Researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Ames Laboratory and the University of Colorado find evidence that wind turbines alter microclimates for farm crops, possibly for the better.
“We’ve finished the first phase of our research, and we’re confident that wind turbines do produce measureable effects on the microclimate near crops,” said Ames Laboratory associate and agricultural meteorology expert Gene Takle. According to Takle, who is also a professor of agricultural meteorology and director of the Climate Science Program at Iowa State University, the slow-moving turbine blades that have become a familiar sight along Midwestern highways, channel air downwards, in effect bathing the crops below via the increased airflow they create.
Wind turbines might reduce temperature extremes and lengthen growing seasons.
For instance, crops warm up when the sun shines on them, and some of that heat is given off to the atmosphere. Extra air turbulence likely speeds up this heat exchange, so crops stay slightly cooler during hot days. On cold nights, turbulence stirs the lower atmosphere and keeps nighttime temperatures around the crops warmer.
“In this case, we anticipate turbines’ effects are good in the spring and fall because they would keep the crop a little warmer and help prevent a frost,” said Takle. “Wind turbines could possibly ward off early fall frosts and extend the growing season.”
Global climate engineering is controversial. Yet microclimate alteration using wind turbines looks like it is not going to generate much if any opposition." (found at FuturePundit)
Thank you, I am aware of posing silly questions all the time. As far as I remember, the first seriously silly one was when I was in doubt about evolution without information transfer between generations. This was in school in the mid 60ies when epigenetics was quite unheard of. Also, one of the few things that I accept as a heritage from my father is the saying that those who laugh in sight of seemingly silly utterances are those who are dumb.
Did not bother to read TFA but quite fruitlessly did a little research on the effects of large scale extraction of wind energy. There must be a 'dark' side. Anyone able to enlighten the crowd, including myself?
is the degree 0 or 1 between two people that know each other personally
The question might be whether the degree between you and yourself is infinity and only approaches 1 after an enormous amount of training. Just a thought.
The implication is that any small number whithin the context given is worth... well.
I can set up a camera, do a video tutorial, and upload it to youtube in less time than it would take me to document the same process in text and pictures.
Which, as I see it, infers that much less time is spent on planning, integration of information, and, of course, thinking. I have a hard time figuring out how the product will be much of a quick aid. Instead, the effort of structuring is an extra burden for the recipient who, different from a FTF situation may not pose questions.
What I have observed in the past decades is an erosion of language comprehension; a marker is the trend (as I observe it) towards time consuming video tutorials.
Yes, I am studying Chen Man Ching Yang style as well as long stick with WIlhelm Mertens in Hamburg for a decade now and have recently started to learn Yang style 108 form.
If you ever come through town, let me know.
Thank you, but unlikely; however, if you should come through Germany, you are welcome (a park is in front of the house).
Stupidity is believing every little saying you see on the Internet.
“Uber die Dummheit” (“On Stupidity”), Musil, way before the Internet was even conceived. I might alert you to the fact that most of my attidudes are pre-70. The Internet did not contribute to my values clarification process.
Thus I still hold to the position that if the majority watches how the ship is sunken, the majority is stupid.
My very personal explanation is that an alternative (sustainable) model would require to overcome the (perhaps) 'natural' trend towards emerging exponential distributions (e.g. populations, words in languages (even think RISC), wealth) by means of intelligence. One will not discuss the lack of latter, which largely implies that 'this' branch of evolution has failed (epically).
We're stuck with high unemployment unless we can grow the economy faster than before
(Wikipedia) "The Limits to Growth is a 1972 book modeling the consequences of a rapidly growing world population and finite resource supplies... In 2010, Peet, Nørgård, and Ragnarsdóttir called the book a "pioneering report", but said that, "unfortunately the report has been largely dismissed by critics as a doomsday prophecy that has not held up to scrutiny.""
Interesting how the belief that "growth" is a solution still is almost ubiquitous.
The next step to take advantage of this technological development is to scan for the profiles of drugs like serotonin, dopamine etc. in order to assess whether the subject (or should one say object?) is planning to, i.e., hijack an aircraft. Of course, in the US, the national security argument will take care of further improving the mechanism up to the level of continuous 24/7 scanning of all the sheeple.
hardware is relatively cheap so too little people care about optimizing the size of stuff
One might come up with a theory that postulates that marketing has developped a toolset to counter Moore's law, secretly handing out incentives to take care of bloating code being one evil.
Turbo Pascal itself was bloatware, and I thought it produced horribly slow and big code.
