Google had the right idea when they located their datacenter in Oregon, in a colder climate so they don't need as much air con power, and right next to a big hydro power plant. What's the point of locating your datacenter in an area with high ground prices, a history of electric power supply problems and a hot climate?
You realize that this is about international flights, right? Flights that do not originate on US soil? I.e. where the takeoff point is NOT under US control?
Depends. If we have solar power at a lower cost/kWh than fossil fuel plants can achieve, we can use excess solar power to create a buffer. Hydro (pumped storage) is one option. Another is to separate water into hydrogen, which you can burn in fuel cells or gas turbines (both options can be started up quickly). Yes, this isn't 100% efficient, but if you have cheap, abundant, renewable power, who cares?
Dinorwig, you mean? Yes, they can synchronise the turbines to the grid (spinning the turbines in air rather than water) so they can start generating faster. From a dead stop they can start generating in about 90s, a synchronized turbine can be generating in 12s.
On second thought, I don't think the fuel burn rate matters all that much. The operating cost of a nuke plant is determined mostly by other factors (cost of building it, personnel etc., EOL disposal of the reactor). Running a nuclear power station strictly as a backup means you won't sell many kWh which means your cost/kWh goes through the roof.
It's not a coincidence nuclear power stations are often run as a base load, running at 100% of capacity basically full time.
Of course, those extra benefits only apply if your local climate is hot enough that everyone uses AC. In colder climates you need all the solar heating you can get, and peak demand is in the middle of the winter, in the early morning and evening.
Highrise buildings have a very high power (usage) density, and not much surface area suitable for putting solar arrays on. I doubt you could power even a single-story office building by covering its roof in solar panels. Also, in an urban environment, buildings cast shadows on each other, decreasing efficiency of the panels. So there won't be a 'rest' to feed back into the grid. It will help a bit, but you'll still need a power infrastructure to move power to dense environments (inner cities).
Nuclear power is an inefficient method to create a buffer. You'll need to run the reactor at a significant power level to keep the steam circuit hot enough that you can start generating immediately. Starting up a cold reactor takes hours, so you're better off not shutting it down at all. And even at low power levels, your fuel will keep fissioning merrily along, so in essence you're throwing away a finite resource. Also, your buffer will be significantly more expensive than the solar energy you're using as primary.
If you have an abundant source of renewable energy, you're better off using some of that to drive a buffer. Hydro buffer plants such as Dinorwig (see elsewhere in this discussion) have been shown to work well.
That means you NEED enough GAS powerplants to power the whole world too, as they're the only type of power plant you can literally turn the dial and turn up the output.
No, they're not. Hydro plants can do this as well. The UK uses several hydro plants like Dinorwig to cover peak loads. Dinorwig can go from 0 to 1320 MW in 12 seconds, and has a peak output of about 1800 MW. It is built as an accumulator system, pumping water up the mountain at night (using excess capacity from nuclear and fossil fuel plants) so it doesn't depend on a huge water supply (river). Efficiency (W generated vs. W needed to pump the water up the mountain) is about 70%.
I wonder if you could use the exhaust gases of the ship for the bubbles for shipping application?
Not directly. If you put the exhaust at the bottom of the ship, you're creating significant pressure for the gases to overcome. You don't want this: for optimal engine efficiency, you want the exhaust to be unobstructed. If the exhaust is 10 m below the surface, you've got 1 bar to overcome, which probably makes your turbochargers choke, dropping power output by half. You're better off running a compressor to generate the bubbles.
Sounds like a stock market crash. Why do people subject themselves to such crazes? We've got similar days here (.nl) once or twice a year (national holidays combined with open stores), and I avoid stores like the plague on those days.
I make it a point never to contact work when I'm on holiday. One reason is that there's no point, since I won't be able to solve any issues that may come up since I don't carry the several GB of data I'd need for that. I've had a few bad experiences, checking in during a vacation only to find a nastygram I couldn't do anything about until I returned to the office. These days, I make sure beforehand that a colleague can cover for me, and then I pull the plug completely. I won't check company e-mail, and the company doesn't have my mobile number.
Also, just one week is not a vacation. I've found I need two weeks at least for the vacation to have a positive effect, i.e. unwinding completely, and getting to a point where at the end of the vacation I've got more energy than at the start.
Did you read my post and its parents? I am perfectly aware that the ATLAS isn't part of the accelerator (and have said so in other posts to this story). I was merely answering a post that erroneously describes the LHA as a cyclotron.
One trend I've noticed leaking over from the consumer electronics field is the use of bling: high-gloss or (even worse) chrome design elements, ultrabright blue LEDs etc. Apart from looking awful, chrome is annoying on a laptop because it deteriorates quickly. Nothing looks worse than flaked-off chrome. High-gloss surfaces highlight dust and fingerprints, and ultrabright LEDs dazzle. Can we please avoid the mistakes of the fashion world (where everything looks the same during a given 'trend') and actually have the choice of buying something more understated? I want my electronics finished in matt black, not silver.
