You got to be kidding... you are now worried that power plants are generating heat??? In case you haven't noticed, we have this giant thing called the sun that pounds the earth's surface with around 150+ petawatts of energy. Total world energy production is about 15 terrawatts. Wouldn't that be less than 0.01% of the total warming of the planet? Ok. I'll bite. It's not me that's worried. Most of that 15 tw of energy production is generated from fossil fuels. If we don't use the fossil fuels (which are stored underground and would normally lay dormant), we wouldn't be producing 15 tw of energy per year. If, however, we can get 15 tw/year of energy from sources that already impinge on the Earth's mantle, either from space (Solar) or geothermal and convert that energy into a useful form, then there is no impact on the balance of energies entering or leaving the Earth. If you dig up stored energy and burn it, with the CO2 and pollution shield as large as it is, we'll all steam to death in one way or another, at 15 tw/year.* That's what has to stop. CO2 is a symptom of this that exacerbates the global warming. If there would be no CO2 then excess energies would be radiated from the Earth and we wouldn't be faced with such a problem.
Massive reduction of CO2 from the atmosphere will allow this excess radiation to leave the planet. Generating more heat while increasing the level of CO2, will only make the planet warmer.
*The global dimming ameliorates global warming a little, but also reduces solar radiation striking the Earth. This is not good for plants. So as CO2 is being cut down, so should we cut pollutants at the same time. That's going to be a tricky balance to strike.
Don't be too concerned about the loss of funding. Australia's Eastern seaboard is sitting on mountains of coal and the current gov. is pushing research into clean coal. So is China (the biggest user), so if the USA doesn't do it, then someone else will. As for the comments I've read so far, it's not the CO2 only that is worrisome, but the fact that the waste heat generated from power plants (should read all heat exchange type power plants) is directly warming the Earth. Not only should there be no CO2 from power plants, but there should also be no waste heat either. So solar power/geothermal/hydro and to some extent, nuclear technologies have the clear edge.
Ideally, the model for future energy creation and use would be: * non-heat producing energy creation and storage * non-heat producing energy consumption
One system currently in focus by the Australian gov. are 1.5kw domestic solar roof installations feeding directly into the grid. If you have every house (excluding high rise) with an installation from Hobart (far South) towards the equator, then that would make a significant impact on all fossil fuel use. Currently, such an installation costs approx $15,000/household and the gov. pays for half. Every country or geophysical region will have their own solutions, so I doubt that there will be a single technology that would be the panacea for everyone. http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/rebates/index.html
(cut scene) And there stands Whiteox, overlooking the valley of IT that will be his burden for years to come. How can he fight the Trolls and the Spammers all at once? And what about his nemesis, the evil (insert name here), who has modded him down on more than one occasion? And Grandma! What about Grandma who still can't work out how to send an attachment? Will Vista and the new gaming machine he's got to build next week really perform? Had he made the right decisions regarding the overclocked 8800GT and the X38 chipset? Is 4 gig of DDR2 1200 really worth it? - just so Jamie can play DirectX 10 games??? Stay tuned for next month's most engaging episode: "Whiteox and the Trials of Soldering Accidentally Cut Tracks on a Motherboard" out soon.:)
True, the brain is very daunting. I too suffer from memory loss, although from an accident I was involved in as a child of 11 yrs. However, I do get very clear memories of the most mundane moments in life. I suppose that may be 'normal'. One of the mundane memories that have just dragged itself to the surface is a long thread of newsgroup posts with someone called Temujin about the proto-history and origins of the Magyars, sometime in the mid 90's.:)
The "computer" is the rectangular box with a few buttons on the front. The "monitor" is the box with the pretty pictures. These two terms are not interchangeable.
Another good one is "Hard Drive" = either floppy (shows my age), computer (the rectangular box). Hard Drive is not RAM! Also Windows Millennium = Windows 2000 (also shows my age). Prolly more, but I forget.
Symantec puts 'hooks' in every part of the Windows system. Almost nothing happens in Windows without Symantec knowing about it. This causes a massive load on the system, to the point that a 256mb laptop running XP will go so slowly, thrashing its HD, that it is not worth operating. No Symantec and it works fine. (ermm... not my laptop). Another thing is Symantec demands almost daily updates of ridiculous file sizes, often 20+mb or more through its Live Update service. This is a real pain, especially on a slow connection and the nag screens never seem to stop. The last thing is that it uses a form of html for its gui. This is very fragile and often breaks, rendering the software useless. Reinstalling it means removal, and some versions demand a password for removal, then reinstall, then update (again). It often breaks itself because the live update can update the modules either in the wrong order, or the wrong versions. Typical Symantec remedy for this is to 'continue to update' to fix. Some hackers have found a way to intentionally break Symantec for you - free of charge, so malware can bypass any of its scanning routines. Clever ones even convince it that the file is ok even when it's not. So the ideal scanner should have a small footprint, incremental downloads, check for all forms of malware (unlike Symantec, Trend, McAffe and most U.S. AV software that requires different modules)and basically stay out of the way. Some of these 'big name' providers even nag you about windows updates, as if Windows doesn't do a good enough job in the first place!:( There is nothing wrong with Windows firewall. Its built in and works, so why replace it? Avast, AVG, NOD are great products, small footprints and although they do drain the system (as any AV does), its nowhere near the demand that Symantec causes. If you have to use it, then only use the AV part and leave the rest alone. If you know what you're doing, you can even run without an AV live, and scan daily before a planned shutdown. but you need discipline to do that effectively. Symantec has even caused a marriage breakup that I know about. Mind you they were prolly gonna split anyway, but the wife was convinced that her ex was spying on her, since Symantec kept reporting attempted firewall intrusions and tracking cookies which were false positives. I hope that someone from Symantec reads this and tries to defend their product. I doubt if they can.
