Ядерна енергія?

Я хочу знати, що думають про використання ядерної енергії в якості основного джерела енергії в нас, чому люди так проти нього? я знаю, що відходи можуть бути використані для створення зброї, а ядерна енергетика є в даний час настільки ефективно, що навряд чи є відходи. Це чисте джерело, і повноваження по крайней мере 2/3 у Франції, а також багатьох інших країн. Нарешті, я знаю, що були випадки, такі як 3-Майл-Айленд і в Чорнобилі, які створили масу кількість радіації і загублених життів, але вони технологія змінилася, і зараз атомні електростанції безпечні. Отже, чому люди так проти?

ядерною державою?

Якщо ви можете відповісти на будь-який з них, що було б здорово!
Мені потрібна одна для АЕС
(Не копалин підживлюється) і Сонця.
Я так плутати з цього!

1. Які джерела палива?

2. Як паливо використовується для виробництва / вивільнення енергії?

3. Що спільного в тому, як вони виробляють енергію?

4. Чи є небезпека для здоров'я пов'язана з тим, як вони виробляють енергію?

5. Чому енергії, що виділяється при ядерних реакціях відбувається? Говорити про це з допомогою дослідження по силам, які тримають ядра атома разом.

Ядерна енергія?

Наскільки я розумію, ядерна енергетика завжди була проблема з відпрацьованим ядерним паливом та ядерними відходами. Я знаю, що маловідходних випромінювання може зберігатися до п'ятдесяти років, і сміливо disgarded регулярно сміття. Але тоді у вас є висока радіоактивного матеріалу (Plutomium, уран і все), які мають період напіврозпаду більше 100000 років.
Чи є якийсь там пояснити, якщо трансмутації працює?
І те, що деякі з основи за цим стоїть?
Основне, що робить його безпечним проводити атомної енергетики?

Це ядерна енергетика є життєздатним варіантом для Сінгапуру? Які ваші проблеми, якщо такі є?

Потужного державного планування комітет рекомендує використання ядерної енергії для задоволення довгострокових потреб в енергії в Сінгапурі. Що ви думаєте? Це ядерна енергетика є життєздатним варіантом для Сінгапуру? Які ваші проблеми, якщо такі є?

Скільки атомних електростанцій повинні бути в США, щоб бути основним джерелом електрики?

Франція отримує майже 80% своєї електроенергії від атомних електростанцій, але це невелика країна, тому, скільки б електростанцій США повинні отримати близько 80-90% своєї електроенергії на АЕС.

Як ділення ядер, що використовуються в атомних електростанцій?

Як ділення ядер, що використовуються в атомних електростанціях. Як атомні електростанції працюють? Це папери для школи. Чи є у вас пропозиції по сайтах використовувати?

Є атомної енергетики є єдиним рішенням по врегулюванню кризи енергії в Бангладеш?

В умовах кризи влади Бангладеш створити багато проблем. Так що ядерна енергетика може допомогти влада, щоб позбавити цю проблему. Але мені потрібна сильна логіка і також контраргумент теж.

Може атомних електростанцій створюють чорні діри?

Я роблю проект в галузі науки і потрібно знати: Якщо хтось для створення атомної електростанції в центральній Каліфорнії, це може створити чорну діру? І якби він міг, які умови необхідні для її створення і як це може бути випадково створив?

Будь-яка інша інформація про негативні наслідки атомних електростанцій було б корисно. Крім того, будь-які джерела ви знаєте було б здорово!

Є ядерного синтезу використовується в атомних електростанціях для виробництва енергії, або просто ядерного ділення?

Я читав, що ядерне розподіл використовується для поділу атомів і виробляти тепло для атомних електростанцій, але що ядерний синтез тоді робити? Чи є у неї щось із цим робити?

Чому США протистояти атомних електростанцій?

Ліберали у Франції та інших європейських країнах охоплює ядерну енергетику, електрика працює на 80% у Франції потужність ядерної бомби.

Невже бояться, як в Три-Майл-Айленд, або фільмі Джейн Фонди Китайський синдром?

Чому європейські екологи, як те, що американські екологи ненавидите?
Супер людина-це французька ЗМІ не роблять, що відомий французький громадський, або ж французького не хвилює?

ядерної аварії електростанції в Чорнобилі, менш імовірно, в більшості нам АЕС сьогодні, тому що?

Якщо всі АЕС в США буде закрита назавжди?

Оскільки небезпечний інцидент, який відбувається в Японії, ви думаєте, ми повинні закрити їх чи ні? Яка ваша думка?

Чи можемо ми зараз будувати та експлуатувати безпечні атомні електростанції в США?

Це було 20-30 років після Чорнобиля та Три-Майл Айленд. Чи повинні ми над Китайський синдром?

Скільки коштує будівництво нових атомних електростанцій в США?

Чи будуть США ядерну бомбу Іран / Ірак, якщо Аль-Каїда напала атомних електростанцій в США?

Схоже, що використання ядерну зброю в якості демонстрації на Токійському затоці була ідея запропонованого режиму Трумена. Може бути використано ядерну зброю, щоб продемонструвати майстерність США "Аль-Каїди?

Що робити, якщо Аль-Каїда була ще одна атака на США. Чи будуть США використовувати ядерну зброю тоді?

Ядерні електростанції місць в Сполучених Штатах?

Why are most of the US nuclear power plants located only in the eastern side of the country? Does this have something to do with half the country not being downwind of the reactors?

Do you agree with Obama's proposal to build new nuclear power plants in the US?

Please also mention if you're registered as Dem, Rep or Ind.

How is McCain's nuclear power plants going to save us money?

Each plant will cost tax payers 6 to 8 billion dollars and McCain wants 45 plants . In the mean time the Companies will rank in the profits. So why would I want to pay for that? How is that going to benefit me and my family?

http://www.money.cnn.com/2008/08/07/news/economy/ nuclear /index.htm

How many Nuclear power plants in Texas?

and where are they located?

Which cities in Texas have nuclear power plants?

I heard some time ago that they were considering building one in Bay City, but what other cities in Texas already have them?

How do you feel about the new nuclear power plant to be built in Bay City, Texas?

The NRG Energy company has applied for permit to build a nuclear power reactor in Bay City, Texas . It will be the first new reactor in the US in 30 years.

Is Texas Glad to have TEPCO building Nuke Plants on Its Gulf Coast?

Ok So Tokyo Electric Power Company builder and operator of the failed nuclear power plants in japan. Can't wait until the first Hurricane… Then they can try to use the emergency Generating systems to shut these down. The emergency generating systems for this Texas power plant were designed by Toshiba. The same folks who designed the emergency generating systems that failed with the tsunami. But it gets better. The engineers who will certify this plant for Operation Stone & Webster are the same guys who faked certification tests for the Shoreham Nuclera Plant in NY.

would crawford texas, be a good location for a nuclear power plant?

i's also like to see a major oil refinery built in kennebunkport. when will they start building?

Не буде у нас буде краще, якщо ми закрили старий стиль вугільних і замінити їх на нові атомні заводи?

США отримує 50% електроенергії з вугілля.

Індія отримує 70% електроенергії з вугілля.

Китай отримує 80% своєї електроенергії з вугілля.

З іншого боку, Франція отримує 80% своєї електроенергії з ядерних.

Ми могли б показати Китаю шлях до закриття наших забруднюючих вугільних як тільки ми створили нове покоління атомних станцій на їх місце.
Нам потрібно показати хороший приклад для Індії і Китаю.

Китай активізує принаймні одну нову вугіллі кожного тижня!
Вони хочуть побудувати 55 вугільних в рік протягом 5 років поспіль.

Ми повинні також будівництво високошвидкісних залізниць на магнітній підвісці по всій країні для того, щоб стати життєздатною альтернативою повітряним транспортом і шосе.
З останнім у попередньо напружених залізобетонних конструкцій, ми можемо побудувати залізничний підвищеної магнітної підвісці система, яка дозволить уникнути небезпек і трафік порушення пов'язані із залізничним перетину поверхні вулиць.

Техас і Вайомінг є найбільш злісними порушниками у вугільних викидів!
Maglev залізничного поїзда управляються електричним струмом. Як виробляти електрику викидів CO2?

Будь ласка, подивіться 60 ХВИЛИН сегмент, який був показаний в пасхальне неділю. Він охоплює атомної промисловості і продемонструвала французька атомна промисловість. Франція є країною, розміром зі штат Техас, з населенням 64 мільйонів чоловік.
У них є 58 ядерних електростанцій, які створюють низька вартість електроенергії в Європі. Вони мають чисте повітря будь промислово розвиненої країни через це. На відміну від США, вони заново обробити їх відпрацьованих паливних стрижнів і використовувати їх знову і знову, щоб будувати нові паливні стрижні. Через це тривалого зберігання ядерних відходів зовсім не проблема саме тут, в США

"Галька ліжко" Реактор являє собою кризу без реактора, яка є меншою, модульний реактор, який набагато дешевше і швидше побудувати, ніж останні реактори ми побудували більше 20 років тому.
Це зайняло 42 місяців, щоб отримати liscence затверджених на будівництво нового реактора і ще 48 місяців, щоб побудувати його. Це змінюється.
У нас достатньо вугілля нам вистачить сотні років, якщо не тисячі. Проблема в тому, викиди CO2, ми створюємо шляхом спалювання вугілля. У нас є багато уранових родовищ в Канаді та інших країнах, але ми навіть не повинні продовжувати видобуток урану так сильно, якщо ми почнемо переробка наших відпрацьованих паливних стрижнів.

Наші фіксованою залізничної транспортної системи практично залишається, де він був 80 років тому!

Maglev залізничного транспорту являє собою нове покоління залізничного транспорту і буде найчистішим видом транспорту, за милю, ніж будь-який інший спосіб механізованої поїздок, за винятком велосипеді!

