China knows that it can't and must not rely on fossil fuel too heavily, as over 90% of the fossil fuel it uses it imports from abroad --- with most of those oil / LNG tanker vessels passing through the Strait of Malacca (from the Middle East) which can easily become a military choking point if any crisis happens
China would be happy to buy oil from Venezuela, and Venezuela would be happy to sell it to them, even if Trump (further) blows up the Middle East.
So China is still making a concerted effort to move to renewables, and the U.S. is still falling behind.
Regulations in general mean companies have to hire more workers because making their staff work 90 hour weeks would get cost prohibitive with overtime, FDA regulations create an entire industry of drug and device testing, etc. The only regulations I can think of that would lead to actual job losses would be for companies that should go die in a fire anyway, like payday loan sharks.
Moving 500 tons of water up and down 20m isn't going to be significant compared to the demands of a neighborhood.
Or 7500 tons for the largest water towers. But 500 would be significant, unless we're using Manhattan as the definition of a "neighborhood". Pumped storage is a proven idea, used around the world, even to back up nuclear power plants - only new thing would be using a water tower to do it. A storage tower would of course take up more space than a Tesla Powerpack. It would also have its operational use measured in centuries rather than decades.
If it were that easy, everybody would be doing it.
We're still on energy grids built around central power generation from nuclear or coal plants, not decentralized grids using renewables. So we don't have neighborhood sized batteries to speak of yet, using any tech. But they would plug the "baseload power" FUD that is thrown at wind and solar power.
1) The United States killed three million Koreans and flattened every city in the north in an illegal war
2) The United States has overthrown dozens of democracies since the Korean War, replacing many of them with dictatorships, and sometimes for giggles gone back decades later to overthrow those dictatorships (see Iraq)
3) North Korea's threats are retaliatory - as in 'we'll can strike you if you attack us'. You could also end sanctions that make NK dependent on outside help, too.
4) The United States has practiced invasions of North Korea every year every year since the 90's. During harvest or planting seasons which forces men who would be working on farms to deploy to the border, in case this time it's for real.
North Korea is not a spoiled child as you absurdly suggest. They are defending themselves against American regime change.
Then use the word Palestine, which would refer to a place, not Palestinian, which refers to people.
Palestine was a place where both Jews and Arabs lived, both groups could have legitimate title to Palestinian
In the same way that European immigrants had an "equal" right to North America and South America, you nazi cow. Jews were less than 5% of the population of Palestine before 1900, which means nearly 100% of Israeli jews today are settlers or the children of settlers. All of whom are living on stolen land.
Other way around. The EC is created precisely because it could allow someone like Trump to become president.
Hardly. You really think elites want a hotheaded failed businessman at the top of government? Hillary was their plan, which is why the entire media and political establishment has kept up the farce that is Russiagate to remind him who's boss. The EC isn't about getting people like Trump in the White House, it's about keeping people like Eugene Debs if he had managed to get a majority vote in any of his presidential campaigns.
The guy didn't have direct popular vote (as the Hillary camp would like to remind you), but he had support from more STATES, which is what Hamilton argued for - the POTUS is supposed to work for the United STATES, so he should be a person who has support from a large number of states, not just a few states with large populations.
You keep harping on this imaginary distinction. Let me guess - you're one of those people who complains that senators no longer represent the states that they are from after the 17th Amendment made them elected by popular vote instead of state legislatures. Except that's a pointless tautology that doesn't actually mean anything, as senators are selected by, you know, a state's voters. Repeal the EC and presidential elections would be conducted by each state, just as they are now.
And all a state is, is a boundary and the people who live there. The EC, aside from being another tool to give power to slave owning states that denied slaves the right to vote, disenfranchises millions of people in states across the country by making their vote pointless.
And the EC makes most of your precious states irrelevant in presidential campaigns. Large states don't matter. Small states don't matter. Only "battleground" states matter when candidates are campaigning for office. So instead of making this about 50 states, you're making this about the same dozen states that decide every presidential election every four years. Without the electoral college, Hillary would have campaigned in Texas and Trump would have campaigned in California, unless you replaced the EC with another asinine winner-takes-all-system. So if you want states to be important in presidential elections, you want to end the electoral college, not perpetuate it.