Most insurance cover specifically includes statements that any space debris (including falling satellites) will not be covered. So it's every geek for themselves! I believe the clause was written in years ago when Sputnik fell to Earth. That goes for meteors, blue ice, rocket stages and acts of God (whatever that means).
Yep. Ok. I withdraw any queries about using the 'Size' of Wales' as an obscure unit of measurement. I didn't realise how commonplace it was. Reminds me of a line in Red Dwarf: "Transmitting on all frequencies and all known languages including Welsh"! (Rimmer)
The English 'foot' or 12 inches was based on the length of a King's foot! Have you got a conversion table for how many Udu = how many Boko? There's no conversion that Google can do!. Anyway, I haven't heard of a Wal-Mart in New Guinea. There may be a K-Mart.
You mean the country of Wales in the UK? That's a weird kind of comparison! But I suppose it's better than World Book Encyclopedia (1967) that kept comparing area to US States. And height comparisons to how many Empire State buildings etc etc.
Let's not forget our male roots! Many years ago, when faced with that dilemma, a man would just find her, club her, grab her hair and drag her back into the cave. Simple really.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. It's not very green is it!
So much for politically correct carbon neutral advancements in applied physics.......
The Russians have already started.
Mod this up please moderators!
It doesn't take much to stuff up all them tubes and pipes on the internets.
It's not me that's worried.
Most of that 15 tw of energy production is generated from fossil fuels. If we don't use the fossil fuels (which are stored underground and would normally lay dormant), we wouldn't be producing 15 tw of energy per year.
If, however, we can get 15 tw/year of energy from sources that already impinge on the Earth's mantle, either from space (Solar) or geothermal and convert that energy into a useful form, then there is no impact on the balance of energies entering or leaving the Earth.
If you dig up stored energy and burn it, with the CO2 and pollution shield as large as it is, we'll all steam to death in one way or another, at 15 tw/year.*
That's what has to stop. CO2 is a symptom of this that exacerbates the global warming. If there would be no CO2 then excess energies would be radiated from the Earth and we wouldn't be faced with such a problem.
Massive reduction of CO2 from the atmosphere will allow this excess radiation to leave the planet. Generating more heat while increasing the level of CO2, will only make the planet warmer.
*The global dimming ameliorates global warming a little, but also reduces solar radiation striking the Earth. This is not good for plants. So as CO2 is being cut down, so should we cut pollutants at the same time. That's going to be a tricky balance to strike.
Don't be too concerned about the loss of funding. Australia's Eastern seaboard is sitting on mountains of coal and the current gov. is pushing research into clean coal. So is China (the biggest user), so if the USA doesn't do it, then someone else will.
As for the comments I've read so far, it's not the CO2 only that is worrisome, but the fact that the waste heat generated from power plants (should read all heat exchange type power plants) is directly warming the Earth.
Not only should there be no CO2 from power plants, but there should also be no waste heat either.
So solar power/geothermal/hydro and to some extent, nuclear technologies have the clear edge.
Ideally, the model for future energy creation and use would be:
* non-heat producing energy creation and storage
* non-heat producing energy consumption
One system currently in focus by the Australian gov. are 1.5kw domestic solar roof installations feeding directly into the grid. If you have every house (excluding high rise) with an installation from Hobart (far South) towards the equator, then that would make a significant impact on all fossil fuel use. Currently, such an installation costs approx $15,000/household and the gov. pays for half.
Every country or geophysical region will have their own solutions, so I doubt that there will be a single technology that would be the panacea for everyone.
http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/rebates/index.html
(cut scene) :)
And there stands Whiteox, overlooking the valley of IT that will be his burden for years to come.
How can he fight the Trolls and the Spammers all at once?
And what about his nemesis, the evil (insert name here), who has modded him down on more than one occasion?
And Grandma! What about Grandma who still can't work out how to send an attachment?
Will Vista and the new gaming machine he's got to build next week really perform? Had he made the right decisions regarding the overclocked 8800GT and the X38 chipset?
Is 4 gig of DDR2 1200 really worth it? - just so Jamie can play DirectX 10 games???
Stay tuned for next month's most engaging episode: "Whiteox and the Trials of Soldering Accidentally Cut Tracks on a Motherboard" out soon.