Зверніть увагу на технологію INDUCTRACK магнітній підвісці, яка була розроблена тут, в США в Ліверморської лабораторії в Каліфорнії.

Військово-морський флот, дивлячись на використання його для запуску його струменя геть палубах своїх авіаносців і закінчуючи використанням традиційної парової катапульти.
НАСА розраховує використовувати цю конкретну технологію магнітної підвісці передбачає, що первинний поштовх при запуску свого супутника і збереження 35-45% від ракетного палива.
У США існує близько 103 діючих АЕС, які виробляють близько 20% електроенергії, споживаної в Сполучених Штатах!

20%!!

Це ганьба, тому що Сполучені Штати, які привели решта світу
в ядерний вік.

Будь ласка, зрозумійте, що Чорнобиль був-графітовими реактора і оператори працювали, що завод на повну потужність з усіма гарантіями і систем безпеки тимчасово вимкнений!

Ми не мають-графітовими реакторами в США і федеральних норм і правил запобігання будь-яких американських ядерних реакторів з діючими в wreckless чином, що оператори в колишньому Радянському Союзі діяли Чорнобиля!

Будь ласка, зробіть своє дослідження, і це не дозволить вам мимоволі порівнювати яблука з апельсинами.

Атомна промисловість є складною і різноманітною один.

Ми повинні створити нове покоління атомних електростанцій, так само в даний час будувати нове покоління автомобілів, пральних машин, водонагрівачів,
і т.д.
Природному газі електростанцій загальною жарт! Вони представляють самі екстравагантні використання обмежених природних ресурсів для того, щоб бути політично коректним, але абсолютно неправильно в будь-якому іншому сенсі.

Ціна на природний газ вже має і буде продовжувати рости, як ми виснажувати обмежені ресурси.

Природний газ є таким корисним для багатьох інших речей, як виробництво пластмас.

Використання природного газу як палива електростанції є нераціональне використання обмежених ресурсів.

Ядерна енергія допомагає стримувати витрати на електроенергію набагато більш ефективно, ніж природний газ робить!

Just watch the price of natural gas go up and your electricity bills along with it if your electricity comes from a natural gas powered plant!
If we follow the example of France, we will have one nuclear power plant for every million people.

If we follow the example of France, we will start re-processing our spent fuel rods.They are so much smarter than us when it comes to nuclear energy. They had to go that way initially because they have very little hydroelectric power sources and very little coal deposits. Necessity was their incentive to embrace nuclear energy and that is the main reason why they have surpassed us in developing nuclear energy.

The new “pebble bed” reactors are some of the ones that China is in the process of building as well.

The US will finally begin building some new nuclear reactors and just in the nick of time because we need to begin shutting down the oldest ones and dismantling them as we bring the new ones on line.If you go to Cuba you will see the cars from the 30s, 40s, and 50s kept running, but none from the last 50 years!
We are almost that bad with our nuclear power plants !
Glenn B makes some excellent points and I can't think of a better country suited to the building of a national network of high-speed maglev rail transportation than Australia!

Australia is the place where the longest railroad straight away exists. I forget how many hundred miles it goes on.

They have to keep replacing their wooden railroad ties due to the hearty species of ants or termites that eat away at them.

China has the world's first maglev rail line from Pudong Airport to Shanghai which is only a 17-mile run.

It was built by the German consortium Transrapid, but does not use our INDUCTRACK technology.

What a beautiful sight it would be to see an elevated high-speed maglev rail system conveying people across the vast beautiful landscapes of Australia.
One set of tracks going in each direction with trains leaving every 10 minutes and some making tourist stops at different places along the way! The rest of the trains will continue as an alternative to air travel.
Fear is a thief!

It is the biggest thief we will ever know!

When we are ignorant about anyone or anything, we tend to believe negative information told to us about that unknown person or thing.

We start out as a blank slate, and suddenly, 100% of what we know is negative. This negative “impression” becomes the banner under which we collect further negative information that only confirms the validity of that banner.

Rumor and inuendo negatively color our impressions of historical figures like Aaron Burr and Warren G. Harding when both end up being cast in a much better light upon further objective scrutiny.

As we evaluate a given science or industry, we run into the same kind of pitfalls of distorted perceptions as a result of negative information that was formed primarily by unobjective and sloppy evaluations.

I challenge everyone to study the latest developments in the nuclear industry as well as those in the coal, solar power , wind, and ocean swell energy industry.
“China is building the world's first commercial Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR).

PBMRs differ radically from light-water reactors. They use helium instead of water to absorb heat from the nuclear fuel, eliminating the need to locate PBMRs close to major water supplies.

Rather than using uranium fuel rods, PBMRs use thousands of ceramic-covered uranium “pebbles” encased in graphite spheres. The containment facilities typical in other reactors are unnecessary because the ceramic casings make a meltdown VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

The overall cost per unit of energy produced is calculated to be less than half of earlier reactor designs.

Also, PBMRs should be able to extract several times as much energy from each ton of fuel — which means less radioactive waste.”

Wouldn't it be great to see a country like Australia equip itself with an adequate number of these PBMRs to power desalination plants all along the Australian coastline and to power a national maglev rail system.

How can God Fearing Texans allow the Federal Government to trample on Gun Rights once again?

"Гармати тепер федеральним злочином на АЕС в Техасі і за її межами"

Хто Грег Palace? і чому він кричить про «корупцію» в атомній енергетиці?

Алекс Джонс інтерв'ю ця людина, Ive ніколи не чув про нього, але те, що він говорить пов'язує катастрофи Японії Pres Обама і Техас контракти на будівництво нових ядерних установок.

Скільки ще Mid. Схід кризи в США і її народу приймати всерйоз, перш ніж лихо них?

Сьогодні нафта досягла $ 100/wet барель. There is usually a 1-2 month slag till it hits Americans directly.
Under the Obama administration the USlost the respect [fear] it had under the Bush
administration. Rouge countries see Obama aa weakling, and dauntlessly act as if Obama gave them free license to.
So,countries saw Bush as a power -drunk Texas Yokel just itchin for another war. Maybe he was. But, I could care less. Countries “behaved.” No rouge state wanted to commit actions to instigate the “Cowboy” to “bomb the hell out of them.” Now these renegade states commit actions that will very likely have very harsh economic repercussions for America and its
people.True,France,Sweden,Switzerland,& other benign countries like us better. Big deal? they- “Don't walk the dog.”- It's amazing how “casual” Americans are regarding this,frightening actually. Americans have an arrogant laze faire attitude about this. “This is America”,and our President.[our commander in chief]. will keep things right. Right is the right word,as in “Yeah..Right!” ?-Me-?[ I have first hand dealings with oil traders] – I see “no light at the end of the tunnel” regarding oil price hikes. Economically, a sustained price of $120/wet barrel is unsustainable for maintaining the “American” Life-Style for very long. Prices of $150+ are not out of the question? And,4-6 months of that, “re-arranges,”?”changes” dramatically the US Food prices now astronomical,electricity rationed, things as air-conditioning are bygones. Memories of gas rationing/lines re-emerge,or to younger folks, are instilled. In 2+ years a president promising an energy independent America focused upon ramming a Health Bill the people didn't want, and desire even less now. This may sound like a screed,but embedded with fact. America could have taken advantage of the enormous supplies of natural gas and,perfected a new generation of nuclear power plants — the existing ones have proved they can deliver reliable,reasonably priced electricity. America could have focused upon adopting conservation and efficiency strategies,because the cheapest energy is energy that 'isn't' used. The nation could have done all this, and more. Lots more than waste away 2+ years that have lead America /s to where it/they is/are now. Yes,right now. Keep tally on what you pay for food,gas,everything; you'll see,it's already started. The promise, “change” has arrived. Question is? is it welcomed?
“He lies….!” a shout from a US congressman-name unknown to me.
Thalia, nice talk.but?” The dog need a walk.”
*
I respet your intent-
But you are absent
As to the content?
I have had my “welcome” to the world economy nearly 3 years ago. Long enough, plenty long to have seen?the..”change.”
Ushie Mayna, Hedge Fund Manager.
Commodities trading & Investment.

Do you support nuclear energy? Why or why not?

I personally support it.
Because:
Here in Australia, we have a lot of Uranium therefore we can also make money exporting it to other countries.
It does not generate as much Carbon Dioxide as, say, coal which is also a non renewable source.
You can produce a great amount of electricity in a single plant.

But I am not ignoring the fact that nuclear energy is, like everything else, not perfect.
The storage of the waste is an issue, and so is the fact that it is a risky operation.

But if we set the waste problem aside for a moment, the risky operation thing is really not of a great deal.
I mean if you look at everyday life, there is a greater chance of people dying in car crashes (something you do almost everyday is ride in a car) than being killed by the meltdown/accidents of a nuclear plant.

Even though Uranium is not renewable and it will only be available for maximum 100 years, I still think it is a better option compared to coal etc, because it really makes a difference to the emission of Carbon Dioxide.

Share your opinions please and give reasons.
@little
I understand where you're coming from, but in comparison to coal, which would you choose?
I myself would prefer if we used wind power or solar power because they are risk-free renewable sources but right now we are relying on coal mostly.

It is producing a LOT of Carbon Dioxide which is contributing towards global warming.

Are Fuel Cells a false economy?

Все, здається, стає дуже роздутими до про нібито водню революція, яка не за горами. Паливних елементах автомобілів, ми обіцяли, буде на 100% тільки з водою в якості побічного продукту. Нам кажуть, що паливні елементи збираються влади все, від автомобілів до ноутбуків.

Хто-небудь ще бачить проблем з цією пропозицією? По-перше, водень є надзвичайно летючий газ, щоб заповнити автомобілів і т.д. з ним буде набагато небезпечніше, ніж заповнити їх з бензином. Крім того, якщо автомобіль повний збій водню і розрив резервуара, все це вибухне при перших ознаках іскри.