There's also the fact that electors are free to ignore the vote in their state and select whoever they want as president. So, yeah, the entire institution is an elitist construction to provide the illusion of representative government, and keep the proles from having a say in their own governance. Like I said the first time. Same reason women, slaves, and non-property owners couldn't vote, and why senators were selected by state legislatures instead of voters.
Hey, thanks AC, that's....pretty much everything I would have said. I owe you a beer.
Actually, the Electoral College has no design mechanism whatsoever, it merely acted by happenstance, as it has before, in four instances on record.
The only thing I'll add is how sad it is that voters are willing to be propagandized to. Democrats wont shut up about Russia, when they could be using all that energy to try and repeal the Electoral College, as they may have had a full quarter of a century control over the White House without it. Instead of Bush and Trump, we could have had Gore and Hillary.
Sure it is. A higher minimum wage means more people have more money to spend, on things like hailing an Uber unlicensed taxi instead of walking or taking the bus.
That's some impressive flexibility, turning a simple point made on how pumped storage is good enough to backup nuclear generated power to thinking the proposal is to put a few square miles of artificial reservoirs in every neighborhood, in a post talking about water towers.
Words mean things.. Socialism is a form of government that is, at it's core, the government controlling all resources and doling them out to everybody.
Indeed, words mean things - so why are you trying to make up your own definition of socialism out of thin air? Socialism == workers owning the means of production. Not that hard to understand, really.
You can see this in the socialist governments of history which where overthrown by the CIA or invaded by the U.S. military, slaughtering millions
FTFY. Iran, Iraq, Chile, Congo and others the victim of American coups, and six million dead just between Korea and Vietnam.
Venezuela is an excellent example of how this progresses. 20 years ago this country was a thriving capitalistic country with a bright future. They had huge natural resource wealth, a vibrant economy and one of the highest standards of living in south America. Now look at where they are.
Yes, look at how their GDP has tripled while lifting millions of people out of generational poverty. Look at the US supported coup in 2003, the currency manipulations, the laughable sanctions that were imposed by claiming Venezuela was a threat to the US, and the many millions of dollars the US has spent to subvert Venezuela's democracy. Before whining like a bitch about 13 twitter trolls.
Capitalism on the other hand, has lifted more people to a higher standard of living than any other kind of economic policy.
Only for those who would have already been rich robber barons. Demand creates jobs, not capitalism. The three richest people in the United States are worth more than the bottom half of the population, and here you think Venezuela has a failed system?
Just how much power do you think is stored in 20,000 gallons, 100 feet up?
You mean the average backyard swimming pool? Only small rooftop water towers hold that much - in which case they can act as a battery for the building it's sitting on. Standalone water towers typically have many times that capacity, with the largest holding millions of gallons.
And then the next time they try to issue bonds or borrow in some other way for some large dollar project, all the potential lenders will treat them as junk and want 15% interest to cover the fact that they'll likely default again.
Common talking point but completely false. Countries that have defaulted on debts have been able to get credit at much lower rates than that, and quickly. Why? Because their economy is now free to grow without their GDP being siphoned off into making debt payments to colonizers. That's part of the reason why people who declare bankruptcy in the U.S. immediately see their mailboxes full of credit card offers.
This is human nature and it's exactly why the United States federal government is a Republic and not a Democracy.
No. It's a republic because the hallowed "Founders" were a bunch of elitist pricks who didn't want the proles to have a say in their own governance. They were afraid of "the mob" not because working for a living makes you stupid, but because landed gentry would see their votes count just as much as an indentured servant, sharecropper or (gasp!) slave.
The problem with Democracy is that it generally warps into a form of socialism over time as politicians figure out that's the easiest way to achieve or maintain power.
This talking point is stupid on it's face. All states in the U.S. have democratic elections for their representatives and governors - no state has an Electoral College to toss out the results of an election because the elites didn't like the result. Yet your talking point doesn't happen in even the most liberal of states, New York and California.
Then do the bare minimum without actually fixing problems because, generally, the politicians are simply not smart enough to do it or, worse, they do not care to do it because there is no accountability for politicians (particularly if they're media darlings).
You and the other Randians are ignoring the elephant in the room here: Puerto Rico has no control over their currency at all, and little control over their economy and trade. For that, you'd have to look to the President of the United States and members of Congress.
All of whom which were selected with your precious republicanism, and none of whom Puerto Rican's get to vote for.