True, the brain is very daunting. :)
I too suffer from memory loss, although from an accident I was involved in as a child of 11 yrs.
However, I do get very clear memories of the most mundane moments in life. I suppose that may be 'normal'.
One of the mundane memories that have just dragged itself to the surface is a long thread of newsgroup posts with someone called Temujin about the proto-history and origins of the Magyars, sometime in the mid 90's.
Don't forget, that over 60,000ft the air gets quite thin.
So if we go with a plane based rail gun, we can shoot the UFOs before they land!
Good Luck! But if you damage any of the bits below, then you're stuffed. I hear that replacement parts are hard to come by.
Crucial interocitor parts being:
* Bead condenser (model #: AB-619)
* Cathermin tube with inindium complex of +4
* Intensifier disk
Chapter One: The Computer
The "computer" is the rectangular box with a few buttons on the front. The "monitor" is the box with the pretty pictures. These two terms are not interchangeable.
Another good one is "Hard Drive" = either floppy (shows my age), computer (the rectangular box).Hard Drive is not RAM!
Also Windows Millennium = Windows 2000 (also shows my age).
Prolly more, but I forget.
Symantec puts 'hooks' in every part of the Windows system. :(
Almost nothing happens in Windows without Symantec knowing about it.
This causes a massive load on the system, to the point that a 256mb laptop running XP will go so slowly, thrashing its HD, that it is not worth operating. No Symantec and it works fine. (ermm... not my laptop).
Another thing is Symantec demands almost daily updates of ridiculous file sizes, often 20+mb or more through its Live Update service. This is a real pain, especially on a slow connection and the nag screens never seem to stop.
The last thing is that it uses a form of html for its gui. This is very fragile and often breaks, rendering the software useless. Reinstalling it means removal, and some versions demand a password for removal, then reinstall, then update (again).
It often breaks itself because the live update can update the modules either in the wrong order, or the wrong versions.
Typical Symantec remedy for this is to 'continue to update' to fix.
Some hackers have found a way to intentionally break Symantec for you - free of charge, so malware can bypass any of its scanning routines. Clever ones even convince it that the file is ok even when it's not.
So the ideal scanner should have a small footprint, incremental downloads, check for all forms of malware (unlike Symantec, Trend, McAffe and most U.S. AV software that requires different modules)and basically stay out of the way. Some of these 'big name' providers even nag you about windows updates, as if Windows doesn't do a good enough job in the first place!
There is nothing wrong with Windows firewall. Its built in and works, so why replace it?
Avast, AVG, NOD are great products, small footprints and although they do drain the system (as any AV does), its nowhere near the demand that Symantec causes.
If you have to use it, then only use the AV part and leave the rest alone.
If you know what you're doing, you can even run without an AV live, and scan daily before a planned shutdown. but you need discipline to do that effectively.
Symantec has even caused a marriage breakup that I know about. Mind you they were prolly gonna split anyway, but the wife was convinced that her ex was spying on her, since Symantec kept reporting attempted firewall intrusions and tracking cookies which were false positives.
I hope that someone from Symantec reads this and tries to defend their product. I doubt if they can.
Most insurance cover specifically includes statements that any space debris (including falling satellites) will not be covered.
So it's every geek for themselves!
I believe the clause was written in years ago when Sputnik fell to Earth. That goes for meteors, blue ice, rocket stages and acts of God (whatever that means).
According to the historical records, they come in all shapes and sizes. But trying to get one is a real bitch.
Hey! Where have my missing eukaryotes gone?
Yep. Ok. I withdraw any queries about using the 'Size' of Wales' as an obscure unit of measurement.
I didn't realise how commonplace it was.
Reminds me of a line in Red Dwarf:
"Transmitting on all frequencies and all known languages including Welsh"! (Rimmer)
The English 'foot' or 12 inches was based on the length of a King's foot!
Have you got a conversion table for how many Udu = how many Boko? There's no conversion that Google can do!.
Anyway, I haven't heard of a Wal-Mart in New Guinea. There may be a K-Mart.
You mean the country of Wales in the UK?
That's a weird kind of comparison!
But I suppose it's better than World Book Encyclopedia (1967) that kept comparing area to US States. And height comparisons to how many Empire State buildings etc etc.
Center = center of a circle
Centre = A building or a complex like a Community Centre.
Ha!
You forget that the best space agency out there is Australian!
http://www.woomera.com.au/
Ermmm.... Well, it was pretty big in the 60's I hear.
What? You can do better?
IF N<>N THEN N = N
NEXT N
OK I worked out how to do it.
Let's not forget our male roots!
Many years ago, when faced with that dilemma, a man would just find her, club her, grab her hair and drag her back into the cave.
Simple really.
Ahhh: In Basic
:)
Loop
IF N N THEN N = N
NEXT N
That's got to be close
Perhaps Slashdot's lameness filter should be able to recognize code?
Umm If I remember correctly:
;)
Tak So Myket
Mind you that was 30 years ago....
If I've got mod points, then I don't know how to use them, but if I had, I'll give them to you.
Can I make bumper stickers out of that?