<OriansJ`>rain1: anything that I could do to help? <OriansJ`>as to the previous point about the geographic location impacting the decision on the use of solar cells. https://www.nrel.gov/gis/solar.html There are measured differences in solar potential not exactly related to latitude (as cloud cover has an impact) and thus one needs to perform a calculation prior to assuming if solar is an optimal solution or not. It is after all just another tool in the toolbox on the question of how to address <OriansJ`>the long term power problem. Personally I prefer nuclear as it does not require storage to the level of solar. (unless one assumes a global superconducting power grid, which could be cool) <vagrantc>solar peak performance does tend to roughly match peak demand times in many cases <vagrantc>and can be located in close proximity to where it is used <vagrantc>though the peak demand is largely because of air conditioning ... which thre are probably better uses of power <vagrantc>and putting panels on a rooftop can insulate the overheating buildings from the sun while producing power ... so there are other side-benefits <OriansJ`>but you are right about the large demand of air conditioning but there are some regions where it is literally about survival rather than comfort. 40+C (100+F approximately) where death rates do climb with rising temps <vagrantc>there are old technologies that are often more effective than industrial scale buildings and air conditioning <OriansJ`>and other regoins where that solar heating of the building is useful in winter to reduce energy use. <OriansJ`>but that is the wonderful complexity of every technology. The world has a large variation in needs and solutions required. <vagrantc>i'm more inclined towards actually bootstrappable technologies that are location specific than the, so to speak, nuclear option <OriansJ`>In the middle east (I am blanking on its name) where effectively passive geothermal cooling ended up being the energy efficient solution. <vagrantc>adobe buildings are pretty much perfect for regions where it's very got in the day and cold at night ... the thermal mass providing cooling inside during hot days and warmht during cold nights <OriansJ`>vagrantc: very fair, as I am guessing you would like to be able to do the bootstrapping work yourself. <vagrantc>and of course, reducing wasteful demand of energy in the first place makes bootstrapping possible :) <vagrantc>but it's been a while since i've really dove into that sort of thing *vagrantc is procrastinating writing up a solar talk this very second :) <OriansJ`>well I like to attack the problem on both fronts: how to get higher EROI energy sources and how to maximize the use of power that is obtained. *vagrantc lives sort of downstream from hanford and thus is a bit skeptical of nuclear <OriansJ`>vagrantc: completely fair, it is generally done in a manner not optimal in terms of technical properties but optimal in terms of politics and blame shifting. <OriansJ`>hence why nuclear is using Uranium instead of Thorium which superior for energy generation in regards to safety. <vagrantc>indeed ... i don't know that we have the societal wisdom to play with that particular fire just yet :) <vagrantc>the half-life problem of the byproducts ... while better technology can improve that significantly ... is still an arguably unsolved problem <OriansJ`>vagrantc: I never though society as a whole could make the right decisions <OriansJ`>The half-life problem is only one of transuranics if one makes nuclear recycling legal <OriansJ`>eg (10-100s of years not millions or billions) <vagrantc>tens sounds workable ... hundreds or thousands of years still pretty disturbing <OriansJ`>well you have to remember 98% of all nuclear waste is simply unspent fuel <vagrantc>indeed ... and is exactly what makes it dangerous <OriansJ`>The transuranics problem at a global scale would be measured in Kg/year which is very reasonable <OriansJ`>not to mention the inverse relationship of radioactivity and half life (eg 1 mol of uranium can only release 1 mol of alpha particles before all of the uranium has decayed) <OriansJ`>There are further details involving decay chains but not something that invalidates the general property <OriansJ`>as various isotopes have different length decay chains with each step having a different half-life <OriansJ`>many of which easy to seperate and handle specificly <stikonas>I doubt that solar heating is that useful in winter. Most of the solar energy generation is in the summer... <stikonas>in those colder countries you would need some nuclear <Profpatsch>OriansJ`: In the old part of Morocco (the medina), the inside of buildings basically never climbs beyond 25C even if it’s 35+C outside. And stays roughly at 20–25C during the night. For some reason, there was also a cool wind coming from somewhere I couldn’t place. <vagrantc>yeah, courtyards are a really amazing architectural design ... they vent hot air during the day and let cool air sink in at night <akkartik>I just caught up on the last few days of conversation. Great! Lots of open tabs from it. I also appreciate OransJ's moderation ;) <akkartik>Personally I tend to worry about a different kinds of commons: gradual erosion of institutional norms. Really concerned about the US Postal Service and obsessing about Nov 3. We don't have to delve deeper there :) <janneke>akkartik: it's a C and C++ compiler written in C <rain1>thank you OriansJ` you are always so kind! ***deesix_ is now known as deesix
