well, I picked mercury because starting next years, most of these sites have to drop their emissions to 1/10 or less of what they currently are at.
Now, I keep viewing coal because that 'waste' product is a large amount of elements that if separated from the (CH*)* suddenly becomes useful, esp. when you have cheap high temps. But burning coal the way that we do and cleaning up on the back-end is VERY expensive. The reason is that post-burn clean-up does a really lousy job.
finally, nearly all coal has Mercury and large amounts of other elements. right now, America emits about 33 tonnes of mercury each year. China emits more than 300 tonnes and it will get much worse.
you mean the one with 3 keys that act up and leave me regularly with upper case letters where not wanted, and another key missing?
That chinese keyboard?
Not really.
None of the plants scrub everything (save CO2). Even the coming lead/mercury clean up will leave something like 5-10%. The reason is that removing 100% post burn is VERY expensive. About the only way to clean it all up, is to convert the coal to methane, and clean it up at that time. The problem with that, is it is more expensive than nat gas in America. OTOH, it actually makes great sense over in Europe. With this approach, they could quickly cut their energy imports esp. from Russia.
Interestingly, most of these approaches leave behind a nice concentrated set of elements that are basically able to be separated and used.
I have done work under FAA for Boeing, worked on MGS for NASA, and DOD contracts. If paperwork did not match up for any of them, then the work would not have been accepted. To claim that any of these organizations accepted BS work is just that; total BS.
Anybody think that coal is clean AND cheap is kidding themselves. The only way to have cheap coal is turn off all scrubbers the way that china does. Then you simply shifted costs from the electrical plant to health services, as well as real estate, business costs, etc.
So, a company pushes to enforce a ban that is in America's interest and that is bad.
Otoh, ULA fought against spacex using existing launch sites at Vandenberg or kennedy, which lead to their first being at Marshall ( very expensive ); fought a second time against spacex getting a site at Vandenberg and Kennedy, but lost; fought to force the DOD to give them a massive launch contracts before spacex, or BO, were in place to bid; fought against Kennedy offering up a launch site for private use, esp spacex; pushed congress to cut spacex out of the human flight ( ula wanted only 1-2 winner; them and Boeing and or SNC and ula );
exactly. 3-4 years ago, Musk said that he was going to use the old cells from the cars for home/business storage. For now, these powerpacks will be using new cells, but, they will mix in old ones down the road and then the packs will be just old cells. Ppl are missing the fact that tesla has not said that these packs will consist of so many cells or that they are all new. For now, the cells will be new, but, tesla will be mixing in cells from the roadster and later MS.
Tesla is NOT selling you a powerpack with new cells. They are selling you a system with 7 or 10 KWH. For now, Tesla is going with new cells. BUT Down the road, the cells will be used from spent roadsters and MSs. BTW, spent means that the BATTERY typically has over 80% of storage.
If you look at the weight of the power packs, it is obvious that there are a lot more cells than the size calls for.
Yes. It is the exact same model as Tesla. The powerpack will initially be using new batteries. They are doing this to help get the factory off the ground. later on, when batteries are coming back from the roadster, and then the MS, they will tear apart the batteries, test the cells and then build powerpacks based on those used cells.
Tesla announced 3 years ago that they would be re-using the cells for doing homes. And Daimler, upon seeing that Musk is doing this, is now trying to copy it.
Mercedes is working hard to copy Tesla with words, but they really have nothing. For example, claiming that their batteries will be as low costs as Tesla. How are they going to do that? With small production? Nope. Zero chance.
You missed the point. By having a strain gauge on the gears for doing weights, it allows for cross-checking. I doubt that any good pilot will give up total control.
Of course, I say that, and all of the airbus pilots do not actually fly the aircraft. It is a true computer controlled aircraft, with inputs from the pilots and other items.
ah.
No, during a start-up, that is different. Basically, these are the owners that have stock options PRIOR to it going public. However, once you go public, then you would no longer get stock or options in the publicly traded stock.
the one issue that I see is that now that so many LBO groups exists out there, what will it mean when they take a company private? I assume that it is like having it back to start-up phase. As such, any executives in that time, can get all of the options that they want. However, upon IPO, that is over.