По-друге, водень не зустрічається у великих quanities природно, у нас є для його виробництва. Для цього потрібна енергія, і, звичайно, ця енергія просто збирається приїхати в результаті спалювання викопного палива більше на електростанціях. І якщо цього не станеться, якщо ми створили поновлюваних енергетичної інфраструктури, чому ми навіть не потрібно водню? всі (у тому числі транспортні засоби і т.д.) може бути просто підключений до електромережі ...

Десять балів!?

Дизайн Пітер Пулі і Майкл Харві, бетонні будинки святкує бетону в якості міцного матеріалу. За
за допомогою легко доступних і переносні компоненти цього будинку є доступним, швидко побудувати, а не покладатися на
Дуже спеціалізованих працівників. Бетон довговічний матеріал вимагає особливого догляду.
Життя в цьому будинку буде жити прихильність сталому, використання поновлюваних джерел енергії, збір дощової води
і мінімізації відходів. Зберігання дощової води інтегрована в дизайн з використанням збірних залізобетонних колон
- Практично будь-який обсяг води може бути збережений за допомогою цього простого методу. Сонячні системи гарячого водопостачання можуть бути встановлені
на даху. Природного термальною маси бетону використовується для зберігання вдома прохолоду влітку і тепло взимку.

Знайдіть у тексті.
а) На противагу холодним:
б) синонім для побудови:
з) один модальне дієслово:
г) один допоміжний дієслово (негативний):

What did we spend the hundreds of billions of dollars on before the war .?

Somehow its assumed by many people that ending the war will improve our lives in some way .
Did we spend 20 billion dollars for a cancer cure or invest in the production of renewable energy , or even provide good foster care for children to ensure none of them got abused .

I think not .

What did we spend the money on .

Bridges to nowhere , renaming post offices , private airports , Fema trailers that sit empty rotting away and rent on storage space to store donated goods for relief efforts that should have been dispersed to hurricane victims .

We spent millions on studies to determine how best to rebuild the devastated Gulf coast and yet to this day only a few thousand residences have been rebuilt .

For people to think the government would have spent this money on anything other then itself and the needs of the wealthy is foolish .

I think war provides work for many who would not have any .

Life is dangerous and more people die in traffic accidents then in war .

Select the TWO items below that are NOT true about nuclear power and power plants?

А) АЕС були вперше розроблені commericially в 1950 році
B) it is government subsidized because it is very expensive compared to fossil fuels
C) it is considered a renewable energy source
D) nuclear power results from a controlled chain reaction splitting apart atomic nuclei called fission
E) 20% of US electricity is from nuclear power
F) releases less greenhouse gas emissions than fossil fuel use
G) usually has fewer occupational health and safety risks for plant workers than at coal-fired plants
H) Pennsylvania doesn't have any high-level radioactive waste storage sites from nuclear power generation

make it simple for me?

Hydroelectricity is produced by hydropower. Hydropower aka hydraulic power means the force or energy of moving water. It is a renewable source of energy produces no waste and carbon dioxide which helps greenhouse gases (gases present in the atmosphere which reduce the loss of heat). Hydroelectricity comes from the potential energy of dammed water driving a water turbine (engine that takes energy from moving water) and generator (a device that converts mechanical energy to electrical energy ). The energy extracted from the water depends on the volume and the difference in height between the source and the water's outflow. This height difference is called the head. Pumped storage hydroelectricity produces electricity to supply high peak demands by moving water between reservoirs (a place or hollow vessel where something (usually liquid) is kept in reserve, for later use) at different elevations. At times of low electrical demand, excess generation capacity is used to pump water into the higher reservoir. When there is higher demand, water is released back into the lower reservoir through a turbine.

give comment about RECYCLING FACTS AND BENEFITs?

Everyone today has heard of how important it is to recycle and most cities offer a recycling program, but what exactly is recycling and how beneficial is it really to us and the environment?

What are the recycling facts and benefits?
Recycling is the process of turning one products useful parts into a new product; this is done to conserve on the consumption of resources, energy and space used in landfills.
By recycling 1 plastic bottle not only saves anywhere from 100 to 1000 years in the landfill but also saves the environment from the emissions in producing new bottles as well as the oil used to produce that bottle.
For every 1 ton of plastic that is recycled we save the equivalent of 2 people's energy use for 1 year, the amount of water used by 1 person in 2 month's time and almost 2000 pounds of oil.
Approximately 60% of our rubbish thrown away today could be recycled. A survey was done and 9 out of 10 people surveyed said they would recycle more if it was easier.

Odd as it seems there are many people who do not realize that plastic bottles our water comes in is made out of oil. This is the same oil that is used to make gasoline. It's the same oil that is in such high demand and is not an unlimited resource.
Today the most common products in cities recycling programs are paper products, cardboard, plastic, glass and aluminum.

Taking just a moment to put your newspaper, soda can and glass spaghetti jar in the recycling bin will save everyone years in environmental harm from production of new materials, over crowded landfills and the depletion of our natural resources.
4000 Years

When we do not recycle at least our glass or aluminum we cost the earth in power usage, water and oil usage and landfill usage; glass takes up to 4000 years to decompose in a landfill yet can be recycled indefinitely.

Earn Money
Recycling can be done at home as well as in conjunction with city programs. Many scrap yards pay for scrap metal including the soda cans and soup cans we use every day.

Be Creative
Many useful items can be made from our everyday trash; the cardboard tubes left over from paper towel and toilet paper can make useful storage containers for our extra extension cords and prevents a tangled mess in the Christmas lights. If your going to throw these out don't just throw it in the rubbish bin, put it the recycling bin.

Baby jars can become snow globes the kids can make and give as gifts, old Christmas cards can become new hand made cards and a glass or plastic bottle along with some clear oil and food coloring and a few other common household items can become a groovy lava lamp!
The possibilities are endless and instructions can be found in books and on the internet.

Start Today
Recycling is a very environmentally green activity; however, there are ways that you can make it greener as well as building a strong beginning if you do not currently recycle.
Many people beginning a recycling program look around and wonder what they can put in the recycling bin; there is so much information available on this site, so don't panic.
By reusing your recycled storage containers you save on the environmental impact as well. Paper and plastic bags are good for recycling storage ; however, a plastic reusable bin is even better.

Spread The Word
Share what you know. If you notice abundant trash in your neighborhood start spreading the word and your experience with recycling and if there isn't already one in place strive to get a city recycling pick up program started.

The fact is many of our resources as well as our Earth is not renewable and we have to start taking control of our selves beginning with the world we live in.

Global warming is no longer viewed as a theory by scientists and has sadly become a fact. The change needed must be in your actions today in order to ensure a bright (not too hot) tomorrow.

JOB OFFER from careers@hewlettpackard-uk.co.cc and hp.recruitmentlondon@live.com?

I got the folowing mail is it scam or frod or is it true i can not understnad there are sending me offer later how can i know this is true form HP or not?

Attention:Mr. Udaysinh C. Vaghela,

Greetings from HEWLETT PACKARD (HP)

This is an affirmation that you have emerged Successful and being appointed for the position stated in your appointment document.

The mode of selection was based on the following;

1. CV and qualification
2. Mode in which your data is being presented on the employment data sheet.
3. Work experiences.

We employ staff based on four core values namely;
Productivity, Talent, Ambitions and Character and we expect all our newly recruited staff to exhibit these core values.
Also we ensure that all our staff especially our International employees are comfortable.

Please find attached herewith, relevant document containing the Soft Copy of your Contract Package for your perusal and approval.

Your Job Offer Summary is as follows;

CONTRACT DURATION: 5 YEARS CONTRACT TERM ( RENEWABLE )
JOB DESIGNATION: SOFTWARE DEVELOPER

STARTUP DATE: 26TH AUGUST, 2010

LEAVE PERIOD: TWICE EVERY 12 MONTHS

JOB REF: RADUK/COL/543AB

JOB CODE AP/S2653

JOB LOCATION: LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM

NOTE: You are to report your duty to Human Resource Manager.

SOFT COPY OF YOUR EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT,

THIS AGREEMENT is made today between HEWLETT PACKARD (HP) of the 1st party and you as a 2nd party.
For good consideration, HEWLETT PACKARD (HP) employs the Employee on the following terms and conditions.

ARTICLE 1: CONTRACT PERIOD
The contract period shall be for Contract duration: The contract shall last for duration of 60 consecutive months; 5 years and could be renewed based on employee's satisfactory services to the Company.

ARTICLE 2: SALARY
HEWLETT PACKARD (HP) shall pay Employee on satisfactory performance of the services the sum of (£ 7,200) Seven Thousand, Two Hundred Great Britain Pounds. Basic (Tax inclusive) MONTHLY. ie after Tax monthly, equivalent depending on employee's home country.
The employee will be reimbursed by the employer for reasonable moving expense incurred only as a result of relocation or early termination of leases, storage charges; procurement of travel documents. Reimbursements shall be made before employees embark on journey not later than Five (5) working days after submission of employee's expense report and receipts, this after the acquisition of relevant travelling papers through the assistance of the company's legal adviser on Immigration Matters..
Employer shall also take care of employees' air ticket including that of employees' family only on employees' early notification to employer and as shall be requested by employee (ONLY TWO FAMILY MEMBERS ARE ALLOWED)

ARTICLE 3: Duties and Position.
HEWLETT PACKARD (HP) hires the Employee in the capacity of Employee's duties may be reasonably modified at HEWLETT PACKARD (HP) discretion from time to time.

ARTICLE 4: Employee to Devote Full Time to HEWLETT PACKARD (HP).
The Employee will devote full time, attention, and energies to the production of the computers, and, during this employment, will not engage in any other business activity, regardless of whether such activity is pursued for profit, gain, or other pecuniary advantage. Employee is not prohibited from making personal investments in any other businesses provided those investments do not require active involvement in the operation of said companies.

