Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re: Watt is this article about? (Score 1) 278

by Paleolibertarian (#49452259) Attached to: The Myth of Going Off the Power Grid

OK. SO lets say I actually average 35 kwh/day on an annual basis. I generate 70 kwh/day with PV and other passive means. I store about half that. Hopefully I can use less during the night than during the hot days in summer. If I store thermal radiation with a heat sink it will help heat during winter.

All of this is dependent on the local climate but I believe it is doable. All of the comments so far have said it isn't doable, to be off grid, that is. Plainly the collectivists on this forum are more numerous than the individualists but the politics doesn't alter the science. It all numbers and up to the initiative and ingenuity of the engineer.

I am an engineer and I believe in real things. Not your collectivist defeatist paradigm but one of hope with a "can-do" attitude.

If the Egyptians can build a pyramid and the Romans can build roads and aqueducts without an electrical power grid I think I can build an off-grid power system that will satisfy my families needs.

"Always listen to experts. They’ll tell you what can’t be done and why. Then do it!" - Lazarus Long

Comment: Re:Watt is this article about? (Score 1) 278

by Paleolibertarian (#49450979) Attached to: The Myth of Going Off the Power Grid

In what way is my math wrong?

In what way is the idea wrong?

If the storage efficiency is wrong (which it isn't) then I just add more solar panels or reduce my energy consumption.

Before you challenge an engineering concept you need to provide some proof. BTW this system works and many systems are now in use. You haven't shown how this is a bad idea.

Again if it can't be expressed in numbers it is not science.

Comment: Re:Watt is this article about? (Score 4, Informative) 278

by Paleolibertarian (#49450475) Attached to: The Myth of Going Off the Power Grid

What I was trying to show is that in order to solve an engineering problem you have to have sound engineering principles. If you're talking about energy you use words like "watt" and numbers like Kilowatt Hours and maybe even joules and other terms that the author is probably unfamiliar with.

For example, If I equip my home with 5,000 watts (peak) solar panels that generate 35 kwh of energy. 15 kwh which I use immediately that leaves 20 kwh excess which I can store. If my storage system is 75% efficient I can then use another 15 kwh at night which will make me capable of being off grid. What's wrong with that?

Comment: Watt is this article about? (Score 4, Insightful) 278

by Paleolibertarian (#49450205) Attached to: The Myth of Going Off the Power Grid

This seems to be an article more about condemning Tesla's batteries that about energy. In fact the word "watt" appears nowhere. Before you can have a discussion about energy you need to be armed with some facts about actual energy needs and potentials. This is just more anti-Tesla propaganda.

Comment: Re:Heisenberg compensator ... (Score 1) 83

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. - Arthur C. Clarke

The fact that a person feels a phenomenon is beyond his comprehension doesn't alter the reality of the phenomenon. I know people who believe that Einstein's special theory of relativity is flawed. I have heard of others who believe rockets cannot fly in a vacuum because there is nothing for the rocket to push against. Still others insist that, "If men were meant to fly, God would have given them wings."

What was my point? I forgot.

+ - When Snowden speaks, future lawyers (and judges) listen->

Submitted by TheRealHocusLocus
TheRealHocusLocus (2319802) writes "We are witness to an historic 'first': an individual charged with espionage and actively sought by the United States government has been (virtually) invited to speak at Harvard Law School, with applause. HLS Professor Lawrence Lessig conducted the hour-long interview last Monday with a list of questions by himself and his students.

Some interesting jumps are Snowden's assertion that mass domestic intercept is an 'unreasonable seizure' under the 4th Amendment, it also violates 'natural rights' that cannot be voted away even by the majority, a claim that broad surveillance detracts from the ability to monitor specific targets such as the Boston Marathon bombers, calls out Congress for not holding Clapper accountable for misstatements, and laments that contractors are exempt from whistleblower protection though they do swear an oath to defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. These points have been brought up before. But what may be most interesting to these students is Snowden's suggestion that a defendant under the Espionage act be permitted to present an argument before a jury that the act was committed "in the public interest". Could this pure-judicial move help ensure a fair trial for whistleblowers whose testimony reveals Constitutional violation?

Professor Lessig wraps up the interview by asking Snowden, Hoodies or Suits? “Hoodies all the way. I hope in the next generation we don't even have suits anymore, they're just gone forever.”"

Link to Original Source

"Now this is a totally brain damaged algorithm. Gag me with a smurfette." -- P. Buhr, Computer Science 354