Maybe 10 years ago, you'd be right. You mythical "average user" is a bit less helpless now. Sure, the people old enough to remember a time before widespread personal computer use would be blocked. But pretty much anyone under 40 wouldn't even blink twice.
If it's on the net, the ISPs can "block" all they want. Unless they're gonna block the entirety of the Internet, and every VPN provider in existence, it's STILL going to be available.
They keep trying to "just in time" EVERYTHING and operate without ANY back-stock. Basically that's a recipe for disaster. Because you CANNOT model grocery trends on a daily/hourly basis. And, even if you could, you're STILL limited by shipping constraints.
All they're doing is destroying Whole Foods with their "grand experiment".
That's fine by me. I never shopped their anyways. Too high a smug content in their offerings.
Have you not seen the idiotic behavior from the Left in the last 2 years? Screaming at the sky. Talking about blowing up the White House. The Scalise Shooting Antifa Google yourself college campus craziness Attacking government officials in public. Trying to claw down the doors of of the Supreme Court.
Ah. You assume I voted for Trump. You assume I'm somehow dependent on Trump for my sense of self-worth. You assume I have the same religious zealotry for my politics that you do.
That's lots of assumptions. And all totally incorrect.
Why exactly do you allow the man to live rent-free in your head this way?
Evidence (or lack thereof) says "no". But, in the most charitable gimme to the Never-Trumpers, the answer is "we don't know (AND NEITHER DO YOU!)".
As such. It's nothing more than a teaching moment. So, to all of those who've welded their asses to the "Impeach Impeach Impeach" train that's going "Trump woke up this morning! IMPEACH HIM NOW!" "Trump tweeted something I don't like! IMPEACH HIM NOW!" "Trump exists! IMPEACH HIM NOW!"?
Take a fucking chill pill. Because your crazy fucking behavior is destroying the Democratic Party and is going to keep the man in office until 2024.
There are several ways to fix it. There are ways to replace the portland cement. There's also ways to SEQUESTER CO2 in concrete as well. There are also forms of concrete that actually ABSORB CO2.
Please understand, the "rare earths" problem isn't our ability to get at it, or actual rarity on a bulk scale. It's the environmental regulations surrounding it's recovery.
Most of these deposits are found alongside things like uranium, thorium, etc. Stuff that would be considered (and in most places IS considered) NUCLEAR WASTE. Which means, due to regulation, that it cannot simply be reburied. Meaning that a mining operation has to PAY for it's disposal.
This is the primary reason why China has cornered the rare earths market. They don't give a shit about dumping tailings full of radioactive materials into their general environment. As such, they were able to undercut domestic production facilities. And with ever-mounting regulatory burden, domestic facilities simply couldn't compete.
Now, for anything that needs these things, we're utterly at the mercy of China's RE market. And if we ever want to break that stranglehold, we have to either:
A) Simply deal with prices that are orders of magnitude higher. B) Fix the regulations. Something that the "Nukes R Badness!" crowd simply won't allow.
What about solar orientation, air sealing, mechanical ventilation, and superior insulation methodology in any way conflicts with earthquake-proofing (which is primarily additional anti-racking precautions and tying foundations, walls, floors and roofing together with strapping)?
No. I'm saying that the US isn't some homogeneously laid out quilt with nice, easily designated areas for stuff like this. While there's lots of space in the US, you can't simply drop these facilities down ANYWHERE. And the places where you it makes SENSE to drop them have generally have other competing claims on usage.
Also, there are environmental/ecological concerns about large solar emplacements. Just as there are concerns about ecological problems with wind emplacements too.
As for your second question.
Primarily because you're proposing to artificially inflate and favor a particular solution in a way that will drive costs WAY up. Never mind that it isn't, provably, the best solution overall. Not to mention, because of the protracted time scale, it's not going to "solve" the problem of carbon emissions before hitting the feared "tipping point".
We already have solar farms larger than that. The largest solar farm on the planet is currently over 13,000 acres (53 square kilometers). And it's nameplate output is 2GW.
