You want to know the reason everyone is paying over 4 bucks a gallon for gas? All of this outsourcing to China and India is the real reason behind it.
The alternative is keeping those two countries continue with hundreds of millions of people living in absolute poverty (under $1 per year).
Is it worth having slightly higher commodity prices to bring most of the world out of poverty? Or would we be better off if the whole world is rich and innovating?
I like socialized healthcare simply because while the free market model works grand for playstations (You have little money, you want a playstation, so you work hard to make money, you buy one) it works less well for medical care
The US is half-way there. In the US, about 50% of health care dollars are paid by the government, plus there are tremendous amounts of regulation of the health industry (including health insurance mandates that vary from state to state, a tougher drug regulatory policy than in most European countries (look at domperidone for example). We already pay 3% Federal payroll taxes for Medicaid (for the poor) and Medicare (for the old, but could be poor or rich). Most states tack on another few percent as well.
The problem is no one in he US admits that we'd have to cut doctor pay in half to meet up with other OECD countries if we wanted to go all the way with socialized medicine.
The way to solve the automobile problem is to solve the suburb problem.
The way to solve that problem is to abolish zoning. In most places, government says you can't live on top of a business, or you can't build a large multi-family dwelling, your yard must be X acres, etc.
Transmission of electricity from the midwest to California would entail tremendous transmission losses.
That may be true, but California has the #2,#3, and #4 largest wind farms on the planet: Tehachapi Pass Wind Farm (690 MW), San Gorgonio Pass Wind Farm (619 MW), Altamont Pass Wind Farm (606 MW)
Of course, their combined peak power is less than equal to the base power of one two-reactor nuclear power plant (~2 GW).
Remember that many Europeans also have access to free healthcare and higher education.
Europeans don't have free healthcare, they are well taxed for their socialized healthcare, even if per capita they end up paying slightly less for it, and that is mainly because doctors are paid less there than in the US.
It is also good to note that 583,000 international students took classes at US colleges last year.
I have no clue what "artifacts" you are talking about
I can attest that Hollywood studios are very serious about making their newest Blu-rays "artifact free". We're talking MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 at 25 Mbps, which (speaking as a HDTV guy) is way overkill for most eyes. Consider that terrestrial HDTV is =19 Mbps MPEG-2 and what you see on cable or DBS is probably compressed down from that. I'm pretty happy delivering 14 Mbps H.264 HDTV to stations for high-quality prime-time network use.
In post-production houses, there is now this position called the "compressionist" who uses semi-automated systems to compress each scene 10 or 20 different ways with different parameters to ensure the best compression. There are built in PSNR measurement, MOS estimation, as well as the human eye looking over all this. And it costs a lot of money....
Did not happen to USENET back in the day and won't happen now.
USENET certainly did change in architecture over time. Once a full feed was over 10 Mbps, most small ISPs backed off many of the alt.binaries.* groups. I worked for a company that delivered about a DS-3 of USENET feed over satellite, but even that did not survive.
Today you have a much smaller number USENET servers rather than every ISP having its own full feed. Sprint, Verizon and Time Warner have dropped alt.*.
Live watching of video isn't the big bandwidth threat - it is video file sharing, where you might leave your torrent downloading all night, (you and everyone else in the country;)
Last Monday, the state's laboratory field services group issued thirteen cease-and-desist letters to genetic testing companies including personal genomics companies 23andMe and Navigenics as well as DNATraits.com, which gives would-be parental couples information about genetic disorders their children could inherit...
Health Department spokeswoman Lea Brooks responded to Wired.com's request for comment saying that the businesses would have a chance to come into compliance with California state law, which requires that a doctor sign off on any laboratory testing.
"The cease-and-desist letters direct the businesses to submit a plan of correction to the California Department of Public Health 14 days from the date the letters were mailed," Brooks wrote in an email. "Each plan of correction must show how the business will come into compliance with California laboratory law. CDPH will review the plans of corrections and respond accordingly."
California regulators warned 13 genetic testing companies, including Knome Inc. in Cambridge, to stop marketing their products in California unless they comply with state licensing and testing laws.
The California Department of Public Health warned the companies that they must obtain a clinical laboratory license before conducting medical tests for Californians. In addition, the agency said the companies cannot offer laboratory tests directly to California consumers without a doctor's order.
"Knome is in violation of California law," the agency warned. "Genetic tests are not exempt" from rules requiring a physician's approval, it said.
