Then your building must suck. What is the problem if outside is 30C at night? If the building is fine constructed it will not increase much above it over daytime. And 30C is a fine temperature for a night. Not perfect, but I would not mind it.
Wow, and they don't pay other taxes around that income bracket? Sounds quite absurd from an european point of view, especially when you hear all the whining of "middle class" americans about the high taxes.
In Germany about 7k income is tax free... towards about 12k of income you get social aid... above roughly 12k income you start paying taxes, it is a it absurd, because if you come into strange "brackets", you drop after taxes so low in income that you get social aid again, while still paying taxes. (Of course that all changes if married and if you have kids) There are plenty of tax reform suggestions including various UBI or flat rate tax systems plus minimum wage etc. but no one really has the guts to reform the system. Instead of that they simply continue to tweak the same old parameters by screwing a little screw here or there.
I mean if your situation was much more known, I know plenty of people who would love to have an easy living on 45k or 60k income. However in Germany you would not come far with that, as everything, housing, food etc. is much more expensive than in the US.
I pulled your leg now often enough. If you don't feel the urge to google and enlighten yourself, that is your sad problem.
To give you a small hint, I answer my own question: Q: Are you able to describe the one condition under which that partiular island has no wind? A: When the eye of a hurricane is over the island.
Why should I google something I know perfectly well?
I took about 5 IQ tests. So I guess that makes me kind of an expert. And I read about it during my lifetime quite often.
You were it that there are IQ differences on races and regions: there are not. The only differences are based on childhood nutrition and education.
However if you find a nice article I'm eager to read it. However IQ "research" is from my point of view settled since 30 or 40 years. So I'm not much motivated to google around again to get new impressions:D
As usually the headline and introduction are wrong. They mix up "waste" with "spend fuel".
Headline: "The Future of Nuclear Power Runs on the Waste of Our Nuclear Past" Intro: "The conventional nuclear power method involves inserting radioactive rods into a reactor core where their fissionable material is converted into energy. Problem is, it's not particularly efficient. Over the four years or so that a rod will remain in use, only about three percent of its available nuclear material is expended, leaving 97 percent as "waste." " <--- the quotes aren't mine.
Further down the article: "According to Transatomic's website, their MSR is incredibly efficientâ"capable of utilizing as much as 98 percent of the remaining fuel's energy (though even a rate of just 50 percent would be a huge improvement)â"since fuel suspended in a liquid medium can remain in a reactor for far longer than as a rod, allowing more of the fuel to be used. What's more, reusing this waste as a fuel source would reduce their radioactive lifetimes from hundreds of thousands of years to just hundreds."
Here thy suddenly call it what it is: "fuel". "Depleted Uranium", well, not technically depleted, but Uranium that once was enriched to something like 3%-6% U235 and 94% - 97% U238 . Now most of its U235 fissioned away, so we have ~95% U238, ~1% U235 <--- that is remaining/unspent fuel. This is waste --> ~4% fission or decay products.
The waste is not going away in a molten salt reactor... it is just accumulating there. There is probably a trick how to get it out, but I never saw an article explaining how they like to do it. Anyway, if they get it out, we still have to take care about it. The waste they will get out is ofc not radioactive for very long times, but nevertheless highly radioactive for quite long periods and need cooling till they can be somewhat safely stored. And: you need a kind of reprocessing plant, the reuse the remaining of the uranium if you want to.
Again: fresh fuel in form of uranium oxides: 3%-6% U235 and 94% - 97% U238 A conventional reactor can fission half or 75% of the U235 part. (CANDU reactors, the Canadian design, manage to fission U238, too) Result: ~5% true waste, fission products like cesium, iodine, cobalt etc. Sooner or later you have to get those out of the reactor, otherwise you have no space to put new Uranium inside... a no brainer.
The article is such a simplification that it is in my eyes wrong, as they claim they had a solution to the "waste problem" but they only utilize Uranium better and produce the same amount of true waste. Nevertheless the reactor or its design makes sense as it is on the first glance quite secure. However molten salts are very aggressive, so I have no idea from what materials they want to build it. You save however money and energy as you don't need to enrich the Uranium, and reduce the amount you need to mine drastically.
One common theme in any religion is they strongly oppose anything that affects population growth. That is nonsense. They're against abortion, and very against birth control. All of them. That is double nonsense.