ARTICLE 5: Confidentiality of Proprietary Information.
Employee agrees, during or after the term of this employment, not to reveal confidential information from rendering any services to any entity to whom said information has been or is threatened to be disclosed, the right to secure an injunction is not exclusive, and the COMPANY may pursue any other remedies it has against the Employee for a breach or threatened breach of this condition, including the recovery of damages from the Employee.

ARTICLE 6: Disability.
In the event that the Employee cannot perform the duties because of illness or incapacity for a period of more than 1 month, the compensation otherwise due during said illness. The Employee's full compensation will be reinstated upon return to work. However, if the Employee is absent from work for any reason for a continuous period of over 2 months, the COMPANY may terminate the Employee's employment, and the Hewlett Packard obligations under this agreement will cease on that date.

ARTICLE 7: Termination of Agreement.
Without cause Hewlett Packard may terminate this agreement at any time upon 6 days' written notice to the Employee, the Employee will continue to perform his/her duties and may be paid his/her regular salary up to the date of termination. In addi

Renewable energy ideal – wind turbine on wheels to capture hurricane power?

Is it possible to get a giant mobile wind turbine on wheels that can be placed in hurricanes in order to collect large amounts of energy ?

For example, how about a very rugged turbine(like propeller you would use for planes going 500 MPH) and a energy storage device that converts aluminum oxide to aluminum(high energy potential material/released energy = thermite reaction) for example. With hydrogen, you waste energy compressing… so preferrably some energy conversion system that gives solids or liquids. Then just pump the fuel to anywhere and convert it to electricity.

YEAH???
Of course you take the wheels off and lock in down once on location… materials for construction can be very cheap I think if they REALLY REALLY tried to build using already made parts.

which type of plant is the Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant in Homestead Florida?

is it either BWR or PWR?

Are we going to see any new nuclear power plants built in the near future?

In the most recent example of staggeringly expensive new nuclear plants ,

“The Ontario government put its nuclear power plans on hold last month because the bid from Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., the only “compliant” one received, was more than three times higher than what the province expected to pay [at $13 billion per reactor].

It means a single project would have wiped out the province's nuclear - power expansion budget for the next 20 years, leaving no money for at least two more multibillion-dollar refurbishment projects.”

“Much of the dramatic price increase relates to the cost of labour and materials, which have skyrocketed over the past few years. Nuclear suppliers and their investors also have less tolerance for risk.”

http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/665644

Similarly, Turkey couldn't get any bids below 21 cents per kWh for a new nuke (their average energy cost is currently under 8 cents per kWh).

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=164556&bolum=105

A new nuke in Finland went over budget by more than $2 billion (50% over the original estimate) and 3 years over schedule.

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSLS56745220080828

In the USA new nuclear energy is on track to cost 15¢ to 20¢ per kilowatt-hour. And no nuclear plant has ever been completed on budget.

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1869203,00.html

Florida Power and Light concluded that two new units totaling 2,200 megawatts would cost $12 billion to $18 billion.

Progress Energy informed state regulators that the twin 1,100-megawatt plants it intends to build in Florida would cost $14 billion, which “triples estimates the utility offered little more than a year ago.” and its cost estimates are “nonbinding” and “subject to change over time.”

http://climateprogress.org/2008/06/13/ nuclear - power -part-2-the-price-is-not-right/

With these incredibly high costs for new nuclear power plants all over the world, do you think we'll see any new nukes built in the near future?

Why don't the proponents of global warming support nuclear power?

This has always puzzled me, because most proponents of global warming are skeptical because they're afraid of the lower cost and efficiency of nuclear power .

But you would think if that were the case, they would mostly favor the change to lower the consumption of cheap fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas. Yet most proponents seem to wholeheartedly resist an increased use of nuclear power .

This seems to contradict their ecological motivations, because new nuclear power is extremely efficient and clean. One of the few new nuclear power plants proposed to be built in the US in the last 30 years – in San Antonio – was originally estimated to cost $13 billion for 2 reactors. The price tag just went up another $4 billion due to unions and unfounded EPA regulations.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/ Nuclear …

The same story can be applied to proposed nuclear plants in Florida , North Carolina, and abroad in Canada and Finland. Due mainly to the EPA and the proponents of global warming, nuclear power is highly suppressed viable alternative.

Yet we constantly hear questions from proponents of global warming about why non-believers don't support algore and the church of global warming more strongly.

What's the deal? Do they not understand the reality of clean, efficient nuclear power ? Do they resist it just because non-believers know nuclear power is better than coal and natural gas? Are they just parroting what they hear from the liberal media and political websites?

Why do global warming 'skeptics' support nuclear power so strongly?

This has always puzzled me, because most AGW deniers are 'skeptics' because they're afraid of the economic costs of carbon regulation.

But you would think if that were the case, they would mostly favor the status quo of relying on cheap fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas. Yet most 'skeptics' seem to wholeheartedly support an increased use of nuclear power .

This seems to contradict their economic motivations, because new nuclear power is extremely expensive. One of the few new nuclear power plants proposed to be built in the US in the last 30 years – in San Antonio – was originally estimated to cost $13 billion for 2 reactors. The price tag just went up another $4 billion.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/Nuclear_cost_estimate_rises.html

The same story can be applied to proposed nuclear plants in Florida , North Carolina, and abroad in Canada and Finland. Due mainly to increased construction costs, nuclear power is an expensive alternative.

Yet we constantly hear questions from deniers about why “alarmists” don't support nuclear power more strongly.

What's the deal? Do they not understand the reality of nuclear costs? Do they support it just because environmentalists used to object to nuclear power ? Are they just parrotting what they hear from the right-wing media?
Looks like it's indeed a combination of my suspicions.

1) They're purely anti-environmentalists.
2) They're purely anti-liberal, and view renewable energy as “liberal” and nuclear as “conservative”.
3) They're stuck in the 1970s and think nuclear power is still cheap.

Or some combination of the three.

How can we rely on increased nuclear power production given its cost?

Florida Power & Light estimated that building a new nuclear plant in that state would cost $12-18 billion. A new study concluded that generation costs from a new nuclear power plant would cost 25-30 cents per kWh – three times the current average US electrical rates. A June 2008 report by Moody's Investor Services Global Credit Research concluded that any utility engaging in the risky venture of building a new nuclear power plant would experience a severe decline in its credit rating.

http://climateprogress.org/2009/01/07/ nuclear - power - plants -troubled-assests-credit-risk/#more-4585

Now I want to point out that I'm not suggesting we shut down all nuclear plants and never use nuclear power again. However, many people seem to feel that nuclear power is a silver bullet which will solve all our energy problems. Given the costs and risks of new nuclear plants , it seems more like a diamond-encrusted platinum bullet to me.

So how can we rely on increased nuclear power production to solve our energy problems given its cost and risks?
Ben – solar and wind (and geothermal) are cheaper, as discussed here:
http://greenhome.huddler.com/forum/thread/975/new- nuclear - power -plant-costs-appear-staggering

How does Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant dispose of it's nuclear waste?

Located in Florida ?

Why is the GOP pushing for new nuclear power?

“Republicans say, build 100 new nuclear power plants during the next twenty years”

http://www.gop.com/News/NewsRead.aspx?Guid=92504368-37ec-4d4e-94bb-9edc4fc33250

But as they push for a massive number of new nuclear plants , this is what's happening around the world.

Finland: “After four years of construction and thousands of defects and deficiencies, the reactor's 3 billion euro price tag, about $4.2 billion, has climbed at least 50 percent. And while the reactor was originally meant to be completed this summer, Areva, the French company building it, and the utility that ordered it, are no longer willing to make certain predictions on when it will go online.”

Turkey: “The only company bidding…offered a price of 21.16 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh). Current electricity prices in the country vary between 4 cents and 14 cents per kWh.”

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=164556&bolum=105

Even here in the USA, in Florida : “Progress Energy offered its revised estimate Tuesday: $14-billion for two new nuclear reactors…The utility said its 200-mile, 10-county transmission project will cost $3-billion more. The total cost triples estimates the utility offered little more than a year ago.”

http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/energy/article414653.ece

Idaho: “Consumers expect reasonably priced energy, and the company's due diligence process has led to the conclusion that it does not make economic sense to pursue the project at this time,” Bill Fehrman, President of MidAmerican Nuclear Energy Co, said in the letter to Payette County residents.

http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews/idUSN2957446620080129

The list goes on. Why does the GOP want 100 new nuclear power plants when currently they're so expensive and having so little success in the USA and around the world?

Why Not Nuclear Reactors if So Much Concern about Environment?

In California, we have one nuclear reactor, on half the time. We still have coal burning power plants . How many tens of thousands of kids and adults have to get asthma before CLEAN nuclear power is established? Florida has 5, their rates are 1/4 of California. Even tiny Switzerland has 5.
There have never been any nuclear 'accident's in the United States. No one was ever injured, no plant or animal of any kind was injured. We had a scare only with Three Mile Island. Russia had catastrophes with poorly designed reactors.
Nuclear reactors have zero emissions unlike even 'clean' natural gas or so called 'clean' coal plants .

What is that power plant near Orlando, right off the Beach Line (528) Highway?

I was just visiting family in Florida , and I was driving back to the Orlando International Airport on 528-W, and I saw a big power plant with two big cooling towers from the highway. I also flew right over the power station and could see it all from the window of my plane. I'm pretty sure it's not a nuclear plant, but I was just wondering what the name of it is. Can anyone give me any information/websites/etc? Спасибо.

How does energy storage affect the future of renewable energy?

Could gravel batteries make renewable energy more realistic?

A company claims to have solved the problem of storing energy from renewable sources using giant gravel batteries:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/26/gravel-batteries- renewable - energy - storage

Що ви думаєте?

what do you think about new wind energy maps?

New energy storage systems are able to store so much renewable energy ….so….

HURRICANE ENERGY CAN BE STORED!! So…1 day hurricane would give much more
usable…. energy than a good constant 1 year 6 m/s wind….

