Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Flywheel spin and political spin (Score 1) 218

by clovis (#47803791) Attached to: Power Grids: The Huge Battery Market You Never Knew Existed

bugnuts said:

Some unscrupulous legislators are trying to saddle solar generators with the cost of those who choose not to use solar.

and then AC said:

You're so wrong, you couldn't even write for Fox News.

So, AC, are you saying that you think there are no unscrupulous legislators? Or are you saying that there are no legislators involved in saddling solar generators with other costs? Or is it that you have no understandin of what you're responding to so you just throw up a cute phrase?

Comment: Re:For a country so good at engineering... (Score 2) 195

by clovis (#47803747) Attached to: Radioactive Wild Boars Still Roaming the Forests of Germany

Why do I get this funny feeling that the "178 TWh/year" figure is from the rated capacity factors and not the actual production?
Because you are an idiot? But for all idiots the old saying is true: is your friend.

I must be one of the idiots because I cannot find your 178 TWh/yr production either.
However, I can get close to that. Looking here:
I see this:
"The first half of 2014 was marked by mild temperatures and high electricity production from wind and
solar energy. Solar power plants have increased their production compared to the first half of 2013 by
28%, while wind power grew about 19%. In June solar systems have produced twice as much electricity
as wind turbines. In the first half of the year solar and wind power plants together produced more than
45 TWh or approximately 17% of the net electricity generation. The renewable energy sources solar,
wind, hydro and biomass produced a total of about 81 TWh and accounted for approximately 31% of
the net electricity production. The renewable share of the gross electricity production including the
industrial power plants is approx. 28%."

That's the first half of 2014, so twice that is 162 TWh.

However, tis statement of yours is wrong "Germany can now meet demand without any nuclear and without additional gas imports."
They can't do that this year or the next.

By way of comparision, in the USA during 2013, we produced 522 TWh with renewables

ooo, look, I included links for my assertions instead of just pulling numbers out of my hat.

So again, we ask: where did you get your number of 178 TWh?

Comment: Re:Raptor? (Score 3, Informative) 107

by clovis (#47740553) Attached to: Air Force Requests Info For Replacement Atlas 5 Engine

You know that the bureaucrats eventually "won" in Rome, right?

Rome collapsed under the weight of its complacent, entrenched bureaucracy. After Marcus Aurelius, every subsequent Caesar had less ability to change the trajectory of the Empire thanks to the political realities imposed by the bureaucracy. They had to act within the constraints of the previously established bureaucracies. Did you know that eventually Roman bureaucrats granted themselves military ranks? Bureaucrats also chose the last of the Western Emperors.

Bureaucracy is a cancer.

Attributing the fall of the Roman empire to a single cause is just plain wrong.

Comment: Huffpost loses misleading tagline championship! (Score 2) 159

by clovis (#47723791) Attached to: Microsoft Lobby Denies the State of Chile Access To Free Software

This just out: Slashdot publishes an article with the title "Microsoft Lobby Denies the State of Chile Access to Free Software".
Anyone reading the article sees that no such thing has happened.
Huffpost slides into second place for misleading tagline, but still retains "sideboob" title.

Comment: Picasso and Braque influenced Klimt (Score 1) 74

From the article:
"They've developed an algorithm that has used these classifications to find many well known influences between artists, such as the well known influence of Pablo Picasso and George Braque on the Austrian symbolist painter Gustav Klimt, ..."

I never heard that before. In what way did Picasso and Braque influence Klimt's art?

Comment: delete fntcache.dat fixed some people (Score 1) 304

It appears that booting into recovery, or using a standalone Linux distro, and deleting C:\windows\system32\fntcache.dat solved the problem for some people, if not all of the ones who tried it.
There are other problems with the patches regarding fonts, but at least you'll be able to boot.

Comment: Re:Translated into English (Score 3, Insightful) 306

and furthermore this from the article:

Under the typical business model for the solar industry, homeowners sign lease agreements with installation companies. The homeowners pay the cost of the panels over time and sell any excess power the systems generate. ...
States where solar thrives typically pay homeowners attractive rates for the excess power they generate and require utilities to get a considerable share of their power from renewable sources. That gives companies an incentive to promote use of solar.

What this is about is that the local utilities are FORCED to purchase the solar panel's excess generation whether they need it or not. At retail rates the utilities are forced to pay are in excess of what it costs the utility to generate and distribute power.

Usual Wiki link, usual caveat,
scroll down to see a list of states and see which states have retail pricing net metering.

How long would Kroger stay in business if it bought apples orchards sold apples to Kroger for 50 cents and Kroger then sold them in stores for 75 cents, but the state passed a law requiring Kroger to pay 75 cents to any individual who brought apples into the store? It sounds like it would be a wash, except that Kroger's cost
for the apples isn't actually 50 cents. Kroger has to buy land, pay taxes and utilities, transport the apples and so on.
The solar power buy-back prices vary wildly across the US, In some states net-metering is the retail price like in the kroger analogy, and in others it is the wholesale price

I can't think of any other industry besides solar whose business model requires laws to require a business (utilities) to purchase their own product from the customers at retail prices whenever the customer feels like having a surplus.

Comment: Re:First problem is calling it Aaron's Law (Score 1) 134

by clovis (#47615197) Attached to: Aaron's Law Is Doomed and the CFAA Is Still Broken

Yes. Its a shame that a small child didn't go on line, steal some copyrighted material and then was driven to suicide by the shame brought down upon the family for harboring such a terrorist.

Then we could have named it the "Just think of the children law" and it would have passed easily.

Sadly, I have to agree with you, but am adding the stipulation that the child be from an upper middle class white family. Optimally, it would be a blonde girl who also fell into a well, but that may be asking too much.

Comment: First problem is calling it Aaron's Law (Score 2) 134

by clovis (#47614907) Attached to: Aaron's Law Is Doomed and the CFAA Is Still Broken

Associating the act with Aaron Swartz such as calling it Aaron's Law is a huge mistake because any congressman that votes for it will have to consider how his opponents would use that against him in the next election. Keep in mind that the people who fund election campaigns are the kind that would look upon Aaron as a simple thief and menace.

The CFAA certainly needs to be fixed, but a better way would be to not mention Aaron Swartz and rather call it something like "CFAA Modernization Act"

Comment: Re:No (Score 1) 190

In a rigged election, it will be that small difference. Close elections are the ones that get rigged.

True - it varies from state to state. In general it's either recanvass (re-run the machine count) or recount (count by hand)

O.C.G.A. 21-2-493
O.C.G.A. 21-2-495

Here's what it looks like to me if there's a problem or close (1%) election
If it's paper ballots, then recounts are done with representatives of affected candidates present. The ballots are read aloud in front of the candidates (and other poll officials) representatives and counted.

In Georgia, if machines are used, you get a re-canvass. Georgia's machines do not have a paper audit of each vote, only paper total generated by the machine, so the law basically says if something went wrong, assume it was the machine and try to figure out what happened. If you can't figure it out, then that's too bad and we'll just go with what you got. If you do find the problem, then that's too bad and change the numbers to match the paper total.

See the difference? See the problem with machine-based voting?

Testing can show the presense of bugs, but not their absence. -- Dijkstra