the cost. That took just over 4 years.
> Allow me to point out that after RTFA, this power company spent $950 million on trying to get Levy built
So basically 10 to 20% of the CAPEX. That is not a big deal, paperwork is almost always 25% of any power project (and about 50% in the case of household PV).
> There ARE ways to design reactors that are safe by default
Yeah, that's what they said about AVR. Totally impossible for anything to go wrong, it's completely passively safe. Then a fuel capsule got stuck in the intake and that was it for AVR. They're still paying for it.
> And Fukushima style cost-cutting for nuclear power won't ever happen again
Yeah, because no one is going to build a nuclear plant anymore.
> And Fukushima wasn't not "not doing safety right".
It's pretty clear you don't know what happened there. The meltdown in Unit 1 was due in large part to misleading readings from a critical probe. That the probe in question could give misleading information in precisely this situation was known to the entire world because it was the same failure that happened at TMI. There was an upgrade suggested after TMI, but they didn't bother to install it. That is by any definition "not doing safety right".
But don't take my word for it, the various international nuclear commissions had lots and lots to say about TEPCOs management and safety culture. Like how the operating manual clearly said "if you turn this valve, do not turn it again", so they went ahead and turned it again and Bad Things Happened.
> They basically saved a few thousand dollars in concrete and rebar
The plant in question was *specifically designed not to need a confinement building", which is precisely why they selected that design. The risk of a steam explosion was addressed through the use of the water chilling torus surrounding the reactor vessel. Unfortunately, the torus was not designed to operate on its own for extended periods, which is precisely what happened when the power was wiped out. So, boom.
> there are roughly 450 operational nuclear plants
No, there are 450 nuclear *reactors* in the world. You're not doing your argument any favours by getting even the most basic terminology wrong.
A fixed-wing aircraft uses something between 2 and 3 *times* as much energy per km. If you add vertical performance you can multiply that by another 2 or 3 or so.
The problems we're in now are because we valued convenience over everything. We need to *stop* doing that.
"The problem with zinc batteries stems around them being difficult to charge because of the lack of electrocatalysts needed to reduce and generate oxygen during the discharging and charging of a battery."
That is not the problem. The problem with *every* rechargable battery that has "air" in the name is that air contains all sorts of nasty things the gum up the works after some time. Every xxx-air battery suffers from this, zinc-air, lithium-air, aluminum-air, etc.
The solution is some sort of filter that removes ALL of this, or an electrolyte that doesn't care. Neither is likely for very simple reasons.
The accuracy is not high enough to avoid collisions in busy areas. eLORAN adds:
1) QOS signals so you know if a station is bad 2) dLORAN (a-la dGPS) which greatly improves accuracy 3) globally synced signals (a-la Omega) so you can use any signal as the basis for measurements against any other 4) easy identification of ground vs. skywaves
> just pump enough energy into the air- and the closer you are to the target, the easier it is
But that's just it... in the case of GPS everyone is very far from the broadcasters and it is very easy for the jammer to be closer to its target than the transmitter, and very easy to generate more power than the weak signals from the satellite.
In the case of eLoran this arrangement is highly unlikely. For one thing, your target is likely to be closer to at least one of the transmitters than you are, and the power levels are so much higher that your jammer has to be equally massive.
It is MUCH more difficult to jam Loran, even in theory.
As a pilot that used NDB, it would agree with the "old" but not "effective". Flying an approach against NDBs in the bumps while dodging snow squalls was an experience that made even my cast-iron stomach start to turn. Modern electronics could fix this by doing the work for you, but at an expense level far beyond GPS.
The idea of using any locallized transmitter is a non-starter for budget reasons, and one in the VHF moreso due to the required antenna sizes. NDB is dead, and good riddance.
> the descendant of the loran (long-range navigation) system created during World War II
Nope. That was LORAN, later known as Loran-A. eLORAN is a slightly upgraded Loran-C, which was entirely post-war. They are similar in name only and worked on entirely different techniques and frequencies.
The meat we feed to animals are cut-offs that don't make it into hotdogs. It has its own separate grade, "canning grade".
Meat is not grown *for* pets, although I'm sure there's some fru-fru company that does it. As such, the pets are eating waste, and the CO2 budget is zero.
> If fusion becomes inexpensive and commercially available
And if you know absolutely nothing about how the energy world works, this sounds possible. If you do know a bit, then you know it's not. And the power companies have been telling the fusion folks this continually since the 1970s. But they don't listen - really, when you try to have this conversation they get mad and run away. Literally.