California has a mandate that 20% of its power must come from renewables...The only cost-effective way to meet this requirement is by building massive thermal solar plants very quickly
There are already several wind farms in California that produce peak on the order of 500 MW. Peak power use by California is 50 GW, so 20% is 10 GW, so all you need is to build 20 large wind farms of current design. Or a farm like San Gorgonio pass already has something like 4,000 wind generators of various sizes, if you replaced them with 3MW class turbines you'd get 12 GW from that farm alone...
Southern California Edison is supposed to ramp Tehachapi up to 1.5 GW in the near future (this site has 5,000 wind generators...Altamont Pass has 6,000).
1) Indium is not found in nature by itself, it is only found in combination with ores of Pb, Zn, Cu, Sn and other base metals. It is extracted from the metal ores.
2) If you don't believe that higher prices increase available supply, read this:
For primarily economic reasons, indium was originally only extracted from zinc and lead concentrates containing at least 500 ppm indium (and coming from ores containing about 50 ppm of indium). Due to improvements in the extraction technology combined with the economics of higher prices Indium is now recovered as a by-product of a wider range of base metals including tin, copper and other polymetallic deposits. Indium is also now being extracted from base metal concentrates containing as little as 100 ppm of indium.
Furthermore:
Base metal consumption has increased over the last few years and mining companies have started making positive financial returns. This profitability, in turn, has prompted new investments in mining. Furthermore, new indium containing ore bodies are being discovered and developed. As examples, note the new Neves Corvo Zinc mine in Portugal, Mitsui Mining's increased mining output in Peru, the Chinese exploration investments in the Guanxi and Yunnan provinces, the Chelyabinsk Zinc purchase of a majority stake in lead and zinc mine Nova Zinc of Kazakhstan, etc. Mining output is increasing, increasing supplies of indium containing feedstock.
3) What has been the price history of Indium? It peaked at $400/kg in 1996, went down to $100 in 2002, peaked again at near $1000 in 2005, and was down to $850 in 2007. As of June 27, Metal Bulletin has it trading at $620-680 per kg.
4) What has been the supply history of Indium? It is up from 250 MT in 1996 to 1,100 MT in 2007. More is being produced every year.
5) What about the future?
A number of smelters have accumulated large amounts of tailings and slags over the years. Many of these are indium containing residues from their production that have very low indium content and/or are particularly difficult to treat. Again due to the higher indium prices and improving recovery process technology, these tailings and slags are now economical to treat. China, as an example, has started treating many of these residues.
The abundance of indium in the earth's crust is estimated to be 0.05 ppm for the continental and 0.072 ppm for the oceanic crust, respectively (Taylor and Mclennan 1985). This concentration is higher than the concentration of silver. Consider that silver is now produced at a rate of 20,000 tons per year...
Maybe mass could be defined in terms of bending light passing 1mm away x pico arc-seconds or something similar. Then just grind down your mass of lead or whatever until it does that:)
the land used for solar generation can be and is placed in non-inhabited
Tell that to theGila Monsters who won't see the sun any more!
Oil leaks and tanker spills could leave billions of acres of prime ecological land destroyed in an instant.
Billions of acres is a bit of an overstatement. The largest on-land oil spill in Alaska covered 2 acres. Crude oil cools down pretty quickly and doesn't get far when it is cold outside. The tankers at the end of the pipeline are going to be there to transit North Slope oil anyway.
The 125 existing applications are for land covering almost one million acres and with the potential to generate 70 billion watts of electricity
1,000,000 acres = 4046 km^2, this is an area equal to a square 63km on side.
This square could actually cover up the entire lower San Francisco bay area, from San Francisco to San Jose, covering Oakland, Hayward, Freemont, Pleasanton, Livermore, San Mateo, Palo Alto.
For comparison, proposed ANWR oil drilling would have only 2,000 acres (8 km^2) of drilling pads.
Energy density:
70 GWe / 1,000,000 acres = 70 kWe/acre = 17 W/m^2, which in in the neighborhood of 5% of typical average insolation (~250 W/m^2) so I agree with these numbers.
The main acreage use of nuclear fission power plants are the exclusion areas of 500 to 1000 acres. You could easily site 4 x 1GWe class nuclear reactors in a 1000 acre site, for a density of 4 MWe / acre (that's what you get when your electrical generators are a billion times closer to the nuclear reactor:)
I would think that the air around a solar plant would actually be cooler, since the panels are converting solar energy into electric power and then transferring it to the grid. If that energy had not been captured, it would have heated the ground.
