What is the use in increasing the percentage of a free energy source converted into electricity?
The factor that matters is the panel production price, in watts per dollar. Along with life duration, total pollution during production, etc. But not watts per candela!
How do we justify the cost of putting a person on the moon?
If I remember well it was justified by a political competition, which is not very far from religion.
Do you take into account deaths caused by uranium extraction in Africa, where little caution is taken regarding nearby population? Do you take into account deaths that may be caused by nuclear waste during the next 100,000 years?
4% of a free energy is still infinite efficiency.
The true question is the same as for other solar cells : what are the production price and the total power output during the life span of these cells?
Linux is the West's OS? Where is it stated in the GPL?
And secure it against who?
What's wrong with you, USA?
Ours?
Is Linux yours?
As an European, let me say that the president of a democracy should not have a list of people he wants dead. Arrested, maybe, although such a list should better be established by Justice, but not dead.
Venezuela is not a dictatorship.
No it can't -- excepted in bombs.
And it remains dangerous for hundreds of thousands years.
The ruling is on "abus de position dominante" in french. Thus yes, you're perfectly correct.
some criminalize belief (like the French law preventing people from saying
No belief is criminalized (how could this be enforced?), neither simply "saying" anything. What is forbidden in many European countries is hate speech using mass media (newspapers, radio, TV, internet) because they are essentially one-way : you could say to many people any horror based on false facts or twisted reasoning without anyone being alowed to contradict you.
We have some serious historical reasons for that.
Protests started in Greece earlier than in Spain. Not to mention Iceland.
In fact the US are just the last ones joining this global movement. But be welcome, fellows!
THERE IS a nuclear reactor on the site, along with a storage facility for highly radioactive wastes from others reactors, research facilities and plants producing nuclear fuel for civilian and military applications.
The part of the site concerned is dealing with low radioactive waste, but THERE IS a risk of leak. Probably not really dangerous, nothing compared with Chernobyl or Fukushima, but hey.
The site is known for recent radioactive leaks, of small quantities, that the authority first DENIED.
You know the difference between *selection* and *insertion of genes from another species*, don't you?
For example, selecting at each generation of a given cereal the seeds from the individual plants that performed best with less water IS NOT THE SAME THING as inserting in said cereals some genes from catus or camel.
I have always been told that the same stands for cars. And I guess it is also the case for every energy consuming device.
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.