The world's largest multi-reactor nuclear plant is above 8GW. And it provides that in just over 1000 acres. The US grid needs around 1000 GW total capacity to maintain a stable service environment at absolute peak demand.
Solar PV farms weigh in at about $750,000-1,000,000 per MW.
That's without any sort of storage whatsoever. And, even with storage, you can't directly compare it to a baseload setup. Because solar doesn't generate 24x7. Meaning, if you have storage (batteries, pumped hydro storage, flywheels, etc, you still need 2-4x as much total capacity for coverage.
So. Assume a mean of 3x.
3000GW 3 TRILLION dollars for a zero-storage solar PV input that could, conceivably, handle the US grid.
And, in 30 years or so, another few trillion to expand the site as the older panels age out. Assuming zero breakage for the entire period.
Now, where's the BEST place to implement things like this? What? The American Southwest? Lotsa sun, seldom snows, few rainy days? Now, how do you get all that power to the rest of the country? Oh. The grid. But, ramping it up to be able to push power from one end of the country to the other? You get big conversion losses and big transmission losses. This is why it's more economical to build generation closer to the points of consumption. How do you deal with that? MORE CAPACITY! Tack 50% more on to cover that stuff.
Now we get to re-engineer all the geographic grids into a true national grid! Who pays for that?
And sure, the renegade little fantasy of everyone having their own solar setup on their home is cute. But we know there are people who can't afford that. And we know that grid providers can't survive/provide service on nothing but connection fees and backhaul fees. So how does industry get by? Mom & pop businesses?
And where is the land or this going to come from? Remember, the 13 most densely populated states generally aren't going to be the states best suited for mass implementation of solar/wind farms across the board.
Remember, 18% of power generated in the US is "renewable". The majority of that is hydro, biomass (burning shit, and biofuel (more burning shit). Wind is a big player. But wind power is still highly situational. You don't install wind turbines in areas that don't produce wind to the necessary criteria.
Solar accounts for approximately 1% of ALL power generation in the US (about 5.5-6% of all renewable).
Over time, yes, it will grow. But if you think you're simply going to paper over a couple states with panels, ESPECIALLY in a timeline not measured in DECADES? You're hallucinating.
At this point, the need for baseload capacity is down about 10% from what it was in the 80's as power companies have become more adept at meeting demand on the fly. Industry experts think it can be reduced further. To what minimum? I dunno. However, you can't simply ELIMINATE baseload power generation.
The main problem with solar and wind are the land use requirements. Solar and wind farms are HUGE compared to conventional powerplants, especially nuclear plants (power density).
Granted, wind farms can be dual-use. But not solar.
Also take into account the immediate ECOLOGICAL impact of covering an area in solar panels.
There's also the fact that you can't simply plop a solar or wind farm down ANYWHERE.
Plus, part of what I was talking about are PRODUCTION issues.
Currently, manufacturers are incapable of building the required AMOUNT of panels, wind turbines and/or battery storage required to replace the US' power infrastructure. And sure, in time, production can ramp up to meet it.
Assuming China's willing to destroy it's ecology with the amount of mining required. Plus all the mining and transport-based pollution involved.
Oh yes. And how do we DISPOSE of these things at end-of-life? Gigatons of landfill?
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe 10 years ago, you'd be right.
You mythical "average user" is a bit less helpless now.
Sure, the people old enough to remember a time before widespread personal computer use would be blocked.
But pretty much anyone under 40 wouldn't even blink twice.
If it's on the net, the ISPs can "block" all they want.
Unless they're gonna block the entirety of the Internet, and every VPN provider in existence, it's STILL going to be available.
They keep trying to "just in time" EVERYTHING and operate without ANY back-stock.
Basically that's a recipe for disaster. Because you CANNOT model grocery trends on a daily/hourly basis.
And, even if you could, you're STILL limited by shipping constraints.
All they're doing is destroying Whole Foods with their "grand experiment".
