Yes, because we all know that the US government would never fund something simply because it sounds good to the general public. Not to mention the reason for the research is to figure out if and how alternative energy can be made viable. Sure, alternative energy would be a lot more viable if we had cheap and efficient solar cells, for instance. But right now, it simply isn't.
There isn't nearly enough alternative energy to satisfy energy needs, especially if cars start using electricity. Not to mention that nuclear energy causes the least environmental impact of any of the technologies you have mentioned. Quite frankly, alternative energy is a feel-good crock of BS.
Your ISP can't randomly delete your email account if you run your own server, and you can always change ISPs. Google can delete your account whenever they feel like it, and you have absolutely zero recourse -- it's a free service. Sure, their policies are nice right now, but Hotmail used to be a really nice email provider, too.
It's not THAT difficult, you just need to add a CPU emulator. Of course, given that wine has about 2.5 active developers, that isn't very high on the priority list (especially since an emulated windows program will run very slowly).
I think DVDs are a hell of a lot more reliable than HDs (and I doubt you got good-quality HDs for that price). IDE hard drives in my experience have a lifetime of about 1 year before they develop bad sectors (and corrupt your data). Recordable media lasts for many years when properly stored (no large temperature/humidity swings, no light exposure, etc).
Yeah, like it's really hard to block a phone number. First, it's already possible -- you could call your phone company and block the VoIP gateway that actually connects the spammers to you. If enough people do it, the gateway won't be able to do much and its operator will be forced to do something.
Actually, the phone company would want to encourage it. Phone companies hate VoIP and would love to see it die.
However, I can't see this becoming a problem. VoIP traffic is very easy to block. If you get a telemarketer, block them. It's not like they can change their internet provider every other day, and VoIP traffic, being two-way, is rather difficult to proxy through a hijacked machine (unlike email). And it's rather difficult to move a call center to another country.
Even if you see a remote it will most likely still have a filter. The LED from the remote is bright enough to go through any IR filter. However, if the LED appears a little bluish, you definitely have a filter.
Please, STFU. If rebates simply brought the item down to market value, there would be no reason to buy the item with the rebate. The thing is, most items with a rebate are an excellent deal. Again: nobody is twisting your arm to buy items with rebates. I really don't mind getting a deal because of someone else's laziness or inability to follow simple instructions.
What microsoft baggage are you talking about? You are paying for a nero license, not for a microsoft version. That sure beats having to buy two different versions of the same exact program just because you use two different systems.
RTFA. More likely than not you will end up paying a $20K+ judgment. The US legal system is not set up to protect individuals, especially individuals who have committed a crime.
Whoever wrote that article completely misunderstands how transformers and power supplies work. A power cube that is not connected to anything consumes an extremely small amount of energy (mainly the transformer core losses). This should be well under half a watt. It should NOT conume 20-50% of its rated power. The same applies to a power conditioner -- if it's consuming 250W when nothing is plugged in, it will catch on fire if it doesn't have an external fan.
I think what they did is took a multimeter, and used its AC current feature to measure the line current, and multiplied by 120. A lot of those cheap power meters do the same thing. That is not a proper way to measure power consumption, because it does not take into account the power factor. An inductive or capacitive load will appear to consume a lot of current, but in reality the current will be 90 degrees out of phase with the voltage, so no power will actually be consumed. I think this is what happened, because they measured enormous power consumption for purely inductive loads, like line filters and conditioners (which should not consume any energy at all).
Interference occurs with any two waves, whether they are electromagnetic waves, sound waves, or changes in light intensity. The only thing that is required is that the two signals add linearly (which is clearly the case with light intensities).
Are you sure your little meter is measuring watts and not volt-amps (VA)? Watts indicate the actual energy consumed; volt-amps include the imaginary power. A switched-off TV should not be consuming 8 watts, but it can consume 8 VA and not use any energy simply due to a few capacitors on the input.
