Solar panels = Small percentage of power production
Small percentage * 1.22 = Small percentage, just a shade higher.
Its not a game changer. Its just a nice development.
Efficiency improvements, mass production, and making coal internalize the cost of CO2 emissions will eventually make photovoltaics more cost-effective than coal. Once that point is reached, solar will take over a large percentage of electricity production. This might not be the improvement that puts it over the top, but I think your dismissive analysis is a little too simplistic.
The US has ratified the Outer Space Treaty, so we don't own the Moon (the plaque on the lander says "We came in peace for all mankind").
Articles II and III of the treaty are pertinent:
Article II
Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.
Article III
States Parties to the Treaty shall carry on activities in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, in accordance with international law, including the Charter of the United Nations, in the interest of maintaining international peace and security and promoting international co-operation and understanding.
By Article II, the US cannot make a sovereign claim to an an asteroid and assign mineral rights as it does on other federal lands, unless it abrogates the treaty. By Article III, "use of... celestial bodies, in accordance with international law", it seems similar to mining on the sea floor in international waters, which is governed by an international authority.
I thought the article was about running out of sand for silicon semiconductors. Besides California falling into the Pacific Ocean after a big earthquake, a lack of sand would be the end of Silicon Valley.
No worries: silicon for semiconductors could be made from the fine, smooth, easily-blows-away desert sand.
Because only Java attracts bad programmers? Or is it simply observation bias? Certainly Java is not the only language which can give you the OS name.
Probably one bad programmer made the mistake of checking against "Windows 9" and assuming a match meant Windows 95 or 98, published the code, and then a bunch of other bad programmers copied the mistake.
Where? Common sense dictates not forcing the airlines to replace screens on 1,300 aircraft just because someone can't go without internet for any meaningful amount of time.
Think about how easy it would be for someone with malicious intent to bring aboard a jammer disguised as a legit electronic device. Cockpit electronics need to be hardened against interference regardless.
A "Carrington-level" event nowadays would most likely be much less disruptive, as back then all the early radio and spark gap stuff was well under 50 MHz, which is where almost all of the natural noise winds up in the spectrum. Ever notice, for example you can hear your shaver motor on an AM radio but not an FM one. This is not due to AM vs. FM, (well, it is a little) but mostly due to the fact that AM is about 1 MHz and FM is about 100 MHz, well above the "static line" around 50 MHz.
It would take a much stronger signal than back then to cause the same level of disruption. Not saying that can't happen, but modern radio communications are quite a bit more robust than they were back over 100 years ago.
The concern is not so much about the disruption of radio communications, but the power grid. Our society might not survive a massive, long-term (months or even years) blackout (a huge number of transformers might be destroyed all at once by the induced EMF).
You still need very pure water or you poison the process. Where's that water coming from? How do you collect the gaseous hydrogen? You still need to liquify it and all the emrittlement and cryogenic issues are still there.
Even if hydrogen gas is free, it makes no sense as an energy carrier for cars.
They don't collect the gaseous hydrogen in the electrolyzer; they soak it up with a "liquid sponge" ("a recyclable redox mediator (silicotungstic acid) " according to the article's abstract. In principle at least, hydrogen could be stored and transported in this form (a liquid sponge soaked with hydrogen).; the hydrogen can be catalytically released (wrung out of the liquid sponge) when needed. Whether such a system could be built with a practical size, weight, and cost for use in vehicles is another matter.
MUMPS, where every keyword has a 1-to-3 letter abbreviation, resulting in code like this:
%DTC
%DTC ; SF/XAK - DATE/TIME OPERATIONS;1/16/92 11:36 AM ;;19.0;VA FileMan;;Jul 14, 1992
D I 'X1!'X2 S X="" Q
S X=X1 D H S X1=%H,X=X2,X2=%Y+1 D H S X=X1-%H,%Y=%Y+1&X2
K %H,X1,X2 Q ;
C S X=X1 Q:'X D H S %H=%H+X2 D YMD S:$P(X1,".",2) X=X_"."_$P(X1,".",2)
K X1,X2 Q
S S %=%#60/100+(%#3600\60)/100+(%\3600)/100 Q ;
H I X
S %Y=$E(X,1,3),%M=$E(X,4,5),%D=$E(X,6,7)
S %T=$E(X_0,9,10)*60+$E(X_"000",11,12)*60+$E(X_"00000",13,14)
TOH S
%H=%M>2&'(%Y#4)+$P("^31^59^90^120^151^181^212^243^273^304^334","^",%M)+%D
S %='%M!'%D,%Y=%Y-141,%H=%H+(%Y*365)+(%Y\4)-(%Y>59)+%,%Y=$S(%:-
1,1:%H+4#7)
K %M,%D,% Q ;
DOW D H S Y=%Y K %H,%Y Q
DW D H S Y=%Y,X=$P("SUN^MON^TUES^WEDNES^THURS^FRI^SATUR","^",Y+1)_"DAY"
S:Y
[...]