The population growth of a city (4.5% in this case) is completely unrelated to the population growth of the country. Cities grow because people move there. Parkistans population growth is 2%... which is quite ok.
Climate change is real, but Karachi's problem are not caused by it. It is not the main cause, but less rain and less slow and less glaciers in the Himalaya are not really helpful.
Furthermore, Italy, the birthplace of fascism, The birthplace, as far as we know, is Sparta, that is in Greece. The name sake is latin, coming from the early emperor times.... and fascism didn't start because people were poor, rather it started because Italy, like the rest of Europe, can't tell the difference between a healthy amount of nationalism, and nationalism of the type that leads to death and destruction. Fascism in Italy had nothing to do with nationalism. They feared a communist revolution, because 80% of the population still where "bond slaves" of the rich land owners. So yes, they where poor. They had no money, but lived from the share of the harvest the landowner would give them, kids did not go to school, they had no healthcare no perspective to be once "free people". When the riots started and the people tried to overthrow the landowners Mussolini channeled that into his vision of a modern state.
Besides, the USA had the same economic crisis, and we weren't anywhere close to turning to fascism or communism. If you believe that, you are an idiot.
Belgium didn't surrender until 27 days after this, so no, you didn't conquer them before the French invasion began.
And? Who said that? I did not. I only pointed out that Belgium did not "allow us" to move troops through it, as the parent claimed. Same for Netherlands.
The rest of your post is not very interesting so I stopped more or less at the quote.
Hint: I'm 50. My father is 71. He was born AFTER WW2... that should be a no brainer. So: he was not in the Hitler Jugend nor was my Grand Pa in the SS or SA, moron!
After all, how many world wars has Germany started? Actually: none Perhaps you should read a history book instead of propaganda? WWI was started by Austria and Serbia. WWII was started in Asia, mostly by Japan I think. The war in Europe was started by Russia and Germany simultaneously. Germany only started with the first "actions"
Of course they can't compete with the cost. But the article claims that Space X is selling below cost and makes it even harder (no idea if that is true).
Anyway, there is no one on the planet who can compete with Space X launch costs at the moment.
The patent stupidity of this statement is beyond words. Congratulations. You are an idiot. Hint: google how a solar plant is integrated into a grid... then read a year or two.
What does Puerto Rico's location on a map tell me about wind? That's right, nothing. Yes, you are an idiot. If you would least look on the map and then think 10 seconds, or a minute, you would most likely realize what looking on a map tells you. Except, you really are an idiot, but for that you type to well.
No one cares about the cloud cover of a particular day. Why would that be interesting if I want to plan for a solar plant?
Insulting others as dumb when you actually never read anything about how solar power works and gets integrated into grids: that is dumb. Especially when raise the topic about wind and are to lazy to look on a map:D
My point was that if you personally pay for this (the batteries) you are subsidizing the cost of a stable power grid (and subsequently if your neighbors are not also doing this, your aggregate cost for a stable energy source is higher than your neighbors.) No you are not. The grid operator is. You and the grid operator go into a win - win position, your neighbours have nothing to do with that.
Given the US progressive tax system, you hit the balance where you pay more in taxes than you consume in services in about the 80th percentile, that is at around $95000.
Sorry, but that sounds absurd. You must have absurd prices for the things the government is doing if you need such an absurd income to be in equilibrium with your tax spendings and what the government is paying for you. Or you must have plenty of jobs that pay minimum that wage (like minimum half the work force). Both sounds very doubtful.
That is, the fact that he can hang out in a California beach town and surf is only possible because people in Silicon Valley, Boston, New York, etc. are working their asses off and paying massive amounts of taxes. He did not say he is "hanging out and only surfs"
Slashdot Mirror
For funk sake, how often do I need to post that?
PV solar cells don't contain rare earth minerals!!! They literally made from SAND!
Then your building must suck.
What is the problem if outside is 30C at night? If the building is fine constructed it will not increase much above it over daytime. And 30C is a fine temperature for a night. Not perfect, but I would not mind it.
Wow, and they don't pay other taxes around that income bracket?
Sounds quite absurd from an european point of view, especially when you hear all the whining of "middle class" americans about the high taxes.