Actually, no. The LHA is not a cyclotron. In a cyclotron, the particles travel in a spiral, in an area sandwiched between two huge electromagnets. The size of the magnet limits the size of the cyclotron. The LHA consists of a tube running through a series of magnets, a bit like a linear accelerator. The tube is bent into a circle so you can have the particles do multiple laps around the accelerator to increase their energy.
IANAPP (particle physicist), but bending the particles' path is often done to determine mass: heavier particles will be pulled off their course less than lighter particles, so they'll impact the detector in a different place.
The magnet needs supercooling because a huge magnetic field is easier to achieve with a superconductor than with a conventional magnet.
Credit cards and debit cards, while more convenient for the individual and shop, are less convenient for the individual behind since they are much slower than cash.
My experience is different. I can pay with a debit card in something like 5 seconds. With cash, I may be able to hand over some bills in 5 seconds, but no way is the cashier going to be able to give me the appropriate change in that time. There's also the 'supply chain' of the cash to consider. If I have to go to an ATM first to retrieve my cash, and then pay with cash at the shop, I've spent more time than if I skip the ATM step altogether.
really like the IBM commercial where the RFID scanner scans all the items instantly and presents the total - hopefully it will zap the tag too
In a mall near you, sometime in the near future...
You walk over to the self-checkout counter. As you pass the scanner post, the RFID scanner scans all the items instantly and presents the total. Once you pay, a set of rings shoot from the ground Stargate SG-1 style and surround you and your groceries. You hear "ZZZZT", the packaging on your groceries begins to smell faintly and smoke comes out of your pockets. All RFID tags have been comprehensively nuked, including the ones in your credit card, driver's license and passport.
Slashdot Mirror
Google had the right idea when they located their datacenter in Oregon, in a colder climate so they don't need as much air con power, and right next to a big hydro power plant.
What's the point of locating your datacenter in an area with high ground prices, a history of electric power supply problems and a hot climate?
You realize that this is about international flights, right? Flights that do not originate on US soil? I.e. where the takeoff point is NOT under US control?
Depends. If we have solar power at a lower cost/kWh than fossil fuel plants can achieve, we can use excess solar power to create a buffer.
Hydro (pumped storage) is one option. Another is to separate water into hydrogen, which you can burn in fuel cells or gas turbines (both options can be started up quickly). Yes, this isn't 100% efficient, but if you have cheap, abundant, renewable power, who cares?
Dinorwig, you mean? Yes, they can synchronise the turbines to the grid (spinning the turbines in air rather than water) so they can start generating faster. From a dead stop they can start generating in about 90s, a synchronized turbine can be generating in 12s.
On second thought, I don't think the fuel burn rate matters all that much. The operating cost of a nuke plant is determined mostly by other factors (cost of building it, personnel etc., EOL disposal of the reactor). Running a nuclear power station strictly as a backup means you won't sell many kWh which means your cost/kWh goes through the roof.
It's not a coincidence nuclear power stations are often run as a base load, running at 100% of capacity basically full time.
Of course, those extra benefits only apply if your local climate is hot enough that everyone uses AC. In colder climates you need all the solar heating you can get, and peak demand is in the middle of the winter, in the early morning and evening.
Highrise buildings have a very high power (usage) density, and not much surface area suitable for putting solar arrays on. I doubt you could power even a single-story office building by covering its roof in solar panels. Also, in an urban environment, buildings cast shadows on each other, decreasing efficiency of the panels.
So there won't be a 'rest' to feed back into the grid. It will help a bit, but you'll still need a power infrastructure to move power to dense environments (inner cities).
Nuclear power is an inefficient method to create a buffer. You'll need to run the reactor at a significant power level to keep the steam circuit hot enough that you can start generating immediately. Starting up a cold reactor takes hours, so you're better off not shutting it down at all.
And even at low power levels, your fuel will keep fissioning merrily along, so in essence you're throwing away a finite resource. Also, your buffer will be significantly more expensive than the solar energy you're using as primary.
If you have an abundant source of renewable energy, you're better off using some of that to drive a buffer. Hydro buffer plants such as Dinorwig (see elsewhere in this discussion) have been shown to work well.
Gee, let's switch from an oval to a figure-8 with an overpass!
Agreed. Figure-8 racing tracks should have a level crossing instead.
That means you NEED enough GAS powerplants to power the whole world too, as they're the only type of power plant you can literally turn the dial and turn up the output.