In order for a Northern European to evolve fair skin and hair, there has to be something that will kill a human of dark skin and hair. Since people with dark skin can survive in Northern Europe, it is not through evolution.
The "something" doesn't have to kill, just reduce the probability of reproductive success. Vitamin D deficiency fills the bill.
Lin and Sofge advocate that the programmers should use strict utilitarian philosophy when deciding what to hit. I don't think that is going to fly, either from a legal or a sales perspective; the least damaging choice is just to try to stop the vehicle even if there is no time, rather than trying to "select" a crash for the least possible damage.
I agree--the results of collisions are simply too unpredictable. The idea of "knowing" the outcomes and choosing the one that leads to the fewest deaths (greatest utility) is preposterous. If a collision is unavoidable, simply remove as much kinetic energy as possible in order to minimize damage to the vehicle and its occupants.
And by easily I mean it has to be as cheap and effective as the dirtier power sources like coal and oil. Otherwise countries will never go towards it as it's too much of a hassle.
The problem with this reasoning is that coal and oil are only cheap if you don't count the cost of building seawalls, moving people inland, loss of arable land, and so forth. There will be longer growing seasons, open Arctic sea lanes, and other positive effects as well, but the consensus is that the net effect will be negative. Factor that in and wind and solar become cost competitive with fossil fuels.
Solar panel creation uses many toxic products, chemicals and dangerous gases, including Sulfur Hexaflouride, the MOST POTENT GREENHOUSE GAS... Is it really about the planet, or is it about money?
From Wikipedia - "According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, SF6 is the most potent greenhouse gas that it has evaluated, with a global warming potential of 23,900 times that of CO2 when compared over a 100-year period."
2002 was the last year I could find a quick worldwide sales number for SF6, 5096 metric tons. Using your factor of 23,900 and rounding up, that's the equivalent of 122 million tons of CO2 assuming every molecule of SF6 was dumped directly into the atmosphere. By comparison, in 2012, an estimated 9700 million tons of CO2 were emitted. Of course, only about 7% of SF6 production is used in semiconductor manufacturing, and only a fraction of that is solar cell production and of that fraction not all is released into the atmosphere. Cradle-to-grave estimates for all greenhouse gas emissions in grams of CO2 equivalent per kWh came in at 1001 for coal, 500 for natural gas, and 45 for solar cells.
Capture and sequestration of CO2 from burning coal would have large capital costs and increase coal usage by about 30%, putting the cost of electricity from coal right in the same ballpark as unsubsidized wind and solar.
Please do a little research and thought before you shout "ZOMG SF6 MOST POTENT GREENHOUSE GAS!"
Slashdot Mirror
Solar panels = Small percentage of power production Small percentage * 1.22 = Small percentage, just a shade higher.
Its not a game changer. Its just a nice development.
Efficiency improvements, mass production, and making coal internalize the cost of CO2 emissions will eventually make photovoltaics more cost-effective than coal. Once that point is reached, solar will take over a large percentage of electricity production. This might not be the improvement that puts it over the top, but I think your dismissive analysis is a little too simplistic.
Is not giving the company's full name commonly done in this sort of story? I'm wondering if this would be considered impolite in China.
Articles II and III of the treaty are pertinent:
Article II
Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.
Article III
States Parties to the Treaty shall carry on activities in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, in accordance with international law, including the Charter of the United Nations, in the interest of maintaining international peace and security and promoting international co-operation and understanding.
By Article II, the US cannot make a sovereign claim to an an asteroid and assign mineral rights as it does on other federal lands, unless it abrogates the treaty. By Article III, "use of ... celestial bodies, in accordance with international law", it seems similar to mining on the sea floor in international waters, which is governed by an international authority.
