Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Summary fail (Score 1) 26

Here's how you do it:

Highlight a term that you want to look up, such as "Kelvin's Predictor". Right-click, and select "search google" from the popup menu. A new tab will open up, and google will present various hits. Wikipedia entries are typically at the top of the list and often gives and adequate explanation of the term. If not, a review of all the hits and what the links point to gives an idea of what the term is. Total time spent to find the information should be under 5 seconds, longer if there is no wiki page.

Anyways, it appears, from the wiki anyways, that they don't actually use the term "Kelvin's Predictor", as you mentioned. I'm somewhat amazed that google was able to find it. Nevertheless, I was informed and read up a bit about something I didn't know, so kudos to all.

Comment Re:Not the total cost! (Score 1) 405

"if you want to rely entirely on wind power" - i don't think anyone is suggesting "only relying" on any single form of power generation...

Yeah, I noticed that too. I looked all over the place for any poster that seriously claimed "we can rely entirely on wind power". Couldn't find it.

So I guess we'll just have to huff, and puff, and blow that strawman down.

Comment Re:Show us the data (Score 3, Insightful) 405

Liberals always use that word: externality.
It's as if life is so complex they have no evidence for any of their conclusions but we are to believe through faith that they are right.

Your second sentence does not seem to follow the first.

It's been estimated if the US were to power everything with wind it would cost somewhere around 100 TRILLION dollars.
This is serious Dr. Evil bullshit. Thanks to the Dems we continue to pour our tax dollars down the drain of liberalism.

Strawman with a side-helping of a ad-hominem non-sequitor.

While the thought of wind power is wonderful.
But reality shows it's not cost effective nor reliable.

What about this reality?

"Wind power is now the cheapest electricity to produce in both Germany and the U.K., even without government subsidies, according to a new analysis by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF). Still, it's remarkable that in every major region of the world, the lifetime cost of new coal and gas projects6 are rising considerably in the second half of 2015, according to BNEF. And in every major region the cost of renewables continues to fall."

Comment Re:Show us the data (Score 1) 405

When the wind stops you use a natural gas power plant. Duh. DUH!

Well, but then you have to add the cost of the gas power plant to the cost of the wind power plant in order to calculate the actual cost of wind power.

So, GPP + WPP = WPP?

The way my municipality does it, is that they add the costs of different sources together to get the total cost of power. Wind, fossil, solar, hydro, thermal...all get added together. They calculate the total power needed, then select from different sources to provide that power. They've done it in a way that balances perceived benefits with costs.

"Falling in love makes smoking pot all day look like the ultimate in restraint." -- Dave Sim, author of Cerebrus.