With "fold" the GPs likely meant that 2 of the 3 blades rotate around the axis and join the third one and all three hang down parallel with the mast and get secured there.
Unfortunately they don't produce more power when the wind is stronger than normal, and as you mentioned most have to be shut down for storm winds.
That is wrong. They produce 8 to 16 times more than nameplate during very high winds, below storm strength.
so power output only falls with lower wind speeds, it doesn't increase with higher speeds. Sorry, that is wrong.
The difference in the amount of force applied to the turbine and it's parts is really significant That is wrong, too. The turbines tilt their blades so that they can handle the pressure. The whole machine: generator, turbine etc. is constructed to have over nameplate yields if the wind is over "normal specs". At least all german wind parks report far over name plate production in stormy times.
If you want to get electricity from "the other side of the world", that's 12,000 miles, so you lose 48 times as much. 5% loss over 250 miles times 48 times as far = you lose basically all of the power. Practically none makes it to the user. Sigh, first of all: no one is importing power over that distances, so what is your damn point? Secondly: the amount of power "lost" is a function of the hight of voltage. So you only need high enough voltage to cut it down to 5% again... regardless of distance.
So suppose there was a major breakthrough in physics that allowed us to store as much electricity as California currently needs for a cloudy week. No it has not. Solar panels are made from sand, which is melted with... electric energy, which can come from nuclear plants or solar plants. So bottom line Solar panels can be 100% green except for mining and transportation of materials. The greenness only depends on the actual existing energy mix in the country where they are produced. A country that produces 40% of its energy without CO2 production, obviously produces Solar panels where 60% of the power input produces CO2... and 40% not.
Regarding Nuclear: the infrastructure around nuclear is o energy intensive that there are studies that claim they produce more CO2 than an equivalent coal plant. Just google...
Your idea that Nuclear plants produce less CO2 than photovoltaic plants is absurd. As soon as a photovoltaic plant is set up, it produces ZERO CO2. A nuclear plant produces CO2 with every step of refilling, waste handling, transport, mining, fuel production etc.
If you spread a myth ones due t ignorance, that is ok. But you got corrected on this topic now so often, continuing to spread that myth is lying!
You have two misconceptions: a storm half as big as America (assuming you mean USA and not the northern continent) can not exist, and if it indeed would approach that size it can not last that long, because unlike over the ocean, there is not much energy in the landmass and the more or less humid air over land. And secondly: a big storm is a weak storm. With hotspots of high wind speeds ofc. And you would be surprised at what wind speeds a turbine shuts down. Especially the big ones that get deployed about now. The wind speed is not as low as you think:D
So suppose there was a major breakthrough in physics that allowed us to store as much electricity as California currently needs for a cloudy week. That has nothing to do with physics or break throughs. You only need land to place pumped storages... and yes: you can place them everywhere. Albeit setting one up in a plane would cost a bit of land, while setting it up in a mountain is more easy, and likely ore economic. California actually could benefit from them during droughts.
Please stop this bullshit. You obviously have no clue about bitcoins and your economics 101 is pretty flawed, too.
You get bit coins via bitcoin exchanges. You are mixing up mining, wich will hit a limited supply and will make finding new coins more and more expensive with transactions and payments.
There is no difference between gong to an ATM, withdrawing $10, going into a pub and drinking 2 or 3 beer versus "withdrawing" bitcoins worth $10 from an "bitcoin exchange" and buying some thing you want to buy via the internet. Except for the difference in "physical" versus internet, both exchanges are exactly the same. And as far as I can see bitcoin will never vanish.
It probably won't be hyper successful but it will be - like gold - always be a collectors item.
With bitcoin, you can't even print more Exactly as with gold. The remaining gold simply gains worth, same as bitcoins. If you need more, you split the existing coins... can't e so hard to grasp. The winning point of bitcoin is: they are limited.
There isn't even a viable alternative to the US Dollar as a reserve. Considering that Africa and (ex) Russia use Deutsche Mark as reserve currency, you must be living behind the moon.
The Unites States are a sinking ship since 30 years, no one is really investing it either $ nor the nation. Even your own bigger corporations flee the country and set up shop elsewhere. If you don't get your ass out of your butt you will sink into oblivion over the next 30 years. What exactly does the USA have except Apple, Intel and Carriers? I mean: stuff that anyone wants or respects or fears?
Ah, yes: Yellowstone, Yosemite, the Grand Canyon... and the Rockies... oh and Hawaii, I wonder when they secede.
