TSR on this very board was really into teledlildonics.. it’s where I first heard the term. Probably was in the VR threads before the Oculus started putting out testing units and such. Crazy times.
Really really into teledildonics.
Would it be more fair/accurate to say teledildonics were into them?
Thanks. I am surprised that the solar panels not only paid for themselves but then made a profit that quickly. Just guessing but: limited hours of operation after which the temperature can be adjusted and electronics turned off, only in use for about 75% of the year (just guessing on that as well), and then I guess economy of scale meant they got them cheaper and it was cheaper to install them.
Thanks. I am surprised that the solar panels not only paid for themselves but then made a profit that quickly. Just guessing but: limited hours of operation after which the temperature can be adjusted and electronics turned off, only in use for about 75% of the year (just guessing on that as well), and then I guess economy of scale meant they got them cheaper and it was cheaper to install them.
I don't think the solar panels have paid for themselves yet. The math probably works out to:
$$$ pays for solar panels upfront.
This comes from a bond, with a $/year cost.
Panels generate $$/year.
The school is paying interest on the bond, but not much, and are earning enough per year to pay it back and have extra, but I doubt they've paid back the bonds already.
(But yes, economy of scale matters. Also, energy efficiency upgrades are going to be doing a lot of work here; an old public building can have laughably inefficient setups.)
Thanks. I am surprised that the solar panels not only paid for themselves but then made a profit that quickly. Just guessing but: limited hours of operation after which the temperature can be adjusted and electronics turned off, only in use for about 75% of the year (just guessing on that as well), and then I guess economy of scale meant they got them cheaper and it was cheaper to install them.
That, and if they were overhauling other stuff then efficiency gains are also contributing. There's a healthy amount of sunlight where the usage of a school building is low too, so I assume they get further offsets by selling power back to the grid in the evenings.
Yeah I went in and read the entire article after that. The company that installs them paid the entire upfront cost, and they actually own them. Which is less than ideal in my mind. I guess the school gets a certain amount of the revenue and the company keeps the rest. It wasn't very clear on how the money breaks down. While I am obviously extremely pro solar and renewable, letting private companies take control of land on school property makes me feel uneasy
Yeah I went in and read the entire article after that. The company that installs them paid the entire upfront cost, and they actually own them. Which is less than ideal in my mind. I guess the school gets a certain amount of the revenue and the company keeps the rest. It wasn't very clear on how the money breaks down. While I am obviously extremely pro solar and renewable, letting private companies take control of land on school property makes me feel uneasy
This is a relatively common method for installing solar, from my understanding, and has the benefit of the company themselves swapping in better solar panel tech as it comes available for no additional cost.
Yeah I went in and read the entire article after that. The company that installs them paid the entire upfront cost, and they actually own them. Which is less than ideal in my mind. I guess the school gets a certain amount of the revenue and the company keeps the rest. It wasn't very clear on how the money breaks down. While I am obviously extremely pro solar and renewable, letting private companies take control of land on school property makes me feel uneasy
This is a relatively common method for installing solar, from my understanding, and has the benefit of the company themselves swapping in better solar panel tech as it comes available for no additional cost.
So now they're proving the Sun as a subscription service?
Yeah I went in and read the entire article after that. The company that installs them paid the entire upfront cost, and they actually own them. Which is less than ideal in my mind. I guess the school gets a certain amount of the revenue and the company keeps the rest. It wasn't very clear on how the money breaks down. While I am obviously extremely pro solar and renewable, letting private companies take control of land on school property makes me feel uneasy
This is a relatively common method for installing solar, from my understanding, and has the benefit of the company themselves swapping in better solar panel tech as it comes available for no additional cost.
So now they're proving the Sun as a subscription service?
Alternatively the Schools are renting surface area that they arent using.
Yeah I went in and read the entire article after that. The company that installs them paid the entire upfront cost, and they actually own them. Which is less than ideal in my mind. I guess the school gets a certain amount of the revenue and the company keeps the rest. It wasn't very clear on how the money breaks down. While I am obviously extremely pro solar and renewable, letting private companies take control of land on school property makes me feel uneasy
Read it again. It said that while having a third company pay the upfront cost is common, these particular panels were paid for via bond, so the school owns them.
