The only thing that runs on gasoline now are the Gators; everything else is diesel, even the pickup trucks.
The reason to push for ethanol is that corn ethanol could be a temporary bridge to cellulosic ethanol, which is much lower in GHGs. The science isn't there yet to do cellulosic at scale, but regs like the LCFS or EPA's Renewable Fuel Standard guarantee that there will be a long-term market, and make private industry more comfortable in investing in the technology.
Some times you do actually have to read the article, the article is not about making Ethanol from the sugars and starches in the grain portion of the corn plant like everybody is assuming, it's about making ethanol from the stalks, leaves and cobs normally left on the fields.
Corn stover -- the stalks, leaves and cobs in cornfields after harvest -- has been considered a ready resource for cellulosic ethanol production.
This is a bad idea because it removes organic matter from the soil and making it less fertile, more easily compacted and more prone to errotion. Fields in that condition require more fertilizer and increased tillage to maintain productivity.
Must be enough to make your head explode working at the NSA, half your people want to be able to break into any computer, the other half wanting o make it impossible to break into any computers.
So did Phill Jones at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of E. Anglica but that expectation of privacy didn't stop the character calling him/herself FOIA from releasing all the Emails that were required to be released by GB's Freedom of Information Act.
If you put random data into Mann's formulas you always get the hockey stick? Even "random noise?" Wow, where's the citation for this? And why does he need Mann's personal emails then? It seems like he could show Mann was a liar and phony pretty easily if "random noise" reproduces the results.
The citation for random noise; also note that just because the computer programming implimentation of Mann's formulas is wrong doesn't mean the Mann's formula themselves are wrong.
The GRL article, “Hockey Sticks, Principal Components and Spurious Significance”
<http://www.climate2003.com/pdfs/2004GL012750.pdf> identifies what is almost certainly a computer programming error in the principal components method used in MBH98. The error causes their PC method to nearly always identify hockey
stick shaped series as the “dominant pattern” in a data set (the so-called “first Principal Component” or PC1), even
when the data are just random numbers. We carried out 10,000 simulations in which we fed “red noise”, a form of trendless random numbers, into the MBH98 algorithm . In over 99% of the cases it produced hockey stick shaped PC1
Steyn said Mann's "hockey stick" graph was fraudulent, which the above citation appears to support, Mann is suing Steyn for defamation claiming that Steyn called Mann the person a fraud, which is sufficent to allow Steyn pretty wide berth durring the discovery phase to look into Mann's professional conduct and correspondance to deduce past behaviours as part of Steyn's defense. Additionally Steyn is a journalists, and Mann is by most common standards a public figure so the rules governing libel and slander are different then for most of us peons living in anonymity.
The problem wasn't that the results weren't reproducible from the data, the problem was any data reproduced the results; even random noise reproduced the results.
Do you want all your email and documents published to the public? If not, what do you have to hide?
If your a public servant sending and receiving Emails via a publicly owned servers, while on publicly paid for time, you had better be prepared for the eventuality that everything will be made public. Sooner or later these Emails will be leaked, all it takes is one FOIA, Manning or Snowden and all your secrets are public!
Your assuming that heartbleed was a bug and not an undocumented feature requested by a Governmental sponsor, even unwashed libertarian programing hippies have to eat.
I reverse-engineered the old Microsoft assembler for CP/M to give it an advanced feature it lacked and did it strictly on my own time and for my own private benefit (pre-DMCA).
Disassembling something like SSL is several orders of magnitude more involved than an assembler for CP/M, but I'll give you extra points if you remember what run #400 did.
When windows 95 upgrade came out and I migrated from windows 3.1, all went well because file-manager was still there from win3.1, then I got my first machine with win95 only and it took me two days to figure out what the start menu was.
It was a catch-22 situation, philosophically Democrats hate the Industrial-Millitary complex, and philosophically Democrats, (like most Americans) support the troops. It's pretty hard to hurt the Industrial-Millitary complex without hurting the troops, yet NASA is a pretty good suragate for the Industrial-Millitary complex as a lot of the subcontractors are the same and no troops to worry about. Of course I'm probably giving too much credit and they really were that stupid.
but the study used “multi-proxy climate reconstructions” and a lot other fancy sounding phrases.
The US really does go batshit crazy when somebody attacks us, especially when the attack is on civilians; I think something on the order of 1 or 2 thousand jihadists have been killed in Iraq and Afganistan for every casualty in 9/11. Sooner or later people will figure that messing with the US is just like kicking a hornet's nest.
I could have signed up for a plan that paid 60/40 after a $10K deductable and actually gotten $2400.00 of the subsidy back at income tax time! That would have been a benefit, just not a healthcare benefit.