Results are evident!

What is the energy output when obtaining hydrogen from water using electrolysis?

Let's say one uses 100 kilowatt generating capacity to produce hydrogen from water using electrolysis, and runs the process for one hour. If he then turns around and uses the hydrogen to generate electricity, how much can he generate? Can he then produce 25 kilowatts for one hour? 50 kw? In other words, is the return from electrolysis 25%? Is it 50%? I am interested in the storage capacity from hydrogen produced with renewable energy . Спасибо.

What do you think about Tomorrowshorizon.org?

Tomorrows Horizon Inc is a start up nonprofit dedicated to the advancement of knowledge regarding the problems our world faces, developments in renewable energy production and storage , and breakthroughs in sustainable living systems.
Our website is still under construction but please take a few minutes to check out our homepage and if you would like updates please join our mailing list.

lightning arresters and storage devices?

is there a way we could use lightning arresters and storage devices to store energy from lightning and use it as a renewable source of electricity?

Why not nuclear the same as France?

I've read many questions and answers about power generation and how the US energy crisis could be solved by renewable resources such as wind or solar cells. While wind, solar cells, hydro, landfill gas and other types of renewable generation all have their place in an overall mix, due to their variability and diffuse nature, none are a viable source of reliable base load power. I emphasis the importance of reliability since there are no practical methods of storing energy that do not have a steep price in efficiency.

The first method of effectively increasing the supply of renewable energy is to use less. Next, if and until fusion power becomes a reality, the only other answer, and I know there will weeping, arm flailing and talk of doomsday, is the use of fail safe nuclear reactors (they will shut down before melting down) with fuel reprocessing to alleviate the spent waste storage problem. 80% of France's power is nuclear. What do they know that we don't?

The alternatives are horrifying?

When it comes to discussing what is going to happen
when oil runs out, the loudest argue adopting renewable energy
is a horrifying prospect – it's inadequate etc.

But if we turn our attention to:
What will solar energy / collectors and storage devices
be like in the year 3000…
maybe we'd move the debate,
and our reality, on
cos, once identified ~
we could produce now…

Що ви думаєте?

I've made a start, putting down my design ideas.
Please take a look:

http://www.the-alternative.org.uk

See: Chapter 6: Energy / Solar

Need information on energy?

I am doing a project on energy . It consists of 12 different types of energies. I just need information on some of them because they are hard to find. They are:

1) Ethanol/Methanol
2) Bio-mass
3)Lithium Ion Battery
4) Pumped storage reservoirs
5) Geothermal

The information I need on them are:

A) Is it efficient?
B) Is it renewable , why or why not?
c) Is it reusable
d) can it be used anywhere?
e) where is it best used?

*Thanks for your help!!

Are McCain/Palin supporters Naive or Oblivious?

I just don't understand?, republicans whine and complain when things go wrong; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_rating

Then all of a sudden their republican presidential nominee chooses a female as his running mate for vice presidency. They forget all about the major issues they so annoyingly complained about over the past few years. Health Care, Education, National Security, Immigration, Abortion, Same-Sex Marriage, Social Security, and the Economy.

Which of these do John McCain and George W Bush disagree about OH YEAH!, none:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/06/17/us/politics/20080617_POLICY_GRAPHIC.html

Sure they do disagree on a few issues but just answer me this in the past 100 years(and not in the last 20 to 30 or so years) which of these: Climate Change, Energy and Oil, Renewable Energy , Interrogation Tactics, and Arms Control. Can you say was brought up as an important issue related to the american people?. I would have to say NONE!.

Is Obama the answer I don't know and i don't really care. Is McCain the solution to our problems sure, if hell freezes over.
Jeez, are you serious when you don't see proof you complain. “where are you facts blah blah blah”. I give you actual facts from reliable sources and it's not enough that's amazing how insanely stuborn you people can be.
I don't follow politics but it's laughable how easy it is to correct some of you like ricky there,

McCain/Palin supporters are those that believe in the American dream…

Do you honestly think republicans are the only one's who dream of that, what person in the world doesn't believe in the american dream; it's what most of us dream of it's what we strive for. Do

Those supporteres haven't forgotten about health care and education…

How are thes not your opinions?, it's completely contradictory bush and McCain agree on the same policy. FOR CHRIST SAKE AHHH!!!.

They haven't forgotten about National Security….

The last attack on American soil before 9/11 occurred 60 years prior, how is that any different than the past 7 years?.

They haven't forgotten about immigration, because they want the illegals to stay out and welcome the documented….
This is why republicans disgust me this wonderful country you love so much was founded on a single basis, Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses. We are a nation of immigrants how we've deluded ourselves into believing that were not natives of this country is beyond any kind of normal comprehension.

They haven't forgotten about abortion. They remember that, “Thou shalt not kill.” They haven't forgotten about same-sex marriage, they ignore it because it's not a natural union.

Once again how does this not differ from what I said about health and education

They haven't forgotten about Social Security. They believe that putting money into the people's pockets and letting them invest it in private funds is better than having government do it for them. Finally, the economy is in better shape than it was in the Clinton years, but a Democratic Congress has made it difficult for the President these past two years.
Why would anyone in the past 100 years bring up climate change, energy and oil, renewable energy , interrogation tactics, or arms control? Global warming wasn'ta concern. Energy and oil were what made the Rockefellers rich. Renewable energy didn't exist. Interrogation tactics included beating the bejesus out of someone until the talked. And arms control was I dare you to pry this gun from my cold dead fingers.
EXACTLY!, does this person have a brain? I clearly stated that.

Is Obama the answer? No. Is McCain? That's the way I'm voting.

How does this final statement even make sense?.

Is The government handing out nearly $2 billion for new solar plants to create jobs Bad?

Obama awards $2B for solar power, hails new jobs

Obama hands out $2 billion for new solar plants, says money will help create thousands of jobs

The government is handing out nearly $2 billion for new solar plants that President Barack Obama says will create thousands of jobs and increase the use of renewable energy sources.

Obama announced the initiative in his weekly radio and online address Saturday, saying the money is part of his plan to bring new industries to the US

“We're going to keep competing aggressively to make sure the jobs and industries of the future are taking root right here in America,” Obama said.

The Obama administration says those projects will create more than 2,000 construction jobs and 1,500 permanent jobs.

Obama said that while it may take years to bring back all the jobs lost during the recession, the economy is moving in a positive direction.

The unemployment rate dropped to 9.5 percent.

Obama has said that to bring the nation's economy back from the brink of a depression, it was necessary to add to the country's debt in the short term.

Everyone is talking about CUT SPENDING. But Is this SPENDING bad?

Entries for Issuing and Calling Bonds; Gain?

Entries for Issuing and Calling Bonds; Gain

Vidovich Corp. produces and sells renewable energy equipment. To finance its operations, Vidovich Corp. issued $1,334,000 of 10-year, 13% callable bonds on January 1, 2012, with interest payable on January 1 and July 1. The fiscal year of the company is the calendar year.

Journalize the entries to record the following selected transactions:

2012
Jan. 1 Issued the bonds for cash at their face amount.
July. 1 Paid the interest on the bonds.
2018
July. 1 Called the bond issue at 96, the rate provided in the bond indenture. (Omit entry for payment of interest.)

Why are there so many social problems in the richest country in the world?

To name but a few, the USA scores lowly in all of the following compared to countries like Japan or Scandinavia (and most of western Europe to a lesser extent):

1) Crime
2) Teenage pregnancy
3) Health/life expectancy
4) Poverty and low income
5) Long working hours culture / less paid hoilday
6) Educational achievement/literacy rates
7) Obesity Environmental pollution eg CO2 per capita, recycling
9) Public transport and renewable energy
by richest country i just meant total not per capita

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

I don' think you can argue over population is the cause of these problems when the countries that perform best are generally more densely populated (japan and western europe) than the usa.

I would suggest government has a big role to play in most of these as many of them are linked – particularly to inequality, education, healthcare and environmental regulation. With the exception of japan, most of western europe has a bigger public sector than the usa.
Personally I would suggest higher taxes on fuel, higher taxes for the rich, less defence spending, and more education, healthcare and public transport spending.

Can someone help me with my DIY residential solar project?

I'm new to the topic of renewable energy with solar panels. I've been doing some research and I think I have a general idea of what is required in a DIY scenario. However, most of the guides have very limited information regarding the use of an enclosure, box, etc. The information that I have found usually points to some home-made enclosure or leaving the batteries exposed. I'd rather not do that if possible.

The closest I have gotten is the Xantrex PH-1800, but it is not officially offered to the general public, so their website does not have any documentation posted on this. Here is some info on my scenario and the type of system I'd like to set up:

Portable:
I live in a house with plenty of space in the yard, and a spare bedroom, however, I don't plan on living here for much longer, so I'd like a small enough system that can be moved to the next house (possibly apartment) I move to.
Here's a picture of one that I found, although again, this one is only sold in bulk:

http://image.made-in-china.com/6f3j00lCf…

I'd like the container to allow for battery replacement. If it's a small container/enclosure, I'd like for it to be scalable so that I can add more batteries down the line if need be. The xantrex enclosure seems to offer that feature, but I'm not sure if that might be too advanced for me. I have a strong tech background, but limited electrical.

Scalable:
To begin with, I would like to simply power just an AC for 4hrs that uses 600 watts. If I'm calculating this right, then I would need 6 deep marine cycle batteries so that I don't drain them past 50%. I would also need an inverter rated at 600watt minimum.

Going back to the enclosure, ideally, the enclosure would have hookups that allow for adding/removing batteries without changing the solar panels. If the charging speed slows down, that's not a big deal for my scenario. Is there a such thing out there?