So checking a map at which states are the worst at introducing renewable power to reduce energy costs seems to be Mississippi->Florida. Which seems odd from a purely objective standpoint given their weather average sunhours.
Is there a less depressing answer than "They're republicans?"
"The western world sips from a poisonous cocktail: Polarisation, populism, protectionism and post-truth"
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
0
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
Yeah actually while we're on the subject you also really need to stop vomiting on the carpet
But we're just going to look the other way on bringing home dead animals, is that it?
Being given gifts makes me feel special
My cats always felt safe around me, which was flattering, but didn't bring me gifts.
So instead of getting dead birds presented to me, I got woken up at 3AM because next to my ear is the safest place to crush mouse bones as you eat.
I woke up in the middle of the night because I had a dream I was burning up in an oven. It was one of my cats curled up around the top of my head like a self heating version of one of those Russian hats.
The other time a cat woke me up in the middle of the night, it was hissing while fighting a rattlesnake a few feet from my head, so I can't complain too much about cat night habits.
So checking a map at which states are the worst at introducing renewable power to reduce energy costs seems to be Mississippi->Florida. Which seems odd from a purely objective standpoint given their weather average sunhours.
Is there a less depressing answer than "They're republicans?"
I mean, solar doesn't make a dent in power generation. (Last I checked, it was still below 1% of total power generated.) So, the real question is if those states have decent wind or hydroelectric sites, because those are the only statistically-relevant renewable energy generation technologies.
So checking a map at which states are the worst at introducing renewable power to reduce energy costs seems to be Mississippi->Florida. Which seems odd from a purely objective standpoint given their weather average sunhours.
Is there a less depressing answer than "They're republicans?"
I mean, solar doesn't make a dent in power generation. (Last I checked, it was still below 1% of total power generated.) So, the real question is if those states have decent wind or hydroelectric sites, because those are the only statistically-relevant renewable energy generation technologies.
Seeing numbers up around 2% for the US with huge growth year over year. One big thing is that the tech has massively improved with regards to cost efficiency the past few years. That number could easily be much higher if we invested some capital in deploying the new technology.
So checking a map at which states are the worst at introducing renewable power to reduce energy costs seems to be Mississippi->Florida. Which seems odd from a purely objective standpoint given their weather average sunhours.
Is there a less depressing answer than "They're republicans?"
I mean, solar doesn't make a dent in power generation. (Last I checked, it was still below 1% of total power generated.) So, the real question is if those states have decent wind or hydroelectric sites, because those are the only statistically-relevant renewable energy generation technologies.
1.8%. And that doesn't count small-scale local generation/consumption.
"The western world sips from a poisonous cocktail: Polarisation, populism, protectionism and post-truth"
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
0
Options
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
So checking a map at which states are the worst at introducing renewable power to reduce energy costs seems to be Mississippi->Florida. Which seems odd from a purely objective standpoint given their weather average sunhours.
Is there a less depressing answer than "They're republicans?"
My bet would be on Republicans, but there may be some extra costs due to local climate or conditions (humidity, kudzu, hurricanes all come to mind) making it easier to block as well
Solar prices have also dropped like a stone. -75% in the last 12 years.
It should be on anyones mind right now when thinking about investing in their house. There's a real good chance it is one of the most cost effective things you can do.
It's not a magic bullet for climate change as there is too much mismatch between when it supplies power and when you need the most, and it puts pressure on the electricity network, but it is certainly needed in the mix.
Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
+4
Options
webguy20I spend too much time on the InternetRegistered Userregular
Solar prices have also dropped like a stone. -75% in the last 12 years.
It should be on anyones mind right now when thinking about investing in their house. There's a real good chance it is one of the most cost effective things you can do.
It's not a magic bullet for climate change as there is too much mismatch between when it supplies power and when you need the most, and it puts pressure on the electricity network, but it is certainly needed in the mix.
My goal in the next 5 years is to go off grid with solar and a water turbine. I have enough property to do a ground installation for solar, or possibly on a pole barn, which is nice.
So checking a map at which states are the worst at introducing renewable power to reduce energy costs seems to be Mississippi->Florida. Which seems odd from a purely objective standpoint given their weather average sunhours.
