Sure. But it's not like the political systems that preceded communism in Russia or China were that much better. Famines are unfortunately a regular occurrence in the history of both those countries.
If you are talking about China it's the closest thing around to the old Soviet style communist dictatorships that's still available, albeit with a mixed economy.
Basically the governments in these countries (e.g. Portugal and Spain) agreed to buy generated wind and solar power at a fixed price per kWh generated, regardless if the electricity was used or not, for decades on at a fixed price which was quite higher than the price you would pay with a fossil fuel power plant back then. Plus this price was calculated at a time oil and coal prices were at all time highs (like 4x higher than it is now, oil was over $100 USD a barrel at one point).
This was such a stupendous deal (it's basically a guaranteed rent from the state for decades) that large bank loans (billions and billions of €) were taken to erect these windmills and solar panels against the collateral that the state would guarantee these rents.
The prices of electricity to the consumer were raised significantly since then in these countries, but still what consumers pay for their electricity is not enough to cover the amounts agreed on the fixed power purchase contracts for wind and solar. So basically the government is covering the shortfall with deficit spending out of the regular government budget. i.e. its subsidizing it. In Portugal these subsidies are to the tune of 2.2%-2.6% of GDP each year alone.
So people have been paying quite a lot for their electricity and the government is granting large subsidies on top of that. I won't say the government deficit problem in these countries is just due to the renewable energy power contracts, because it isn't, but they are one of the major reasons for the deficit.
In 2007, the estimated production cost of electricity ranged from 110 €2005/MWh for wind on-shore farm, 145 €2005/MWh for large hydro, to 195 €2005/MWh for solid biomass and 880 €2005/MWh for photovoltaic. In comparison, fossil fuel based technologies such as coal, and natural gas were cheaper (from 50 €2005/MWh for coal to 75 €2005/MWh for gas) (11). Obviously, most of the renewable technologies were not competitive enough to be deployed through market forces alone.
These calculations do not take account of the additional costs for the overall energy systems to integrate the massive deployment of renewables. These costs involve, first of all, investment in the electricity grid to transport and balance electricity generated from renewable sources. The variability of electricity generated from renewables also requires investment in back-up power plants (gas turbines), costly hydro storage facilities or interconnectors.
Spain and Portugal have the highest tariff deficits, with their cumulative value of 2.2% to 3% of GDP. While the scope of these deficits differs between these two countries, in both of them the authorities have formally recognized the right of the affected utilities to recover the corresponding amount. They have also set up securitisation schemes that turn these credit rights of the utilities into fixed-income securities. Both countries aim at eliminating new tariff deficits as soon as possible, but have so far failed to do so.
General government deficit was extremely high in Greece and Spain in 2009-2012 and in Portugal in 2009-2010, i.e. close to or even exceeding 10% of GDP.
The tariff debt in Portugal is also substantial. The total accumulated tariff debt was estimated by the regulator at EUR 3.7 billion (2.2% of GDP) at the end of 2013; according to other government estimates, it could be even higher at 2.6% of GDP (EUR 4.4 billion) (35).
That's the tariff debt on generated power alone. It's a way to hide the electricity costs of renewables from the electric bill of the final consumer even when these countries have some of the highest rates in Europe. It's not counting the other costs to the electric grid, or even counting the long term bank loans that were used to build these facilities and which are part of the outstanding bank debt. Also don't think that the extra cost of the generated energy doesn't have an economic impact either.
There are facts pointing both ways. It is questionable if there is a warming and its even more questionable how much of an impact does human activity have on it.
You wish. The Russians have been waiting for the Arctic to defrost since the Novgorod Republic collapsed. Last I heard their investments at Archangelsk have been mostly frozen (hah) because the Arctic isn't defrosting as the warm mongers told us it would.
What about the fact that pollution in Beijing is so bad this week, they're having to shut down freeways [slashdot.org] because the visibility is too bad to drive safely. Pollution in India [slashdot.org] is even worse. The World Heath Organization estimates that air pollution causes 7 million premature deaths a year [ibtimes.co.uk]. What exactly do you think is overblown?