That's fine by me. I never shopped their anyways. Too high a smug content in their offerings.
Yep. The alt right. A group so small they haven't actually mattered in over 40 years...
Hahahah!
Sure they're manufactured. By the nutjobs on the far left
Have you not seen the idiotic behavior from the Left in the last 2 years?
Screaming at the sky.
Talking about blowing up the White House.
The Scalise Shooting
Antifa
Google yourself college campus craziness
Attacking government officials in public.
Trying to claw down the doors of of the Supreme Court.
Come on.
Ah.
You assume I voted for Trump.
You assume I'm somehow dependent on Trump for my sense of self-worth.
You assume I have the same religious zealotry for my politics that you do.
That's lots of assumptions. And all totally incorrect.
Why exactly do you allow the man to live rent-free in your head this way?
Did the Russians interfere?
Yes? DUH?
Now. Did they connive WITH Trump to do it?
Evidence (or lack thereof) says "no".
But, in the most charitable gimme to the Never-Trumpers, the answer is "we don't know (AND NEITHER DO YOU!)".
As such. It's nothing more than a teaching moment.
So, to all of those who've welded their asses to the "Impeach Impeach Impeach" train that's going "Trump woke up this morning! IMPEACH HIM NOW!" "Trump tweeted something I don't like! IMPEACH HIM NOW!" "Trump exists! IMPEACH HIM NOW!"?
Take a fucking chill pill. Because your crazy fucking behavior is destroying the Democratic Party and is going to keep the man in office until 2024.
There are several ways to fix it.
There are ways to replace the portland cement.
There's also ways to SEQUESTER CO2 in concrete as well.
There are also forms of concrete that actually ABSORB CO2.
Cap and trade is a game. Nothing more.
It won't actually have any real-world effect.
58 million vids.
Even if you assume an average length of 3 minutes, that's still the equivalent of about 331 YEARS worth of video.
Then how does one compete with China?
Especially since the tailings can't be used to make fuel for reactors because people are terrified of nuclear power?
And what happens when they weaponize this materials hegemony?
58 million videos?
Anyone?
Please understand, the "rare earths" problem isn't our ability to get at it, or actual rarity on a bulk scale.
It's the environmental regulations surrounding it's recovery.
Most of these deposits are found alongside things like uranium, thorium, etc. Stuff that would be considered (and in most places IS considered) NUCLEAR WASTE. Which means, due to regulation, that it cannot simply be reburied. Meaning that a mining operation has to PAY for it's disposal.
This is the primary reason why China has cornered the rare earths market. They don't give a shit about dumping tailings full of radioactive materials into their general environment. As such, they were able to undercut domestic production facilities. And with ever-mounting regulatory burden, domestic facilities simply couldn't compete.
Now, for anything that needs these things, we're utterly at the mercy of China's RE market.
And if we ever want to break that stranglehold, we have to either:
A) Simply deal with prices that are orders of magnitude higher.
B) Fix the regulations. Something that the "Nukes R Badness!" crowd simply won't allow.
They pay for their own bandwith.
It's the customers on these networks that GENERATE the requests for traffic.
It's not like these services are simply broadcasting into these networks.
Fucking retarded.
Basically it's another excuse to label anything against the company's ideological bent as "conspiracy".
Really?
What about solar orientation, air sealing, mechanical ventilation, and superior insulation methodology in any way conflicts with earthquake-proofing (which is primarily additional anti-racking precautions and tying foundations, walls, floors and roofing together with strapping)?
No. I'm saying that the US isn't some homogeneously laid out quilt with nice, easily designated areas for stuff like this.
While there's lots of space in the US, you can't simply drop these facilities down ANYWHERE.
And the places where you it makes SENSE to drop them have generally have other competing claims on usage.
Also, there are environmental/ecological concerns about large solar emplacements. Just as there are concerns about ecological problems with wind emplacements too.
As for your second question.
Primarily because you're proposing to artificially inflate and favor a particular solution in a way that will drive costs WAY up.
