I propose a really giant brickwork, like the great pyramid but with a central fixed post and gears. The extra power can raise the stone, and then later it can be lowered, turning the generators.
Inefficient, but reliable, and cheap labor can be used for most of the construction.
Well, for example I live in Oregon, and my local public utility owns wind farms in Wyoming. People in Wyoming next to the wind farm don't see lower prices at all for having it there. But I sure do.
It means if they ground the excess power, they don't get paid a subsidy for it. You don't really have to use the power, and if it costs less to run the plant than to shut it down, that is still true if you ground it; paying for use can only be caused by a subsidy or other regulation.
lol yeah, we have a bit of gas, but buying from Canada is awesome! 3 Canada! Best neighbor ever. So glad they're not Russia. OMG. No surprise Europe is interested in coal. Sad but true.
They actually have a record of executing CEOs of companies that don't follow rules they're serious about. If they're serious about this one is a bigger question than if they have serious enforcement.
In Oregon where utilities are culturally expected to be cooperative to end user PV, you just have to have a digital meter (you buy the upgrade if you don't already have it, but my city is converting everybody for free in 2 years) and a standard inverter. They don't "hate" it, they "love" it, and they promote it heavily. You don't need new wires, so there is nothing for them to pay for. It doesn't increase electricity usage in the neighborhood, so where would these wires go? The electricity flows from you, to your nearest neighbors that are drawing power. They see it at the sub-station as the power draw going down. First, what you produce flows inside your own house wires first. So if you're using the AC and generating PV at the same time, it is flowing directly, it is not going through your meter, and you reduced your bill at full price. If you're producing and using at different times, then you're getting credited at wholesale, which just comes off your bill.
It reduces the maintenance on the substation, it lowers the load on the local system. It is all win for the last mile provider. I mean, unless they're worried about lower usage. In that case, public utilities will love it, and private utility companies will hate it.
It only takes one local election to start a public utility.
In Oregon I'm paying 5 cents for the electricity, and another 6 cents for delivery, with transparent markup (public utility)
One problem with comparing the prices is that there are different types of contracts; wind we get on fixed contracts, where it is very cheap because the capacity is purchased in advanced. Any coal power we get is off the spot market, where it is vastly more expensive than wind, hydro, or nuclear.
In Kentucky, their coal power is cheap not because coal is cheaper, but because they're getting it on a fixed contract.
California experiences perpetual growth, and has trouble getting the number of fixed contracts that they would desire based on what they know they need. And because of the size of the California market, energy companies try very hard to play games with the maintenance schedules to increase the percent that is bought off the spot market.
Inside the same market, hydro is cheapest, next is PV, nuclear, wind, natural gas, and pulling up the rear, coal. Obviously there will be a very tiny area right around the physical coal where the transport and storage costs are close to zero, where it probably beats natural gas.
Actually that link suggests it probably is a good candidate for base load.
Although large-scale effects are observed, wind power has a negligible effect on global-mean surface temperature, and it would deliver enormous global benefits by reducing emissions of CO2 and air pollutants. Our results may enable a comparison between the climate impacts due to wind power and the reduction in climatic impacts achieved by the substitution of wind for fossil fuels.
You're jumping from not perfect to not for base load, but nothing is perfect. If it is better than the other things already in use, then increasing it is good, regardless of it starts carrying the base load. Yeck, if it is better than what we have... especially if it is enough to carry the base load!
Yeah, me too, I'm with a public utility in Oregon and the monthly newsletter a while back was talking about the wholesale rates and how the investments they made in wind a decade ago are paying off, and that power is cheaper than the market power, and they're investing in new farms as fast as they can. There used to be an option where people could buy only renewable power in a segregated market (simulated, same wires) and it cost about double. Still, there was a waiting list. Then as the investments paid off and oil prices shot up, suddenly those people were getting lower bills. So they changed it so the green-only power has a fixed markup now, so that people can support investment. There is still a waiting list.
Exactly. And it is well known that marijuana causes an increase in active disease in people predisposed to schizophrenia. These are people who are likely to drift in and out of a disease state if unmedicated anyways. The studies already have shown that it does not cause schizophrenia in people not already at risk.
This study is about a different thing, psychotic episodes. And it is the same type of result; it shouldn't be assumed to imply a causal link in people not already predisposed to have psychotic episodes. It is potentially a bigger deal than schizophrenia, because in that case people can quit using and the effect usually goes away within 2 years. With psychotic episodes, it is unknown if this reversal will happen.
Why should he want a wider audience? Why should he care? If English-speaking people don't want to learn Russian, they'll just wait for somebody to translate it. Why should waiting for that be bad? He's in Russia, it is entirely natural to release it only in Russian.
If I made some neat discovery I would release it only in English. If somebody told me, "oh, the world wants this type of paper in Italian now," I would tell them to translate it.
And if I want something in C that is in Perl, I'll port it myself if I have to. No sense complaining about what languages people use.