I thought the article was about running out of sand for silicon semiconductors. Besides California falling into the Pacific Ocean after a big earthquake, a lack of sand would be the end of Silicon Valley.
No worries: silicon for semiconductors could be made from the fine, smooth, easily-blows-away desert sand.
George Lucas Museum of Narrative Art
I bet I'll be the only person in the "More American Graffiti" and "Willow" section.
Yes, but I'll be nearby in the "Howard the Duck" wing.
..I could have sworn I heard Whole Lotta Love blasting out of the magnolia tree across the street.
Turns out, it might have been a couple of bluejays getting horny!!!
The only thing missing was the sound of the thermin...
If you mean the descending sound in the chorus, I don't think it's a theremin. I've always thought it was slide guitar and volume control.
You can't copyright a single telephone number, but you can copyright a telephone book.
Actually, you cannot copyright a telephone book.
Why this conflation of space and science? We stopped sending people to the bottom of the ocean too, where are the Aqua Nutters?
James Cameron went to the bottom of the ocean just 2.5 years ago.
I despise the clicky, springy sound and the activation force is higher than I like.
In college, there were some terminals with Hall-effect keyboards that I liked, wish I could remember the model.
The Amiga 1000 keyboard was pretty good but the action was a little too light.
I'd take a Sun Type 5 over a Model M any day.
Because only Java attracts bad programmers? Or is it simply observation bias? Certainly Java is not the only language which can give you the OS name.
Probably one bad programmer made the mistake of checking against "Windows 9" and assuming a match meant Windows 95 or 98, published the code, and then a bunch of other bad programmers copied the mistake.
Where? Common sense dictates not forcing the airlines to replace screens on 1,300 aircraft just because someone can't go without internet for any meaningful amount of time.
Think about how easy it would be for someone with malicious intent to bring aboard a jammer disguised as a legit electronic device. Cockpit electronics need to be hardened against interference regardless.
The new Stream laptops by default have no touchscreen
I wanted one, until I read this part. Could you really consider it a tablet if you have to plug a mouse in for it to work?
HP is using the Stream brand for both laptops and tablets.
Read a Budweiser label. It's made with barley and rice. Many other American beers include "select grains" as well.
They "select" whatever is cheapest--truth in labeling!
On the other hand, 75 is an arbitrary number. I'm 53, and will match wits with any of you.
OK, but I am not falling for that iocaine trick.
A "Carrington-level" event nowadays would most likely be much less disruptive, as back then all the early radio and spark gap stuff was well under 50 MHz, which is where almost all of the natural noise winds up in the spectrum. Ever notice, for example you can hear your shaver motor on an AM radio but not an FM one. This is not due to AM vs. FM, (well, it is a little) but mostly due to the fact that AM is about 1 MHz and FM is about 100 MHz, well above the "static line" around 50 MHz.
It would take a much stronger signal than back then to cause the same level of disruption. Not saying that can't happen, but modern radio communications are quite a bit more robust than they were back over 100 years ago.
The concern is not so much about the disruption of radio communications, but the power grid. Our society might not survive a massive, long-term (months or even years) blackout (a huge number of transformers might be destroyed all at once by the induced EMF).
You still need very pure water or you poison the process. Where's that water coming from? How do you collect the gaseous hydrogen? You still need to liquify it and all the emrittlement and cryogenic issues are still there.
Even if hydrogen gas is free, it makes no sense as an energy carrier for cars.
They don't collect the gaseous hydrogen in the electrolyzer; they soak it up with a "liquid sponge" ("a recyclable redox mediator (silicotungstic acid) " according to the article's abstract. In principle at least, hydrogen could be stored and transported in this form (a liquid sponge soaked with hydrogen).; the hydrogen can be catalytically released (wrung out of the liquid sponge) when needed. Whether such a system could be built with a practical size, weight, and cost for use in vehicles is another matter.
