No. The current status of renewable energy (geothermal, hydroelectric, wind, solar, etc.) can in no way support our current consumption habits.

Can a more widely implemented renewable energy/less-polluting energy infrastructure support a society that uses less energy? Likely. Or some of us are going to have to die to make room for the bigger consumers lest we all die.

The plan?

(1) Assume all fossil-fuel-burning energy plants will shut down in 50 years.
(2) Begin plans to install the most regionally appropriate renewable energy power plants to support those areas.
(3) Calculate the energy shortfalls and make plans to supplement with the most reasonable nuclear options (insert arguments about recycling waste, using thorium, etc.)
(4) Select a demo site, implement, learn, discuss, implement better.

First, Lego didn't design Jabba's Palace. I'm pretty sure that was under LucasArts' realm.

Second, Jabba's Palace is modeled like all the other homes on Tatooine. Except his is bigger. It's desert design influencing desert design.

Third, Jabba's not the only one smoking from a hookah like device in the movie.

Fourth, omg stop being the dumb.

Entrepreneurs achieve greater innovation because they take many risks. They fail a great deal of the time, too, so they have to know how to externalize risk or game the system so that risk is not felt as directly. "Screwed up? Write it off and try something else!"

Managers, on the other hand, are typically *in* the system with genuine and figurative audits coming from up the ladder, their employees, and their colleagues. In management, risk has less reward potential while steady (bearish) gains are better for the long-term health of one's employment. "Screwed up? Better hope your performance review isn't crapped out."

High Winds in the area: http://www.ceoe.udel.edu/windpower/ResourceMap/sse_figure28a_rev.gif
Paper on effects of high winds on U-Shaped buildings: http://nargeo.geo.uni.lodz.pl/~icuc5/text/O_18_1.pdf

This is great!

I had no idea there were schools in which 100% of the populations had access to sufficiently capable computers with broadband access! I can't wait to see how well the kids on free lunch respond to this amazing new standard!

Yes, that was sarcasm.

False Dichotomy.

You could also work to reduce the frequency at which people feel compelled to attack.

(Ego, Politics)
How concerned are you with others' perception of you and your actions?

(Self-Confidence, Protection)
How do you handle stress passed down from the higher rungs on the ladder? Do you pass it down the hierarchy or do you act to shield your employees from stress they don't genuinely need?

(Field Sgt. vs. Desk Jockey)
How important is it for a manager to be capable of replacing her/his employees in absence of the employee? Are you willing to fill-in for your employees to the best of your capability?

(Career "Management Track" vs. Genuine Leader)
What do you see as the "perks" of being a manager vs. being the managed? What are the burdens?
You have 3 employees in your division and you are told that the office is letting most people go early for the holidays. However, each division must "hold the fort" with at least one person. How do you decide who stays?

(Ethics)
Have you ever been required to compromise your integrity by a supervisor or manager? How did you feel?

(Authenticity)
What makes you uncomfortable in the work environment? (Clothing, language, discussion topics, etc.)

(Humor and Creativity)
Cake or pie? When and why?

(Confidence in Team)
On a scale of 1-10 (10 being frequent), how much do you micromanage? When would you prefer to be most involved in lower-level decision? When would you like to see your employees take charge?

Some tech actually erodes employment. There's no question about there. In fact, nearly any kind of system that decreases human input or actions has the specific INTENT of incurring savings through reduced human employment and increased process precision:

--Manufacturing automation
--Community Self-Assistance (Forums, FAQs, etc.)
--Self-driving taxi cabs
--Etc.

Some tech on the other hand creates employment need. This tech usually involved the addition of a product or service to a market.

--Cellular Telephones
--New websites that offer services in new niches
--Etc.

The problem comes when business, entrepreneurs, and economic theory suggests that the first grouping is more important than the second. With that scenario, tech has a net-negative effect on employment.

The question then arises, "What do we do when the machines are capable of doing our work?". The answer is simple, but not easy: move the general global philosophy from working for the ability to survive and progress financially to a socialistic and humanistic expectations on how one receives what s/he needs to live and how s/he spends her/his time. Yes, the "Start Trek" switch.

Unfortunately, tech advances by the day and hour while philosophy changes by the generation... and even then only slightly.

It's hard to convince yourself to stay home when you know your company is relying on something so inane as the Bradford Factor to decide if you're a lazy-ass. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_Factor)

"Wow... someone around here must be very important. Or rich."

Yes, but I wish people would just send me emails. Often, I just don't have the time to talk. If I get an email, I can respond at will or forward it off to someone else who it should have gone to in the first place.

Come on... this is Criminology 101 - Crime and criminal actions are the symptoms of anger, hopelessness, unmet expectations, and the lack of accessibility to comfort reasonable to the actor.

I was hoping someone else would type this out so I didn't have to.

I enjoyed this comment. =D

I know... it's their award, they can do what they want, but I would assume that the "car of the year" would be the best mix of:
*Affordability
*Driver/Passenger Safety
*Safety for Other Road Users
*Fuel Economy/GHG Emissions per Mile
*Sustainability of Production and Retirement
*Attractiveness to the General Public
*Real-World Availability