Well, as long as we are judging things on the basis of "merit" we should calculate the true price of oil with all the extranalities involved in the equation and none of the tax breaks and subsides that the oil industry recieves. The external costs of the drilling, transporting, refining, transporting again, and then the end use of oil are incalculable. Consider things like an army to protect the oil at its source, how much does it cost to maintain the ships to transport this oil, what's the environmental toll payed in cleanup costs for every oil spell, the enormous rise in health care costs caused by polution, the money it takes to build roads, cars, etc... many of these costs would still persist in a 'hydrogen economy' but many not, and many would disapear if we would only learn the true cost of our consumption and then account for it. I'll have my 'oil-free' economy any day thank you.
They were discussing on Off the Hook tonight about how Philadelphia and Verizon struck a deal that would allow the city to move forward irregardless of whether or not the bill was passed. Anyone know anything more about this?
I read somewhere that nearly 50% of the army's budget is consumed by fuel costs, though i don't remember where i got this number or know how accurate it is for that matter, this may be baseless. But, it might highlight what the army has in mind when they are attempting to increase fuel efficency. Rather then being environmentally friendly, it might be a tactical decision, a few of the united state's potential enemies control large amounts of oil, this is an extreme disadvantage for the US if they need this oil to operate its millitary. Thus, any reduction in fuel consumption its a strategic imperitive. Also, fuel is expensive, if you aren't spending as much money on fuel you can buy more guns and bombs to kill people. These two things are probably more what the army has in mind as they attempt to decrease their consumption of fuels.
According to the detail of the project http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/projects_showcas e/human_proteome.html the project was setup by and for the Institute for Systems Biology, their webpage is located here, http://www.systemsbiology.org/. The IBM website says that "[ISB] will use the results within its larger research efforts." According to their website, ISB is a non-profit, internationally renowned organization. There is no mention of whether the information accured will be open sourced.
Oct. 22--Verizon Communications Inc. is expanding its fiber-optic network -- capable of delivering telephone and super-fast Internet access and eventually television service -- to parts of six more states, including some communities in Bucks and Chester Counties.
The expansion is part of Verizon's nationwide plan to overhaul its old copper-wire systems and gain new customers and sources of revenue.
Verizon will add 3,000 to 5,000 jobs as it brings fiber-optic cable to homes and businesses in parts of Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia. It already has fiber networks in parts of California, Texas and Florida, and is expanding in those states, too.
"This is just the beginning," Verizon retail markets president Bob Ingalls said in a conference call yesterday. "Next year, we plan to announce video services on this platform."
Verizon did not say where the jobs would be created. But it said the fiber network was coming to Doylestown, Yardley and Newtown in Bucks County, as well as Chester Springs, Downingtown and Exton in Chester County.
Upper Makefield Township in Bucks County said Verizon was building a fiber network there as well, although the company would not confirm that.
Verizon said its fiber expansion would be focused on the suburbs for now.
Doylestown Township Manager Stephanie Mason said Verizon started installing fiber lines there a few months ago and planned on selling new services to Doylestown residents and businesses early next year.
"Verizon said we were one of the pilot areas," Mason said. "The end result for residents is going to be exciting -- they'll be offering new services."
For instance, Verizon said its new fiber system would allow customers to add or drop lines more quickly.
"If you need to add capacity because your broadband-hungry son or daughter is home from college, we can do that quickly," Verizon network services group president Paul Lacouture said.
The fiber network will allow for Internet access speeds that are much faster than Verizon's digital subscriber line service, the company says.
The company expects to complete its "fiber-to-the-premises" network in about five years, which will allow it to phase out its DSL service.
In areas in which the fiber network has already been built, the monthly charge for five-megabits-per-second Internet service -- faster than the top speeds offered by most cable-modem services -- starts at $34.95.
Verizon has said it would spend $2.5 billion by the end of next year on the new fiber system.
Verizon and other local-phone companies are working to revamp their businesses so they can compete more broadly with cable operators such as Comcast Corp., which are expanding into telephone service over their cable lines. Earlier this year, SBC Communications Inc. said it would invest $6 billion on a video-capable system over the next five years.
The ability of Verizon's fiber system to carry video service has prompted Upper Makefield Township to craft an agreement that would allow it to collect franchise fees from Verizon when the company starts offering television services. The township receives about $90,000 annually in franchise fees from Comcast.
"We negotiated for two months," said Township Manager Rich Gestrich. "We're very concerned that they weren't back-dooring us on that issue."
-----
To see more of The Philadelphia Inquirer, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.philly.com.