That's a different problem. China is building a lot of hydroelectric power, nuclear power, and yes even renewables to try to clean up their electricity generation. They are also building electric subways and rail like mad. I wouldn't be surprised if they cleaned it up substantially in a couple of decades and reached levels similar to, say, Japan. Now India might be a much bigger issue.
Air pollution near places where people live is a problem. I don't think you'll find a lot of people who disagree with that.
Actually in Portugal there were plenty of places to add it because most hydroelectric dams did not have pumped storage facilities. They are being upgraded with reversible pumps. It's costing a huge wallop of money but its the only way to make the make the wind power that was already installed economically viable. Ignore whatever propaganda you hear, the wind power construction is one of the reasons why Portugal (and Spain) are running a deficit and will continue doing so for probably the next 20 years. That's how long it will take to pay the goddamned windmills and reversible pumps.
That's why I think atheism is a non-scientific stand as much as theism is. The only correct stand for a properly science minded person is to be agnostic regarding the whole matter.
Oh please, give me a fuckin' break. Did you even read my comment? No one knows who wrote the Gospels, but we DO know that they were written long after Jesus' supposed death. In other words (pay attention) they in no way prove anything about him, including whether or not he existed.
The Iliad was written even longer after its events were supposed to have happened. Yet Hissarlik is there. Sure the events may have been fantasized or romanticized a bit but it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Another story which I suspect actually happened from the Greek Tragedies is the events in the Seven Against Thebes which were also written a long time after the events were supposed to happen.
I may be wrong, but I think we have hundreds of thousands of multiple independent accounts along with literally tons of supporting evidence to show that those things happened. Photos, memorabilia, military records, physical evidence, etc etc etc. I'd say there's good reason to believe it happened, unlike the "just-believe-my-story-about-the-guy-who-died-and-came-back-to-life" Jesus myth.
WWII happened less than a century ago. It's still in living memory as were the events surrounding Christ's life and death at the time the Gospels or Josephus were written. In a thousand or two thousand years who's to tell how many records will remain? Especially if there is a cataclysmic event like the Fall of the Roman Empire or the Greek Dark Ages. I don't know how much what is written in the Gospels actually happened but to dismiss the entire thing out of hand seems a bit reckless to me. To think Jesus himself did not exist seems even more idiotic to me when there are multiple sources talking about him. Like I said the only physical remains extant that Pilate actually lived is a small stone and he was a much more important person back then than Jesus.
"For all I know..." I rest my case. So in other words, as far as you know, the story is bullshit.
It's a matter of faith. Either you have it or you don't. If you don't you can try to rationalize the events. I take the events as an article of faith but it doesn't mean I can't try to rationalize them if I want to.
There are absolutely no contemporaneous accounts that speak of Jesus. Not a single one. As far as the historical record is concerned he just did not exist. There's not a single carving, sculpture, poem, painting, drawing or mention of him from the time in which he supposedly lived.
They are called 'The Gospels' and are collected in a book called 'The Bible' namely 'The New Testament' section. Other religions transmitted stories orally before they were formally written down including the Hindus with the Vedas. There are written reports of the time that there were many religious movements in Judea back then so his could have basically been lost among the multitude. Even the Bible itself talks about John the Baptist who is basically another prophet of the same era. There are other possibilies for there being few records; 'damnatio memoriae' is one, another could be the fact that quite simply a lot of things back then were not written at all. Some people actually claimed that Pontius Pilate himself was a fictional character at one point, until the Pilate Stone was discovered in Israel in 1961. Another thing. Judea was the shithole of the Roman Empire back then so it is hardly surprising there are few records. There is Josephus which is the best you're gonna find regarding the circumstances.
As for there being common tropes with prior religions, you said it yourself, these prior religions have common tropes among themselves as well. Oh and remember the twelve tribes of Israel? The slaughter of the newborns in the Ancient Testament regarding Moses? Is the story about Noah in the Ancient Testament a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh?