%DTC ;1/16/92 11:36 AM
;;19.0;VA FileMan;;Jul 14, 1992
;
;
;
%DTC ; SF/XAK - DATE/TIME OPERATIONS
D I 'X1!'X2 S X="" Q
S X=X1 D H S X1=%H,X=X2,X2=%Y+1 D H S X=X1-%H,%Y=%Y+1&X2
K %H,X1,X2 Q
C S X=X1 Q:'X D H S %H=%H+X2 D YMD S:$P(X1,".",2) X=X_"."_$P(X1,".",2)
K X1,X2 Q
S S %=%#60/100+(%#3600\60)/100+(%\3600)/100 Q
H I X S %Y=$E(X,1,3),%M=$E(X,4,5),%D=$E(X,6,7)
S %T=$E(X_0,9,10)*60+$E(X_"000",11,12)*60+$E(X_"00000",13,14)
TOH S
%H=%M>2&'(%Y#4)+$P("^31^59^90^120^151^181^212^243^273^304^334","^",%M)+%D
S %='%M!'%D,%Y=%Y-141,%H=%H+(%Y*365)+(%Y\4)-(%Y>59)+%,%Y=$S(%:-
1,1:%H+4#7)
K %M,%D,% Q
DOW D H S Y=%Y K %H,%Y Q
DW D H S Y=%Y,X=$P("SUN^MON^TUES^WEDNES^THURS^FRI^SATUR","^",Y+1)_"DAY"
S:Y
[...]
In order for a Northern European to evolve fair skin and hair, there has to be something that will kill a human of dark skin and hair. Since people with dark skin can survive in Northern Europe, it is not through evolution.
The "something" doesn't have to kill, just reduce the probability of reproductive success. Vitamin D deficiency fills the bill.
What I'm wondering is why I want to carry around 2 months worth of fuel in my car and be sitting on top of that amount of potential energy in a crash?
Maybe because of the unlikelihood that all of that energy would be released rapidly enough to cause a safety concern?
Lin and Sofge advocate that the programmers should use strict utilitarian philosophy when deciding what to hit. I don't think that is going to fly, either from a legal or a sales perspective; the least damaging choice is just to try to stop the vehicle even if there is no time, rather than trying to "select" a crash for the least possible damage.
I agree--the results of collisions are simply too unpredictable. The idea of "knowing" the outcomes and choosing the one that leads to the fewest deaths (greatest utility) is preposterous. If a collision is unavoidable, simply remove as much kinetic energy as possible in order to minimize damage to the vehicle and its occupants.
So much of the budget is off-limits (social security and medicare) that the only areas left vulnerable to cutting are things like NASA.
The USA has locked itself into forced spending in some areas and it's squeezing other areas.
We could double NASA's budget and pay for it with a 3% cut to the military.
Reality is overwhelmingly liberal.
Not overwhelmingly, it's just that reality has a well-known liberal bias.
Also, given his long standing support to Left wing causes, what exactly does he have against Stalin to call cellphones 'Stalin's dream'?
One can be a collectivist while opposing authoritarianism. See Political Compass.
And by easily I mean it has to be as cheap and effective as the dirtier power sources like coal and oil. Otherwise countries will never go towards it as it's too much of a hassle.
The problem with this reasoning is that coal and oil are only cheap if you don't count the cost of building seawalls, moving people inland, loss of arable land, and so forth. There will be longer growing seasons, open Arctic sea lanes, and other positive effects as well, but the consensus is that the net effect will be negative. Factor that in and wind and solar become cost competitive with fossil fuels.
Solar panel creation uses many toxic products, chemicals and dangerous gases, including Sulfur Hexaflouride, the MOST POTENT GREENHOUSE GAS... Is it really about the planet, or is it about money?
From Wikipedia - "According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, SF6 is the most potent greenhouse gas that it has evaluated, with a global warming potential of 23,900 times that of CO2 when compared over a 100-year period."
2002 was the last year I could find a quick worldwide sales number for SF6, 5096 metric tons. Using your factor of 23,900 and rounding up, that's the equivalent of 122 million tons of CO2 assuming every molecule of SF6 was dumped directly into the atmosphere. By comparison, in 2012, an estimated 9700 million tons of CO2 were emitted. Of course, only about 7% of SF6 production is used in semiconductor manufacturing, and only a fraction of that is solar cell production and of that fraction not all is released into the atmosphere. Cradle-to-grave estimates for all greenhouse gas emissions in grams of CO2 equivalent per kWh came in at 1001 for coal, 500 for natural gas, and 45 for solar cells.
Capture and sequestration of CO2 from burning coal would have large capital costs and increase coal usage by about 30%, putting the cost of electricity from coal right in the same ballpark as unsubsidized wind and solar.
Please do a little research and thought before you shout "ZOMG SF6 MOST POTENT GREENHOUSE GAS!"