Solar panels are only about 5% efficient, thus there is the potential for absorption of the other 95% of the light energy, warming the panels and re-radiating as heat. Some light will reflect off the panels without warming them, but they look pretty black to me, so I suspect 50%-75% of the light hitting a panel would warm it. Soils, especially desert soils, reflect a greater percentage of the radiation.
My understanding is that the environmental impact issues of solar are focused more on the materials involved in manufacturing and/or disposing of solar panels.
The plants and animals that would otherwise be living under the panels, now shaded from the sun, may be affected. The plants would probably be very upset. Animals that depend on warm soil may be upset as well.
Then there is rain - which is very important in the desert. Solar panels may keep the area below them from getting any rain.
The problem with that idea is one of enforcement. Unless you want people to fill out an income statement every time they buy a pack of gum, you're proposing a tax that is unenforceable.
You could have a smart card that records digitally signed (yet blinded) transactions. At the end of the year, they get matched up with the digitally signed / blinded transactions from all US vendors. Perhaps you have to pay a base sales tax at all sales, but get reimbursed for your excess tax at regular periods later. OK, it is a bit of a data processing task and potentially full of privacy problems if not implemented properly.
Of course, today's income tax isn't exactly perfectly collected either (think: informal sector) or not full of privacy problems (think: SSN).
I thank the overall literacy rate must be related to this - even abundant access to a computer won't mean much if you can't read.
You have it backwards - if there is no economy to support returns to investment on reading, children will work in the fields instead of being taught to read.
It is the governments of poor countries that do not allow for enough economic freedom that keep those countries poor.
I believe that taxes should be levied on "wealth" not "income." Everything else is just class warfare against the poor and middle class.
But if you tax wealth, you are taxing savings and investment. One of our greatest current challenges is that Americans are not saving enough for retirement.
Perhaps you should investigate taxing consumption through a sales tax on goods and services (but not securities and bonds). It doesn't have to be a "flat" tax, it could be a progressive consumption tax, perhaps zero up to the $30,000 if you are concerned about the effect on the poor. So that way a "rich" person could pay tax on the purchase of their $100,000 car, but not on a $100,000 investment in a company that creates several jobs and will help them save for retirement.
You could argue that the increase in cost will do more overall damage to the economy than bringing the jobs back home will do good, but even that's sort of immaterial, the cost increase is going to happen pretty much no matter what we do, so our net result from this move is an increase in capital flowing into our the US economy and job creation, from the perspective of the US that's a good thing, maybe not so much a good thing for China, but still a good thing.
What is bad for China is bad for the US. We are all interdependent, and will grow more and more every year.
This part is right:
Yes, producing locally will be more expensive than it used to be to produce externally
Which hurts everyone because it is a decrease in productivity, especially if it means Chinese workers are going back to sitting in rice paddies all day rather than manufacturing.
I wish people on Slashdot would be willing to treat those who ignore economic science the same way they treat people who ignore evolution science.
er from the Salem [nrc.gov] dual 1.1 MWe PWRs and the co-located Hope Creek [nrc.gov] 1.0 MWe BWR in New Jersey, for a total of 3.2 MWe of nuclear in the neighborhood.
Bluewater Wind agrees to build a 150 turbine, 450MW wind project 12-13 miles off of Rehoboth Beach. Delmarva Power agrees to buy up to 300MW at any one time. The cost to Delmarva ratepayers for energy and capacity will be 10.56 cents/kWh in 2007 dollars. Delmarva is also purchasing Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) associated with its energy purchases.
So evidently these are 150 x 3MW turbines. Generally turbines of this class have a blade space diameter of 100m.
It is interesting to note that while Delaware has no nuclear reactors, it is across the river from the Salem dual 1.1 MWe PWRs and the co-located Hope Creek 1.0 MWe BWR in New Jersey, for a total of 3.2 MWe of nuclear in the neighborhood.
Slashdot Mirror
You want to know the reason everyone is paying over 4 bucks a gallon for gas? All of this outsourcing
to China and India is the real reason behind it.
The alternative is keeping those two countries continue with hundreds of millions of people living in absolute poverty (under $1 per year).
Is it worth having slightly higher commodity prices to bring most of the world out of poverty? Or would we be better off if the whole world is rich and innovating?