These requirements are not set in stone, so if I missed anything, feel free to subsititute numbers where necessary. The most important feature I'm interested in is scalability so that I don't have to throw away components down the line. I'd rather buy a 1000watt inverter now even if I would only use 600watts, assuming this doesn't produce another inefficiency. If it does, please let me know.
Update:
Thanks for the feedback. However, does anyone have information regarding a container that does not involve some kind of DIY process?

Also, since this is more of a starter project for me, I wouldn't be planning on using the AC and charging the batteries at the same time. In fact, I generally get home late from work and might only use this during the weekend.

Also, does higher wattage from the solar panels mean faster charging? I was under the impression that the controller's job is to pretty much take whatever electricity is coming from the solar panel and then “standardize it” to whatever the battery can handle, kind of like a funnel so to speak.

One other related question, would this change if I were to connect say 6 batteries in parallel or woudl it still require the same amount of wattage for the charging process?

Am I a Democrat or Republican?

Ok. I'm 13, and basically am just trying to figure out the political party my views fit in with best. I think I'ma Democrat, and that's what most quizzes I've taken have said, but I want a larger amount of people to take a look at it. Without further ado, here are my views on certain subjects.

I generally think that abortion is wrong, but I would NEVER take away a woman's right to choose.
I believe that Obamacare is a good thing.
I believe in welfare programs.
Gay marriage should definitely be legalized.
Affirmative action should be perfected. I believe that someone more qualified should have the job, not the minority.
I believe in a progressive tax rate. The highest bracket should be at almost 50%, with the lowest near 0%.
As for prayer in schools, I think that a student should have the right to be excused from class if he/she wants to pray, but no school should ever mandate prayer.
I would like us to move towards more renewable energy and hybrid cars.
I believe in an absolute separation of church and state. I don't even like it when candidates say, “God bless this land,” at the end of a speech.
Thanks for all the answers. Oh, and to the person talking about socialism and evolution, I am not a socialist, and I believe in evolution. We are humans because of a series of mutations over millions of years, NOT because God created a bunch of different animals.

Is The government handing out nearly $2 billion for new solar plants to create jobs Bad?

Obama awards $2B for solar power, hails new jobs

Obama hands out $2 billion for new solar plants, says money will help create thousands of jobs

The government is handing out nearly $2 billion for new solar plants that President Barack Obama says will create thousands of jobs and increase the use of renewable energy sources.

Obama announced the initiative in his weekly radio and online address Saturday, saying the money is part of his plan to bring new industries to the US

“We're going to keep competing aggressively to make sure the jobs and industries of the future are taking root right here in America,” Obama said.

The Obama administration says those projects will create more than 2,000 construction jobs and 1,500 permanent jobs.

Obama said that while it may take years to bring back all the jobs lost during the recession, the economy is moving in a positive direction.

The unemployment rate dropped to 9.5 percent.

Obama has said that to bring the nation's economy back from the brink of a depression, it was necessary to add to the country's debt in the short term.

How are todays landfills for economical and efficient. What would happen if America didn't have landfills?

-what items can be recycled (as in when you take your recycling bins curbside) what goes to landfill? I know pizza boxes, hangers, paint cans, anything contaminated either with food or chemicals can't be… I don't think. Why is it better to put it in the landfill?

I've heard if you throw a plastic bottle in the land fill it can last a thousand years?! Is that true. I read there is a new thing called bio-reactor landfills. These types of landfills use moisture as a method to enhance the waste degradation process. Have you heard of a bio-reactor? How does it work?
Studies carried out by EPA have suggested that by operating a landfill as a bio-reactor there is an increase in settlement of the solid waste as well as an enhancement in the methane generation rate of approximately five times that of conventional landfills. Overall, technologies developed under this program can extend the utility of municipal solid waste landfill space and produce a viable source of renewable energy .

I'm looking for information of how landfills today are economical and efficient.

I keep finding a ton of info on recycle, and zero-waste. But everything can't be recycled can it? What happens to those materials/items? What would happen to America if we didn't have landfills.

What will America/the world be like when humanity runs out of carbon fuel?

By now, most scientists are beginning to realize large scale renewable energy (such as solar, wind, etc) isn't going to be possible (at least not before we run out of carbon based fuels). So, what the hell are we going to do? What will America be like when the people who live in the suburbs don't have the gas to make it to the city? What will New York City be like with sky high food prices and shortages? How will YOU survive the Apocalypse if it comes in your lifetime? We've already passed our peak for oil and natural gas, and with consumption at the rate it is, it is likely we will run out soon or begin to see amazingly high gas prices.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubbert_peak_theory#Natural_gas

You all realize of course that ignoring the problem or saying it probably won't happen won't keep it from happening right?

Have you ever gotten 3 estimates to put solar PV on your house w/ power company rebates and a 30% tax credit?

In CA, you can lease a system, for only the cost of your electric bill at today's rates . That certainly affordable. You lock in the rate you pay today, no power rate increases. The system is warranted for 25 years, is connected to the crid and sized so the power company provides your power in bad weather and at night. Or you can buy the system, pay it off in 8-12 years and have free power from then on. Why do people say solar PV is not viable? Solar is more efficient in colder temperature. Voltage increases as temperature goes down. There are a lot of misunderstandings about solar. The federal tax refund, is like tax deductions for mortgage interest, allowable and your right to use. Renewable energy is not Partisan, it's sensible and saves you money. Why not get a few estimate and find out what it really costs, and how it really works?

earth sci help! please thanks!! best answer! =)?

8. Between 1930 and 2000, human population rose by _______.
A) 50%
B) 150%
C) 300%
D) 500%
9. At current production and use rates , it is estimated that all of the known oil in the world will be used up in approximately _____ years.
A) 15
B) 40
C) 85
D) 140
10. The United States consumes approximately ____ more energy per person than the global average.
A) 2 times
B) 4.5 times
C) 8 times
D) 9.5 times
11. Which of the following is NOT a renewable energy resource?
A) Solar
B) Wind
C) Clean Coal
D) Tidal
E) Hydrothermal
12. Which of the following is NOT a fossil fuel?
A) Coal
B) Nuclear
C) Gas
D) Oil

How to reduce the USA federal budget deficit? A spending freeze, is that really a serious approach?

A serious freeze on 17% of the budget while the big spending items like the military are not frozen? Is that a real serious approach to deficit reduction?

What about returning income tax rates to what they were about 30 years ago or so on the top 1%?

The other issue is …..how does stopping domestic spending help create jobs? I thought it was common knowledget that one way to stimulate spending and therefore the economy is to have public works projects..like road and highway building and repairs, and same for bridges, dams, and other infrastructure? what about the renewable energy type projects they talked so much about during the election campaign of 2008?

Anyone else like me think that the Obama administration seems to have not conviction…no real belief? certainly not belief in the reform rhetoric they were shouting out during last campaign season. Since when is a 59 to 41 majority in the senate a handicap? since when is a huge election victory last election a handicap? And why the heck is Joe Lieberman chairman of anything right now anyway?

I voted for Obama and Democrats last election…….and like many people who did am getting pretty pissed off. Before you Republicans get too excited, yes I am bashing Obama and Democrats, but it will be cold day in hades before a Republican gets my vote…cause they are even worse.

Would you rather live in a society with no money if it was possible?

this is a little hypothecitcal – would you rather live in a world without money? Imagine if we could harness technology to produce our food and housing and basic needs, used 100% renewable energy such as heat from the earths core. Having no money would also change the schooling system, instead of teaching children to pass exams, to earn passage to university, to earn more money, we could school children to be good human beings and inventors.

Do you think this would reduce crime and war in the world or do you think that humans would find something else to fight about?

Beart in mind that poorer areas of cities and towns ALWAYS have higher crime rates than richer areas, and that all wars are fundemently wars to get control of resources which equal, money.

Maybe a better question would be – does money cause the crime and suffering in the world

What measures have the UK government taken to reduce CO2 emissions in industrial/transport/retail sectors?

I genuinely do not know.

They have targeted the housing sector heavily; HIPS, Energy Asset Rating and the constant drives for us to have renewable forms of energy and energy efficient light bulbs.

The problem is, energy wastage in homes is absolutely dwarfed by the wastage in other sectors.

Does anyone have any idea at all how insignificant fitting energy efficient (compact fluorescent) lamps are, when the massive Debenhams in Bond Street has it's entire facade covered in what appears to be standard GU bulbs for Christmas? (one of thousands of such stores)

Heated stores always having their door open; Lights on 24 hours even when the stores are closed. And do not get me started on Transport and Industrial sectors.

Am I the only one who thinks the heavy targetting by the government of energy efficiency in homes is totally misdirected? Focus on the retail sector at least!!!!

Why aren't we harnessing our own energy?

Why are we not drilling our own non- renewable resources while developing new technologies that will enable energy independence in the future?

We have a vast supply of Natural gas.

http://www.naturalgas.org/overview/resources.asp

We have a vast amount of land we can use for wind energy .

http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/wind_maps.asp

We have areas of the US mainland where drilling is prohibited. Why not use these? (with regulations, we can keep both tourism and the oil industry safe)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/758Syms2006OCSMapWithPlanni.png

Are we developing new weapons? At the rate China is developing, a nuclear warhead will be like TNT in the future.

We have a vast amount of deserts where no one lives, where the sun's energy could be harnessed for miles.

Compare the ISS with China's new space station to be completed in 2020.
China: http://i.space.com/images/i/12419/original/china-space-station-design-art.jpg
The ISS: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/STS-135_final_flyaround_of_ISS_1.jpg
Theirs looks a little bigger. And they will have it completed in only 8 years. The ISS (which is not ours) was completed in 14 years.

Soon China will become the world leader in technology (if their not already!).

If you want to rely on solar electricity exclusively, how many solar panels will you need to buy?

Solar energy is one of the most important components of a renewable energy future. Your parents are considering installing photovoltaic cells, which convert the sun's energy directly into electricity, on their roof, and have asked for your help. You do some research and learn that, on a sunny day in Idaho, sunlight at the earth's surface provides about 0.75 kilowatt/m2. Solar panels have an area of 0.5 square meter, operate at 10% efficiency, and cost $63. Your parents use electricity at a rate of 2 kW.