Consider this: any energy producing machine requires a certain amount of money to build. That money has a payback rate based on the riskiness of the investment. For investments like this where there's little salvage value, the rate is the "unsecured rate", about 6.5%. So very simply, if your machine does not sell enough energy in a year to cover those payments and make a profit, no one will build it. You get that, right?
Which is precisely why fission plants are being ignored. They have many technical merits, but at current prices, they cost about 5x as much as a wind turbine to build, but deliver about 3x as much power. And they have fuel, and more expensive maintenance. So no one is building them. That is the only reason.
We know that any possible fusion plant that's been presented will cost much more than a fusion plant. Even in their wildest predictions, assuming everything goes right, power from a fusion plant will be at least 50% more than a fission plant even if you look 100 years into the future:
> Isn't solving a problem like our dependency on fossil fuels
Already solved. While these guys are wasting everyone's time with a system that has repeatedly demonstrated not to work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migma we're installing wind and PV faster than any other power source in history.
Slashdot Mirror
> Apple prevented this in order to ensure that users had to pay for services.
Right, like the hundreds and hundreds of app I can download to get any of those services without paying Apple.
And it's impressive how they figured out a decade ago how they were going to remove the headphone jack in the future *so they could turn off FM*.
Yeah, like that.
> other words, to me they become inferior with every incarnation ::rolleyes::
Like the best screen and camera of any smartphone, ever, and much faster performance?
Aren't those then things you *actually use*?
The rest is fluff, but it didn't stop you buying a phone before, did it?
> who doesn't place their finger on the back of their phone
Me. I hold it with my thumb on the power button on the right, my first three fingers around the left side of the frame, and my pinky curled up so its on the bottom holding it up. None of my fingers is near the location of the sensor found on other phones.
> Even after puffing on just one electronic cigarette with nicotine, healthy non-smokers were found to have a biological marker known to increase the risk of heart disease in tobacco users
Yeah, but is it more or less than one cigarette?
> You 'solve' it by making energy so cheap, plentiful, and available that it doesn't matter.
Call me when that happens.
> adding a third dimension to travel would make a lot of sense coming next ... you mean global climate change? You're saying a transport system that uses perhaps 5 to 10 times as much energy as existing technologies is what we need at this point?
Sure, we solved the pilot problem. Call me when you figured out the problem about how to make VTOL use less energy than a wheel.
Duh.
We're basing an entire article on one real example and then a bunch of wanna-bes?
Let's write an article about how you can tell a company is going to blow up because the first letter in their name is "U". After all, Uber...
> a plant can be set-up in 1-2 years
Construction time - JUST construction time - on Darlington B was 6 years. The fastest modern build I can think of was Qinshan Phase III, which was in China where regulation is "different", the site was already prepared, the work crew shifted from another project at the same site, and the Canadian taxpayer footed $2 billion of the cost. That took just over 4 years.
So, no.
> Allow me to point out that after RTFA, this power company spent $950 million on trying to get Levy built
So basically 10 to 20% of the CAPEX. That is not a big deal, paperwork is almost always 25% of any power project (and about 50% in the case of household PV).
> There ARE ways to design reactors that are safe by default
Yeah, that's what they said about AVR. Totally impossible for anything to go wrong, it's completely passively safe. Then a fuel capsule got stuck in the intake and that was it for AVR. They're still paying for it.
> And Fukushima style cost-cutting for nuclear power won't ever happen again
Yeah, because no one is going to build a nuclear plant anymore.
> And Fukushima wasn't not "not doing safety right".
It's pretty clear you don't know what happened there. The meltdown in Unit 1 was due in large part to misleading readings from a critical probe. That the probe in question could give misleading information in precisely this situation was known to the entire world because it was the same failure that happened at TMI. There was an upgrade suggested after TMI, but they didn't bother to install it. That is by any definition "not doing safety right".
But don't take my word for it, the various international nuclear commissions had lots and lots to say about TEPCOs management and safety culture. Like how the operating manual clearly said "if you turn this valve, do not turn it again", so they went ahead and turned it again and Bad Things Happened.
> They basically saved a few thousand dollars in concrete and rebar
The plant in question was *specifically designed not to need a confinement building", which is precisely why they selected that design. The risk of a steam explosion was addressed through the use of the water chilling torus surrounding the reactor vessel. Unfortunately, the torus was not designed to operate on its own for extended periods, which is precisely what happened when the power was wiped out. So, boom.
> there are roughly 450 operational nuclear plants
No, there are 450 nuclear *reactors* in the world. You're not doing your argument any favours by getting even the most basic terminology wrong.
A fixed-wing aircraft uses something between 2 and 3 *times* as much energy per km. If you add vertical performance you can multiply that by another 2 or 3 or so.
The problems we're in now are because we valued convenience over everything. We need to *stop* doing that.