Also just because Germany invaded France through Belgium twice in WWI and WWII does that mean WWII never happened? Because it couldn't happen that the French could be suckered into it twice right? Repetition of events isn't proof of it being a lie. Also most of the miracles in the New Testament to me are a lot less fantastic than the things you see in the Ancient Testament especially the stuff around Moses.
To me quite a lot of the 'miracles' in the New Testament could be explained scientifically. Take Lazarus. For all I know he was in a deep coma and never actually died. Same thing could have happened to Jesus after the crucifixion. But that kinda takes the magic away.
The two countries with the most expensive electricity in Europe are Denmark and Germany. Spain is also in the top 5. All big proponents of renewables: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/s...
Italy doesn't use nuclear they burn natural gas and are also investing in renewables. I quote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... "Rapid growth in the deployment of solar, wind and bio energy in recent years lead to Italy producing over 40% of its electricity from renewable sources in 2014.... The share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption (all energy uses) had risen to 17.1% in 2014.... Italy has implemented generous incentive schemes to encourage the development of renewable energy production. Its largest scheme incentivised solar PV production and lead Italy from a low base of installed PV in 2010 to become the world's fourth largest country by installations by the end of 2014, ahead of the USA at that time."
Coincidence? I think not. Especially solar which has been a pure economical disaster everywhere its been implemented so far. As for natural gas it has large price fluctuations depending on where you are located and when it was purchased.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, I know Marissa Meyer is a shitty CEO but she was never at HP. Perhaps you meant Meg Whitman?
Sure. But it's not like the political systems that preceded communism in Russia or China were that much better. Famines are unfortunately a regular occurrence in the history of both those countries.
If you are talking about China it's the closest thing around to the old Soviet style communist dictatorships that's still available, albeit with a mixed economy.
Basically the governments in these countries (e.g. Portugal and Spain) agreed to buy generated wind and solar power at a fixed price per kWh generated, regardless if the electricity was used or not, for decades on at a fixed price which was quite higher than the price you would pay with a fossil fuel power plant back then. Plus this price was calculated at a time oil and coal prices were at all time highs (like 4x higher than it is now, oil was over $100 USD a barrel at one point).
This was such a stupendous deal (it's basically a guaranteed rent from the state for decades) that large bank loans (billions and billions of €) were taken to erect these windmills and solar panels against the collateral that the state would guarantee these rents.
The prices of electricity to the consumer were raised significantly since then in these countries, but still what consumers pay for their electricity is not enough to cover the amounts agreed on the fixed power purchase contracts for wind and solar. So basically the government is covering the shortfall with deficit spending out of the regular government budget. i.e. its subsidizing it. In Portugal these subsidies are to the tune of 2.2%-2.6% of GDP each year alone.
So people have been paying quite a lot for their electricity and the government is granting large subsidies on top of that. I won't say the government deficit problem in these countries is just due to the renewable energy power contracts, because it isn't, but they are one of the major reasons for the deficit.
Source:
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_fi...
In 2007, the estimated production cost of electricity ranged from 110 €2005/MWh for wind on-shore farm, 145 €2005/MWh for large hydro, to 195 €2005/MWh for solid biomass and 880 €2005/MWh for photovoltaic. In comparison, fossil fuel based technologies such as coal, and natural gas were cheaper (from 50 €2005/MWh for coal to 75 €2005/MWh for gas) (11). Obviously, most of the renewable technologies were not competitive enough to be deployed through market forces alone.
These calculations do not take account of the additional costs for the overall energy systems to integrate the massive deployment of renewables. These costs involve, first of all, investment in the electricity grid to transport and balance electricity generated from renewable sources. The variability of electricity generated from renewables also requires investment in back-up power plants (gas turbines), costly hydro storage facilities or interconnectors.
Spain and Portugal have the highest tariff deficits, with their cumulative value of 2.2% to 3% of GDP. While the scope of these deficits differs between these two countries, in both of them the authorities have formally recognized the right of the affected utilities to recover the corresponding amount. They have also set up securitisation schemes that turn these credit rights of the utilities into fixed-income securities. Both countries aim at eliminating new tariff deficits as soon as possible, but have so far failed to do so.
