"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'
"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." -- Matthew 25:41-46, NIV
Note that "His left" will be the right of those of us with the good conscience to face Him.
Wind and hydroelectric power have a very low yield
The U.S. could satisfy 90% of its electrical demand with wind turbines on 3% of our farmland. We would have to triple the capacity of our electric grid, but it's a small price to pay for all that coal and natural gas that our kids are going to need for plastics.
I am, of course, that the government should help out, because it is in their interest. Think of all the money they could save on oil wars.
Frankly, there are a lot of good reasons to believe, from a quick search of the patent literature, that there are still several unexploited leads in the development of batteries.
Why don't we, for example, have modular batteries for electric cars which could be changed by robotic equipment at service stations where they would be recharged underground? That kind of thing would allow us to cut over from oil to renewable (eg., wind, hydro) power without any innovations in actual battery technology.
[Sorry I flubbed the formatting on previous reply to parent. I meant to hit 'Preview' I swear.]
Put 3x as much windpower on the grid?
No, we have less than 2% wind now, and I'm talking about building to 90%: about 57x.
Increased the amount of power the grid can move by a factor of 3?
Yes, by adding twice as many wires by metal mass as are there now.
Interconnect the regional grids so that places not servable by wind turbines can be plugged in?
Yes, that is part of it too, but I assume new wind power installations will include new connections to the nearest grid not counted in the 3x wire metal figure.
Once we get three times the capacity, then we can take full advantage of the law of averages -- the wind is almost always blowing somewhere -- and we can shape locally with existing hydro, and convert coal, gas, and nuclear plants to demand only operations.
No, we have less than 2% wind now, and I'm talking about building to 90%: about 57x.
Increased the amount of power the grid can move by a factor of 3?
Yes, by adding twice as many wires by metal mass as are there now.
Interconnect the regional grids so that places not servable by wind turbines can be plugged in?
Yes, that is part of it too, but I assume new wind power installations will include new connections to the nearest grid not counted in the 3x metal figure.
Once we get three times the capacity, then we can take full advantage of the law of averages -- the wind is almost always blowing somewhere -- and we can shape locally with existing hydro, and convert coal, gas, and nuclear plants to demand only operations.
Biofuels being grown on an irrigated desert result in a net carbon sink, granted. However, the sad fact of the matter is that they will most likely be grown in place of ordinary crops, where they are a wash, or on land that used to be forest or rainforest, where they consume significantly less carbon dioxide than would be consumed had the land not been cleared to grow biofuels.
If the U.S. tripled the capacity of our electric grid, we could satisfy 90% of our electric demand with wind turbines occupying only 3% of our existing farmland, with the remainder shaped by hydroelectric dams, and only 1.5% from coal, natural gas, or nuclear.
Nuclear power does not remove energy from the atmosphere, as wind power does. Heat produced from nuclear power generation and use also enters the the atmosphere.
burning fossil fuels increases the net CO2 in the atmosphere, which burning plant matter doesn't
On the contrary, burning plant matter does increase "net" CO2. The length of time carbon in the fuel has been sequestered has no bearing on the destination of the carbon dioxide.
There is no ecological difference between CO2 from fossil fuel combustion and CO2 from renewable or sustainable plant matter combustion. Both trap the same amount of solar energy in the troposphere. Both are captured equivalently by growing plants.
Why the heck can't you just replace the chip with the flash with a new one? Or take it out and flash it back to it's initial state and plug it back in?
Supporting a reliable flush callback is not the same thing as supporting a reliable flush operation. I can not speak for the so-called "storage area network" but most forms of NFS support fflush(), last I checked. Perhaps SMB does not?
write-ahead logging is why I use and advocate PostgreSQL. Witness the recent power failure problems at Livejournal in which WAL recovery would probably have cut downtime to a few hours instead of days.
How does that make me wrong? Conservatism works on more than one axis.
You have been wrong because your brand of fundamentalist conservatism which you share with your alma matter teaches mythology contrary to the evidence that God has left for us, simply because
it is inconsistent with someone's edition of "holy scripture."
Those of us who count ourselves as true conservatives do not squander precious resources to fight unwinnable wars designed to steal the same resources they squander.