(c) 2004, The Philadelphia Inquirer. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News. For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.
I think it is important to discuss Stewart's reaction to his interview with Kerry. If you check out the cover article for rolling stone this week it discusses how regretful he was in not asking him tougher questions, so much so that he beat himself up about it for a good time afterward. Its important to keep in mind in the context of the Crossfire "interview" because they are attempting to call him out on not doing a good interview, using it to bring him down when he has publically made his regret known both on his show and in rolling stone
Thank you for giving me your perspective on the situation. One of the things that has always worried me about nuclear power is in fact the pollution that it can create. New advances like pebble bed reactors have all but eliminated the risk of nuclear disaster.
isn't a tad bit of a misstatement to call a nuclear power plant non-polluting? i mean they don't give off carbon dixoide but nuclear waste is a byproduct. I think everything pollutes a little it just a matter of how it pollutes and how much, current solar arrays for instance use a lot of chemicals in their manufaturing process more recent advances are allowing for organic solar panels but still a little pollution is generated. So maybe low-polluting technology would be a better phrase.
I guess i failed really to state the point of my argument well. Sort of beat around the bush a little (no pun intented) but i guess what i was trying to get to was that the original post blamed bush for the thousands upon thousands of deaths in Iraq. And I guess it depends how you look at escalation... but isnt a million dying bad too? I mean only 10s of thousands have died under bush's watch. Anyway my really point is how would Kerry handle this any better? Kerry did vote for the war resolution and he never stood up against the Clinton and Bush Sr. administrations in all those years he was in the senate to stop the dying, to my knowledge.
So if he is tired of arabs being killed in this so called holy war then who exactly is he supposed to vote for? Didn't John Kerry vote FOR the war resolution? The United States has been fighting a low-intensity war against Iraq since long before 9/11 and long before Bush was in office. Who was responsible for the millions dying under economic sanctions and ariel bombardments since Gulf War I? Not a Republican.
Bush's Iraq policy was merely an extension of Clintons, which was merely an extension of Bush Sr's. In effect this merely demonstrates the danger of a two party system, not enough government accountability, and the absolute danger of the imperial president. So, no, in effect your argument hasn't scared me into voting for Kerry or Bush, which I think is what you were trying to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, as long as we are judging things on the basis of "merit" we should calculate the true price of oil with all the extranalities involved in the equation and none of the tax breaks and subsides that the oil industry recieves. The external costs of the drilling, transporting, refining, transporting again, and then the end use of oil are incalculable. Consider things like an army to protect the oil at its source, how much does it cost to maintain the ships to transport this oil, what's the environmental toll payed in cleanup costs for every oil spell, the enormous rise in health care costs caused by polution, the money it takes to build roads, cars, etc... many of these costs would still persist in a 'hydrogen economy' but many not, and many would disapear if we would only learn the true cost of our consumption and then account for it. I'll have my 'oil-free' economy any day thank you.
not more environmentally sound, the bus is still running irregardless of whether or not you are on it.
They were discussing on Off the Hook tonight about how Philadelphia and Verizon struck a deal that would allow the city to move forward irregardless of whether or not the bill was passed. Anyone know anything more about this?
I read somewhere that nearly 50% of the army's budget is consumed by fuel costs, though i don't remember where i got this number or know how accurate it is for that matter, this may be baseless. But, it might highlight what the army has in mind when they are attempting to increase fuel efficency. Rather then being environmentally friendly, it might be a tactical decision, a few of the united state's potential enemies control large amounts of oil, this is an extreme disadvantage for the US if they need this oil to operate its millitary. Thus, any reduction in fuel consumption its a strategic imperitive. Also, fuel is expensive, if you aren't spending as much money on fuel you can buy more guns and bombs to kill people. These two things are probably more what the army has in mind as they attempt to decrease their consumption of fuels.
According to the detail of the project http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/projects_showcas e/human_proteome.html the project was setup by and for the Institute for Systems Biology, their webpage is located here, http://www.systemsbiology.org/. The IBM website says that "[ISB] will use the results within its larger research efforts." According to their website, ISB is a non-profit, internationally renowned organization. There is no mention of whether the information accured will be open sourced.
from http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=96235:
Verizon to Expand Fiber-Optic Network
Oct. 22--Verizon Communications Inc. is expanding its fiber-optic network -- capable of delivering telephone and super-fast Internet access and eventually television service -- to parts of six more states, including some communities in Bucks and Chester Counties.
The expansion is part of Verizon's nationwide plan to overhaul its old copper-wire systems and gain new customers and sources of revenue.