Different memories here, and Wikipedia gives support:
"The Turbo name alluded to the speed of compilation and of the executables produced. The edit/compile/run cycle was fast compared to other Pascal implementations because everything related to building the program was stored in RAM, and because it was a one-pass compiler written in assembly language. Compilation was very quick compared to that for other languages (even Borland's own later compilers for C),[citation needed] and programmer time was also saved since the program could be compiled and run from the IDE. The speed of these COM executable files was a revelation for developers whose only prior experience programming microcomputers was with interpreted BASIC or UCSD Pascal, which compiled to p-code."
First of all, partial quoting out of context is an evil practice that would not pass code review.
Ahem
To not quote the selected text from Wikipedia out of context, I add the part that touches 'peer review' from an angle different to the one your selective quotation tries to establish:
"In 1996, Social Text did not conduct peer review because its editors believed that an editorial open policy would stimulate more original, less conventional research.[4] The editors argued that, in that context, Sokal's article, "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", was a fraudulent betrayal of their trust. Moreover, they further argued that scientific peer review does not necessarily detect intellectual fraud, viz. the later Schön scandal (2002), the Bogdanov Affair (2002), and other instances of published poor science. After the Sokal Hoax, Social Text established an article peer review process." (emphasis mine)
Slashdot Mirror
you can't get a hydrogen explosion (again, no water in the reactor).
You might get a hydrogen explosion if
CC.
"Never underestimate the potential of Human stupidity." --Heinlein
Given that the trend is that the majority neither understands science nor knows what fiction is, we are on target.
CC.
inconsistent folks
On a side note, to me it seems that the ability to exert consistent behaviour gets lost thanks to externalization of memory.
CC.
large chunks of our population are due up for a Darwin Award
Which brings us back to natural selection when the chain of events that you suggest happens. Nothing of big value would be lost.
CC.
Wind Turbines Alter Farm Microclimates
Researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Ames Laboratory and the University of Colorado find evidence that wind turbines alter microclimates for farm crops, possibly for the better.
“We’ve finished the first phase of our research, and we’re confident that wind turbines do produce measureable effects on the microclimate near crops,” said Ames Laboratory associate and agricultural meteorology expert Gene Takle. According to Takle, who is also a professor of agricultural meteorology and director of the Climate Science Program at Iowa State University, the slow-moving turbine blades that have become a familiar sight along Midwestern highways, channel air downwards, in effect bathing the crops below via the increased airflow they create.
Wind turbines might reduce temperature extremes and lengthen growing seasons.
For instance, crops warm up when the sun shines on them, and some of that heat is given off to the atmosphere. Extra air turbulence likely speeds up this heat exchange, so crops stay slightly cooler during hot days. On cold nights, turbulence stirs the lower atmosphere and keeps nighttime temperatures around the crops warmer.
“In this case, we anticipate turbines’ effects are good in the spring and fall because they would keep the crop a little warmer and help prevent a frost,” said Takle. “Wind turbines could possibly ward off early fall frosts and extend the growing season.”
Global climate engineering is controversial. Yet microclimate alteration using wind turbines looks like it is not going to generate much if any opposition." (found at FuturePundit)
CC.
It's a rather silly question
Thank you, I am aware of posing silly questions all the time. As far as I remember, the first seriously silly one was when I was in doubt about evolution without information transfer between generations. This was in school in the mid 60ies when epigenetics was quite unheard of. Also, one of the few things that I accept as a heritage from my father is the saying that those who laugh in sight of seemingly silly utterances are those who are dumb.
CC.
Did not bother to read TFA but quite fruitlessly did a little research on the effects of large scale extraction of wind energy. There must be a 'dark' side. Anyone able to enlighten the crowd, including myself?
CC.
is the degree 0 or 1 between two people that know each other personally
The question might be whether the degree between you and yourself is infinity and only approaches 1 after an enormous amount of training. Just a thought.
The implication is that any small number whithin the context given is worth ... well.
CC.
This is your point of view, YMMV.
I am not convinced though.
I can set up a camera, do a video tutorial, and upload it to youtube in less time than it would take me to document the same process in text and pictures.
Which, as I see it, infers that much less time is spent on planning, integration of information, and, of course, thinking. I have a hard time figuring out how the product will be much of a quick aid. Instead, the effort of structuring is an extra burden for the recipient who, different from a FTF situation may not pose questions.
CC.
What I have observed in the past decades is an erosion of language comprehension; a marker is the trend (as I observe it) towards time consuming video tutorials.
CC.
are you a taiji practitioner?