To fire one who works for 12â an hour you need a reason. So in practice you can only replace him with a 9,25â worker if the previous worker quits his job.
In the long run, unions still have to respect market forces. In an highly regulated market those forces are quite weak;D
Even if the unions somehow gets their way all the time, eventually someone will start a non-unionized company with all of the extra labor, and be more competitive than the unionized company, driving it out of business. In an economics 101 book. In a world where economics are run by that book, yes.
However in real life this is not going to happen. It is more likely that the influx of foreign workers is stimulating the economy and that bottom line the competition for workers will raise their wages.
The refugees cause much server problems than shifts on the markets regarding wages, e.g. housing.
people earning more than the minimum will see their income fall. Why would that be the case? Enlighten me. Do you really think a minimum wage job is replacing a high skilled and high payed regular job?
* I couldn't find exact data, but from what I did find, the minimum wage covers a bit more than 25% of the people, and significantly less than 50%. By law perhaps. The rest is covered by trade unions and their agreements with companies/the industry.
The minimum wage is 1473 Euros a month, or 9.2 an hour. This does not cover a majority of the people*, and it's not so high that you'd live very comfortably earning just that. In comparison to other countries you can live comfortable enough. Especially if you consider that you can get social aid on top of it (which actually only shows sadly that the minimum wages are to low).
The book is called "Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong". It is a funny read but also has many flaws (wrong informations), but those flaws don't really matter, it is entertaining and to show the differences in culture it is pretty good.
If you can't see how giving the government the power to automatically delete any story it doesn't like will inevitably be abused, Which part of "law" and how a society is run, do you not get?
The government has no power to abuse the law, as the law is executed by the juristic branch, like all laws and not by the government.
Obviously you have not to predict what is wrong, sigh. Some agency will tell you what to take down. If you are to dumb to realize it by yourself, ofc. And then again, if the agency is "wrong" you can go to court.
No idea why people here always take out the "censoring" club or the totalitarian club.
Do people just go around believing that the actual purpose of a law is it's stated purpose? Yes, people believe that. Because unlike other parts of the world, we do live in a civilized country.
Do you believe salesmen, too? Depending on what he is selling and what I want to buy, yes. After all for most "misinformations" he is giving me he is liable, usually even in person. No idea how that again is handled in your part of the world. On the other hand from most sales you can withdraw if you see issues during the next days or even weeks.
As far as I understood it the complaints need to come from an authority, and are not random.
If you get an illegit DMCA takedown note, the guy who issued it is liable. So you can sue him and nail him for the costs he caused. If he can pay is ofc. another matter.
What exactly did you want to say? Taking down "Fake News" from your web site is... hm, wrong? Being forced to do it by law is... wrong? Is something wrong with your mind?
Well, IMHO the mein problem with Eiffel (and ADA) was that "they" wanted to make money from it ASAP. It was super expensive, getting a license to make a competing environment was expensive and that killed the language quicker than it got traction. I would always prefer Eiffel over C++... not sure about Java/Groovy and other modern languages though. However as the topic is SmallTalk I hope for a revival;D
As for the heating: it's hard enough to melt things like zinc with sunlight. Hot enough to melt basalt with just sunlight? On Mars? Now that's a very tall order. I don't think so.
Showing how to use a Fresnel lens to have a 3D printer using sand.
There are a few more/better videos but I could not find them quickly.
it'd be much simpler/cheaper/more reliable just to import your fiber from Earth, at least while one is just getting a colony established. Really? I mean, we are talking about tons, hundreds of tons of "building material"... I can't imagine it is cheaper to transport tons of "stone" when you simply can send basic "builders". Probably even stuff like Fresnel lenses can be made on Mars easy if one knows where to look for "sand".
C++ is not derived from C. It is derived from Simula and was given a C compatible syntax.
Going so far, that at the time C++ was created, the compiler could compile most C programs. And probably you know it compiled "to C" as it was "only" a cross compiler.
Slashdot Mirror
With "fold" the GPs likely meant that 2 of the 3 blades rotate around the axis and join the third one and all three hang down parallel with the mast and get secured there.
Unfortunately they don't produce more power when the wind is stronger than normal, and as you mentioned most have to be shut down for storm winds.
That is wrong. They produce 8 to 16 times more than nameplate during very high winds, below storm strength.
so power output only falls with lower wind speeds, it doesn't increase with higher speeds.
Sorry, that is wrong.
The difference in the amount of force applied to the turbine and it's parts is really significant
That is wrong, too. The turbines tilt their blades so that they can handle the pressure.