If you have solar, you need batteries to get you though the night and cloudy days, plus additional generation capacity to charge all these batteries. Windmills are a bit better, but individuals would have a hard time building and maintaining enough capacity to keep the lights on when it's calm so you'd likely need to share capacity with your neighbors, meaning you need transmission lines.
Just retrofit the local water tower with a lower tank and a turbine to act as the neighborhood's battery for wind and solar power, or build a new one if necessary. If pumped storage is good enough for nuclear, it's good enough for renewables. With very low maintenance it would be usable for centuries at least.
I grew up in a country where the power company was (and still is) state owned. Constant blackouts, sometimes a week long, are not unusual.
....you could have had a privately owned power plant, and paid 3x the rates for worse service. Assuming they even put a line out to your neighborhood if you were in a sparsely populated area.
Tesla has a cult following - like 1990's Apple. It's purely psychological.
If it's all about cults, then just like with Apple, it's funny how another company with better products and/or prices hasn't created their own cult via a marketing campaign, and driven Tesla out of business.
Slashdot Mirror
Ignoring the fact that China has three times the population of the United States and thus polluting far less per capita makes you the joke.
China would be happy to buy oil from Venezuela, and Venezuela would be happy to sell it to them, even if Trump (further) blows up the Middle East.
So China is still making a concerted effort to move to renewables, and the U.S. is still falling behind.
You're not defending Europe, clown shoes. You're occupying it.
You know the old bit about the average net worth of a bar patron skyrocketing the moment Bill Gates comes in for a beer is a joke, right?
Right?
Regulations in general mean companies have to hire more workers because making their staff work 90 hour weeks would get cost prohibitive with overtime, FDA regulations create an entire industry of drug and device testing, etc. The only regulations I can think of that would lead to actual job losses would be for companies that should go die in a fire anyway, like payday loan sharks.
Or 7500 tons for the largest water towers. But 500 would be significant, unless we're using Manhattan as the definition of a "neighborhood". Pumped storage is a proven idea, used around the world, even to back up nuclear power plants - only new thing would be using a water tower to do it. A storage tower would of course take up more space than a Tesla Powerpack. It would also have its operational use measured in centuries rather than decades.
We're still on energy grids built around central power generation from nuclear or coal plants, not decentralized grids using renewables. So we don't have neighborhood sized batteries to speak of yet, using any tech. But they would plug the "baseload power" FUD that is thrown at wind and solar power.
1) The United States killed three million Koreans and flattened every city in the north in an illegal war
2) The United States has overthrown dozens of democracies since the Korean War, replacing many of them with dictatorships, and sometimes for giggles gone back decades later to overthrow those dictatorships (see Iraq)
3) North Korea's threats are retaliatory - as in 'we'll can strike you if you attack us'. You could also end sanctions that make NK dependent on outside help, too.
4) The United States has practiced invasions of North Korea every year every year since the 90's. During harvest or planting seasons which forces men who would be working on farms to deploy to the border, in case this time it's for real.
North Korea is not a spoiled child as you absurdly suggest. They are defending themselves against American regime change.
Then use the word Palestine, which would refer to a place, not Palestinian, which refers to people.
In the same way that European immigrants had an "equal" right to North America and South America, you nazi cow. Jews were less than 5% of the population of Palestine before 1900, which means nearly 100% of Israeli jews today are settlers or the children of settlers. All of whom are living on stolen land.
Hardly. You really think elites want a hotheaded failed businessman at the top of government? Hillary was their plan, which is why the entire media and political establishment has kept up the farce that is Russiagate to remind him who's boss. The EC isn't about getting people like Trump in the White House, it's about keeping people like Eugene Debs if he had managed to get a majority vote in any of his presidential campaigns.
You keep harping on this imaginary distinction. Let me guess - you're one of those people who complains that senators no longer represent the states that they are from after the 17th Amendment made them elected by popular vote instead of state legislatures. Except that's a pointless tautology that doesn't actually mean anything, as senators are selected by, you know, a state's voters. Repeal the EC and presidential elections would be conducted by each state, just as they are now.
And all a state is, is a boundary and the people who live there. The EC, aside from being another tool to give power to slave owning states that denied slaves the right to vote, disenfranchises millions of people in states across the country by making their vote pointless.