General government deficit was extremely high in Greece and Spain in 2009-2012 and in Portugal in 2009-2010, i.e. close to or even exceeding 10% of GDP.
The tariff debt in Portugal is also substantial. The total accumulated tariff debt was estimated by the regulator at EUR 3.7 billion (2.2% of GDP) at the end of 2013; according to other government estimates, it could be even higher at 2.6% of GDP (EUR 4.4 billion) (35).
That's the tariff debt on generated power alone. It's a way to hide the electricity costs of renewables from the electric bill of the final consumer even when these countries have some of the highest rates in Europe. It's not counting the other costs to the electric grid, or even counting the long term bank loans that were used to build these facilities and which are part of the outstanding bank debt. Also don't think that the extra cost of the generated energy doesn't have an economic impact either.
There are facts pointing both ways. It is questionable if there is a warming and its even more questionable how much of an impact does human activity have on it.
For all we know it could be Chinese dumping solar panels until the day comes their competition dies and they jack the prices back up again.
The Emirates are also building nuclear power plants with South Korean help.
The future was solar back when Carter was President too.
Jesus, not this shit again, burning wood is even more polluting than burning coal.
The Chinese have been quite busy building coal power plants in Vietnam and elsewhere. Africa is just another of their destinations.
I think it was Mongolians actually. They were major promoters of biological warfare back in the day too...
Anyway that was an accident.
Almost all of the pollution will be in the place of manufacture (i.e. China).
You wish. The Russians have been waiting for the Arctic to defrost since the Novgorod Republic collapsed. Last I heard their investments at Archangelsk have been mostly frozen (hah) because the Arctic isn't defrosting as the warm mongers told us it would.
It's mostly hydropower so far.
Must be why the Emirates are building nice, juicy, nuclear power plants.
Do you not believe in global warming?
*yawn*
What about the fact that pollution in Beijing is so bad this week, they're having to shut down freeways [slashdot.org] because the visibility is too bad to drive safely. Pollution in India [slashdot.org] is even worse. The World Heath Organization estimates that air pollution causes 7 million premature deaths a year [ibtimes.co.uk]. What exactly do you think is overblown?
That's a different problem. China is building a lot of hydroelectric power, nuclear power, and yes even renewables to try to clean up their electricity generation. They are also building electric subways and rail like mad. I wouldn't be surprised if they cleaned it up substantially in a couple of decades and reached levels similar to, say, Japan. Now India might be a much bigger issue.
Air pollution near places where people live is a problem. I don't think you'll find a lot of people who disagree with that.
I just consider it as putting the carbon back in the atmosphere where it came from.
Sure carbon monoxide, NOX are issues, but carbon dioxide isn't.
Photo voltaic has become very compelling plus we don't fund people who want to kill us when we buy photo voltaic so that's always a plus.
I wouldn't bet on it considering a large part of the solar PV manufacturing facilities are in China.
Actually in Portugal there were plenty of places to add it because most hydroelectric dams did not have pumped storage facilities. They are being upgraded with reversible pumps. It's costing a huge wallop of money but its the only way to make the make the wind power that was already installed economically viable. Ignore whatever propaganda you hear, the wind power construction is one of the reasons why Portugal (and Spain) are running a deficit and will continue doing so for probably the next 20 years. That's how long it will take to pay the goddamned windmills and reversible pumps.
That's why I think atheism is a non-scientific stand as much as theism is. The only correct stand for a properly science minded person is to be agnostic regarding the whole matter.
Oh please, give me a fuckin' break. Did you even read my comment? No one knows who wrote the Gospels, but we DO know that they were written long after Jesus' supposed death. In other words (pay attention) they in no way prove anything about him, including whether or not he existed.
The Iliad was written even longer after its events were supposed to have happened. Yet Hissarlik is there. Sure the events may have been fantasized or romanticized a bit but it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Another story which I suspect actually happened from the Greek Tragedies is the events in the Seven Against Thebes which were also written a long time after the events were supposed to happen.