I like socialized healthcare simply because while the free market model works grand for playstations (You have little money, you want a playstation, so you work hard to make money, you buy one) it works less well for medical care
The US is half-way there. In the US, about 50% of health care dollars are paid by the government, plus there are tremendous amounts of regulation of the health industry (including health insurance mandates that vary from state to state, a tougher drug regulatory policy than in most European countries (look at domperidone for example). We already pay 3% Federal payroll taxes for Medicaid (for the poor) and Medicare (for the old, but could be poor or rich). Most states tack on another few percent as well.
The problem is no one in he US admits that we'd have to cut doctor pay in half to meet up with other OECD countries if we wanted to go all the way with socialized medicine.
The way to solve the automobile problem is to solve the suburb problem.
The way to solve that problem is to abolish zoning. In most places, government says you can't live on top of a business, or you can't build a large multi-family dwelling, your yard must be X acres, etc.
Transmission of electricity from the midwest to California would entail tremendous transmission losses.
That may be true, but California has the #2,#3, and #4 largest wind farms on the planet: Tehachapi Pass Wind Farm (690 MW), San Gorgonio Pass Wind Farm (619 MW), Altamont Pass Wind Farm (606 MW)
Of course, their combined peak power is less than equal to the base power of one two-reactor nuclear power plant (~2 GW).
Remember that many Europeans also have access to free healthcare and higher education.
Europeans don't have free healthcare, they are well taxed for their socialized healthcare, even if per capita they end up paying slightly less for it, and that is mainly because doctors are paid less there than in the US.
It is also good to note that 583,000 international students took classes at US colleges last year.
HDTV will soon be replaced with SHDTV and other such nonsense.
Don't forget 3DTV
I have no clue what "artifacts" you are talking about
I can attest that Hollywood studios are very serious about making their newest Blu-rays "artifact free". We're talking MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 at 25 Mbps, which (speaking as a HDTV guy) is way overkill for most eyes. Consider that terrestrial HDTV is =19 Mbps MPEG-2 and what you see on cable or DBS is probably compressed down from that. I'm pretty happy delivering 14 Mbps H.264 HDTV to stations for high-quality prime-time network use.
In post-production houses, there is now this position called the "compressionist" who uses semi-automated systems to compress each scene 10 or 20 different ways with different parameters to ensure the best compression. There are built in PSNR measurement, MOS estimation, as well as the human eye looking over all this. And it costs a lot of money....
Did not happen to USENET back in the day and won't happen now.
USENET certainly did change in architecture over time. Once a full feed was over 10 Mbps, most small ISPs backed off many of the alt.binaries.* groups. I worked for a company that delivered about a DS-3 of USENET feed over satellite, but even that did not survive.
Today you have a much smaller number USENET servers rather than every ISP having its own full feed. Sprint, Verizon and Time Warner have dropped alt.*.
So far youtube hasn't brought down the Internet.
Live watching of video isn't the big bandwidth threat - it is video file sharing, where you might leave your torrent downloading all night, (you and everyone else in the country ;)
why does the CA legislature even care about this?
Because they trust doctors more then patients apparently.
See here:
Last Monday, the state's laboratory field services group issued thirteen cease-and-desist letters to genetic testing companies including personal genomics companies 23andMe and Navigenics as well as DNATraits.com, which gives would-be parental couples information about genetic disorders their children could inherit...
Health Department spokeswoman Lea Brooks responded to Wired.com's request for comment saying that the businesses would have a chance to come into compliance with California state law, which requires that a doctor sign off on any laboratory testing.
"The cease-and-desist letters direct the businesses to submit a plan of correction to the California Department of Public Health 14 days from the date the letters were mailed," Brooks wrote in an email. "Each plan of correction must show how the business will come into compliance with California laboratory law. CDPH will review the plans of corrections and respond accordingly."
Or here:
California regulators warned 13 genetic testing companies, including Knome Inc. in Cambridge, to stop marketing their products in California unless they comply with state licensing and testing laws.
The California Department of Public Health warned the companies that they must obtain a clinical laboratory license before conducting medical tests for Californians. In addition, the agency said the companies cannot offer laboratory tests directly to California consumers without a doctor's order.
"Knome is in violation of California law," the agency warned. "Genetic tests are not exempt" from rules requiring a physician's approval, it said.
The problem with wind power in California is that you don't get peak power from your turbines during periods of peak demand.
Indeed...is the "20% renewable" law mean peak, base, or average power?
I suggest the use of renewable nuclear fission power. Every time there is a supernova, fissionable uranium gets renewed!