1. If your parents want to rely on solar electricity exclusively, how many solar panels will they need to buy? How big must their roof be (in feet) to hold the array of panels?
2. If electricity costs $0.08 per kilowatt-hour, how long will it take your parents to recoup their initial investment?

Why Germany has it so good while America is going down?

. The European Union, 27 member nations with a half billion people, has become the largest, wealthiest trading bloc in the world, producing nearly a third of the world's economy — nearly as large as the US and China COMBINED. Europe has more Fortune 500 companies than either the US, China or Japan.

European nations spend far less than the United States for universal healthcare rated by the World Health Organization as the best in the world, as US health care is ranked 37th. Europe leads in confronting global climate change with renewable energy technologies, creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs in the process. Europe is twice as energy efficient as the US and their ecological “footprint” (the amount of the earth's capacity that a population consumes) is about half that of the United States for the same standard of living.

Unemployment in the US is widespread and becoming chronic, but when Americans have jobs, we work much longer hours than our peers in Europe. Before the recession, Americans were working 1,804 hours per year versus 1,436 hours for Germans — the equivalent of nine extra 40-hour weeks per year.

People in the countries that are in trouble now economically were the ones willing to go to Iraq — and there is a connection. These are the countries that were much more inclined to go the American route, going into debt heavily, using housing speculation as the engine of the economy, and opening their economies big time to global bank debt and finance.

Goldman Sachs poured tons of money into Greece, and other New York, London and German banks poured money into Spain. None of the bubbles occurred in Germany and in the “old Europe” that Donald Rumsfeld wrote off. Part of Europe is in trouble to the extent — and only to the extent — that it's involved in the American model. Those countries most resistant to the American model are doing fine.

Would you agree that it is the Conservatives and Libertarians that actually care about the environment?

Considering the fact that Conservatives and Libertarians largely support Nuclear energy – a vital importance to solving climate change– unlike liberals who still think renewable energy is the way to go (lol).In the 1980s, we were commissioning 40 new nuclear power plants a decade. If we kept building at approximately that rate, we would have the share of electricity generated by coal and nuclear almost reversed today. Instead of it being 20 percent nuclear and 50 percent coal, it would be 50 percent nuclear and 20 percent coal. Who would argue that from an environmental point of view that wouldn't be a better situation?
I don't care about what that idiot Glenn Beck said.

Is anyone in Houston using Spark Energy? Anyone have problems?

I haven't been able to find any reviews and would appreciate any opinions from people who've either tried to sign up or are with them now, or have had them and switched. They seem to have the best rate, especially for the 100% renewable plans so it seems too good to be true.

спасибі!

Recall when barry said that under his plan, electricity rates would “necessarily skyrocket”? Is LA there?

Households that get their power from the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power could see their electric bills go up between 8.8% and 28.4%, depending on where they live and how much energy they use, under a plan unveiled Monday by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Appearing with labor and environmental leaders, Villaraigosa said the proposed increases would ensure that the DWP meets his goal of securing 20% of its energy from renewable sources such as wind and solar by Dec. 31. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dwp-rates16-2010mar16,0,7870063.story

Why are so many people concerned with the rate in which the crude oil reserves of the planet are being used?

Only once the non- renewable energy sources are depleted will the science of renewable energy thrive. Drive large vehicles, waste electricity, you will help get us there sooner.
Selfishness and greed are not answers or excuses.

What would your tax policy be if you were president?

This is mine. Please comment on yours.
-First, a flat tax is the dumbest idea ever and the Bush tax cuts were terrible.
-I am in favor of cutting taxes for everyone. However, 35% should be the minimum government should tax millionaires.
-I feel that the corporate tax rate should be lowered. American businesses need to get competitive with other countries tax codes. Therefore, I'd lower it to 25% and companies involved in renewable energy projects should get a tax rate of 0%.
2nd, I'd lower interest rates , dividends, and capital gains tax on middle income families making $100,000 or less.
3rd, I favor the current capital gains tax. I think America needs to encourage investments. Therefore, I wouldn't change that.
Що ви думаєте? It's a mix of republican values and democrat values.

How would I be categorized politically?

I support unborn rights and would support a pro-life amendment to the constitution, with the only acceptation for the mother's life.

I would abolish the department of education because it's a local and state level responsibility.

I support the right to bear arms, concealed weapons licenses, hunting, stand your ground laws, etc.

I support a 2 strikes and your out drunk driving law.

I support a his body his choice law banning infant circumcision unless it is to treat a legitimate medical condition.

I support the decriminalizing of marijuana because it is less harmful than alcohol.

I think the drinking age should be 18 to match the age of adulthood.

I think it is of the highest urgency to become and stay energy independent.

I support nuclear power and increasing the number of nuclear power plants across America.

I would push the auto makers to make electric cars available for drivers who want them.

I would set and push for goals of energy independence, curing cancer, and paying down the nation debt.

I oppose the endangered species act because it has failed to protect one species and has only given government control of people's land.

I would raise the levels of fines on employers hiring illegal aliens.

Homeland security should only be used as an anti-terror agency and criminal law enforcement should be handled by other agencies.

I don't believe there is such thing as a gay marriage and think we should give them the same privileges that comes with marriage but call it something else.

I think capitalism is the greatest antipoverty tool the world has ever seen and encourage the economy, not put outrageous taxes on it.

I don't believe humans are warming up the Earth but I think we need to clean up some of the messes we are making such as air quality.

I believe in a small federal government. I don't think the general public should even notice the federal government unless they visit their local military recruiter or post office.

No more ethanol, it causes higher grocery bills and less MPG.

I support Boone's plan.

I support the rights of nudists to live their lifestyle on their privately owned property without the government telling them they must put clothes on.

I am a Christian but don't think it's the government's job to push morality, I think morality must come from the people up. Not the government down.

I support net neutrality, and oppose bandwidth caps.

I would revert our copyright laws back to that of the Webster and Benjamin Franklin years: An item can be copyrighted for 14 years, renewable once, then falls into public domain.

We allow men to go out in public shirtless. I support amending the law allowing both genders to do the same. One gender shirtless is discrimination. I support women's rights to breast feed in public. That is the function of the breast. I don't think anyone has ever been harmed for seeing a breast.

I think smokers should be required to pay their own way when they get cancer and heart disease. Not get public money to fight a self imposed condition.

I would allow people to own their social security accounts and allow them to invest in a Roth IRA within their social security account so the people may build a nest egg to retire on. Each person will own their account and congress may never dip into it.

I would make it illegal for credit card companies to raise interest rates , at will, with no delinquent activity: banning universal default.

Absolutely, no more national debt. No more borrowing.

I believe terminally ill patients should be allowed to take experimental drugs that have yet to receive FDA approval.

Lets get rid of the IRS, replace tax system with flat tax or national sales tax. The IRS and current tax code only exists to control people.

I oppose taxes on broadband internet access, sales tax on in items bought online, and regulation of online content.

I don't believe our government is up to the task of providing national heath care and it's much better off left in the hands of the private sector.

I think adults should legally be able to take steroids for body building if he is not competing in competitive sports.

I think daylight savings time should be expanded to a year round project.

I oppose the government regulating the content of literature, films, video games, etc.

Comparing & Contrasting: Iceland and Finland?

I have been researching and reading a lot about Finland lately and I have made almost a 100% decision that I want to move there for my Master's degree and to pursue an Engineering career (after I'm finished with a few years in the States for my Bachelor's degree). I already know a lot about Finland from the things I have read, such as:
How technologically advanced it is
How the people are very shy and quiet but also are very friendly and cooperative with one another
How little corruption it has
How effective their education system is
Their excellent fluency in the English language
Their scientific and mathematic literacy
Their fairly low poverty rate
Their use of renewable energy and preservation of their environment
Their civil rights, including freedom of press, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, democracy…
Their national pride
etc. etc.

However, I have just recently become interested in Iceland and I have to say I am very impressed with it. Of the things I listed above, how does Iceland compare with Finland? I would also like to know how their job openings in the engineering field compare with Finland (since from what I've heard, there aren'ta lot in Finland at the moment). I'd also be curious to know their relationship with the rest of the world (since I know Finland generally keeps to themselves) and the climate there (yes, I know it's cold as hell, but I've heard that the summer months in Finland are usually fairly nice).

Final note: I know the Icelandic language is extremely difficult to learn, and how most people say it's one of the most difficult in the world. That's why I'm interested in their fluency in English because I want to know how long I can get with English alone (I'm usually not bad with picking up languages through immersion).

Why do people say solar panels are too expensive when in CA they lease/install at current electric bill rate?

If your electric bill is $200. you can lease a Solar PV system in CA, and pay $200. for 20 years. No raising of rates !!! No C02 or pollution to offset. The Panels are warranted for 25 years. Yet, so many here buy into the ignorant idea, solar is not viable, it's too far off, why is that? Glen Beck said so? Check rates in your area. 21 states have incentives. If Oil and Defense get corporate welfare solar incentives are fair. The main components are silicon (same as computer chips), metal and glass. It's a no brainer. The ones trying you to convince you it's not realistic are Petroleum companies, ever wonder why?

Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy

Science report help! (year 7)Fossil fuels etc?

Ok i have almost finished my report but there are a few things that i need to include but i don't know the answers.I have tried browsing the internet but i can't find anything.The report is based on Fossil fuels and renewable energy sources…

1. Explain how animal waste can be used as a source of energy .Write a balanced equation for the reaction that produces the energy .(you don't have to write out the equation but a few facts and notes would help for this one please)
2.Which of these are renewable sources of energy ? a) the sun, b) rainfall, c) the wind, d) the tide, e) hot rocks, f) biomass.
3.the importance of fossil fuels and their products in life
4.How long fossil fuels are likely to last at the present rates of consumption.
5.Pollution problems involved in the use or fossil fuels.
6.How recycling plastics etc can help us to save fossil fuel.