In Germany about 7k income is tax free ... towards about 12k of income you get social aid ... above roughly 12k income you start paying taxes, it is a it absurd, because if you come into strange "brackets", you drop after taxes so low in income that you get social aid again, while still paying taxes. (Of course that all changes if married and if you have kids) There are plenty of tax reform suggestions including various UBI or flat rate tax systems plus minimum wage etc. but no one really has the guts to reform the system. Instead of that they simply continue to tweak the same old parameters by screwing a little screw here or there.
I mean if your situation was much more known, I know plenty of people who would love to have an easy living on 45k or 60k income. However in Germany you would not come far with that, as everything, housing, food etc. is much more expensive than in the US.
I pulled your leg now often enough.
If you don't feel the urge to google and enlighten yourself, that is your sad problem.
To give you a small hint, I answer my own question:
Q: Are you able to describe the one condition under which that partiular island has no wind?
A: When the eye of a hurricane is over the island.
Why should I google something I know perfectly well?
I took about 5 IQ tests. So I guess that makes me kind of an expert. And I read about it during my lifetime quite often.
You were it that there are IQ differences on races and regions: there are not. The only differences are based on childhood nutrition and education.
However if you find a nice article I'm eager to read it. However IQ "research" is from my point of view settled since 30 or 40 years. So I'm not much motivated to google around again to get new impressions :D
As usually the headline and introduction are wrong. They mix up "waste" with "spend fuel".
Headline: "The Future of Nuclear Power Runs on the Waste of Our Nuclear Past"
Intro: "The conventional nuclear power method involves inserting radioactive rods into a reactor core where their fissionable material is converted into energy. Problem is, it's not particularly efficient. Over the four years or so that a rod will remain in use, only about three percent of its available nuclear material is expended, leaving 97 percent as "waste." " <--- the quotes aren't mine.
Further down the article: "According to Transatomic's website, their MSR is incredibly efficientâ"capable of utilizing as much as 98 percent of the remaining fuel's energy (though even a rate of just 50 percent would be a huge improvement)â"since fuel suspended in a liquid medium can remain in a reactor for far longer than as a rod, allowing more of the fuel to be used. What's more, reusing this waste as a fuel source would reduce their radioactive lifetimes from hundreds of thousands of years to just hundreds."
Here thy suddenly call it what it is: "fuel". "Depleted Uranium", well, not technically depleted, but Uranium that once was enriched to something like 3%-6% U235 and 94% - 97% U238 . Now most of its U235 fissioned away, so we have ~95% U238, ~1% U235 <--- that is remaining/unspent fuel. This is waste --> ~4% fission or decay products.
The waste is not going away in a molten salt reactor ... it is just accumulating there. There is probably a trick how to get it out, but I never saw an article explaining how they like to do it. Anyway, if they get it out, we still have to take care about it. The waste they will get out is ofc not radioactive for very long times, but nevertheless highly radioactive for quite long periods and need cooling till they can be somewhat safely stored. And: you need a kind of reprocessing plant, the reuse the remaining of the uranium if you want to.
Again: fresh fuel in form of uranium oxides: 3%-6% U235 and 94% - 97% U238 ... a no brainer.
A conventional reactor can fission half or 75% of the U235 part. (CANDU reactors, the Canadian design, manage to fission U238, too)
Result: ~5% true waste, fission products like cesium, iodine, cobalt etc. Sooner or later you have to get those out of the reactor, otherwise you have no space to put new Uranium inside
The article is such a simplification that it is in my eyes wrong, as they claim they had a solution to the "waste problem" but they only utilize Uranium better and produce the same amount of true waste. Nevertheless the reactor or its design makes sense as it is on the first glance quite secure. However molten salts are very aggressive, so I have no idea from what materials they want to build it. You save however money and energy as you don't need to enrich the Uranium, and reduce the amount you need to mine drastically.
The silly argument again.
How high do you want to rise the prices?
How are you dealing with the riots?
The only way is rationing. And then education. And in the end price changes.
One common theme in any religion is they strongly oppose anything that affects population growth. That is nonsense.
They're against abortion, and very against birth control. All of them.
That is double nonsense.
The population growth of a city (4.5% in this case) is completely unrelated to the population growth of the country. Cities grow because people move there. ... which is quite ok.
Parkistans population growth is 2%
Climate change is real, but Karachi's problem are not caused by it.
It is not the main cause, but less rain and less slow and less glaciers in the Himalaya are not really helpful.