Is there a less depressing answer than "They're republicans?"
Dont forget those HOA’s that decide that Solar Panels are unattractive and force you to install them in areas that cant be seen from the street even if that puts them on the wrong side of the house and other idiotic HOA decisions.
So checking a map at which states are the worst at introducing renewable power to reduce energy costs seems to be Mississippi->Florida. Which seems odd from a purely objective standpoint given their weather average sunhours.
Is there a less depressing answer than "They're republicans?"
Dont forget those HOA’s that decide that Solar Panels are unattractive and force you to install them in areas that cant be seen from the street even if that puts them on the wrong side of the house and other idiotic HOA decisions.
HOAs in general are just bizarre and stupid. And seem a very american thing too.
So checking a map at which states are the worst at introducing renewable power to reduce energy costs seems to be Mississippi->Florida. Which seems odd from a purely objective standpoint given their weather average sunhours.
Is there a less depressing answer than "They're republicans?"
Dont forget those HOA’s that decide that Solar Panels are unattractive and force you to install them in areas that cant be seen from the street even if that puts them on the wrong side of the house and other idiotic HOA decisions.
My utility is only letting me get enough capacity for my yearly average consumption. And because of their monopoly, they get to do that.
Werewolf2000adSuckers, I know exactly what went wrong.Registered Userregular
edited October 2020
So, the UK History Channel decided they'd try and make a show without any Nazis in it for a change.
How's that going, lads?
Oh dear.
See, they tweeted this:
And everyone said "Hang on, History Channel, that bloke's got a blatant '88' tattoo on his face. That's a Nazi tattoo. Did you not spot that? How could people who spend as much time talking about Nazis as you do not spot that?"
To which the History Channel replied:
And everyone said "Your extensive background checks apparently didn't include looking at his face, since he also has other Nazi-related numerical tattoos, unless you're claiming his dad died on the 23rd of Sixteenber. Oh, and if his dad died in 1988, why was he also on the Bristol electoral register from 2002 - 2011?"
To which the history channel replied:
Gone right? Well, the show's host, Lee Mack, will now have an absolutely cracking anecdote for the 2035 series of Would I Lie To You?, and the History Channel did eventually tweet this:
Which I think is as close as we'll get to an admission that their 'extensive background check' consisted of a panicked phone call some time this morning shouting "Mate, everyone's saying you're a Nazi, that's not true is it?"
Even if the guy had tattooed 88 on his face for entirely non-nazi-related reasons, OF COURSE they're going to end up with a bunch of comments about why they're interviewing a nazi. There's a lot of people in this world; you don't need to interview this person in particular.
Even if the guy had tattooed 88 on his face for entirely non-nazi-related reasons, OF COURSE they're going to end up with a bunch of comments about why they're interviewing a nazi. There's a lot of people in this world; you don't need to interview this person in particular.
It isn't just 88, either. Werewolf mentioned 23 16 (WP, white power), but just pulling from twitter threads he's also got a bunch of other well known Nazi number tattoos visible on his arms and neck in other parts of the clip:
1 11 (AK, Aryan Knights)
3 11 (3K, KKK)
1 8 (AH, Adolf Hitler, which he has a second time coupled with 20 4 89, his birth day)
14W (14 words)
14 88 (14 words again, coupled with Heil Hitler)
109/110 (A more complicated meme here, the claim that Jews have already been expelled from 109 countries with hopes for one more)
Also has 1 3, I've seen several claims of what that one means including AC, Aryan Circle.
And that's just what's visible, his tattoos extend up his arms and down his neck into his shirt and... I mean, I've never seen somebody with that much on their face and arms who kept their torso pure as a temple, but he keeps his shirt on so maybe they abruptly cut off like a racist farmer's tan.
Jesus that's a lot. I always lean towards the benefit of the doubt for 88 on its own, given that I'm of the generation born around then and also follow a lot of pianists (88 keys on a piano) but as soon as it's paired with a 14 it's immediately suspect, and then that guy apparently went every possible Nazi numerology.
Jesus that's a lot. I always lean towards the benefit of the doubt for 88 on its own, given that I'm of the generation born around then and also follow a lot of pianists (88 keys on a piano) but as soon as it's paired with a 14 it's immediately suspect, and then that guy apparently went every possible Nazi numerology.