California has a mandate that 20% of its power must come from renewables ...The only cost-effective way to meet this requirement is by building massive thermal solar plants very quickly
There are already several wind farms in California that produce peak on the order of 500 MW. Peak power use by California is 50 GW, so 20% is 10 GW, so all you need is to build 20 large wind farms of current design. Or a farm like San Gorgonio pass already has something like 4,000 wind generators of various sizes, if you replaced them with 3MW class turbines you'd get 12 GW from that farm alone...
Southern California Edison is supposed to ramp Tehachapi up to 1.5 GW in the near future (this site has 5,000 wind generators...Altamont Pass has 6,000).
OK, listen up:
1) Indium is not found in nature by itself, it is only found in combination with ores of Pb, Zn, Cu, Sn and other base metals. It is extracted from the metal ores.
2) If you don't believe that higher prices increase available supply, read this:
For primarily economic reasons, indium was originally only extracted from zinc and lead concentrates containing at least 500 ppm indium (and coming from ores containing about 50 ppm of indium). Due to improvements in the extraction technology combined with the economics of higher prices Indium is now recovered as a by-product of a wider range of base metals including tin, copper and other polymetallic deposits. Indium is also now being extracted from base metal concentrates containing as little as 100 ppm of indium.
Furthermore:
Base metal consumption has increased over the last few years and mining companies have started making positive financial returns. This profitability, in turn, has prompted new investments in mining. Furthermore, new indium containing ore bodies are being discovered and developed. As examples, note the new Neves Corvo Zinc mine in Portugal, Mitsui Mining's increased mining output in Peru, the Chinese exploration investments in the Guanxi and Yunnan provinces, the Chelyabinsk Zinc purchase of a majority stake in lead and zinc mine Nova Zinc of Kazakhstan, etc. Mining output is increasing, increasing supplies of indium containing feedstock.
3) What has been the price history of Indium? It peaked at $400/kg in 1996, went down to $100 in 2002, peaked again at near $1000 in 2005, and was down to $850 in 2007. As of June 27, Metal Bulletin has it trading at $620-680 per kg.
4) What has been the supply history of Indium? It is up from 250 MT in 1996 to 1,100 MT in 2007. More is being produced every year.
5) What about the future?
A number of smelters have accumulated large amounts of tailings and slags over the years. Many of these are indium containing residues from their production that have very low indium content and/or are particularly difficult to treat. Again due to the higher indium prices and improving recovery process technology, these tailings and slags are now economical to treat. China, as an example, has started treating many of these residues.
The abundance of indium in the earth's crust is estimated to be 0.05 ppm for the continental and 0.072 ppm for the oceanic crust, respectively (Taylor and Mclennan 1985). This concentration is higher than the concentration of silver. Consider that silver is now produced at a rate of 20,000 tons per year...
Here is a Canadian mine re-opening to extract more Tin and Indium
Maybe mass could be defined in terms of bending light passing 1mm away x pico arc-seconds or something similar. Then just grind down your mass of lead or whatever until it does that :)
the land used for solar generation can be and is placed in non-inhabited
Tell that to theGila Monsters who won't see the sun any more!
Oil leaks and tanker spills could leave billions of acres of prime ecological land destroyed in an instant.
Billions of acres is a bit of an overstatement. The largest on-land oil spill in Alaska covered 2 acres. Crude oil cools down pretty quickly and doesn't get far when it is cold outside. The tankers at the end of the pipeline are going to be there to transit North Slope oil anyway.
FTA:
The 125 existing applications are for land covering almost one million acres and with the potential to generate 70 billion watts of electricity
1,000,000 acres = 4046 km^2, this is an area equal to a square 63km on side.
This square could actually cover up the entire lower San Francisco bay area, from San Francisco to San Jose, covering Oakland, Hayward, Freemont, Pleasanton, Livermore, San Mateo, Palo Alto.
For comparison, proposed ANWR oil drilling would have only 2,000 acres (8 km^2) of drilling pads.
Energy density:
70 GWe / 1,000,000 acres = 70 kWe/acre = 17 W/m^2, which in in the neighborhood of 5% of typical average insolation (~250 W/m^2) so I agree with these numbers.
The main acreage use of nuclear fission power plants are the exclusion areas of 500 to 1000 acres. You could easily site 4 x 1GWe class nuclear reactors in a 1000 acre site, for a density of 4 MWe / acre (that's what you get when your electrical generators are a billion times closer to the nuclear reactor :)
I would think that the air around a solar plant would actually be cooler, since the panels are converting solar energy into electric power and then transferring it to the grid.