I may be wrong, but I think we have hundreds of thousands of multiple independent accounts along with literally tons of supporting evidence to show that those things happened. Photos, memorabilia, military records, physical evidence, etc etc etc. I'd say there's good reason to believe it happened, unlike the "just-believe-my-story-about-the-guy-who-died-and-came-back-to-life" Jesus myth.
WWII happened less than a century ago. It's still in living memory as were the events surrounding Christ's life and death at the time the Gospels or Josephus were written. In a thousand or two thousand years who's to tell how many records will remain? Especially if there is a cataclysmic event like the Fall of the Roman Empire or the Greek Dark Ages. I don't know how much what is written in the Gospels actually happened but to dismiss the entire thing out of hand seems a bit reckless to me. To think Jesus himself did not exist seems even more idiotic to me when there are multiple sources talking about him. Like I said the only physical remains extant that Pilate actually lived is a small stone and he was a much more important person back then than Jesus.
"For all I know..." I rest my case. So in other words, as far as you know, the story is bullshit.
It's a matter of faith. Either you have it or you don't. If you don't you can try to rationalize the events. I take the events as an article of faith but it doesn't mean I can't try to rationalize them if I want to.
No. Andy Grove was actually from the time when people who knew tech led tech.
There are absolutely no contemporaneous accounts that speak of Jesus. Not a single one. As far as the historical record is concerned he just did not exist. There's not a single carving, sculpture, poem, painting, drawing or mention of him from the time in which he supposedly lived.
They are called 'The Gospels' and are collected in a book called 'The Bible' namely 'The New Testament' section. Other religions transmitted stories orally before they were formally written down including the Hindus with the Vedas. There are written reports of the time that there were many religious movements in Judea back then so his could have basically been lost among the multitude. Even the Bible itself talks about John the Baptist who is basically another prophet of the same era. There are other possibilies for there being few records; 'damnatio memoriae' is one, another could be the fact that quite simply a lot of things back then were not written at all. Some people actually claimed that Pontius Pilate himself was a fictional character at one point, until the Pilate Stone was discovered in Israel in 1961. Another thing. Judea was the shithole of the Roman Empire back then so it is hardly surprising there are few records. There is Josephus which is the best you're gonna find regarding the circumstances.
As for there being common tropes with prior religions, you said it yourself, these prior religions have common tropes among themselves as well. Oh and remember the twelve tribes of Israel? The slaughter of the newborns in the Ancient Testament regarding Moses? Is the story about Noah in the Ancient Testament a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh?
Also just because Germany invaded France through Belgium twice in WWI and WWII does that mean WWII never happened? Because it couldn't happen that the French could be suckered into it twice right? Repetition of events isn't proof of it being a lie. Also most of the miracles in the New Testament to me are a lot less fantastic than the things you see in the Ancient Testament especially the stuff around Moses.
To me quite a lot of the 'miracles' in the New Testament could be explained scientifically. Take Lazarus. For all I know he was in a deep coma and never actually died. Same thing could have happened to Jesus after the crucifixion. But that kinda takes the magic away.
The two countries with the most expensive electricity in Europe are Denmark and Germany. Spain is also in the top 5. All big proponents of renewables:
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/s...
Italy doesn't use nuclear they burn natural gas and are also investing in renewables. I quote:
... ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Rapid growth in the deployment of solar, wind and bio energy in recent years lead to Italy producing over 40% of its electricity from renewable sources in 2014.
The share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption (all energy uses) had risen to 17.1% in 2014.
Italy has implemented generous incentive schemes to encourage the development of renewable energy production. Its largest scheme incentivised solar PV production and lead Italy from a low base of installed PV in 2010 to become the world's fourth largest country by installations by the end of 2014, ahead of the USA at that time."
Coincidence? I think not. Especially solar which has been a pure economical disaster everywhere its been implemented so far. As for natural gas it has large price fluctuations depending on where you are located and when it was purchased.