The real issue is that so many kids today take degrees that society does not need. How many journalists, philosophers, artists, any business item esp MBA, Law, etc does a society need? Basically, too many ppl are pursuing easy degrees. What is needed are things like engineering, nursing, medicine, computer science, etc.
And yes, at the same time, we need to add more to vocational. So does Canada.
There are North Dakota Democratic-Nonpartisan League Party and Democratic farmers party in minnesota. This guy belongs to the later. They are far more like the old style dems from the 40-60s, rather than the losers of today. Of course, this guy still needs to go.
Actually, we need to roll back the regs that reagan removed.
After the great stock market crash, a reg was put in place that required that all executives not own any stock in the industry that they were working in. As such, they made correct choices for the company and not for themselves. Since reagan rolled that back, the executives have shifted from being paid wages (with normal taxation), along with a bonus for profit performance, to paying themselves with massive stock options in which they pay little to nothing in taxes. Worse, they put their own interests above the the company's long-term interest.
Yes. The F117 was shot down with it. And within 6 years later, it was decided to retire the fleet after such a very short service live. In addition, we keep the rest of the stealth going.
And as was noted elsewhere, trying to remove the stealth coating is impossible without destroying the plane itself.
first, UHF does not detect American stealth. China just claims it in hopes that fools will buy their radar.
China is giving up nothing. They have a compound that will absorb UHF, but all others are reflected. IOW, it is worthless.
So, why not publish it?
Slashdot Mirror
well, I picked mercury because starting next years, most of these sites have to drop their emissions to 1/10 or less of what they currently are at.
Now, I keep viewing coal because that 'waste' product is a large amount of elements that if separated from the (CH*)* suddenly becomes useful, esp. when you have cheap high temps. But burning coal the way that we do and cleaning up on the back-end is VERY expensive. The reason is that post-burn clean-up does a really lousy job.
finally, nearly all coal has Mercury and large amounts of other elements. right now, America emits about 33 tonnes of mercury each year. China emits more than 300 tonnes and it will get much worse.
you mean the one with 3 keys that act up and leave me regularly with upper case letters where not wanted, and another key missing?
That chinese keyboard?
yes, this should be interesting since volvo is now a Chinese car, with Chinese quality.
And I am sure that it will be out next fall. Right?
Not really.
None of the plants scrub everything (save CO2). Even the coming lead/mercury clean up will leave something like 5-10%. The reason is that removing 100% post burn is VERY expensive.
About the only way to clean it all up, is to convert the coal to methane, and clean it up at that time. The problem with that, is it is more expensive than nat gas in America. OTOH, it actually makes great sense over in Europe. With this approach, they could quickly cut their energy imports esp. from Russia.
Interestingly, most of these approaches leave behind a nice concentrated set of elements that are basically able to be separated and used.
I have done work under FAA for Boeing, worked on MGS for NASA, and DOD contracts. If paperwork did not match up for any of them, then the work would not have been accepted. To claim that any of these organizations accepted BS work is just that; total BS.
Anybody think that coal is clean AND cheap is kidding themselves. The only way to have cheap coal is turn off all scrubbers the way that china does. Then you simply shifted costs from the electrical plant to health services, as well as real estate, business costs, etc.
So, a company pushes to enforce a ban that is in America's interest and that is bad.
Otoh, ULA fought against spacex using existing launch sites at Vandenberg or kennedy, which lead to their first being at Marshall ( very expensive ); fought a second time against spacex getting a site at Vandenberg and Kennedy, but lost; fought to force the DOD to give them a massive launch contracts before spacex, or BO, were in place to bid; fought against Kennedy offering up a launch site for private use, esp spacex; pushed congress to cut spacex out of the human flight ( ula wanted only 1-2 winner; them and Boeing and or SNC and ula );
exactly. 3-4 years ago, Musk said that he was going to use the old cells from the cars for home/business storage. For now, these powerpacks will be using new cells, but, they will mix in old ones down the road and then the packs will be just old cells. Ppl are missing the fact that tesla has not said that these packs will consist of so many cells or that they are all new. For now, the cells will be new, but, tesla will be mixing in cells from the roadster and later MS.
waste not want not.
