LinuxQuestions.org
Did you know LQ has a Linux Hardware Compatibility List?
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 02-28-2013, 10:42 AM   #46
DavidMcCann
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Salix
Posts: 3,030

Rep: Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779

Quote:
Originally Posted by jefro View Post
Again, humans will find some way to waste the resource.
The only green way is to not use energy and products.
This is really the point. The world's largest consumer of energy is the USA, with 301GJ per capita per annum. By comparison, Germans use 168 and Japanese 164.
 
Old 02-28-2013, 11:10 AM   #47
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: infinity; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth
Distribution: any UNIXish that works well on my cheapest with mostly KDE, Xfce, JWM or CLI but open ;-)
Posts: 1,345
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 349Reputation: 349Reputation: 349Reputation: 349
Rich Dad, Poor Dad (particularly demonizing) and Art of War (we are our own worse enemy(animal I.e.))—(books) it's all how YOU\nowWE look at it; the US is no worse than anyone, human!

When you start looking at entire "countries", statistically, it's as bad as saying lets let corporations act as people. And, don't you have anti monopoly laws in London?

"Only three kinds of lies...
—Not originally Mark Twain by the way, humans.

Last edited by jamison20000e; 03-01-2013 at 10:50 PM.
 
Old 02-28-2013, 12:14 PM   #48
273
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 3,354

Rep: Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773
Quote:
Originally Posted by moxieman99 View Post
Uh, no, expense isn't "another argument entirely." EVERYTHING comes down to expense. The expense of lives lost or damaged from one form of power source or another. The expense of not having enough power. The expense of construction, operation, and demolition. The expense, in the case of nuclear, of having to build something that will last for millions of years (which we have never done) to hold the waste until it ceases to have dangerous levels of radioactivity.

And the expense, in the case of nuclear, of us getting our sums wrong and having all this radioactive waste for hundreds of thousands or millions of years.

Remember, we can't externalize costs. Therefore, the cost of nuclear waste storage must be factored in.
Yes, expense is another argument entirely. I was addressing arguments about the horrors and extreme dangers nuclear power has caused like these:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xeratul
Mass loves Nuclear, but it will kill us all
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xeratul View Post
I would also mention that if you play with fire you will burn you some day or another.

Btw, a way to categorize of a nuclear incident is to count a number of person that have been killed/injured/... Wow. Where are human rights to allow such evaluation?
If you want to talk economics, that's a different issue.
If nuclear power were given unlimited monetary budget it could, like any other technology, be made 99.99% safe. Should nuclear power be more regulated, should it cost more, ought legislation be tightened? Perhaps on all, but that's not the same as saying that nuclear power is bad because it's dangerous.
We need, of course, to use less power and we ought to be making existing plants more efficient and cleaner but that does not mean there is no place for nuclear power.
As for renewables, we get about two weeks of summer a year in the UK and go for weeks without suitable wind for wind farms so we'd be a bit stuffed relying upon them alone. They're good to have some of, of course, and things like local storage can be used but there's no way a country like this could rely upon renewables only.

Last edited by 273; 02-28-2013 at 12:16 PM.
 
Old 02-28-2013, 09:36 PM   #49
rigor
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Posts: 128

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMcCann View Post
OMG, another climate change denier! I studied this at university (which I doubt you did) and I've kept abreast of it. The mechanisms of climate change are reasonably well understood. Given the landmasses in the right place, there will be glaciation such as we have now. Its ebb and flow is controlled by astronomical changes (Milankovitch cycles), which have been studied for a century now. It shouldn't be getting this much warmer this quickly: the climate should be static and then cooling.

If you take the trouble to check the deniers with scientific qualifications (listed on Wikipedia), you can eliminate the non-climatologists (they know no more than you) and the retired (out of the loop, going gaga); you're left with about half a dozen: like the doctors who deny that HIV causes aids.
W.R.T. Wikipedia, it can be a wonderful source of information, indeed I checked my recollection on the time frame of the last Ice Age in Illinois via Wikipedia, before I commented on that Ice Age. BUT, it is contributed information, which in general principle, anyone can edit at any time. If no one else had created a page that describes the color Red, instead of what the color Red actually is, I could provide a description of the color Blue, and perhaps even provide a photograph of something colored Blue, and claim that is Red. Yes, there is a vetting process which can take place after a page is initially created, or later edited, but you need to double check the state of the page, and any references, before trusting what is on a page.

Indeed I did not specialize in Climatology when I attended University. Although some Climatology was included in the general study of Science.
But as I was on the path to becoming a Physicist, I did extensively study Scientific Method in general, Experimental Technique, etc., etc., and spent years studying Formalized Principles of Logical Thought.

