OMG, you fucking moron, learn something, read a book, go read some jokes, humour obviously is not your strong suit, but maybe you can learn to pretend you understand it, moron.

Geothermal is smaller than wind.

Your target: 25%. Subtract the 7% hydro, because we both agree it's maxed: 18% remaining.
Per the EIA, in 2013 wind actually led behind hydro at 4.13%, not 2.08, and solar was at .23%, not .39%, so I'm curious where your numbers come from.
Biomass: 1.48
Geothermal: .41%
Solar: .23%
Wind: 4.13%
Actually adds up to 6%. To reach 18% we'd need to build 3x as much of 'all of the above'.
To reach my goal(60%), we'd need 10X as much. 10X/3=3.33. I should have said 1/3rd, not 1/4, sorry.
To reach my goal you 'only' need a 5 fold uptick on wind, not 100x, solar would be 100x, not 500x. I'm curious as to how you worked your math, because 100*2.08%= 208% of current generation, which means we'd be more than doubling our generation capability in wind alone.

Given that solar has had a relatively late start over wind, the fact is that it only needs another 4% of total generation over wind. That's a better way to look at it than goal percentage/current percentage = difficulty.

Biomass and geothermal would need around a 6X increase(they only need to hit ~12%). Of course, to outright state it again: There's a reason I said rough percentages. I'm not going to cry if the mix ends up being 50% nuclear, 15% wind, 10% solar, 25% 'other'. I also didn't state any real timeline, though 'sooner is better' should be implied.
source

Tigerdirect here in Canada, the sale on samsung ended monday when stock was cleared. Though they still have 240GB OCZ(Toshiba) drives up for $69 after rebate, Intel drives were on amazon if I remember. Though there are other ocz 120gb drives for $20 and this was one of the intel drives for $100 with a double stacking coupon. So yeah, I guess you're welcome.

Yes I have. Most of it's green. Like most northern areas if you take pictures at the right time you can get very dead looking terrain.

Let's see: Green grass, check, mold check, lichen check, green trees, check.

That would be tough given that we pre-entomb our reactors in the USA.

Yeah, I've mentioned that a few times...

I suggest you check your research. They've been testing/developing pebble bed reactors, but they've run into issues such that they're not replacements for rod type reactors yet.

Where's the huge ecological impact for nuclear coming from? Like I said earlier, no argument from me about coal/oil. My point has always been not that nuclear is harmless, but that it's less harmful than the alternatives while still remaining affordable(minus political stuff).

I'd also love thorium-salt reactors. There's a reason why I mentioned 5 designs spread over 200 reactors - I want some experimentals in there that will hopefully become standard.

Gotta love democracy, eh!! Forcing people who disagree with you to do what you feel is right just warms the cockles of your heart...

No, I oppose it. Fascists like you favor it.

It's not that there's no problems. It's just that if you do an honest assessment that includes externalities nuclear beats coal hand over fist. They're mostly captured with nuclear plants, not so with coal.

"YOUR" FFS. I can't even go on after that. It's not even my paper./P

But they don't say anything like this:

They didn't address the "what if everything changed in an instant" case in their article.

I assert that most people want the government to improve society.

Well, yes, they do; they want lots of non-sensical things. A large part want there to be an invisible omnipotent spirit that watches them every minute of the day too. Those kinds of delusions are the reason why nations repeatedly deteriorate into fascism, theocracy, or communism.

The error isn't in wanting a better world--everybody does that--the error is in how you people go about it, usually by trying to force other people to do things for you.

I completely agree. If it had been up to the prosecutor, this wouldn't even have gone to the grand jury. But because a lynch mob was calling for blood the prosecutor took it to a grand jury to cover his ass. There simply is no legal case against Wilson. The prosecutor knows that and the grand jury confirmed it. If this had gone to court, it would have ended in an acquittal. So what exactly is it you want?

So you would pay $1200 for a hard drive "without hesitation"?

100% Yes for that storage space that ran at Samsung's claimed 1.6GB/s speed...

It would make a huge difference for image management where I'm often loading many 60MB TIFF files in the course of looking over processed images.

Now mind you I'd be backing that up on the cheaper "real" hard drives, but for working with that speed would be fantastic and easily worth the money in terms of saved time and frustration over the life of the drive.

The thing is, that drive will probably be more like $5k which is a much harder amount to take... probably $2k is the edge for my own use.

What's the alternative motivation besides profit? How do you get some people to do what you want without paying them?

Fear won't work. People can just decide not to be afraid. And, since doomsday predictions have always been wrong, they would be wise not to fear the end you're warning them about. Altruism won't work either.

People focus on profit/money because its a clear way to motivate others. Everything else is just salesmanship, putting a gun to someone's head, or asking "pretty please".

We need to stop charging money to our children's credit cards, start sending money to it, pay it off completely, and start putting money in savings.

Hmm, sounds like you're ignoring the advice of all the best economists - remember, saving for a rainy day is bad for the economy...we're supposed to spend every penny we make or the economy will go south....

That's not what the original article says.