u320

This deposit has been known for a long time. The news is that they have a better estimate how much rare earths are actually in there now. You don't just stumble upon something like this right next to one of the most important iron mines in Europe.

Tungsten refers to the rock where the element is found. The english language reused the name for the actual element.

> Their testing showed that their refrigerator was able to maintain a cool temperature and that it was approximately as efficient as refrigerators now on the market.

So apparently it uses the same amount of energy, so no breaking of thermodynamics.

And yeah salt is white or clear, dunno what's up with that statement.

Ios app works fine though

Nope, it worked fine until 5 minutes ago, got logged out and can't log in.

I believe the majority of "No" votes are people thinking like this.

There are opposing pessimists in the energy sector (e.g. renewables/nuclear), so it is very likely that at least some of the pessimists will be proven right.

I think the person who you are replying to was being sarcastic. These journalists have not been posting flight data.

Because migrating off Oracle to an Oracle-compatible DB is less work than migrating to straight Postgres. This is not rocket science.

They haven't hit EnterpriseDB who have been doing the same thing, except not open source, since forever.

What rules have been broken here?

I must admire the tone-deafness of posting a link to a Tesla product tonight...

"Free speech"

There are no bools in Verse conditionals. That doesn't mean that there are no bools in the language at all.

AFAICT: Just "false" would be a regular boolean value. The question mark turns it into a logic value so it can be used in conditionals.

> For example, the claim is that lithium ion batteries are expensive at grid scale...but the cost of such batteries continues to fall

The rate at which they have been falling has been diminishing for quite some time, until this year when they are starting to rise (more than inflation).

The idea that past price movements will always continue indefinitely has zero basis in reality.

And yes li-ion batteries are way too expensive for large scale grid usage, even if they did fall at 10% yearly we would be decades away for them to be a satisfactory solution.

> If the Russians blow up Zaporizhzhia while the wind is blowing east-to-west Europe

Nope. Chernobyl was a different beast altogether.

There is no "equivalent wind power". They perform different roles on the grid.

Gas is used to cover for wind and solar when that is not delivering. You cannot replace that by more wind and solar.

To approach nuclear-like capacity factors on wind+batteries you need an INSANE amount of batteries, £0.30/kWh will seem like a bargain in comparison. Wind lulls can last for weeks or longer. There is a reason why countries like Germany are so focused on hydrogen for storage.

Fusion produces neutrons, not photons.

Heat pollution from power generation is a non-problem. We will run out of raw materials to build power plants out of long before this happens. This is what happens when people don't run the numbers.

This is a bit of a myth. The heat wave and water levels was a problem, but most of it was maintenance issues unrelated to that. It was more a problem of mismanagement, and the fact that Macron went into office promising to shut down the fleet, making operators start to cut down on maintenance. He has now reversed course after realising that depending on Russian gas is bad. All wind/solar in Europe works by balancing it against natural gas or hydro, but the amount of hydro is fixed so expanding the wind/solar fleet increases the demand for gas. Hence why the renewable poster child Germany is in so deep shit right now.

If you think nuclear is dead in the water you haven't really been following where the energy debate is heading these days. Especially in Europe, where we no longer have the luxury of plugging the holes left by renewables with gas.

Nobody has done it. Nobody has put forth a credible theoretical model on how to do it. If you believe otherwise please show how it can be done. With details. Things like frequency regulation, reactive power and all that stuff that makes the grid work. And include the economic calculations. The burden of proof is on you.

I don't know where you looked then because batteries are not anywhere near low cost enough to be deployed at grid scale at the amounts required to run a grid of wind and solar. Even in a sunny climate with reliable solar output, if you assume that there is a 10% chance that in any year you will have a 10 day period of cloud cover and 50% lower solar output and your entire grid cost goes up by 5x! The math for storage is BRUTAL.

Microgrids and storage cost way more than any method of generating power we are currently using. Please stop using buzzwords and look at the actual numbers.

The safety profile is better with fusion, but I think you underestimate how good the safety profile of nuclear is these days. We haven't had any significant incidents since Fukushima, but we upgraded the safety mechanisms of our nuclear plants a lot based on that experience. Nuclear is on a path similar to flight, were we started off with very risky airline travel and got to a point where you are more likely to suffer an accident on the taxi on your way to the airport.

You cannot build a grid out of solar and wind alone.

Can you explain what you mean by "the natural carrying capacity of Earth for humans". You framed this like it's something that exists outside of technology.