So:

1) I've been trained to evaluate the accuracy with which Science and Logic are applied to an endeavor.
2) I'm well aware that we go through different Scientific Epochs/Eras when many people believe something, that is eventually shown, at the very least, to be not entirely true.
3) I realize that during each period of Scientific belief, ideas that differ from those commonly accepted, aren't necessarily well received.
4) I'm aware that it can be very difficult to be absolutely sure of any ideas derived/reverse-engineered from Fossils, Soil Strata, etc., in an effort to determine the history of any aspect of the Earth, including Climatology.
5) I realize that subjects such as the one we are discussing, tend to bring out a lot of emotionally charged Argument, as opposed to Careful, Logical, Scientific, Debate.

Perhaps we can find some less impassioned common ground?

Two different scenarios, concerning a company that manufactures medications:

1) They found a potential cure for Cancer.
2) They came up with something that helps people with the so called Common Cold, feel a little bit better while they have a Cold.

In scenario 1, it would be easy, to want a quick path to market for the cure for Cancer, yes? After all, it would save many lives.
In scenario 2, although it would be nice to feel a little better during a Cold, the reasons for wanting to get the medication to market, wouldn't be anywhere near as strong as in scenario 1, is that true?

The strong reasons behind wanting the medication to be quickly available in scenario 1 would be Humanitarian, Emotional, and Financial, right?
But the strongest reason behind wanting the medication to be quickly available in scenario 2 would be Financial, the Manufacturer would make money, would you agree?

A manufacturer of medications might usually take months, or a year or two, to do Clinical trials with a medication, to try to make sure that are no serious side effects. But strictly speaking, nothing physically prevents them from taking 10 years, or 20 years to do Clinical trials, so they have actual experience with long term usage, to much better rule out bad side affects from long term use.

Plenty of people would be strongly pushing for the medication in scenario 1; there would be intense pressure from outside the manufacturer to get the drug to people.
But even though there probably wouldn't be intense external pressure in scenario 2, how many manufacturers would wait 10 or 20 years to get the drug to market? They wouldn't, because they'd lose money.

My feeling is that so much comes down to money.

In the US, there are "Smoke Stacks" from Businesses which produce "pollutants", into which "scrubbers" have been installed, that eliminate, or reduce, the pollutants. The scrubbers cost money. Using them reduces the "profit margin" for a business. How many businesses installed them, without being required to install them?

The information about the "production of rare earth based materials" in China talks about the idea that it wasn't known ( at least by some people ) that the result would be pollution. But if money had not been involved, would more time have been taken to try to determine the long term effects? Now that it is much more widely known that the pollution does occur, is there a countermeasure which can be created to limit, prevent or reduce, future pollution? Would the business rush to install it, since it costs money and will reduce profit?

Considering how long it can take for a Country which is home to many many people, just to complete a Census of its population, I suspect it may be fair to say that it's rather difficult to know the exact state of the entire Earth, at any given moment, to use that state information to formulate sweeping conclusions about the entire Earth.

So I can't say that I know, but when I hear of plenty of surplus of some resource in one area, and a tremendous lack of the same resource in another part of the World, then if I do a little math regarding the supposed populations in different parts of the World, often it seems as if there might well be enough of that resource in the World, to meet everyone's basic Human need for that sort of thing. So I suspect that if we could somehow effectively rise above money, things could be much more consistently Humane.

I certainly hope we don't have to abandon all Technology as some people have suggested might be necessary, go back to being Farmers, etc., and do everything manually, to avoid pollution. I hope that having seen plenty of invention in the World, including things like those scrubbers to reduce air pollution from smoke stacks, that we can choose to keep Humanity in anything which affects Humans, can choose to be sufficiently responsible, and manage to be sufficiently inventive, to find solutions to keep technology, and eliminate pollution. { Maybe in part, based on Graphene, or things like it? }

Last edited by rigor; 02-28-2013 at 09:40 PM.
 
Old 03-01-2013, 11:18 AM   #50
DavidMcCann
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Salix
Posts: 3,030

Rep: Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by rigor View Post
3) I realize that during each period of Scientific belief, ideas that differ from those commonly accepted, aren't necessarily well received.
4) I'm aware that it can be very difficult to be absolutely sure of any ideas derived/reverse-engineered from Fossils, Soil Strata, etc., in an effort to determine the history of any aspect of the Earth, including Climatology.
5) I realize that subjects such as the one we are discussing, tend to bring out a lot of emotionally charged Argument, as opposed to Careful, Logical, Scientific, Debate.
A lot of the problem is when (4) is exploited in the interests of (5). The scientist says (correctly) "Of course, we can't be certain" and the man with the vested interest says "There you are, it's not certain!" If one hears the sort of thing said by climate-change deniers it's seldom careful or logical; often more like the stuff said by evolution deniers (often the same people). And when it's said by those who aspire to high political office (almost always in the USA), the rest of us are going to get heated!