Yes, I am studying Chen Man Ching Yang style as well as long stick with WIlhelm Mertens in Hamburg for a decade now and have recently started to learn Yang style 108 form.
If you ever come through town, let me know.
Thank you, but unlikely; however, if you should come through Germany, you are welcome (a park is in front of the house).
CC.
Stupidity is believing every little saying you see on the Internet.
“Uber die Dummheit” (“On Stupidity”), Musil, way before the Internet was even conceived. I might alert you to the fact that most of my attidudes are pre-70. The Internet did not contribute to my values clarification process.
Thus I still hold to the position that if the majority watches how the ship is sunken, the majority is stupid.
CC.
history shows that property rights are a requisite for a functional society
Debatable; see 'The Gods Must Be Crazy' for a starter.
Not to start a debate on how societies are functional today or have been in the past.
CC.
And imagine how divorced from reality you'd have to be to believe that the US is suffering from a tyranny of the majority...
Hmm ... "Stupidity rules this world by sheer force of numbers"; hard to believe the US should be an exception.
CC.
P.S.: OK, I basically agree.
I do not understand why this is never discussed
My very personal explanation is that an alternative (sustainable) model would require to overcome the (perhaps) 'natural' trend towards emerging exponential distributions (e.g. populations, words in languages (even think RISC), wealth) by means of intelligence. One will not discuss the lack of latter, which largely implies that 'this' branch of evolution has failed (epically).
CC.
proof of bias, it is merely an observation of what is
Interesting; so you are of the opinion that there is proof in empirical sciences?
Given your low id, one would assume you know better, but obviously, this fact does not prove anything.
CC.
We're stuck with high unemployment unless we can grow the economy faster than before
(Wikipedia) "The Limits to Growth is a 1972 book modeling the consequences of a rapidly growing world population and finite resource supplies ... In 2010, Peet, Nørgård, and Ragnarsdóttir called the book a "pioneering report", but said that, "unfortunately the report has been largely dismissed by critics as a doomsday prophecy that has not held up to scrutiny.""
Interesting how the belief that "growth" is a solution still is almost ubiquitous.
CC.
different mental exercises cause brain changes
e.g. "Mindfulness meditation training changes brain structure in 8 weeks"
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-mindfulness-meditation-brain-weeks.html
CC.
take the easiest route and being lazy
There are areas where quite a bit of exercise is required before you are able to take the easiest route and thus can afford to be lazy.
Probably, for more general tasks, socialization is the space where the training happens.
CC.
The next step to take advantage of this technological development is to scan for the profiles of drugs like serotonin, dopamine etc. in order to assess whether the subject (or should one say object?) is planning to, i.e., hijack an aircraft. Of course, in the US, the national security argument will take care of further improving the mechanism up to the level of continuous 24/7 scanning of all the sheeple.
CC.
TFS: "people now expect that you should be able to expect to speak ordinary English"
Given the context, wouldn't it be 'one' in ordinary English?
CC.
hardware is relatively cheap so too little people care about optimizing the size of stuff
One might come up with a theory that postulates that marketing has developped a toolset to counter Moore's law, secretly handing out incentives to take care of bloating code being one evil.
CC.
Turbo Pascal itself was bloatware, and I thought it produced horribly slow and big code.
Different memories here, and Wikipedia gives support: "The Turbo name alluded to the speed of compilation and of the executables produced. The edit/compile/run cycle was fast compared to other Pascal implementations because everything related to building the program was stored in RAM, and because it was a one-pass compiler written in assembly language. Compilation was very quick compared to that for other languages (even Borland's own later compilers for C),[citation needed] and programmer time was also saved since the program could be compiled and run from the IDE. The speed of these COM executable files was a revelation for developers whose only prior experience programming microcomputers was with interpreted BASIC or UCSD Pascal, which compiled to p-code."
CC.
it's been said that the real peer review begins after publication
Agreed
CC.
First of all, partial quoting out of context is an evil practice that would not pass code review.
Ahem
To not quote the selected text from Wikipedia out of context, I add the part that touches 'peer review' from an angle different to the one your selective quotation tries to establish:
"In 1996, Social Text did not conduct peer review because its editors believed that an editorial open policy would stimulate more original, less conventional research.[4] The editors argued that, in that context, Sokal's article, "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", was a fraudulent betrayal of their trust. Moreover, they further argued that scientific peer review does not necessarily detect intellectual fraud, viz. the later Schön scandal (2002), the Bogdanov Affair (2002), and other instances of published poor science. After the Sokal Hoax, Social Text established an article peer review process." (emphasis mine)
CC.