Tesla is NOT selling you a powerpack with new cells. They are selling you a system with 7 or 10 KWH. For now, Tesla is going with new cells. BUT Down the road, the cells will be used from spent roadsters and MSs. BTW, spent means that the BATTERY typically has over 80% of storage.
If you look at the weight of the power packs, it is obvious that there are a lot more cells than the size calls for.
Yes. It is the exact same model as Tesla. The powerpack will initially be using new batteries. They are doing this to help get the factory off the ground. later on, when batteries are coming back from the roadster, and then the MS, they will tear apart the batteries, test the cells and then build powerpacks based on those used cells.
Tesla announced 3 years ago that they would be re-using the cells for doing homes. And Daimler, upon seeing that Musk is doing this, is now trying to copy it.
Mercedes is working hard to copy Tesla with words, but they really have nothing. For example, claiming that their batteries will be as low costs as Tesla. How are they going to do that? With small production? Nope. Zero chance.
yeah, you can keep stroking yourself but in the end, most are going to find that you right-wing nut jobs have very little integrity or honesty.
While I am a huge fan of killing off H1B, as well as L1B, what does that have to do with North American degrees or vocational school?
wants you to use an ad blocker. Had this traitor NOT told the world how NSA was spying on AQ and ISIS, then Paris very likely would not have occurred.
LOL.
Yeah. No.
You missed the point. By having a strain gauge on the gears for doing weights, it allows for cross-checking. I doubt that any good pilot will give up total control.
Of course, I say that, and all of the airbus pilots do not actually fly the aircraft. It is a true computer controlled aircraft, with inputs from the pilots and other items.
really? The aircrafts require a max thrust every 30 days? Why is that?
ah.
No, during a start-up, that is different. Basically, these are the owners that have stock options PRIOR to it going public. However, once you go public, then you would no longer get stock or options in the publicly traded stock.
the one issue that I see is that now that so many LBO groups exists out there, what will it mean when they take a company private? I assume that it is like having it back to start-up phase. As such, any executives in that time, can get all of the options that they want. However, upon IPO, that is over.
Right. But my whole point is that that the F117 was retired way early precisely because the stealth was not working all that well.
The real issue is that so many kids today take degrees that society does not need. How many journalists, philosophers, artists, any business item esp MBA, Law, etc does a society need? Basically, too many ppl are pursuing easy degrees. What is needed are things like engineering, nursing, medicine, computer science, etc.
And yes, at the same time, we need to add more to vocational. So does Canada.
Seriously, at this time, it would actually make sense for the manufacturers to design in weight happening automatically.
There are North Dakota Democratic-Nonpartisan League Party and Democratic farmers party in minnesota. This guy belongs to the later. They are far more like the old style dems from the 40-60s, rather than the losers of today. Of course, this guy still needs to go.
Actually, we need to roll back the regs that reagan removed.
After the great stock market crash, a reg was put in place that required that all executives not own any stock in the industry that they were working in. As such, they made correct choices for the company and not for themselves. Since reagan rolled that back, the executives have shifted from being paid wages (with normal taxation), along with a bonus for profit performance, to paying themselves with massive stock options in which they pay little to nothing in taxes. Worse, they put their own interests above the the company's long-term interest.
Yes. The F117 was shot down with it. And within 6 years later, it was decided to retire the fleet after such a very short service live. In addition, we keep the rest of the stealth going.
And as was noted elsewhere, trying to remove the stealth coating is impossible without destroying the plane itself.
first, UHF does not detect American stealth. China just claims it in hopes that fools will buy their radar.
China is giving up nothing. They have a compound that will absorb UHF, but all others are reflected. IOW, it is worthless.
So, why not publish it?