Verizon will add 3,000 to 5,000 jobs as it brings fiber-optic cable to homes and businesses in parts of Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia. It already has fiber networks in parts of California, Texas and Florida, and is expanding in those states, too.
"This is just the beginning," Verizon retail markets president Bob Ingalls said in a conference call yesterday. "Next year, we plan to announce video services on this platform."
Verizon did not say where the jobs would be created. But it said the fiber network was coming to Doylestown, Yardley and Newtown in Bucks County, as well as Chester Springs, Downingtown and Exton in Chester County.
Upper Makefield Township in Bucks County said Verizon was building a fiber network there as well, although the company would not confirm that.
Verizon said its fiber expansion would be focused on the suburbs for now.
Doylestown Township Manager Stephanie Mason said Verizon started installing fiber lines there a few months ago and planned on selling new services to Doylestown residents and businesses early next year.
"Verizon said we were one of the pilot areas," Mason said. "The end result for residents is going to be exciting -- they'll be offering new services."
For instance, Verizon said its new fiber system would allow customers to add or drop lines more quickly.
"If you need to add capacity because your broadband-hungry son or daughter is home from college, we can do that quickly," Verizon network services group president Paul Lacouture said.
The fiber network will allow for Internet access speeds that are much faster than Verizon's digital subscriber line service, the company says.
The company expects to complete its "fiber-to-the-premises" network in about five years, which will allow it to phase out its DSL service.
In areas in which the fiber network has already been built, the monthly charge for five-megabits-per-second Internet service -- faster than the top speeds offered by most cable-modem services -- starts at $34.95.
Verizon has said it would spend $2.5 billion by the end of next year on the new fiber system.
Verizon and other local-phone companies are working to revamp their businesses so they can compete more broadly with cable operators such as Comcast Corp., which are expanding into telephone service over their cable lines. Earlier this year, SBC Communications Inc. said it would invest $6 billion on a video-capable system over the next five years.
The ability of Verizon's fiber system to carry video service has prompted Upper Makefield Township to craft an agreement that would allow it to collect franchise fees from Verizon when the company starts offering television services. The township receives about $90,000 annually in franchise fees from Comcast.
"We negotiated for two months," said Township Manager Rich Gestrich. "We're very concerned that they weren't back-dooring us on that issue."
-----
To see more of The Philadelphia Inquirer, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.philly.com.
(c) 2004, The Philadelphia Inquirer. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News. For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.
I think it is important to discuss Stewart's reaction to his interview with Kerry. If you check out the cover article for rolling stone this week it discusses how regretful he was in not asking him tougher questions, so much so that he beat himself up about it for a good time afterward. Its important to keep in mind in the context of the Crossfire "interview" because they are attempting to call him out on not doing a good interview, using it to bring him down when he has publically made his regret known both on his show and in rolling stone
Thank you for giving me your perspective on the situation. One of the things that has always worried me about nuclear power is in fact the pollution that it can create. New advances like pebble bed reactors have all but eliminated the risk of nuclear disaster.
isn't a tad bit of a misstatement to call a nuclear power plant non-polluting? i mean they don't give off carbon dixoide but nuclear waste is a byproduct. I think everything pollutes a little it just a matter of how it pollutes and how much, current solar arrays for instance use a lot of chemicals in their manufaturing process more recent advances are allowing for organic solar panels but still a little pollution is generated. So maybe low-polluting technology would be a better phrase.
I guess i failed really to state the point of my argument well. Sort of beat around the bush a little (no pun intented) but i guess what i was trying to get to was that the original post blamed bush for the thousands upon thousands of deaths in Iraq. And I guess it depends how you look at escalation... but isnt a million dying bad too? I mean only 10s of thousands have died under bush's watch. Anyway my really point is how would Kerry handle this any better? Kerry did vote for the war resolution and he never stood up against the Clinton and Bush Sr. administrations in all those years he was in the senate to stop the dying, to my knowledge.
So if he is tired of arabs being killed in this so called holy war then who exactly is he supposed to vote for? Didn't John Kerry vote FOR the war resolution? The United States has been fighting a low-intensity war against Iraq since long before 9/11 and long before Bush was in office. Who was responsible for the millions dying under economic sanctions and ariel bombardments since Gulf War I? Not a Republican. Bush's Iraq policy was merely an extension of Clintons, which was merely an extension of Bush Sr's. In effect this merely demonstrates the danger of a two party system, not enough government accountability, and the absolute danger of the imperial president. So, no, in effect your argument hasn't scared me into voting for Kerry or Bush, which I think is what you were trying to do.