Your medical references bring one round to another point: the precautionary principle. To be allowed to claim that the new drug "works" one need to make a prima facie case, but to claim that it's safe enough to use one needs a lot more evidence. If it turned out that artificial climate change was not happening, we'd have wasted a lot of money. But if it gave the worst case results, the human consequences will be far, far worse.
 
Old 03-01-2013, 02:45 PM   #51
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: infinity; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth
Distribution: any UNIXish that works well on my cheapest with mostly KDE, Xfce, JWM or CLI but open ;-)
Posts: 1,345
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 349Reputation: 349Reputation: 349Reputation: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMcCann
bla bla (and there's good blaS in there, the irony is I'm human too) bla USA
Sounds like jealousy* when you do that. Are you using the "sources" that can help F-S-up as well I.e. "the media"? Must love soap-operas and drama too, hu?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jefro View Post
Again, humans will find some way to waste the resource.
The more average folks have, the more they waste (on Earth (not that we shouldn't have equally +education)!). So Nuclear? No. ("ideas" E.g. +Moores law again). But the bigger problem is $tupidity and $ex!

Who claim they can't use green technology are misinformed. Or, work for* the system one way or another?

Last edited by jamison20000e; 03-04-2013 at 04:09 PM. Reason: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/where-can-i-buy-american-made-components-697342/page2.html#post4893418
 
Old 03-02-2013, 11:15 AM   #52
DavidMcCann
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Salix
Posts: 3,030

Rep: Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamison20000e View Post
Sounds like jealousy* when you do that.
Jealousy of what or whom? I find most of your posts need translating: what pills are you popping?

As far as US politicians are concerned, Mitt Romney said the earth was warming but no-one knew why and Paul Ryan called claims of global warming a "conspiracy". At least they both believed in evolution, so I suppose the GOP is slowly advancing towards the 19th century.
 
Old 03-02-2013, 03:06 PM   #53
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: infinity; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth
Distribution: any UNIXish that works well on my cheapest with mostly KDE, Xfce, JWM or CLI but open ;-)
Posts: 1,345
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 349Reputation: 349Reputation: 349Reputation: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMcCann View Post
Jealous of what or whom?
(fixed that for u) Stereotypes? They make you look brilliant by the way. So what you poppin' or are you just a hater?

Translating? Not a smooth move when you can just ask derr... Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan yep too many like drama. How-about you learn to relax a little type A?

Last edited by jamison20000e; 03-02-2013 at 11:22 PM.
 
Old 03-02-2013, 03:43 PM   #54
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 13 , Various Puppys (MacPup,Slack0),MX-14
Posts: 2,577
Blog Entries: 16

Rep: Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827
Well, just reading through this thread.

I live in a area where my computer is powered by wind but further out in the desert you can find nuclear dump storage sites.

I did not read about any of the I like nuclear posts saying, "Yeah, put a dump site in my country or back yard. We could use the money."

I am also surprised for people surrounded by large masses of water and tides mentioning solar and wind energy. I guess they just don't know about that option.

Oh well, I get spectacular sunsets and tomorrow is 80F so I guess I'll jump on my scooter that killed I don't know who
over making it.
 
Old 03-02-2013, 03:54 PM   #55
273
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 3,354

Rep: Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773
Sure, if you want to kill fish you can use tidal power (sorry, I am joking a little):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_p...l_power_issues
As I understand it there are no current tidal plants which are efficient and safe enough to be deployed widely.
I mentioned wind and solar because they're the ones (mainly wind) being pushed here despite the fact that solar here is obviously going to have problems and wind only works with just the right wind speed which we get less often than is practical.
Of course, wind power in the UK is just a scam used by power companies to extract money from government but that's another story entirely.
As for nuclear waste storage, personally I'd not have a problem living near a site used to store it though I know others would feel differently. As it happens I was considering moving to a place near a nuclear power plant also.

It's your computer and mobile phone which use materials that people die for regularly, by the way. Though at least they have a use unlike diamonds which people die for so others can boast.

Last edited by 273; 03-02-2013 at 03:58 PM.
 