The whole machine: generator, turbine etc. is constructed to have over nameplate yields if the wind is over "normal specs". At least all german wind parks report far over name plate production in stormy times.
If you want to get electricity from "the other side of the world", that's 12,000 miles, so you lose 48 times as much. 5% loss over 250 miles times 48 times as far = you lose basically all of the power. Practically none makes it to the user. ... regardless of distance.
Sigh, first of all: no one is importing power over that distances, so what is your damn point?
Secondly: the amount of power "lost" is a function of the hight of voltage. So you only need high enough voltage to cut it down to 5% again
So suppose there was a major breakthrough in physics that allowed us to store as much electricity as California currently needs for a cloudy week. ... electric energy, which can come from nuclear plants or solar plants. ... and 40% not.
No it has not.
Solar panels are made from sand, which is melted with
So bottom line Solar panels can be 100% green except for mining and transportation of materials. The greenness only depends on the actual existing energy mix in the country where they are produced. A country that produces 40% of its energy without CO2 production, obviously produces Solar panels where 60% of the power input produces CO2
Regarding Nuclear: the infrastructure around nuclear is o energy intensive that there are studies that claim they produce more CO2 than an equivalent coal plant. Just google ...
Your idea that Nuclear plants produce less CO2 than photovoltaic plants is absurd. As soon as a photovoltaic plant is set up, it produces ZERO CO2. A nuclear plant produces CO2 with every step of refilling, waste handling, transport, mining, fuel production etc.
If you spread a myth ones due t ignorance, that is ok.
But you got corrected on this topic now so often, continuing to spread that myth is lying!
You have two misconceptions: a storm half as big as America (assuming you mean USA and not the northern continent) can not exist, and if it indeed would approach that size it can not last that long, because unlike over the ocean, there is not much energy in the landmass and the more or less humid air over land. :D
And secondly: a big storm is a weak storm. With hotspots of high wind speeds ofc. And you would be surprised at what wind speeds a turbine shuts down. Especially the big ones that get deployed about now. The wind speed is not as low as you think
So suppose there was a major breakthrough in physics that allowed us to store as much electricity as California currently needs for a cloudy week. ... and yes: you can place them everywhere. Albeit setting one up in a plane would cost a bit of land, while setting it up in a mountain is more easy, and likely ore economic.
That has nothing to do with physics or break throughs. You only need land to place pumped storages
California actually could benefit from them during droughts.
Please stop this bullshit.
You obviously have no clue about bitcoins and your economics 101 is pretty flawed, too.
You get bit coins via bitcoin exchanges. You are mixing up mining, wich will hit a limited supply and will make finding new coins more and more expensive with transactions and payments.
There is no difference between gong to an ATM, withdrawing $10, going into a pub and drinking 2 or 3 beer versus "withdrawing" bitcoins worth $10 from an "bitcoin exchange" and buying some thing you want to buy via the internet. Except for the difference in "physical" versus internet, both exchanges are exactly the same. And as far as I can see bitcoin will never vanish.
It probably won't be hyper successful but it will be - like gold - always be a collectors item.
With bitcoin, you can't even print more ... can't e so hard to grasp. The winning point of bitcoin is: they are limited.
Exactly as with gold. The remaining gold simply gains worth, same as bitcoins. If you need more, you split the existing coins
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There isn't even a viable alternative to the US Dollar as a reserve.
Considering that Africa and (ex) Russia use Deutsche Mark as reserve currency, you must be living behind the moon.
The Unites States are a sinking ship since 30 years, no one is really investing it either $ nor the nation. Even your own bigger corporations flee the country and set up shop elsewhere. If you don't get your ass out of your butt you will sink into oblivion over the next 30 years. What exactly does the USA have except Apple, Intel and Carriers? I mean: stuff that anyone wants or respects or fears?
Ah, yes: Yellowstone, Yosemite, the Grand Canyon ... and the Rockies ... oh and Hawaii, I wonder when they secede.
Also, given that 5 Chinese organizations control the computing power to generate the majority of bitcoins, ...
If that was the case, you would not know
We are here in Europe, not the USA.
To fire one who works for 12â an hour you need a reason. So in practice you can only replace him with a 9,25â worker if the previous worker quits his job.
In the long run, unions still have to respect market forces. ;D
In an highly regulated market those forces are quite weak
Even if the unions somehow gets their way all the time, eventually someone will start a non-unionized company with all of the extra labor, and be more competitive than the unionized company, driving it out of business. In an economics 101 book. In a world where economics are run by that book, yes.