Do you realize what would happen to OSDN if someone posted illegal porn on one of your servers, and the prosecution called you to the stand to state your views about the appropriate punnishment for explaining sex to children?
CO2 is transparent to the visible wavelengths at which the sun radiates most of its energy on to the ground. But it is opaque or nearly so through the infrared wavelengths that ground radiates when it becomes warm, trapping the infrared energy in the atmosphere (the troposphere.)
Note that the use of wind power is the only try mitigation of the greenhouse gas problem.
There are buffers in the atmosphere which have caused temperatures to increase less rapidly than the concentration of CO2 (e.g., reflective cloud formation), but the energy still has to go somewhere, since total cloud-cover hasn't increased all that much.
I gave him a copy of my TIMIT CD-ROM from the Linguistic Data Consortium, and he accepted it! No other television personality would have been likely to do that, in my estimation.
Slashdot Mirror
I want RMS to dye his hair and beard blonde and go touring with Ashlee Simpson, opening up her act with chants in praise of GNU software.
My OSX box has no idea what kind of printer I have, only that it prints PCL. Just sayin'.
You can use `cat bloated.image > new.image`
This one? Check your gmail.
Note that "His left" will be the right of those of us with the good conscience to face Him.
Wake me up when the creationists debate in an unbiased forum.
I am, of course, that the government should help out, because it is in their interest. Think of all the money they could save on oil wars.
Why don't we, for example, have modular batteries for electric cars which could be changed by robotic equipment at service stations where they would be recharged underground? That kind of thing would allow us to cut over from oil to renewable (eg., wind, hydro) power without any innovations in actual battery technology.
I like the icon on this story!
Once we get three times the capacity, then we can take full advantage of the law of averages -- the wind is almost always blowing somewhere -- and we can shape locally with existing hydro, and convert coal, gas, and nuclear plants to demand only operations.
If the U.S. tripled the capacity of our electric grid, we could satisfy 90% of our electric demand with wind turbines occupying only 3% of our existing farmland, with the remainder shaped by hydroelectric dams, and only 1.5% from coal, natural gas, or nuclear.
Whether you consider it byproduct or waste, its combustion products are much more serious than asbestos.
Nuclear power produces highly toxic waste and byproducts.
On the contrary, burning plant matter does increase "net" CO2. The length of time carbon in the fuel has been sequestered has no bearing on the destination of the carbon dioxide.
Wind power is the only actual mitigation of increases in greenhouse gasses.
Why the heck can't you just replace the chip with the flash with a new one? Or take it out and flash it back to it's initial state and plug it back in?
Supporting a reliable flush callback is not the same thing as supporting a reliable flush operation. I can not speak for the so-called "storage area network" but most forms of NFS support fflush(), last I checked. Perhaps SMB does not?
True, but for a small server (or any kind of server without reliable UPS) MySQL isn't is fault tolerant as InnoDB or PostgreSQL.
write-ahead logging is why I use and advocate PostgreSQL. Witness the recent power failure problems at Livejournal in which WAL recovery would probably have cut downtime to a few hours instead of days.
You have been wrong because your brand of fundamentalist conservatism which you share with your alma matter teaches mythology contrary to the evidence that God has left for us, simply because it is inconsistent with someone's edition of "holy scripture."
Those of us who count ourselves as true conservatives do not squander precious resources to fight unwinnable wars designed to steal the same resources they squander.
Do you realize what would happen to OSDN if someone posted illegal porn on one of your servers, and the prosecution called you to the stand to state your views about the appropriate punnishment for explaining sex to children?
I demand that you resign.
Some of that energy is thermal, but some manifests in stronger storms and worse weather.
Note that the use of wind power is the only try mitigation of the greenhouse gas problem.
There are buffers in the atmosphere which have caused temperatures to increase less rapidly than the concentration of CO2 (e.g., reflective cloud formation), but the energy still has to go somewhere, since total cloud-cover hasn't increased all that much.
If it's raining outside, and I show you in the window, would you ask me to stick my hand out and then splash you with water droplets just to be sure?
The airport is also where I met him. In Las Vegas, year 2000. I don't remember how he was dressed.
I gave him a copy of my TIMIT CD-ROM from the Linguistic Data Consortium, and he accepted it! No other television personality would have been likely to do that, in my estimation.