Never mind that it isn't, provably, the best solution overall.
Not to mention, because of the protracted time scale, it's not going to "solve" the problem of carbon emissions before hitting the feared "tipping point".
We already have solar farms larger than that. The largest solar farm on the planet is currently over 13,000 acres (53 square kilometers).
And it's nameplate output is 2GW.
The world's largest multi-reactor nuclear plant is above 8GW. And it provides that in just over 1000 acres.
The US grid needs around 1000 GW total capacity to maintain a stable service environment at absolute peak demand.
Solar PV farms weigh in at about $750,000-1,000,000 per MW.
That's without any sort of storage whatsoever. And, even with storage, you can't directly compare it to a baseload setup. Because solar doesn't generate 24x7. Meaning, if you have storage (batteries, pumped hydro storage, flywheels, etc, you still need 2-4x as much total capacity for coverage.
So. Assume a mean of 3x.
3000GW
3 TRILLION dollars for a zero-storage solar PV input that could, conceivably, handle the US grid.
And, in 30 years or so, another few trillion to expand the site as the older panels age out.
Assuming zero breakage for the entire period.
Now, where's the BEST place to implement things like this? What? The American Southwest? Lotsa sun, seldom snows, few rainy days?
Now, how do you get all that power to the rest of the country?
Oh. The grid. But, ramping it up to be able to push power from one end of the country to the other? You get big conversion losses and big transmission losses.
This is why it's more economical to build generation closer to the points of consumption.
How do you deal with that? MORE CAPACITY! Tack 50% more on to cover that stuff.
Now we get to re-engineer all the geographic grids into a true national grid!
Who pays for that?
And sure, the renegade little fantasy of everyone having their own solar setup on their home is cute.
But we know there are people who can't afford that.
And we know that grid providers can't survive/provide service on nothing but connection fees and backhaul fees.
So how does industry get by? Mom & pop businesses?
And where is the land or this going to come from?
Remember, the 13 most densely populated states generally aren't going to be the states best suited for mass implementation of solar/wind farms across the board.
Remember, 18% of power generated in the US is "renewable".
The majority of that is hydro, biomass (burning shit, and biofuel (more burning shit).
Wind is a big player. But wind power is still highly situational. You don't install wind turbines in areas that don't produce wind to the necessary criteria.
Solar accounts for approximately 1% of ALL power generation in the US (about 5.5-6% of all renewable).
Over time, yes, it will grow.
But if you think you're simply going to paper over a couple states with panels, ESPECIALLY in a timeline not measured in DECADES? You're hallucinating.
At this point, the need for baseload capacity is down about 10% from what it was in the 80's as power companies have become more adept at meeting demand on the fly.
Industry experts think it can be reduced further.
To what minimum? I dunno.
However, you can't simply ELIMINATE baseload power generation.
The main problem with solar and wind are the land use requirements. Solar and wind farms are HUGE compared to conventional powerplants, especially nuclear plants (power density).
Granted, wind farms can be dual-use. But not solar.
Also take into account the immediate ECOLOGICAL impact of covering an area in solar panels.
There's also the fact that you can't simply plop a solar or wind farm down ANYWHERE.
Plus, part of what I was talking about are PRODUCTION issues.
Currently, manufacturers are incapable of building the required AMOUNT of panels, wind turbines and/or battery storage required to replace the US' power infrastructure. And sure, in time, production can ramp up to meet it.
Assuming China's willing to destroy it's ecology with the amount of mining required. Plus all the mining and transport-based pollution involved.
Oh yes. And how do we DISPOSE of these things at end-of-life? Gigatons of landfill?
Yes?
AND?
Learn to make more concise statements.
Your other option, depending on if you have enough land, is to go with a buried "field" 6-10 feet down.
But excavation for something like that would likely have cost every bit as much...
That must be some good shit you're smokin'...
Getting A's and academic achievement (and achievement in general) is BAD!
Be dumb! You'll be happier in the long run!
Jesus Christ people!
Is that REALLY where we are in academia now?