UPS Sales to soar
-
Ryan Roberts wrote:
will have us relying on Russian gas and wind power within 10 years.
Well, options: Nuclear: Implemented at current levels of energy consumtion, known uranium ressources will take us 20, maybe 30 years. It can give you a head start, but just hope your kids can deal with it. Saudi Oil. It's not that they are worse than Russia, but... US. American Oil: With their current hogging attitude, you can assume they' make you pay arm and leg for a barrel. All the article says is Wind power is currently twice as expensive as todays preferred energy sources. Of course if all that counts for you is little colorful pieces of paper in your pocket, wind power is idiotic. "Weather" isn't a weekend luxury for treehuggers. If storms sink two of three oil tankers, you'll hug the ass of your "idiot government" for wind power and the russia deal. And to end it with a proper doomsday scenario: if a billion people on this planet tries to relocate because their home place has become uninhabitable, you better be prepared. Not that I think this will happen in the near future, but I'm appaled how many people underestimate the influence of weather on us. Just saying.
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us!peterchen wrote:
US. American Oil: With their current hogging attitude, you can assume they' make you pay arm and leg for a barrel.
First, the US is a net importer, not exporter, and has very few oil reserves of its own. Most north American oil is in Canada and Mexico. 2nd, since oil is a global commodity, no one country controls the price. OPEC can influence it by controlling supply, but even it's control is limited. We can however offer you a good deal on coal. 3rd, thanks for the gratuitous anti-American remark of the day...
-
peterchen wrote:
US. American Oil: With their current hogging attitude, you can assume they' make you pay arm and leg for a barrel.
First, the US is a net importer, not exporter, and has very few oil reserves of its own. Most north American oil is in Canada and Mexico. 2nd, since oil is a global commodity, no one country controls the price. OPEC can influence it by controlling supply, but even it's control is limited. We can however offer you a good deal on coal. 3rd, thanks for the gratuitous anti-American remark of the day...
So can I conclude that you really cannot feed the UK if other sources get scarce? That was the whole point of my post. I could have offered some east german lignite, together iwth some old commies that know how to run an entire chemical industry on it.. If that's gratuitously anti-american for you, avoid my targeted verbal attacks. It might make you faint. ;) BTW. if anybody is interested in numbers[^] (just what google gives, political bias unknown)
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us! -
Ryan Roberts wrote:
will have us relying on Russian gas and wind power within 10 years.
Well, options: Nuclear: Implemented at current levels of energy consumtion, known uranium ressources will take us 20, maybe 30 years. It can give you a head start, but just hope your kids can deal with it. Saudi Oil. It's not that they are worse than Russia, but... US. American Oil: With their current hogging attitude, you can assume they' make you pay arm and leg for a barrel. All the article says is Wind power is currently twice as expensive as todays preferred energy sources. Of course if all that counts for you is little colorful pieces of paper in your pocket, wind power is idiotic. "Weather" isn't a weekend luxury for treehuggers. If storms sink two of three oil tankers, you'll hug the ass of your "idiot government" for wind power and the russia deal. And to end it with a proper doomsday scenario: if a billion people on this planet tries to relocate because their home place has become uninhabitable, you better be prepared. Not that I think this will happen in the near future, but I'm appaled how many people underestimate the influence of weather on us. Just saying.
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us!peterchen wrote:
Nuclear: Implemented at current levels of energy consumtion, known uranium ressources will take us 20, maybe 30 years.
And the obvious answer is the new generation of breeder reactors. Run them for a while to churn out a surplus of fuel and then throttle them back to consume the worst of the long life waste.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
-
peterchen wrote:
Nuclear: Implemented at current levels of energy consumtion, known uranium ressources will take us 20, maybe 30 years.
And the obvious answer is the new generation of breeder reactors. Run them for a while to churn out a surplus of fuel and then throttle them back to consume the worst of the long life waste.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
Do you have a techie link? [edit] I guess they "breed" Plutonium? I'm not against nuclear power per se, and I think it's a bad move to give up the technology. However, it doesn't seem a long term solution either. [/edit] -- modified at 14:36 Sunday 17th December, 2006
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us! -
Ryan Roberts wrote:
will have us relying on Russian gas and wind power within 10 years.
Well, options: Nuclear: Implemented at current levels of energy consumtion, known uranium ressources will take us 20, maybe 30 years. It can give you a head start, but just hope your kids can deal with it. Saudi Oil. It's not that they are worse than Russia, but... US. American Oil: With their current hogging attitude, you can assume they' make you pay arm and leg for a barrel. All the article says is Wind power is currently twice as expensive as todays preferred energy sources. Of course if all that counts for you is little colorful pieces of paper in your pocket, wind power is idiotic. "Weather" isn't a weekend luxury for treehuggers. If storms sink two of three oil tankers, you'll hug the ass of your "idiot government" for wind power and the russia deal. And to end it with a proper doomsday scenario: if a billion people on this planet tries to relocate because their home place has become uninhabitable, you better be prepared. Not that I think this will happen in the near future, but I'm appaled how many people underestimate the influence of weather on us. Just saying.