However in real life this is not going to happen. It is more likely that the influx of foreign workers is stimulating the economy and that bottom line the competition for workers will raise their wages.
The refugees cause much server problems than shifts on the markets regarding wages, e.g. housing.
Har har.
And you are kinda insulting ...
How do you come to that retarded idea?
people earning more than the minimum will see their income fall.
Why would that be the case? Enlighten me. Do you really think a minimum wage job is replacing a high skilled and high payed regular job?
* I couldn't find exact data, but from what I did find, the minimum wage covers a bit more than 25% of the people, and significantly less than 50%.
By law perhaps. The rest is covered by trade unions and their agreements with companies/the industry.
The minimum wage is 1473 Euros a month, or 9.2 an hour. This does not cover a majority of the people*, and it's not so high that you'd live very comfortably earning just that.
In comparison to other countries you can live comfortable enough. Especially if you consider that you can get social aid on top of it (which actually only shows sadly that the minimum wages are to low).
The book is called "Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong". It is a funny read but also has many flaws (wrong informations), but those flaws don't really matter, it is entertaining and to show the differences in culture it is pretty good.
If you can't see how giving the government the power to automatically delete any story it doesn't like will inevitably be abused,
Which part of "law" and how a society is run, do you not get?
The government has no power to abuse the law, as the law is executed by the juristic branch, like all laws and not by the government.
We are not in Turkey or any dictatorship.
Obviously you have not to predict what is wrong, sigh.
Some agency will tell you what to take down. If you are to dumb to realize it by yourself, ofc.
And then again, if the agency is "wrong" you can go to court.
No idea why people here always take out the "censoring" club or the totalitarian club.
Do people just go around believing that the actual purpose of a law is it's stated purpose?
Yes, people believe that. Because unlike other parts of the world, we do live in a civilized country.
Do you believe salesmen, too?
Depending on what he is selling and what I want to buy, yes. After all for most "misinformations" he is giving me he is liable, usually even in person. No idea how that again is handled in your part of the world.
On the other hand from most sales you can withdraw if you see issues during the next days or even weeks.
As far as I understood it the complaints need to come from an authority, and are not random.
If you get an illegit DMCA takedown note, the guy who issued it is liable. So you can sue him and nail him for the costs he caused. If he can pay is ofc. another matter.
Again then: Considering that most languages predate C anyway ...
The immigrants have no work permit.
Germany has in most areas minimum wage laws.
So goes your idea about cheap labor, facepalm.
Merkels politics is not bad.
I did not vote for her as she is in "the wrong party". But what she does is the "right thing".
And unlike other politicians she has a PH.D in Physics, and is not a fucking lawyer or "retired" school teacher.
You started with the "preprocessor" meme, not me.
The point is that a web site should take down "false news" when notified about the false news.
So what again is your problem?
What exactly did you want to say? ... hm, wrong? ... wrong?
Taking down "Fake News" from your web site is
Being forced to do it by law is
Is something wrong with your mind?
The word "preprocessor" does not mean what you think it means.
I already pointed out that C++ was translated to C at those times, so what do you want to point out?
Well, ... not sure about Java/Groovy and other modern languages though. ;D
IMHO the mein problem with Eiffel (and ADA) was that "they" wanted to make money from it ASAP. It was super expensive, getting a license to make a competing environment was expensive and that killed the language quicker than it got traction.
I would always prefer Eiffel over C++
However as the topic is SmallTalk I hope for a revival
As for the heating: it's hard enough to melt things like zinc with sunlight. Hot enough to melt basalt with just sunlight? On Mars? Now that's a very tall order. I don't think so.
There is a nice youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Showing how to use a Fresnel lens to have a 3D printer using sand.
There are a few more/better videos but I could not find them quickly.
it'd be much simpler/cheaper/more reliable just to import your fiber from Earth, at least while one is just getting a colony established. ... I can't imagine it is cheaper to transport tons of "stone" when you simply can send basic "builders". Probably even stuff like Fresnel lenses can be made on Mars easy if one knows where to look for "sand".
Really? I mean, we are talking about tons, hundreds of tons of "building material"
Searching for "do it yourself basalt fibres" I stumbled over this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Would also be an idea for a Mars base ;D
C++ is not derived from C.
It is derived from Simula and was given a C compatible syntax.
Going so far, that at the time C++ was created, the compiler could compile most C programs. And probably you know it compiled "to C" as it was "only" a cross compiler.