Any one could be explained, but I'm automatically suspicious of context free tattoos. Still, any one could be explained.
Two, in the absence of any other numbers, is going to be a very hard sell. Like, if he also had 12 19 82 and 7 25 44 and 46 24 36 I'd maybe buy his excuse for 20 4 89.
He has TEN number tattoos visible, ALL of which have well documented white supremacist meanings.
Around here, accidentally asking for a tattoo too close to something with white supremacist use (like a rose cross, celtic knots, anything Norse) will get you at least a warning and some places a ban.
I just don't believe that even if he had innocent intentions that he could have gotten all of those and still not know.
Hevach on
+5
Options
MortiousThe Nightmare BeginsMove to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
Wait, have celtic knots been co-opted by White Supremacists?
That puts an unfortunate spin on my M&B Battanians campaign.
Wait, have celtic knots been co-opted by White Supremacists?
That puts an unfortunate spin on my M&B Battanians campaign.
More uncomfortably adjacent than co-optrd, as it's used with Celtic/Sun cross tattoos sometimes. Rose cross falls into the same category, since it's visually similar to the co-opted Celtic cross and both are often shown with runic writing (also co-opted).
A LOT of stuff has been hijacked by white supremacists, having a wolf or Punisher or Mjolnir tattoo is probably not going to get you labeled.
Having both arms fully sleeved in hijacked images and code numbers is going to, fairly or not.
Hevach on
+3
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Posts
Yeah but how are you at catching mice, birds, and the occasional frog?
Teledildonics? I'd like some more inside
*edit: I mean insight
Gone right: They do an analysis, find that by putting in a bunch of solar panels and updating the lights/air systems/etc, they could run a $1.8 million surplus.
Gone fantastic: They did so, the numbers were right, and the majority of the money saved went into pay raises for teachers
This is why you always look at TCO.
PSN:Furlion
Total Cost of Ownership.
So like initial purchase plus maintenance, repair, etc.
Thanks. I am surprised that the solar panels not only paid for themselves but then made a profit that quickly. Just guessing but: limited hours of operation after which the temperature can be adjusted and electronics turned off, only in use for about 75% of the year (just guessing on that as well), and then I guess economy of scale meant they got them cheaper and it was cheaper to install them.
PSN:Furlion
I don't think the solar panels have paid for themselves yet. The math probably works out to:
$$$ pays for solar panels upfront.
This comes from a bond, with a $/year cost.
Panels generate $$/year.
The school is paying interest on the bond, but not much, and are earning enough per year to pay it back and have extra, but I doubt they've paid back the bonds already.
(But yes, economy of scale matters. Also, energy efficiency upgrades are going to be doing a lot of work here; an old public building can have laughably inefficient setups.)
That, and if they were overhauling other stuff then efficiency gains are also contributing. There's a healthy amount of sunlight where the usage of a school building is low too, so I assume they get further offsets by selling power back to the grid in the evenings.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
PSN:Furlion
I mean, they’re not wrong...
This is a relatively common method for installing solar, from my understanding, and has the benefit of the company themselves swapping in better solar panel tech as it comes available for no additional cost.
So now they're proving the Sun as a subscription service?
Alternatively the Schools are renting surface area that they arent using.
MWO: Adamski
Read it again. It said that while having a third company pay the upfront cost is common, these particular panels were paid for via bond, so the school owns them.
So checking a map at which states are the worst at introducing renewable power to reduce energy costs seems to be Mississippi->Florida. Which seems odd from a purely objective standpoint given their weather average sunhours.
Is there a less depressing answer than "They're republicans?"
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
The other time a cat woke me up in the middle of the night, it was hissing while fighting a rattlesnake a few feet from my head, so I can't complain too much about cat night habits.
I mean, solar doesn't make a dent in power generation. (Last I checked, it was still below 1% of total power generated.) So, the real question is if those states have decent wind or hydroelectric sites, because those are the only statistically-relevant renewable energy generation technologies.
Seeing numbers up around 2% for the US with huge growth year over year. One big thing is that the tech has massively improved with regards to cost efficiency the past few years. That number could easily be much higher if we invested some capital in deploying the new technology.