And the EC makes most of your precious states irrelevant in presidential campaigns. Large states don't matter. Small states don't matter. Only "battleground" states matter when candidates are campaigning for office. So instead of making this about 50 states, you're making this about the same dozen states that decide every presidential election every four years. Without the electoral college, Hillary would have campaigned in Texas and Trump would have campaigned in California, unless you replaced the EC with another asinine winner-takes-all-system. So if you want states to be important in presidential elections, you want to end the electoral college, not perpetuate it.
There's also the fact that electors are free to ignore the vote in their state and select whoever they want as president. So, yeah, the entire institution is an elitist construction to provide the illusion of representative government, and keep the proles from having a say in their own governance. Like I said the first time. Same reason women, slaves, and non-property owners couldn't vote, and why senators were selected by state legislatures instead of voters.
Hey, thanks AC, that's....pretty much everything I would have said. I owe you a beer.
The only thing I'll add is how sad it is that voters are willing to be propagandized to. Democrats wont shut up about Russia, when they could be using all that energy to try and repeal the Electoral College, as they may have had a full quarter of a century control over the White House without it. Instead of Bush and Trump, we could have had Gore and Hillary.
Sure it is. A higher minimum wage means more people have more money to spend, on things like hailing an Uber unlicensed taxi instead of walking or taking the bus.
That's some impressive flexibility, turning a simple point made on how pumped storage is good enough to backup nuclear generated power to thinking the proposal is to put a few square miles of artificial reservoirs in every neighborhood, in a post talking about water towers.
Indeed, words mean things - so why are you trying to make up your own definition of socialism out of thin air? Socialism == workers owning the means of production. Not that hard to understand, really.
FTFY. Iran, Iraq, Chile, Congo and others the victim of American coups, and six million dead just between Korea and Vietnam.
Yes, look at how their GDP has tripled while lifting millions of people out of generational poverty. Look at the US supported coup in 2003, the currency manipulations, the laughable sanctions that were imposed by claiming Venezuela was a threat to the US, and the many millions of dollars the US has spent to subvert Venezuela's democracy. Before whining like a bitch about 13 twitter trolls.
Only for those who would have already been rich robber barons. Demand creates jobs, not capitalism. The three richest people in the United States are worth more than the bottom half of the population, and here you think Venezuela has a failed system?
I think I saw that movie
You mean the average backyard swimming pool? Only small rooftop water towers hold that much - in which case they can act as a battery for the building it's sitting on. Standalone water towers typically have many times that capacity, with the largest holding millions of gallons.
See the aforementioned "or build a new one if necessary".
No worries
Do you? Which states do you think have EC's to select who their governors are during election years?
Common talking point but completely false. Countries that have defaulted on debts have been able to get credit at much lower rates than that, and quickly. Why? Because their economy is now free to grow without their GDP being siphoned off into making debt payments to colonizers. That's part of the reason why people who declare bankruptcy in the U.S. immediately see their mailboxes full of credit card offers.
No. It's a republic because the hallowed "Founders" were a bunch of elitist pricks who didn't want the proles to have a say in their own governance. They were afraid of "the mob" not because working for a living makes you stupid, but because landed gentry would see their votes count just as much as an indentured servant, sharecropper or (gasp!) slave.
This talking point is stupid on it's face. All states in the U.S. have democratic elections for their representatives and governors - no state has an Electoral College to toss out the results of an election because the elites didn't like the result. Yet your talking point doesn't happen in even the most liberal of states, New York and California.
You and the other Randians are ignoring the elephant in the room here: Puerto Rico has no control over their currency at all, and little control over their economy and trade. For that, you'd have to look to the President of the United States and members of Congress.
All of whom which were selected with your precious republicanism, and none of whom Puerto Rican's get to vote for.
Of course, because that was the ONLY power company in the entire world that could come and work on the island.
/inserteyerollemoji
Just retrofit the local water tower with a lower tank and a turbine to act as the neighborhood's battery for wind and solar power, or build a new one if necessary. If pumped storage is good enough for nuclear, it's good enough for renewables. With very low maintenance it would be usable for centuries at least.
....you could have had a privately owned power plant, and paid 3x the rates for worse service. Assuming they even put a line out to your neighborhood if you were in a sparsely populated area.
Russia and Iran are pikers next to the NSA/CIA/FBI elephants in the room.
There was also Apple being willing to spend millions going to court when the FBI wanted to force them into cracking a dead suspect's iPhone.
If it's all about cults, then just like with Apple, it's funny how another company with better products and/or prices hasn't created their own cult via a marketing campaign, and driven Tesla out of business.