This is the reason for *Cobalt, Ontario* for instance. It was a silver mining area.
"The problem with zinc batteries stems around them being difficult to charge because of the lack of electrocatalysts needed to reduce and generate oxygen during the discharging and charging of a battery."
That is not the problem. The problem with *every* rechargable battery that has "air" in the name is that air contains all sorts of nasty things the gum up the works after some time. Every xxx-air battery suffers from this, zinc-air, lithium-air, aluminum-air, etc.
The solution is some sort of filter that removes ALL of this, or an electrolyte that doesn't care. Neither is likely for very simple reasons.
>Apple Refuses
So "no comment" now means "you refuse"? I think the civil liberties people would have a problem with that statement.
>Could Save Countless Lives
Given that it exists on Android, it seems extremely countable to me.
Another story with "Apple" in the title for teh clix.
> Why is a new version needed?
The accuracy is not high enough to avoid collisions in busy areas. eLORAN adds:
1) QOS signals so you know if a station is bad
2) dLORAN (a-la dGPS) which greatly improves accuracy
3) globally synced signals (a-la Omega) so you can use any signal as the basis for measurements against any other
4) easy identification of ground vs. skywaves
> just pump enough energy into the air- and the closer you are to the target, the easier it is
But that's just it... in the case of GPS everyone is very far from the broadcasters and it is very easy for the jammer to be closer to its target than the transmitter, and very easy to generate more power than the weak signals from the satellite.
In the case of eLoran this arrangement is highly unlikely. For one thing, your target is likely to be closer to at least one of the transmitters than you are, and the power levels are so much higher that your jammer has to be equally massive.
It is MUCH more difficult to jam Loran, even in theory.
> This old but effective technology
As a pilot that used NDB, it would agree with the "old" but not "effective". Flying an approach against NDBs in the bumps while dodging snow squalls was an experience that made even my cast-iron stomach start to turn. Modern electronics could fix this by doing the work for you, but at an expense level far beyond GPS.
The idea of using any locallized transmitter is a non-starter for budget reasons, and one in the VHF moreso due to the required antenna sizes. NDB is dead, and good riddance.
> the descendant of the loran (long-range navigation) system created during World War II
Nope. That was LORAN, later known as Loran-A. eLORAN is a slightly upgraded Loran-C, which was entirely post-war. They are similar in name only and worked on entirely different techniques and frequencies.
The meat we feed to animals are cut-offs that don't make it into hotdogs. It has its own separate grade, "canning grade".
Meat is not grown *for* pets, although I'm sure there's some fru-fru company that does it. As such, the pets are eating waste, and the CO2 budget is zero.
> The only way to win is not to play. Turn off your TV
Or get an antenna.
> I have never heard of a civil search warrant
Gebus, google it.
http://www.fasken.com/anton-piller-order-civil-search-warrant/
> Just take the subway over to Akihabara and buy yourself a Kodi box. Canadians only wish they could do that
There's a half dozen vendors selling Kodi boxes in my town. And my town is small.
> When you've developed a system so strict that people are violating laws to voluntarily watch commercials
>, you know the system is broken
Or the people are.
> If fusion becomes inexpensive and commercially available
And if you know absolutely nothing about how the energy world works, this sounds possible. If you do know a bit, then you know it's not. And the power companies have been telling the fusion folks this continually since the 1970s. But they don't listen - really, when you try to have this conversation they get mad and run away. Literally.
Consider this: any energy producing machine requires a certain amount of money to build. That money has a payback rate based on the riskiness of the investment. For investments like this where there's little salvage value, the rate is the "unsecured rate", about 6.5%. So very simply, if your machine does not sell enough energy in a year to cover those payments and make a profit, no one will build it. You get that, right?
Which is precisely why fission plants are being ignored. They have many technical merits, but at current prices, they cost about 5x as much as a wind turbine to build, but deliver about 3x as much power. And they have fuel, and more expensive maintenance. So no one is building them. That is the only reason.
We know that any possible fusion plant that's been presented will cost much more than a fusion plant. Even in their wildest predictions, assuming everything goes right, power from a fusion plant will be at least 50% more than a fission plant even if you look 100 years into the future:
http://www-pub.iaea.org/mtcd/publications/pdf/p1250-cd/papers/sese-v.pdf
> Cheap fuel + electric vehicles
You can do that now with PV. PV's down around 4 cents, 1/3rd the predicted value of fusion power, if it works, 100 years from now.
> Isn't solving a problem like our dependency on fossil fuels
Already solved. While these guys are wasting everyone's time with a system that has repeatedly demonstrated not to work:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migma
we're installing wind and PV faster than any other power source in history.