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
My bet would be on Republicans, but there may be some extra costs due to local climate or conditions (humidity, kudzu, hurricanes all come to mind) making it easier to block as well
It should be on anyones mind right now when thinking about investing in their house. There's a real good chance it is one of the most cost effective things you can do.
It's not a magic bullet for climate change as there is too much mismatch between when it supplies power and when you need the most, and it puts pressure on the electricity network, but it is certainly needed in the mix.
My goal in the next 5 years is to go off grid with solar and a water turbine. I have enough property to do a ground installation for solar, or possibly on a pole barn, which is nice.
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
Dont forget those HOA’s that decide that Solar Panels are unattractive and force you to install them in areas that cant be seen from the street even if that puts them on the wrong side of the house and other idiotic HOA decisions.
MWO: Adamski
HOAs in general are just bizarre and stupid. And seem a very american thing too.
My utility is only letting me get enough capacity for my yearly average consumption. And because of their monopoly, they get to do that.
How's that going, lads?
Oh dear.
See, they tweeted this:
And everyone said "Hang on, History Channel, that bloke's got a blatant '88' tattoo on his face. That's a Nazi tattoo. Did you not spot that? How could people who spend as much time talking about Nazis as you do not spot that?"
To which the History Channel replied:
And everyone said "Your extensive background checks apparently didn't include looking at his face, since he also has other Nazi-related numerical tattoos, unless you're claiming his dad died on the 23rd of Sixteenber. Oh, and if his dad died in 1988, why was he also on the Bristol electoral register from 2002 - 2011?"
To which the history channel replied:
Gone right? Well, the show's host, Lee Mack, will now have an absolutely cracking anecdote for the 2035 series of Would I Lie To You?, and the History Channel did eventually tweet this:
Which I think is as close as we'll get to an admission that their 'extensive background check' consisted of a panicked phone call some time this morning shouting "Mate, everyone's saying you're a Nazi, that's not true is it?"
EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
It isn't just 88, either. Werewolf mentioned 23 16 (WP, white power), but just pulling from twitter threads he's also got a bunch of other well known Nazi number tattoos visible on his arms and neck in other parts of the clip:
1 11 (AK, Aryan Knights)
3 11 (3K, KKK)
1 8 (AH, Adolf Hitler, which he has a second time coupled with 20 4 89, his birth day)
14W (14 words)
14 88 (14 words again, coupled with Heil Hitler)
109/110 (A more complicated meme here, the claim that Jews have already been expelled from 109 countries with hopes for one more)
Also has 1 3, I've seen several claims of what that one means including AC, Aryan Circle.
And that's just what's visible, his tattoos extend up his arms and down his neck into his shirt and... I mean, I've never seen somebody with that much on their face and arms who kept their torso pure as a temple, but he keeps his shirt on so maybe they abruptly cut off like a racist farmer's tan.
Any one could be explained, but I'm automatically suspicious of context free tattoos. Still, any one could be explained.
Two, in the absence of any other numbers, is going to be a very hard sell. Like, if he also had 12 19 82 and 7 25 44 and 46 24 36 I'd maybe buy his excuse for 20 4 89.
He has TEN number tattoos visible, ALL of which have well documented white supremacist meanings.
Around here, accidentally asking for a tattoo too close to something with white supremacist use (like a rose cross, celtic knots, anything Norse) will get you at least a warning and some places a ban.
I just don't believe that even if he had innocent intentions that he could have gotten all of those and still not know.
That puts an unfortunate spin on my M&B Battanians campaign.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
Lots of things have been claimed by white supremecists.
I largely choose to ignore their claims however.
More uncomfortably adjacent than co-optrd, as it's used with Celtic/Sun cross tattoos sometimes. Rose cross falls into the same category, since it's visually similar to the co-opted Celtic cross and both are often shown with runic writing (also co-opted).
A LOT of stuff has been hijacked by white supremacists, having a wolf or Punisher or Mjolnir tattoo is probably not going to get you labeled.
Having both arms fully sleeved in hijacked images and code numbers is going to, fairly or not.
They took the OK sign from us, dammit.