08-15

53 ms·

481.
by 08-15 10y ago
> these are more facts the article relays So it's a bad article, aka a political fluff piece. I got that message from reading it. But what are these facts?
482.
by 08-15 10y ago
1) Conclusion from a well supported theory (not a fact, but pretty darn close). It's only an approximation, though: what's the albedo of a heterogenous body and doesn't it depend on temperature? 2, 3) Simple conclusions f
483.
by 08-15 10y ago
Bullshit. Science deals with facts and theories. Look: Fact: "I measured the CO2 content in a sample of air, and it was 400ppm." (I didn't actually measure. Bear with me.) Fact: "50 year old textbooks list the cont
484.
by 08-15 10y ago
Come on! All people who got their womb removed in the 1920s and 30s are dead now. They don't affect any statistics anymore, especially not those concerning women who had their womb removed by the age of 55. I agree with GP, a rate of
485.
by 08-15 10y ago
What's compared is usually the "homologous regions". That means literally "similar because of common descent", but in practice, it means "similar enough that we think it's homologous". Since parts o
486.
by 08-15 10y ago
> In this election, dark posts were used to try to suppress the African-American vote. According to Bloomberg, the Trump campaign sent ads... Really? Sending ads is suppressing the vote of certain people? Like the soviet union suppress
487.
by 08-15 10y ago
"Number of characters gives little information about the complexity of a program. Functions is a better metric." When the human genome was sequences (it was a ten year project), lots of pseudo-philosophers predicted the number of
488.
by 08-15 10y ago
1. Depends on the technology. On Illumina (cheapest tech and highest throughput), you get the first and last 125 bases of smallish DNA molecules with an acceptable error rate. Pacific Biosciences (lower throughput and more expensive) giv
489.
by 08-15 10y ago
> "sequenced a genome" — what does that mean, exactly? It means we got the sequence of As, Cs, Gs and Ts; but in practice, we don't even achieve that. The human genome has approximately 3 billion nucleotides in 23 chromoso
490.
by 08-15 10y ago
> They are faster and way more efficient Either or. Combined cycle ("GuD") is more efficient than coal, simple cycle responds faster. But you'll never guess what responds the fastest---it's the large nuclear plants
491.
by 08-15 10y ago
The article itself cites the Guardian, who cites the European Environmental Agency, who cites REVIHAAP, which is only a review. REVIHAAP ( http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/193108/R
492.
by 08-15 10y ago
Actually, the (East-) German plant in Lubmin provided district heating for the city of Greifswald. It has been shut down and the district heating is now provided by---wait for it---a gas burner. NPP Gundremmingen, which is still operating
493.
by 08-15 10y ago
> Schroeder The guy known as Gazprom Gerhardt, who coincidentally decided to phase out nuclear power? Yeah, sad story.
494.
by 08-15 10y ago
> compare for example a gas boiler in a house vs a CCGT in a powerplant One makes hot water (~100% efficiency based on LHV), the other makes electricity (~50% effciency). What's your point?
495.
by 08-15 10y ago
> Nitrogen oxides cause tens of thousands of early deaths in Europe Complete bullshit. There isn't a single death certificate in the world that lists "NOx poisoning" as cause of death, unless it was an industrial accident
496.
by 08-15 10y ago
The lead-acid battery in my car holds 660Wh (12V, 55Ah) and costs less than $100. That puts lead acid at a quarter the price of the Tesla powerwall (admittedly without an inverter).
497.
by 08-15 10y ago
If power-to-gas means methane, it's bullshit. You'd need a source of carbon dioxide, and despite all the hype, it's only a trace gas in the atmosphere. (Personally, I think power-to-gas is a propaganda piece invented to lin
498.
by 08-15 10y ago
So you would become a professional reviewer. Sounds like a reasonable career choice to me.
499.
by 08-15 10y ago
I'm sure no commercial publisher will agree. But there is still a difference between "I will not review because I don't feel like it" and "I will not review unless I get paid for it". They send different mess
500.
by 08-15 10y ago
Don't review for free. Seriously. Every time you review for a journal and don't ask for a reasonable (say, $150/h) fee, you are enabling their predatory practices. Stop doing it. Come to think about it, why not copy their p
501.
by 08-15 10y ago
Oh dear, you're completely right. Beer and orders of magnitude don't seem to mix. :-/
502.
by 08-15 10y ago
> How close is 1500GW solar generation from 5e9 MWh [per year]? Almost six orders of magnitude too low. 1GW nameplate capacity is about 100MW actual generation, so 1500GW[nameplate] x 8600h = 13GWh = 13000 MWh, comparable to 5e3MWh in ro
503.
by 08-15 10y ago
Are you suggesting the solution is a Sacred Engine running on... uhhh... magic and small children, I guess? (I get it, you're implying that the release of some "cooling compound" might cause an ice age. I'm just not con
504.
by 08-15 10y ago
Does not work, as far as anyone can see. However, assume it did. Then ocean acidification is still a first world problem. If you're the government of a developing country (India, China, Brazil, ...) where most people don't even
505.
by 08-15 10y ago
Huh? What's anything I wrote got to do with Marx? I see collectives constantly failing to deliver everywhere. Yes, that includes every single socialist country that ever existed (they were not stable), but also many current capitali
506.
by 08-15 10y ago
All right, we had an ecological crisis in the 19th century, and the collectivist attempt to fix it (i.e. state intervention) gave us wars, inhuman labor conditions, another ecological crisis at the other side of the world, and no solution
507.
by 08-15 10y ago
> Electric cars are an order of magnitude more efficient than ICE cars. Citation needed. (I don't think more than a factor of 3 is possible, in ideal circumstances.)
508.
by 08-15 10y ago
This article asks the wrong question. And answers an unrelated one. First off, the question subtly implies that nuclear power should be the last resort. That's already setting the stage for a slanted discussion. The correct questio
509.
by 08-15 10y ago
> Does Thorium eliminate this risk? sigh (I hear this too often.) No, it doesn't. Thorium in conventional, solid fuel reactors is useless. Also, conventional, solid fuel reactors are a relatively dumb idea. We need better react
510.
by 08-15 10y ago
> The tax payer in Germany is picking up most of the... cleanup. Indeed, because it's cleanup of political, not nuclear fallout. Energy policy is Germany has always been a political issue. The government decides what gets done, who

More ›