Imaginary power is power consumed by things like capacitors and inductors. It will cause a current to flow, but no power will be dissipated because the current will be out of phase with the voltage.
An easy way to check this is to plug in a wall-wart into the meter. If the wall-wart is not connected to anything else, the reading should be very close to zero. If it indicates power being consumed, it's probably displaying apparent power instead of true power.
Sounds like you flunked basic physics. When two frequencies are added, you get a beat frequency that is equal to the difference between the two. If you have a 120Hz flicker from the lights and an 85Hz flicker from the monitor, you get a 35Hz beat frequency -- VERY noticeable and annoying.
This is, quite honestly, the most retarded thing I have ever read. DC does offer some minor power savings -- if you are transmitting megawatts of power over megavolt transmission lines. It does not save anything for normal 120V wiring. In fact, it's a lot less efficient.
AC transformers are nearly 95% efficient. A 12V DC-DC converter will, at best, be around 70% efficient. They simply don't make MOSFETs with low enough on-resistance to be efficient at low voltages. If you power your whole house with 12VDC, you will end up with ridiculous currents and you will have huge resistive losses in almost anything. Remember: Power = Voltage * Current = Current^2 * resistance.
The tiny amount of mercury vapor inside a broken fluorescent bulb is not harmful, even if you break one. Regular fluorescent tubes often get broken during installation, and I've never heard of anyone getting mercury poisoning from one (and a 4 foot tube has a lot more mercury vapor in it than a tiny compact fluorescent). In the paper you linked to, they spilled an entire ounce of liquid mercury -- yeah, that might be a problem.
Also, if you think we are going to move away from coal, even in 50 years, you are deluding yourself. Coal power is cheaper than most other forms of electrical power, and most people care more about their pocketbook than the environment. Not to mention that the only viable alternative to coal is (and will be) nuclear power.
The article you linked to is a good example of sensationalist reporting. I think it would be safe to say that 70% of it is complete BS. I like this tidbit though: In the United States coal-fired power plants alone pump about 50 tons of it into the air each year. I think this completely invalidates your point about fluorescent lamps.
Liquid mercury is not terribly dangerous, even if swallowed. Mercury vapor is fairly harmful, but you won't ever get exposed to it if it's in an open-air landfill (and there is already lots of it in the atmosphere). Mercury is most dangerous when it's in some kind of soluble compound, but that's not likely to happen if it's buried in a landfill. The only concern would be groundwater contamination, and landfills already have safeguards against that.
Well, first, it's not a made-up figure, it is the lowest price for a panel that I was able to find with Froogle. I don't know where the hell you found 500W panels for $1500, because real prices seem to be quite different. Besides, it still doesn't change the equation -- using the most optimistic power output predictions, they pay off in about 15 years. You don't need 3 reports, you need a brain and a calculator.
Bah. "Toxic" metals do not cause pollution, as much as various environmentalists would like you to believe. Let's see, what's worse, a drop of mercury in a landfill or a few thousand tons of CO2 in the air? Besides, where the hell do you think mercury comes from? All heavy metals are naturally occurring minerals.
Guess why PV panels cost hundreds of dollars: they take LOTS of energy to make! If they didn't require lots of energy to make, they would be dirt cheap.
As far as solar panels paying for themselves: a $600 solar panel that puts out a hundred watts (that's how much they cost) is not going to pay for itself in its lifetime. Assuming the solar panel gets a yearly average of 6 hours of max power output a day (VERY optimistic), it will only produce about 219 KW-h per year. Assuming perfect conversion efficiency and 100% use, you save about $25 worth of electricity a year. At that rate, it would take about 30 years to just pay for the solar panel! You are neither saving energy nor reducing pollution.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that would be a hell of a lot better than 10,000 coal or gas plants (which is the only real alternative).
What do you find wrong with nuclear energy? It's not a panacea, but it is a hell of a lot better than anything else right now.