Old 03-02-2013, 05:47 PM   #56
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 13 , Various Puppys (MacPup,Slack0),MX-14
Posts: 2,577
Blog Entries: 16

Rep: Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827Reputation: 827
Quote:
As I understand it there are no current tidal plants which are efficient and safe enough to be deployed widely.
Kinda true ,I'll get to that at the end of the post. I guess like, I don't remember who mentioned in this thread, about using unlimited
funds to deploy a solution for atomic. If the same was done with Tidal energy. You might end up with something like this

Maybe trash can be used also

Quote:
There have been one or two successes. Mr Thomas picks out Premier New Earth Solutions Recycling Facilities, an offshore mutual fund from Premier Group, which has grown 41 per cent over the past three years. This fund is about as specialist as it gets. "It focuses on efficient disposal of waste through recycling, efficient incineration and power generation. It has performed well and the story is a powerful one." - See more at: http://www.thenational.ae/lifestyle/...n-payoff#page2


Like I promised
these guys will be doing wave,solar,trash,and what ever else
if they can see past the smog they are generating lately.

Me, I have blue skys and miles if viewable landscape.

I lived in the big city once or twice. Did not like it one bit.

Edit: Oh yeah, I'll be riding on a road made out of ground up old tires (it is recyclable asphalt).

Last edited by rokytnji; 03-02-2013 at 05:49 PM.
 
Old 03-02-2013, 05:54 PM   #57
273
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 3,354

Rep: Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773Reputation: 773
So, perhaps, tidal is in a similar position to nuclear -- though that makes one wonder why nuclear is used more if they're as difficult to use. I suppose it could be down to the fact that cutting corners in nuclear still leads to power generation but without figures it's tough to tell.
 
Old 03-02-2013, 10:07 PM   #58
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: infinity; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth
Distribution: any UNIXish that works well on my cheapest with mostly KDE, Xfce, JWM or CLI but open ;-)
Posts: 1,345
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 349Reputation: 349Reputation: 349Reputation: 349
Cool

My Raspberry Pi computer runs 5.5 hours (with heavy CPU load (1Ghz overclock to one away from—the danger zone) +pinging Wifi\N) on a 12-volt\12V system (Belkin $10 at a thrift store saved me the $80 I was looking at (newer gel G.e. (obviously not 80)) and has the charger (persistence))-(hooked up to a 12V DC / AC converter) plus, so far, only one Coleman 12V\2-watt trickle charging solar panel (designed for campers, cars and boats; approximately 15"x4) all great for a backpack or wherever (small screens for my hat, I'm still working on hanging system to suspend the see through mirror so I will have a steady transparent display\((beam splitter))(\physical screen (1.5") is hats logo plus another mirror above the transparent display (floating like a rearview mirror (under and at the end of the visor) but as see thorough computer monitor)... ++

Treadmill\* changers? lol

I think the "fact" is some don't want us to have $ecret$ that can be trickled out; if we change the power\*\fossil companie$\* die!
I envision many sharing donuts with Homer J

Last edited by jamison20000e; 08-14-2014 at 11:12 PM.
 
Old 03-03-2013, 12:05 PM   #59
Xeratul
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2006
Location: Debian Land
Posts: 1,331

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by rokytnji View Post
Well, just reading through this thread.

I live in a area where my computer is powered by wind but further out in the desert you can find nuclear dump storage sites.

I did not read about any of the I like nuclear posts saying, "Yeah, put a dump site in my country or back yard. We could use the money."

I am also surprised for people surrounded by large masses of water and tides mentioning solar and wind energy. I guess they just don't know about that option.

Oh well, I get spectacular sunsets and tomorrow is 80F so I guess I'll jump on my scooter that killed I don't know who
over making it.
That's great. In which country/region are you living?

Imagine that in France, it is unlikely possible that they use wind lol
Or nuclear wind mill?
 
Old 03-03-2013, 03:20 PM   #60
k3lt01
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Jessie, Sid/Experimental, playing with Slackware 14.
Posts: 2,647

Rep: Reputation: 555Reputation: 555Reputation: 555Reputation: 555Reputation: 555Reputation: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xeratul View Post
That's great. In which country/region are you living?

Imagine that in France, it is unlikely possible that they use wind lol
Or nuclear wind mill?
Funny I always believed Jack Chirac was full of hot air
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Restart a user's server, or mass-kill processes ? Sabinou Linux - Security 2 01-30-2013 12:38 PM
LXer: The Nuclear Option LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 03-19-2007 05:01 AM
nuclear energy foo_bar_foo General 103 02-22-2006 09:36 AM
gnome panel went nuclear imbaczek Linux - Software 0 10-08-2004 01:23 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:32 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration