Klaus Stock wrote:
>
> Nope. In Germany, political reasons are the real reasons, not common
> sense.
>
The europeans are crazy. They don't know what to do, they add a lot of
uncertainty to the economy with all those subsidies that come and go,
taxes that come and go, and regulations that come and g
On 12/1/2012 6:36 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
How is that going to happen. Are you arguing that the US will impose a
carbon tax that is so high that we will be paying more in carbon taxes than
fuel costs? Given the fact that we've been unable to raise the gas tax in
decades, how will we impose a sev
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 11:00 AM, "Dan Minette" wrote:
(Keith)
>
>>If you have a better way to get humanity off fossil fuels, don't keep it to
> yourself.
>
> I have actions that, given historical precident, have a much better chance
> of suceeeding.
>
>>Make a good case that it's cheaper and I w
>> Of course, it would make sense to integrate water and wind plants,
> probably even using the wind
>>turbines to power the pumps directly. But that's a problem with politics,
> not technology.
> I beg to differ. The obvious problem is geography. Pump storage is highly
> used in Switzerland, a
-Original Message-
From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On
Behalf Of Kevin O'Brien
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 8:13 AM
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: Greens add to Greenhouse gasses
On 11/30/2012 8:49 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
>> So
> Of course, it would make sense to integrate water and wind plants,
probably even using the wind
>turbines to power the pumps directly. But that's a problem with politics,
not technology.
I beg to differ. The obvious problem is geography. Pump storage is highly
used in Switzerland, and they
>If you have a better way to get humanity off fossil fuels, don't keep it to
yourself.
I have actions that, given historical precident, have a much better chance
of suceeeding.
>Make a good case that it's cheaper and I will support that instead of
working on power satellites
>and laser propuls
>> So, they were fired up when the windmills were down due to low
>> wind. Now, with cheap natural gas, the building of windmills has slown down
>> to a virtual halt.
> Well, cheap currently. It is just one carbon tax away from being
> expensive. And to my mind the only question is when that tax
On 11/30/2012 8:49 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
So, they were fired up when the windmills were down due to low
wind. Now, with cheap natural gas, the building of windmills has slown down
to a virtual halt.
Well, cheap currently. It is just one carbon tax away from being
expensive. And to my mind the o
On 11/29/2012 6:38 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
They used the low price tactic to drive out virtually all
other rare earth suppliers a bit over a decade ago, and are now in a
position where the startup costs are high for other countries, and any
country with pollution regulations would have a hard ti
>Here in Brazil, Wind is used as part of the electric grid (there is a
country-wide electric grid, only >some parts of the Rain Forest are outside
it). It helps save "water" and not consume natural gas when >the wind blows.
So, Wind is _not_ one black swam away, it can be used complementary to oth
>> Wind just needs one, effective storage. The lack of it is why
>> wind power cannot be counted on as part of peak demand.
>> It only made sense when natural gas was expensive.
>>
> Here in Brazil, Wind is used as part of the electric grid (there is a
> country-wide electric grid, only some parts
Dan Minette wrote:
>
> Wind just needs one, effective storage. The lack of it is why
> wind power cannot be counted on as part of peak demand.
> It only made sense when natural gas was expensive.
>
Here in Brazil, Wind is used as part of the electric grid (there is a
country-wide electric grid, on
-Original Message-
From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On
Behalf Of Kevin O'Brien
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 9:06 AM
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: Greens add to Greenhouse gasses
On 11/27/2012 5:18 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
>&
>Yup, oil production is not as harmless as nuclear bomb tests.
It depends on how close you are to the nuclear bomb test. But, oil is
generally lower in radioactivity than bananas. If you are far enough away
from the test, then the radiation is so low, it's orders of magnitude below
what you get
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:00 AM, "Dan Minette" wrote:
snip
> I was basically asking if you've been around the block. That's not an appeal
> to authority, just the result of the observation that folks who've walked
> the walk are more likely to be accurate the next time they talk the talk
> tha
On 11/28/2012 7:05 PM, Keith Henson wrote:
In regard to Kevin B. O'Brien's comments, the Chinese are far more
likely to build propulsion lasers and power sats than the US. It's
possible they have already made the decision, see the recent
announcement about building power sats with the Indians.
>> With all due respect, Keith, I've been hearing arguments like this for
>> 50 years.
>That's impressive hearing considering that the big, high efficiency lasers
that make this
>concept possible have been around for less than 5 years.
This particular combination, I haven't heard for 50 years.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Klaus Stock
wrote:
snip
> Our political leaders don't need solutions, they need fear. Once you
> control voters by fear, you can do literally everything.
snip
> However, Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, has studied physics.
> I'm wondering if she would
On 11/27/2012 5:18 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
"Really cheap power if we bootstrap by building one power satellite and use
it for propulsion
lasers to bring up parts for thousands. "
With all due respect, Keith, I've been hearing arguments like this for 50
years. One thing would help you establish
>"Really cheap power if we bootstrap by building one power satellite and use
it for propulsion
>lasers to bring up parts for thousands. "
With all due respect, Keith, I've been hearing arguments like this for 50
years. One thing would help you establish credibility. Can you point to a
design o
>> This issue is not being resolved rationally, but then very
>> few people approach problems that way.
> Twitter compressed solution
> "Really cheap power if we bootstrap by building one power satellite
> and use it for propulsion lasers to bring up parts for thousands. "
> If anyone wants to k
> I think you are correct in that. The only thing I would add is that the
> design of the Fukushima plant was very old, and that modern designs are
> even safer.
Um, like the german SNR-300 design? Yup, the first reactor with a core
catcher! Which was, of course, dismantled. Apparently, there's on
On 11/26/2012 9:21 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
Since we don't want this list dominated by carved Norwegian tourist shop
items, I thought I'd throw out an argument. I have seen Germany and Japan
shutting down nuclear energy, after the Greens have suceeded in making it
non-PC. They had argued that the
For God's sake (written as 日本酒), Japan had the "earthquake of the
century", it hit hard on the nuclear plants, and almost nothing
happened. If this is not a very good security test on nuclear power,
then I don't know what could be. Maybe hit a nuclear plant with an
airplane?
Alberto Monteiro
25 matches
Mail list logo