Yes, because we all know that the US government would never fund something simply because it sounds good to the general public. Not to mention the reason for the research is to figure out if and how alternative energy can be made viable. Sure, alternative energy would be a lot more viable if we had cheap and efficient solar cells, for instance. But right now, it simply isn't.
There isn't nearly enough alternative energy to satisfy energy needs, especially if cars start using electricity. Not to mention that nuclear energy causes the least environmental impact of any of the technologies you have mentioned. Quite frankly, alternative energy is a feel-good crock of BS.
Your ISP can't randomly delete your email account if you run your own server, and you can always change ISPs. Google can delete your account whenever they feel like it, and you have absolutely zero recourse -- it's a free service. Sure, their policies are nice right now, but Hotmail used to be a really nice email provider, too.
It's not THAT difficult, you just need to add a CPU emulator. Of course, given that wine has about 2.5 active developers, that isn't very high on the priority list (especially since an emulated windows program will run very slowly).
I think DVDs are a hell of a lot more reliable than HDs (and I doubt you got good-quality HDs for that price). IDE hard drives in my experience have a lifetime of about 1 year before they develop bad sectors (and corrupt your data). Recordable media lasts for many years when properly stored (no large temperature/humidity swings, no light exposure, etc).
Yeah, like it's really hard to block a phone number. First, it's already possible -- you could call your phone company and block the VoIP gateway that actually connects the spammers to you. If enough people do it, the gateway won't be able to do much and its operator will be forced to do something.
Actually, the phone company would want to encourage it. Phone companies hate VoIP and would love to see it die.
However, I can't see this becoming a problem. VoIP traffic is very easy to block. If you get a telemarketer, block them. It's not like they can change their internet provider every other day, and VoIP traffic, being two-way, is rather difficult to proxy through a hijacked machine (unlike email). And it's rather difficult to move a call center to another country.
Even if you see a remote it will most likely still have a filter. The LED from the remote is bright enough to go through any IR filter. However, if the LED appears a little bluish, you definitely have a filter.
Please, STFU. If rebates simply brought the item down to market value, there would be no reason to buy the item with the rebate. The thing is, most items with a rebate are an excellent deal. Again: nobody is twisting your arm to buy items with rebates. I really don't mind getting a deal because of someone else's laziness or inability to follow simple instructions.
What microsoft baggage are you talking about? You are paying for a nero license, not for a microsoft version. That sure beats having to buy two different versions of the same exact program just because you use two different systems.
Right click on the bar, hit Customize, remove the search bar, and drag the "new tab" button to the left side of the personal toolbar. Problem solved.
RTFA. More likely than not you will end up paying a $20K+ judgment. The US legal system is not set up to protect individuals, especially individuals who have committed a crime.
You can't distort FM during reception or you will end up with the same problems. If you distort a signal, you will change its frequency composition.
Whoever wrote that article completely misunderstands how transformers and power supplies work. A power cube that is not connected to anything consumes an extremely small amount of energy (mainly the transformer core losses). This should be well under half a watt. It should NOT conume 20-50% of its rated power. The same applies to a power conditioner -- if it's consuming 250W when nothing is plugged in, it will catch on fire if it doesn't have an external fan.
I think what they did is took a multimeter, and used its AC current feature to measure the line current, and multiplied by 120. A lot of those cheap power meters do the same thing. That is not a proper way to measure power consumption, because it does not take into account the power factor. An inductive or capacitive load will appear to consume a lot of current, but in reality the current will be 90 degrees out of phase with the voltage, so no power will actually be consumed. I think this is what happened, because they measured enormous power consumption for purely inductive loads, like line filters and conditioners (which should not consume any energy at all).
Interference occurs with any two waves, whether they are electromagnetic waves, sound waves, or changes in light intensity. The only thing that is required is that the two signals add linearly (which is clearly the case with light intensities).