No, they're not. Hydro plants can do this as well. The UK uses several hydro plants like Dinorwig to cover peak loads. Dinorwig can go from 0 to 1320 MW in 12 seconds, and has a peak output of about 1800 MW. It is built as an accumulator system, pumping water up the mountain at night (using excess capacity from nuclear and fossil fuel plants) so it doesn't depend on a huge water supply (river). Efficiency (W generated vs. W needed to pump the water up the mountain) is about 70%.
Wow. Strong magnetic fields induce Forth in people? Who knew!
--
You Forth love if honk then
Lo and behold the slideshow link gives you a 404 File Not Found.
I was able to view the slideshow. Nothing impressive, but nice pics.
this presentation is better, including short video clips of the machines in action. It's also more fun. Requires Flash, though.
same presentation without it opening in a popup window
I wonder if you could use the exhaust gases of the ship for the bubbles for shipping application?
Not directly. If you put the exhaust at the bottom of the ship, you're creating significant pressure for the gases to overcome. You don't want this: for optimal engine efficiency, you want the exhaust to be unobstructed. If the exhaust is 10 m below the surface, you've got 1 bar to overcome, which probably makes your turbochargers choke, dropping power output by half.
You're better off running a compressor to generate the bubbles.
"Thankfully they really don't make 'em like they used to."
No, these days they cram Windows CE and lots of ersatz chrome into the things. Such progress!
Sounds like a stock market crash.
Why do people subject themselves to such crazes? We've got similar days here (.nl) once or twice a year (national holidays combined with open stores), and I avoid stores like the plague on those days.
I make it a point never to contact work when I'm on holiday. One reason is that there's no point, since I won't be able to solve any issues that may come up since I don't carry the several GB of data I'd need for that. I've had a few bad experiences, checking in during a vacation only to find a nastygram I couldn't do anything about until I returned to the office. These days, I make sure beforehand that a colleague can cover for me, and then I pull the plug completely. I won't check company e-mail, and the company doesn't have my mobile number.
Also, just one week is not a vacation. I've found I need two weeks at least for the vacation to have a positive effect, i.e. unwinding completely, and getting to a point where at the end of the vacation I've got more energy than at the start.
Did you read my post and its parents? I am perfectly aware that the ATLAS isn't part of the accelerator (and have said so in other posts to this story). I was merely answering a post that erroneously describes the LHA as a cyclotron.
One trend I've noticed leaking over from the consumer electronics field is the use of bling: high-gloss or (even worse) chrome design elements, ultrabright blue LEDs etc. Apart from looking awful, chrome is annoying on a laptop because it deteriorates quickly. Nothing looks worse than flaked-off chrome. High-gloss surfaces highlight dust and fingerprints, and ultrabright LEDs dazzle.
Can we please avoid the mistakes of the fashion world (where everything looks the same during a given 'trend') and actually have the choice of buying something more understated? I want my electronics finished in matt black, not silver.
Actually, no. The LHA is not a cyclotron. In a cyclotron, the particles travel in a spiral, in an area sandwiched between two huge electromagnets. The size of the magnet limits the size of the cyclotron.
The LHA consists of a tube running through a series of magnets, a bit like a linear accelerator. The tube is bent into a circle so you can have the particles do multiple laps around the accelerator to increase their energy.
You seem to suggest the ATLAS magnet is used to contain the particles within the accelerator itself, which is not the case.
The accelerator does use magnets to contain the particles, just not this one.
The ATLAS experiment is one of the detectors which use the output from the accelerator.
IANAPP (particle physicist), but bending the particles' path is often done to determine mass: heavier particles will be pulled off their course less than lighter particles, so they'll impact the detector in a different place.
The magnet needs supercooling because a huge magnetic field is easier to achieve with a superconductor than with a conventional magnet.
Credit cards and debit cards, while more convenient for the individual and shop, are less convenient for the individual behind since they are much slower than cash.
My experience is different. I can pay with a debit card in something like 5 seconds. With cash, I may be able to hand over some bills in 5 seconds, but no way is the cashier going to be able to give me the appropriate change in that time.
There's also the 'supply chain' of the cash to consider. If I have to go to an ATM first to retrieve my cash, and then pay with cash at the shop, I've spent more time than if I skip the ATM step altogether.
really like the IBM commercial where the RFID scanner scans all the items instantly and presents the total - hopefully it will zap the tag too
In a mall near you, sometime in the near future...
You walk over to the self-checkout counter. As you pass the scanner post, the RFID scanner scans all the items instantly and presents the total. Once you pay, a set of rings shoot from the ground Stargate SG-1 style and surround you and your groceries. You hear "ZZZZT", the packaging on your groceries begins to smell faintly and smoke comes out of your pockets. All RFID tags have been comprehensively nuked, including the ones in your credit card, driver's license and passport.
fines of E497 and E280 is off by 6 orders of magnitude. Should be E497M and E280M.
James Follett's novel 'Torus' also explores this concept.