Right. They don't. Generally Democracies are where that happens. In Socialist countries people who sit on their asses and contribute nothing go to the gulag as hooligans. From Each According to His Ability! If you truly had no ability, you would also have no value. But everybody has some ability. If you do nothing, you're a hooligan, you're anti-social.
Nonsense, Capitalism is the premise that business people will all cheat to make a buck, that this is harmful to investment, and that if a neutral third party (the Government) regulates in certain ways to create a level playing field, then Capital is free to flow, and the economy is based around where people want Capital to flow. Whereas prior, in an unregulated economy, established interests will almost always conspire against newcomers, and new capital won't flow at all into an industry unless somebody has some sort of new political control over part of the process.
Marx took the basic premise straight from Adam Smith, that if two business people drink in the same pub, by the end of the evening you have collusion; and completely ignored Smith's remedy. Instead, he made up a fresh remedy, involving a wide variety of radical changes to every part of people's lives. Once you understand the distribution of traits, you can understand it is mathematically, physically, statistically impossible for a society to agree to all these changes; it can only be by force, just because people will want different things. In that sort of environment, there will not be an abundance of goods to distribute. Morale will be low, it has to be low, because genes are distributed in a certain broad natural way. So it can very much be end-stage, "full-blown Communism" and still have a lot of suffering. That is why the places where "Communism" works are the places where it is actually a mixed economy, like China, Vietnam, Cuba. China tried real Communism and it sucked.
If the places are no longer on any existing maps, they are "lost." If they are actually cataloged somewhere, they're not lost. Notice the lost-ness being claimed is in reference to the 'agropolis' (farm town or grange with associated farmland) not to Colonial New England.
No, the impressive thing is that the technology is already revealing abandoned structures closer to home. The find itself as a find is not interesting.
There are two main areas where this is interesting: 1) Thinking about the future looking back at us, and what will we look like? What does our past already look like now that it is showing up?
2) The power of these tools to find things not immediately visible to human observation is impressive. These aren't giant pyramids, these are small structures mostly obscured. Think about how much LIDAR data is available for free download, and how much of it hasn't yet been searched for structures? Certain areas around known archaeological sites have been searched extensively, often finding new sites. There is a lot of opportunity here, even for people on slashdot. If you import the LIDAR data into a GIS system like GRASS, you can use SQL to analyze the data and write new tools, or just run normal visualization plugins.
Slashdot Mirror
Admittedly, physics and earth science arent my specialties, but Archaeology, ancient religions and ancient history are amongst my top 10.
If you claim to have a "top 10" specialties, you're actually claiming to have "0" specialties.
The point is not to convince the other party. Keep trying.
[bleep]s and giggles.
I propose a really giant brickwork, like the great pyramid but with a central fixed post and gears. The extra power can raise the stone, and then later it can be lowered, turning the generators.
Inefficient, but reliable, and cheap labor can be used for most of the construction.
Well, for example I live in Oregon, and my local public utility owns wind farms in Wyoming. People in Wyoming next to the wind farm don't see lower prices at all for having it there. But I sure do.
It means if they ground the excess power, they don't get paid a subsidy for it. You don't really have to use the power, and if it costs less to run the plant than to shut it down, that is still true if you ground it; paying for use can only be caused by a subsidy or other regulation.
lol yeah, we have a bit of gas, but buying from Canada is awesome! 3 Canada! Best neighbor ever. So glad they're not Russia. OMG. No surprise Europe is interested in coal. Sad but true.
They actually have a record of executing CEOs of companies that don't follow rules they're serious about. If they're serious about this one is a bigger question than if they have serious enforcement.
In Oregon where utilities are culturally expected to be cooperative to end user PV, you just have to have a digital meter (you buy the upgrade if you don't already have it, but my city is converting everybody for free in 2 years) and a standard inverter. They don't "hate" it, they "love" it, and they promote it heavily. You don't need new wires, so there is nothing for them to pay for. It doesn't increase electricity usage in the neighborhood, so where would these wires go? The electricity flows from you, to your nearest neighbors that are drawing power. They see it at the sub-station as the power draw going down. First, what you produce flows inside your own house wires first. So if you're using the AC and generating PV at the same time, it is flowing directly, it is not going through your meter, and you reduced your bill at full price. If you're producing and using at different times, then you're getting credited at wholesale, which just comes off your bill.
It reduces the maintenance on the substation, it lowers the load on the local system. It is all win for the last mile provider. I mean, unless they're worried about lower usage. In that case, public utilities will love it, and private utility companies will hate it.
It only takes one local election to start a public utility.
In Oregon I'm paying 5 cents for the electricity, and another 6 cents for delivery, with transparent markup (public utility)
One problem with comparing the prices is that there are different types of contracts; wind we get on fixed contracts, where it is very cheap because the capacity is purchased in advanced. Any coal power we get is off the spot market, where it is vastly more expensive than wind, hydro, or nuclear.
In Kentucky, their coal power is cheap not because coal is cheaper, but because they're getting it on a fixed contract.
California experiences perpetual growth, and has trouble getting the number of fixed contracts that they would desire based on what they know they need. And because of the size of the California market, energy companies try very hard to play games with the maintenance schedules to increase the percent that is bought off the spot market.
Inside the same market, hydro is cheapest, next is PV, nuclear, wind, natural gas, and pulling up the rear, coal. Obviously there will be a very tiny area right around the physical coal where the transport and storage costs are close to zero, where it probably beats natural gas.
Are they idiots for blocking low efficiency, high side-effect fuels, or for winning a small battle?
Actually that link suggests it probably is a good candidate for base load.
You're jumping from not perfect to not for base load, but nothing is perfect. If it is better than the other things already in use, then increasing it is good, regardless of it starts carrying the base load. Yeck, if it is better than what we have... especially if it is enough to carry the base load!
Yeah, me too, I'm with a public utility in Oregon and the monthly newsletter a while back was talking about the wholesale rates and how the investments they made in wind a decade ago are paying off, and that power is cheaper than the market power, and they're investing in new farms as fast as they can. There used to be an option where people could buy only renewable power in a segregated market (simulated, same wires) and it cost about double. Still, there was a waiting list. Then as the investments paid off and oil prices shot up, suddenly those people were getting lower bills. So they changed it so the green-only power has a fixed markup now, so that people can support investment. There is still a waiting list.
Exactly. And it is well known that marijuana causes an increase in active disease in people predisposed to schizophrenia. These are people who are likely to drift in and out of a disease state if unmedicated anyways. The studies already have shown that it does not cause schizophrenia in people not already at risk.
This study is about a different thing, psychotic episodes. And it is the same type of result; it shouldn't be assumed to imply a causal link in people not already predisposed to have psychotic episodes. It is potentially a bigger deal than schizophrenia, because in that case people can quit using and the effect usually goes away within 2 years. With psychotic episodes, it is unknown if this reversal will happen.
Dave's not here, man.
methinks your sarcasm detector is busted.
Online sarcasm was deprecated in 1986.
Why should he want a wider audience? Why should he care? If English-speaking people don't want to learn Russian, they'll just wait for somebody to translate it. Why should waiting for that be bad? He's in Russia, it is entirely natural to release it only in Russian.
If I made some neat discovery I would release it only in English. If somebody told me, "oh, the world wants this type of paper in Italian now," I would tell them to translate it.
And if I want something in C that is in Perl, I'll port it myself if I have to. No sense complaining about what languages people use.
Right. They don't. Generally Democracies are where that happens. In Socialist countries people who sit on their asses and contribute nothing go to the gulag as hooligans. From Each According to His Ability! If you truly had no ability, you would also have no value. But everybody has some ability. If you do nothing, you're a hooligan, you're anti-social.
Nonsense, Capitalism is the premise that business people will all cheat to make a buck, that this is harmful to investment, and that if a neutral third party (the Government) regulates in certain ways to create a level playing field, then Capital is free to flow, and the economy is based around where people want Capital to flow. Whereas prior, in an unregulated economy, established interests will almost always conspire against newcomers, and new capital won't flow at all into an industry unless somebody has some sort of new political control over part of the process.
Marx took the basic premise straight from Adam Smith, that if two business people drink in the same pub, by the end of the evening you have collusion; and completely ignored Smith's remedy. Instead, he made up a fresh remedy, involving a wide variety of radical changes to every part of people's lives. Once you understand the distribution of traits, you can understand it is mathematically, physically, statistically impossible for a society to agree to all these changes; it can only be by force, just because people will want different things. In that sort of environment, there will not be an abundance of goods to distribute. Morale will be low, it has to be low, because genes are distributed in a certain broad natural way. So it can very much be end-stage, "full-blown Communism" and still have a lot of suffering. That is why the places where "Communism" works are the places where it is actually a mixed economy, like China, Vietnam, Cuba. China tried real Communism and it sucked.
If the places are no longer on any existing maps, they are "lost." If they are actually cataloged somewhere, they're not lost. Notice the lost-ness being claimed is in reference to the 'agropolis' (farm town or grange with associated farmland) not to Colonial New England.
-polis is Persian for "city," for example the famous Persepolis, City of the Persians.
You need a whole farm town to make an agropolis.
They must have found an old grange.
No, the impressive thing is that the technology is already revealing abandoned structures closer to home. The find itself as a find is not interesting.
There are two main areas where this is interesting:
1) Thinking about the future looking back at us, and what will we look like? What does our past already look like now that it is showing up?
2) The power of these tools to find things not immediately visible to human observation is impressive. These aren't giant pyramids, these are small structures mostly obscured. Think about how much LIDAR data is available for free download, and how much of it hasn't yet been searched for structures? Certain areas around known archaeological sites have been searched extensively, often finding new sites. There is a lot of opportunity here, even for people on slashdot. If you import the LIDAR data into a GIS system like GRASS, you can use SQL to analyze the data and write new tools, or just run normal visualization plugins.
it's not a discovery that Native Americans were building saw mills or anything.
While true, there are also those. But, somewhere else.
Yep, soon we'll just 3d print everything in the garage, at least until the replicators hit the market.
3. Leak the info anonymously to a known white-hat security researcher.