Are you sure your little meter is measuring watts and not volt-amps (VA)? Watts indicate the actual energy consumed; volt-amps include the imaginary power. A switched-off TV should not be consuming 8 watts, but it can consume 8 VA and not use any energy simply due to a few capacitors on the input.
Imaginary power is power consumed by things like capacitors and inductors. It will cause a current to flow, but no power will be dissipated because the current will be out of phase with the voltage.
An easy way to check this is to plug in a wall-wart into the meter. If the wall-wart is not connected to anything else, the reading should be very close to zero. If it indicates power being consumed, it's probably displaying apparent power instead of true power.
Sounds like you flunked basic physics. When two frequencies are added, you get a beat frequency that is equal to the difference between the two. If you have a 120Hz flicker from the lights and an 85Hz flicker from the monitor, you get a 35Hz beat frequency -- VERY noticeable and annoying.
This is, quite honestly, the most retarded thing I have ever read. DC does offer some minor power savings -- if you are transmitting megawatts of power over megavolt transmission lines. It does not save anything for normal 120V wiring. In fact, it's a lot less efficient.
AC transformers are nearly 95% efficient. A 12V DC-DC converter will, at best, be around 70% efficient. They simply don't make MOSFETs with low enough on-resistance to be efficient at low voltages. If you power your whole house with 12VDC, you will end up with ridiculous currents and you will have huge resistive losses in almost anything. Remember: Power = Voltage * Current = Current^2 * resistance.
The tiny amount of mercury vapor inside a broken fluorescent bulb is not harmful, even if you break one. Regular fluorescent tubes often get broken during installation, and I've never heard of anyone getting mercury poisoning from one (and a 4 foot tube has a lot more mercury vapor in it than a tiny compact fluorescent). In the paper you linked to, they spilled an entire ounce of liquid mercury -- yeah, that might be a problem.
Also, if you think we are going to move away from coal, even in 50 years, you are deluding yourself. Coal power is cheaper than most other forms of electrical power, and most people care more about their pocketbook than the environment. Not to mention that the only viable alternative to coal is (and will be) nuclear power.
The article you linked to is a good example of sensationalist reporting. I think it would be safe to say that 70% of it is complete BS. I like this tidbit though:
In the United States coal-fired power plants alone pump about 50 tons of it into the air each year.
I think this completely invalidates your point about fluorescent lamps.
Liquid mercury is not terribly dangerous, even if swallowed. Mercury vapor is fairly harmful, but you won't ever get exposed to it if it's in an open-air landfill (and there is already lots of it in the atmosphere). Mercury is most dangerous when it's in some kind of soluble compound, but that's not likely to happen if it's buried in a landfill. The only concern would be groundwater contamination, and landfills already have safeguards against that.
Well, first, it's not a made-up figure, it is the lowest price for a panel that I was able to find with Froogle. I don't know where the hell you found 500W panels for $1500, because real prices seem to be quite different. Besides, it still doesn't change the equation -- using the most optimistic power output predictions, they pay off in about 15 years. You don't need 3 reports, you need a brain and a calculator.
Bah. "Toxic" metals do not cause pollution, as much as various environmentalists would like you to believe. Let's see, what's worse, a drop of mercury in a landfill or a few thousand tons of CO2 in the air? Besides, where the hell do you think mercury comes from? All heavy metals are naturally occurring minerals.
Guess why PV panels cost hundreds of dollars: they take LOTS of energy to make! If they didn't require lots of energy to make, they would be dirt cheap.
As far as solar panels paying for themselves: a $600 solar panel that puts out a hundred watts (that's how much they cost) is not going to pay for itself in its lifetime. Assuming the solar panel gets a yearly average of 6 hours of max power output a day (VERY optimistic), it will only produce about 219 KW-h per year. Assuming perfect conversion efficiency and 100% use, you save about $25 worth of electricity a year. At that rate, it would take about 30 years to just pay for the solar panel! You are neither saving energy nor reducing pollution.