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us!peterchen wrote:
All the article says is Wind power is currently twice as expensive as todays preferred energy sources.
Does it actually say that, or does it try to trick you into believing that? According to other sources, wind power is not at all twice as expensive: "Since 2004, according to some sources, the price in the United States is now lower than the cost of fuel-generated electric power, even without taking externalities into account." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power[^] "Wind energy is relatively cheap; the estimated cost of generating one kilowatt-hour by wind power is about 8¢, as compared to 5¢ for typical hydropower and 15¢ for nuclear power ("Alternative energy sources (2)")." http://www.netpilot.ca/aes/wind/eco.html[^] "In the early 1980's, when the first utility-scale wind turbines were installed, wind-generated electricity cost as much as 30 cents per kilowatt-hour. Now, state-of-the-art wind power plants at excellent sites are generating electricity at less than 5 cents/kWh. Costs are continuing to decline as more and larger plants are built and advanced technology is introduced." http://www.awea.org/faq/cost.html[^]
--- It's amazing to see how much work some people will go through just to avoid a little bit of work.
-
peterchen wrote:
US. American Oil: With their current hogging attitude, you can assume they' make you pay arm and leg for a barrel.
First, the US is a net importer, not exporter, and has very few oil reserves of its own. Most north American oil is in Canada and Mexico. 2nd, since oil is a global commodity, no one country controls the price. OPEC can influence it by controlling supply, but even it's control is limited. We can however offer you a good deal on coal. 3rd, thanks for the gratuitous anti-American remark of the day...
Rob Graham wrote:
thanks for the gratuitous anti-American remark of the day
It was? Good grief, make sure you don't go outside in a light breeze or your organs will fall right out of your body...
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music to programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk -
So can I conclude that you really cannot feed the UK if other sources get scarce? That was the whole point of my post. I could have offered some east german lignite, together iwth some old commies that know how to run an entire chemical industry on it.. If that's gratuitously anti-american for you, avoid my targeted verbal attacks. It might make you faint. ;) BTW. if anybody is interested in numbers[^] (just what google gives, political bias unknown)
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us!peterchen wrote:
BTW. if anybody is interested in numbers[^] (just what google gives, political bias unknown)
The footnote about massive oil discoveries in Australia seems to be pure fantasy. Wikipedia has some useful info on oil reserves (especially Canadian): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves[^]
John Carson "All Mr. Bush and his party can do at this point is demonize their opposition. And my guess is that the public won’t go for it, that Americans are fed up with leadership that has nothing to hope for but fear itself." Paul Krugman
-
Do you have a techie link? [edit] I guess they "breed" Plutonium? I'm not against nuclear power per se, and I think it's a bad move to give up the technology. However, it doesn't seem a long term solution either. [/edit] -- modified at 14:36 Sunday 17th December, 2006
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us!An article in Scientific American. http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa=Products.ViewIssuePreview&ARTICLEID_CHAR=36E574C2-6DDE-4FEE-BFD1-808479268DF[^] It's probably a better and simpler option than trying to switch to "clean" coal. And a bridge to the day, if ever, we get nice clean fusion power.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
-
An article in Scientific American. http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa=Products.ViewIssuePreview&ARTICLEID_CHAR=36E574C2-6DDE-4FEE-BFD1-808479268DF[^] It's probably a better and simpler option than trying to switch to "clean" coal. And a bridge to the day, if ever, we get nice clean fusion power.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
Tim Craig wrote:
we get nice clean fusion power
It would be nice if those run on Kyles...
-- Verletzen zerfetzen zersetzen zerstören Doch es darf nicht mir gehören Ich muss zerstören
-
peterchen wrote:
All the article says is Wind power is currently twice as expensive as todays preferred energy sources.
Does it actually say that, or does it try to trick you into believing that? According to other sources, wind power is not at all twice as expensive: "Since 2004, according to some sources, the price in the United States is now lower than the cost of fuel-generated electric power, even without taking externalities into account." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power[^] "Wind energy is relatively cheap; the estimated cost of generating one kilowatt-hour by wind power is about 8¢, as compared to 5¢ for typical hydropower and 15¢ for nuclear power ("Alternative energy sources (2)")." http://www.netpilot.ca/aes/wind/eco.html[^] "In the early 1980's, when the first utility-scale wind turbines were installed, wind-generated electricity cost as much as 30 cents per kilowatt-hour. Now, state-of-the-art wind power plants at excellent sites are generating electricity at less than 5 cents/kWh. Costs are continuing to decline as more and larger plants are built and advanced technology is introduced." http://www.awea.org/faq/cost.html[^]
--- It's amazing to see how much work some people will go through just to avoid a little bit of work.