Increases rain ... somewhere.
Bit not where you need/want it.
Wow, it tells you it is an island?
And mothing else?
I guess you are a lost cause ...
Are you able to describe the one condition under which that partiular island has no wind?
Furthermore, Italy, the birthplace of fascism, The birthplace, as far as we know, is Sparta, that is in Greece. The name sake is latin, coming from the early emperor times. ... and fascism didn't start because people were poor, rather it started because Italy, like the rest of Europe, can't tell the difference between a healthy amount of nationalism, and nationalism of the type that leads to death and destruction.
Fascism in Italy had nothing to do with nationalism. They feared a communist revolution, because 80% of the population still where "bond slaves" of the rich land owners.
So yes, they where poor. They had no money, but lived from the share of the harvest the landowner would give them, kids did not go to school, they had no healthcare no perspective to be once "free people".
When the riots started and the people tried to overthrow the landowners Mussolini channeled that into his vision of a modern state.
Besides, the USA had the same economic crisis, and we weren't anywhere close to turning to fascism or communism.
If you believe that, you are an idiot.
Belgium didn't surrender until 27 days after this, so no, you didn't conquer them before the French invasion began.
And? Who said that? I did not. I only pointed out that Belgium did not "allow us" to move troops through it, as the parent claimed. Same for Netherlands.
The rest of your post is not very interesting so I stopped more or less at the quote.
Hint: I'm 50. My father is 71. He was born AFTER WW2 ... that should be a no brainer. So: he was not in the Hitler Jugend nor was my Grand Pa in the SS or SA, moron!
After all, how many world wars has Germany started?
Actually: none Perhaps you should read a history book instead of propaganda?
WWI was started by Austria and Serbia.
WWII was started in Asia, mostly by Japan I think.
The war in Europe was started by Russia and Germany simultaneously. Germany only started with the first "actions"
Of course they can't compete with the cost.
But the article claims that Space X is selling below cost and makes it even harder (no idea if that is true).
Anyway, there is no one on the planet who can compete with Space X launch costs at the moment.
Ah, interesting. I'm a fan of Bagua, but never practiced it. It is super rare in Germany but funnily there is a great teacher about 45km away from me.
Well, horse stance sounds incredible exhausting for surfing :D
The patent stupidity of this statement is beyond words. Congratulations. ... then read a year or two.
You are an idiot. Hint: google how a solar plant is integrated into a grid
What does Puerto Rico's location on a map tell me about wind? That's right, nothing.
Yes, you are an idiot. If you would least look on the map and then think 10 seconds, or a minute, you would most likely realize what looking on a map tells you. Except, you really are an idiot, but for that you type to well.
And, how is that relevant?
Subsidizes come mostly from ESA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There France and Germany are on par regarding contribution.
No one cares about the cloud cover of a particular day. Why would that be interesting if I want to plan for a solar plant?
Insulting others as dumb when you actually never read anything about how solar power works and gets integrated into grids: that is dumb. Especially when raise the topic about wind and are to lazy to look on a map :D
You really live under a rock? But you can say bullshit very good ;D
Payed seems to be an accepted alternative to paid.
After all, the spelling correction does not underline it red.
But thanks for the hint, I try to remember that.
No worries !!
You get older and everything around you will look more and more like a joke!
My point was that if you personally pay for this (the batteries) you are subsidizing the cost of a stable power grid (and subsequently if your neighbors are not also doing this, your aggregate cost for a stable energy source is higher than your neighbors.)
No you are not. The grid operator is. You and the grid operator go into a win - win position, your neighbours have nothing to do with that.
Given the US progressive tax system, you hit the balance where you pay more in taxes than you consume in services in about the 80th percentile, that is at around $95000.
Sorry, but that sounds absurd. You must have absurd prices for the things the government is doing if you need such an absurd income to be in equilibrium with your tax spendings and what the government is paying for you.
Or you must have plenty of jobs that pay minimum that wage (like minimum half the work force). Both sounds very doubtful.
That is, the fact that he can hang out in a California beach town and surf is only possible because people in Silicon Valley, Boston, New York, etc. are working their asses off and paying massive amounts of taxes.
He did not say he is "hanging out and only surfs"
As long as you don hack into my preferred WiFi network: "Terrornetzwerk", all fine by me!