<xentrac>OriansJ`: I am not better than others! <xentrac>OriansJ`: I think trying to get people to watch Michael Moore documentaries and accusing them of spreading "dangerous propaganda myths" if they aren't taken in by Moore's misinformation is ... not something that should be tolerated <xentrac>I mean that's Alex-Jones-level trolling <OriansJ`>janneke: exactly, however I don't see anything special about it yet. Perhaps I am being dense again and missing what you are seeing in terms of potential. <OriansJ`>rain1: just don't be afraid to ask for help if you need it ^_^ <janneke>OriansJ`: exactly, i was voicing my enthousiasm because i thought i had discovered/stumbled upon something new and interesting <OriansJ`>xentrac: it is certainly fair if you view Michael Moore as a person who engages in propaganda and do not wish to regard things stated by them as something worth consideration. It is your personal time after all but it would be healthier for conversation instead of attacking the source, simply imply you would prefer if that information came from an alternate source with more rigorous proof. <janneke>it's much bigger and older than i had anticipated... <janneke>although...when we were looking at alternatives to tcc (pcc, 8cc, etc.) nothing much came up, so i guess i missed this before <xentrac>well, my concern is not merely that he engages in propaganda <OriansJ`>janneke: that certainly is true and something we did definitely previously miss (but then again there are alot we certainly miss because of the swamp of code out there these days) <xentrac>it's that he engages in lying, in order to personally attack people <janneke>i doubt whether it can build gcc-7.5.0, though <xentrac>like, read the Wikipedia article about the movie we're talking about here <OriansJ`>xentrac: well personal attacks generally are bad form, they are not uncommon when one is "preaching to the choir" and thus treated as such. <OriansJ`>janneke: well if it can do GCC-4.7.4 we would be happy but honestly I put my hopes more on MesCC growing to be able to build GCC directly as I know it is the best course of action for the Lisp bootstrap dream. <OriansJ`>but I do have alot of work to make the task easier for you janneke and I am sorry my efforts have been more limited as of late. <Profpatsch>I want to make clear that this documentary was not, in fact, made by Michael Moore as xentrac has stated <janneke>OriansJ`: np, i have been postponing bootstrapping ... will get to it some time soon... <Profpatsch>OriansJ`: yes, I lik that to people all the time <OriansJ`>janneke: plus it'll be alot easier for you when I get the binutils and guile compatible up to grade <xentrac>are we talking about Planet of the Humans? <Profpatsch>I won’t read through the discussion from yesterday again, but I’m fairly sure the ad hominem attacks were not started by me <xentrac>"backed and promoted by Michael Moore", says ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_of_the_Humans <OriansJ`>Noted flaws in the Movie: The chemistry requirements are for cost related reasons not absolute. eg quartz isn't required for silicon but rather the lowest cost way of manufactoring. Coal isn't required but it is cheaper than electrical heating. <OriansJ`>Noted good point in the Movie: it forces the question of EROI (indirectly) and points out the behavior of various "green" organizations actually are far worse for the environment. It also shines a light on the problem of "green washing" <OriansJ`>a common note: The film presents a Malthusian point of view of the planet but that isn't uncommon of a perspective as humans are bad at thinking of non-zero sum games. <OriansJ`>remember propaganda is only effective if it contains some element of truth and by refusing to admit that truth is a common mistake of those wish to fight that propaganda. <OriansJ`>as all humans are imperfect, no truth is shared without mistakes or lies attached. Newton's laws despite their high usefulness are still wrong but knowing that enables their useful application regardless. <Profpatsch>It indirectly makes people thing of a Malthusian argument, which is part of how you make people talk about it <Profpatsch>Can the planet support 10Bn people? Probably? But not at the current trajectory <Profpatsch>Can the planet support 10Bn people after playing out the current trajectory? Maybe? <Profpatsch>Maybe it can only support 1Bn, because most current high population centers become unlivable <OriansJ`>Profpatsch: well human population is entirely an energy question for me. For example using current technology only. It is possible to house and grow the food needed for 100 billion people in an area less than the state of Texas with zero impacts outside of it <OriansJ`>but such a plan doesn't work with current diets or lifestyle expectations <OriansJ`>One could literally put 100 Billion people in orbit and have zero impact on Earth but that is a different solution set <rain1>OriansJ`: that is really sweet of you, thanks! <Profpatsch>You need incremental solutions, otherwise it turns into pure chaos and war would destroy everything before that. <rain1>I think my main problem is I can't attend my meditation group. <Profpatsch>(not saying that chaos is bad in general, but when people see their living basis attacked, they become aggressive and start wars) <OriansJ`>rain1: well self guided meditation is something I can help you with if you like. <rain1>that could be good! at the moment i have a project on so it's hard to make time for stuff <OriansJ`>Profpatsch: generally correct; hence the distinction between what is a viable population given current level of technology already available, rather than what is likely to occur. <janneke>unless you're too busy, then make double time for yourself