If that energy had not been captured, it would have heated the ground.
Solar panels are only about 5% efficient, thus there is the potential for absorption of the other 95% of the light energy, warming the panels and re-radiating as heat. Some light will reflect off the panels without warming them, but they look pretty black to me, so I suspect 50%-75% of the light hitting a panel would warm it. Soils, especially desert soils, reflect a greater percentage of the radiation.
My understanding is that the environmental impact issues of solar are focused more on the materials involved in manufacturing and/or disposing of solar panels.
The plants and animals that would otherwise be living under the panels, now shaded from the sun, may be affected. The plants would probably be very upset. Animals that depend on warm soil may be upset as well.
Then there is rain - which is very important in the desert. Solar panels may keep the area below them from getting any rain.
The problem with that idea is one of enforcement. Unless you want people to fill out an income statement every time they buy a pack of gum, you're proposing a tax that is unenforceable.
You could have a smart card that records digitally signed (yet blinded) transactions. At the end of the year, they get matched up with the digitally signed / blinded transactions from all US vendors. Perhaps you have to pay a base sales tax at all sales, but get reimbursed for your excess tax at regular periods later. OK, it is a bit of a data processing task and potentially full of privacy problems if not implemented properly.
Of course, today's income tax isn't exactly perfectly collected either (think: informal sector) or not full of privacy problems (think: SSN).
I thank the overall literacy rate must be related to this - even abundant access to a computer won't mean much if you can't read.
You have it backwards - if there is no economy to support returns to investment on reading, children will work in the fields instead of being taught to read.
It is the governments of poor countries that do not allow for enough economic freedom that keep those countries poor.
India didn't gain their independence through guns.
Indian Rebellion of 1857
Ghadar Party
Chittagong Armoury Raid
Indian National Armu
If not the final straw that lead to Indian independence, the threat of violence was certainly around...
I believe that taxes should be levied on "wealth" not "income." Everything else is just class warfare against the poor and middle class.
But if you tax wealth, you are taxing savings and investment. One of our greatest current challenges is that Americans are not saving enough for retirement.
Perhaps you should investigate taxing consumption through a sales tax on goods and services (but not securities and bonds). It doesn't have to be a "flat" tax, it could be a progressive consumption tax, perhaps zero up to the $30,000 if you are concerned about the effect on the poor. So that way a "rich" person could pay tax on the purchase of their $100,000 car, but not on a $100,000 investment in a company that creates several jobs and will help them save for retirement.
You could argue that the increase in cost will do more overall damage to the economy than bringing the jobs back home will do good, but even that's sort of immaterial, the cost increase is going to happen pretty much no matter what we do, so our net result from this move is an increase in capital flowing into our the US economy and job creation, from the perspective of the US that's a good thing, maybe not so much a good thing for China, but still a good thing.
What is bad for China is bad for the US. We are all interdependent, and will grow more and more every year.
This part is right:
Yes, producing locally will be more expensive than it used to be to produce externally
Which hurts everyone because it is a decrease in productivity, especially if it means Chinese workers are going back to sitting in rice paddies all day rather than manufacturing.
I wish people on Slashdot would be willing to treat those who ignore economic science the same way they treat people who ignore evolution science.
er from the Salem [nrc.gov] dual 1.1 MWe PWRs and the co-located Hope Creek [nrc.gov] 1.0 MWe BWR in New Jersey, for a total of 3.2 MWe of nuclear in the neighborhood.
Correction: 3.2 GWe, not MWe.
Technical data here...
Bluewater Wind agrees to build a 150 turbine, 450MW wind project 12-13 miles off of Rehoboth Beach. Delmarva Power agrees to buy up to 300MW at any one time. The cost to Delmarva ratepayers for energy and capacity will be 10.56 cents/kWh in 2007 dollars. Delmarva is also purchasing Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) associated with its energy purchases.
So evidently these are 150 x 3MW turbines. Generally turbines of this class have a blade space diameter of 100m.
It is interesting to note that while Delaware has no nuclear reactors, it is across the river from the Salem dual 1.1 MWe PWRs and the co-located Hope Creek 1.0 MWe BWR in New Jersey, for a total of 3.2 MWe of nuclear in the neighborhood.
would anyone care to argue that FOX is the single worst place to get information, at least "accurate" information.
Worse than, say, Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace, and Lou Dobbs?