Thanks if you just know the answer to one it really would help.

Do you think that someday as many homeowners that own cars will own the Solar PV power plant on their roof?

Seems to me that when cars were first invented and people owned horses, and buggies and carriage houses, they denied that cars were reliable and worth the investment. Here in CA you can buy a solar PV system, it's connected to the power company with a bi-directional meter, it's sized so that you get your power from the power company at night and bad weather, and they buy your excess power when your family is at work and school. NO BATTERIES unless you want back-up power from the grid. Most don't have batteries. Then there is CSP, those giant trough-like concentrated solar power plants in the desert. I square mile of CSP could power the country. Sure we'd have to update the grid. The biggest resistance is coming from the Nuclear and Petroleum industries. They want you to think those are better options. Nuclear is a dead end game, we don't need it and it's too dangerous. There is a 30% Federal tax rebate — NOT A SUBSIDY — no more than any other allowable deduction is a subsidy. The power company in many states like CA, NJ, NY and 21 States will also pay a big portion of your initial cost? Чому? They get to buy the excess power from your roof cheaper and locally. It's win/win. If we manufactured here, and people bought the systems like they do cars, the market would drive the industry. Solar, Wind, Hydo, Tidal these are the future of energy and they are renewable . Oil is half gone refered to as “Paek Oil” they will squeeze every dime of profit before it's gone. Would be better to see to it petroleum lasts longer. Corn ethanol is a loser but switch grass ethanol is a winer, made from weeds. Why is corn ethanol pushed instead? The corn industry. It's corporatism driving what is really best into the ground with misinformation and propaganda to head off the emergence of Renewable Energy which is the best way to go. Solar PV on your roof is distributed solar (not a huge power plant) depending on where you live and your local power rates the payback can be 8 years, warranted for 25 years, that's 17 years of free power. The current energy industry is dead set against US buying into that reality, hence all the misinformation. I know a family who has solar and wind turbines. The turbines work great in winter and the solar work great in summer, they sell excess power to the power company and get power when the solar and wind systems are not at their best. Works great and saves them a bundle. That's in CO.

Should I take a 50% increase on my energy bills for the sake of the planet?

And that's just my bill. No telling what it will do to businesses whose energy bills are more than 10 times mine.

The governor of California is mandating that energy companies provide electricity that is produced by 30% renewable sources such as solar panels and wind turbines.

These companies will raise energy rates so they can collect the money needed to invest in these additional energy sources. By the way, it would cost me $15,000 to solarize my house. Given my current energy bills, it would take more than ten years for my panels to pay themselves.
Roadrunner: You bring up another point. The governor promised 500 thousand “GREEN JOBS”, which were supposed to include solar panel factories.

He promised the jobs, but I guess he didn't promise them in California

How much oil do we have left?

Also, when will it all run out if we continue drilling at the rate we are now and which renewable energy source is most likely to rule supreme once petrol and diesel is no longer an option?

Should politics be one big game or should it be for the benefit of the people? What say you?

In its first 40 hours, the new majority of the House of Representatives kept their promise to voters and passed legislation—increasing the minimum wage for the first time in a decade, empowering Medicare to negotiate lower prices on drugs, cutting interest rates on student loans in half, revoking big oil subsidies and using the money to invest in renewable energy —that provided a down payment for a new direction for this country.

These bills are overwhelmingly popular, and are simply common sense reforms. Yet every one of them—and many more—got held up in the US Senate.

Conservatives boast about the “success” of their strategy in discrediting the new majority. As Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss., put it, “the strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. So far it's working for us.”

How is it working? It's dragging the reputation of the Congress down to the level of the failed president. Conservatives lie in the road of progress and then complain that nothing is moving.

This values partisan posturing over reforms vital to the country. It must be challenged.

It's time to take the gloves off.

The first step is to expose the obstruction to the American people. Let's urge Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to force a real filibuster. Keep the bills on the floor and force vote after vote, exposing the obstructionists. We'll organize in states across the country to insure that their constituents know exactly who is standing in the way of progress.
Proud Conservatives need to learn how to read, the freaking point is that the Senate has obstructed the bills , what a freaking tard
All idiots like the Proud Conservative please refer to paragraph 2 before you open your pie hole and make a fool of yourself
Yeah it tells me that a bunch of mindless idiots who can't see past the REAL problem forgot to vote straight ticket to get a REAL majority that could effect change
Indeed, Hendrix also sang
With the power of love anything is possible

Band of Gypsys………..absolutely GREAT RnR
DC John are you really that stupid? The American people VOTED for this agenda so if that's ram rodding something it's the DAMN WILL OF THE PEOPLE , what an idiot

Shouldn't McCain be questioning his own energy policies instead of Obama's?

“In 2007, McCain missed all 11 energy -related Senate votes considered key by the League of Conservation Voters, including votes related to automobile fuel economy, offshore Virginia drilling, refinery construction, renewable electricity mandates, energy efficiency, liquefied coal and support for biofuels. The absences prompted the League to give McCain a “zero” rating for the year.”

And Inflating your tires is a tip recommended by all energy experts, Obama merely endorsed it, he never said anything about making that his energy policy.

Why would John Mc Cain be a good president in terms of energy policy for the US?

In 2007, McCain missed all 11 energy -related Senate votes considered key by the League of Conservation Voters, including votes related to automobile fuel economy, offshore Virginia drilling, refinery construction, renewable electricity mandates, energy efficiency, liquefied coal and support for biofuels. The absences prompted the League to give McCain a “zero” rating for the year.
JonChicago – he has received $200 million from oil companies… he is bought and paid for. how does this make him independent or a maverick?

Why are there so many social problems in the richest country in the world?

To name but a few, the USA scores lowly in all of the following compared to countries like Japan or Scandinavia (and most of western Europe to a lesser extent):

1) Crime
2) Teenage pregnancy
3) Health/life expectancy
4) Poverty and low income
5) Long working hours culture / less paid hoilday
6) Educational achievement/literacy rates
7) Obesity Environmental pollution eg CO2 per capita, recycling
9) Public transport and renewable energy

Is China taking a more sensible approach to coal-fired energy?

I have read that since about 2006, China has been 'retiring' many of its smaller, older, less efficient coal-fired plants. To offset the closure of these plants, they are building new, more efficient coal-plants that don't put out as much in the way of pollutants.

As China is rich in coal resources, don't you think that it is wise for them to make the most out of their cheap, readily available energy resource?

China closing down small coal-fired plants
Yvonne Chan in Hong Kong, BusinessGreen, 31 Jul 2009

“Facilities with a total generating capacity of 54GW have been shut from 2006 to June this year, Sun Qin, deputy director of the National Energy Administration, said yesterday.
The announcement follows the release of a Greenpeace report earlier this week that called for China to phase out outdated facilities with a generating capacity of less than 100MW and set a renewable energy target of 30 per cent by 2020.
Sun said the number of plants with a capacity below 100MW comprised 14 per cent of the total proportion of energy -generating units, down from 30 per cent in early 2006.
However, in the meantime new coal-burning plants are still being built at a rate of 70GW per year, although Sun said most of the new facilities have significantly higher levels of energy efficiency than those they replace.
China is the world's largest coal producer and consumer. The fossil fuel accounts for at least 70 per cent of its energy needs – a factor that has led to its top ranking in global greenhouse gas emissions.”

Can you answer five short poll questions?

1. Should the government tax income earners making more than $250,000 annually at a higher rate or the same rate as income earners making less?

2. Should government provide tax incentives for businesses and individuals who use wind, solar or other renewable energy sources instead of nuclear, oil, coal or other fossil fuels?

3. Should the US government support Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip or should the US government support an independent Palestinian state in those territories?

4. Should the government legalize same sex marriages, civil unions, or neither?

5. Should the government keep abortion legal or criminalize it?

How does my English essay sound?

The topic is “The greatest evil facing our world today”
It is actually a speech to be given in front of a massive crowd

The greatest evil facing the world today is the footprint left on this planet by mankind. The earth is the only one of its kind that we have. Our planet is being worn out by the unnecessary actions that we take each second, minute, hour, day and year. The ridiculous amounts of greenhouse gases that we emit into our once clean atmosphere are going to result in the earth punishing us at anytime she wants. Our survival could be lost in as little as twenty-five years if our behavior towards the environment doesn't change for the better.
The depletion of the ozone layer will be complete within 200 years at the rate it is being depleted now. If this occurs, no life will be able to live on the surface of the earth. There are already some holes in the ozone layer which have caused immense skin cancers and blindness in animals. Frogs all over the world are becoming dreadfully deformed. In addition, over fifty-one acres of rainforest are destroyed by the developed world per minute.
Currently, twenty-five percent of western pharmaceuticals derive from rainforest ingredients although less than one percent of all rainforest materials have been scientifically tested. This shows that the rainforest could have the cure to the vast majority of the diseases that cause troubles in this world. It could have probably been easily ALL the diseases if the extinction rate of all species was not as high as it is now. Currently, over 130 species are lost per day and more than 99.999% of all species that once lived on this earth are now extinct. Nearly half of the world's existing species will be eliminated in the next twenty-five years due to rainforest deforestation.
The amazing thing is that we still consume non- renewable energy much more than we use renewable energy . We consume almost 1.4 million barrels of oil every forty minutes whilst the solar energy that hits the earth's surface in forty minutes is enough energy for the whole world for a whole year. But this does not make us think about the vast amount of energy that has less effect on their world. If we did, the earth would be a much healthier and cleaner place to be in.
Politicians are actually accepting the reality of our situation and are taking actions. They have been given the irritating wake-up call of land loss due to the rising sea levels. Some people are thankful that they are starting to realize our problem. I for one am not. It shouldn't be economic problems that influence their actions, but moral beliefs.