>kill power plants
>kill most factories
>kill the legal and illegal drug markets
>kill the general human workforce
>kill (non research) medical jobs
The future is gonna be so cool!
This cannot be emphasized enough.
There are mesh networks in some towns that work really well. I remember hearing about someone who also had an isp connection ran a ftp server on the mesh for the entire town to watch his animu collection.
But that shit already exists, and it's incredibly inefficient.
And probably always will be.
>implying this will ever happen
Not anytime soon. The reliability is a huge issue and the storage technology just isn't there yet.
Can only make shitty plastic as of yet.
Will almost certainly be heavily regulated. They might replace mass production of drugs to some extent, but that just means the drugs - most of which are either proprietary, heavily regulated or both - will be made locally by pharmacies. And if they did kill legal drug markets? Say good bye to almost all the research going into development of new drugs. That would be a HUGE problem.
There's soylent (yes based off the movie, but it's a drink) but it's more like emergency rations, and doesn't taste all too good.
Food is more than just chemical slurry for your stomach; it's a social event, and a physical pleasure that affects your body differently, depending on the form the chemicals take.
To some extent, though, we seem to head toward food replacements.
>Not anytime soon. The reliability is a huge issue and the storage technology just isn't there yet.
You haven't been following the news and projections. Within a decade it will be under a $1 a watt. That is cheaper than building a power plant.
>Can only make shitty plastic as of yet.
Other than the metal 3D printers...lol
>Will almost certainly be heavily regulated. They might replace mass production of drugs to some extent, but that just means the drugs - most of which are either proprietary, heavily regulated or both - will be made locally by pharmacies. And if they did kill legal drug markets? Say good bye to almost all the research going into development of new drugs. That would be a HUGE problem.
How could you regulate a molecular printer someone makes in their house?
>You haven't been following the news and projections. Within a decade it will be under a $1 a watt. That is cheaper than building a power plant.
And they still need powerplants for back-up/handling peak capacity/when the sun isn't shining.
>How could you regulate a molecular printer someone makes in their house?
There's no need to, because molecular printer isn't something someone can just "make" in their house.
>And they still need powerplants for back-up/handling peak capacity/when the sun isn't shining.
So, you admit that even without advancements in storage, power plants will be cut massively, because they would only be needed for non-peak nights and backup?
>>How could you regulate a molecular printer someone makes in their house?
>There's no need to, because molecular printer isn't something someone can just "make" in their house.
>>you cant store electricity
Not using any technology in existence or on the horizon for less than it would cost to have a coal, natural gas, or nuclear power plant produce power.
So you reduced the resolution and think its fixed?
This is already addressed in this thread. Even if you don't store electricity at all. Solar panels would still kill most power plants because they would only be needed for night or backup power.
Though maybe you would rather hear the US utilities tell you this:
>see the pdf in the link if you feel like reading the report
>This is already addressed in this thread. Even if you don't store electricity at all. Solar panels would still kill most power plants because they would only be needed for night or backup power.
Oh don't get me wrong, government subsidized solar hurts the operation of electrical generation due to how it distorts the mid day market. But peak demand happens after solar production falls to near zero.
You could build solar to run in the day then have other plants cover the base load and peak demand, but that's just a waste of money.
>government subsidized solar
People throw this around, but then never admit to how heavily subsidized oil, coal, and natural gas is.
>But peak demand happens after solar production falls to near zero.
That's a new peak demand. Right now it is mid day.
>Shows how much you know about Germany.
I don't give a fuck about germany.
I know that in my land it's almost always rainy or cloudy, I know solar panels have limited life, batteries for night have limited life, panels and batteries cost shitload of money. I would rather have nuclear reactor under my table.
Everything has limited life. Nuclear reactors need constant maintenance. Rainy or cloudy, solar still works. If anything your location probably makes a good case for solar and wind.
>People throw this around, but then never admit to how heavily subsidized oil, coal, and natural gas is.
No problem, pic related. Most of the nuclear subsidy is in the form of research, natural gas in in the form of tax deferments to get more wells drilled and so on.
>That's a new peak demand. Right now it is mid day.
No it's not. Video related, the peak time for both Texas and California is the early evening. Same for Ontario.
Are you the same person who posted that pic in the last thread about this?
I'm still not letting you get away with that shit graph of electrical subsidizes, that totally ignores all the transportation, farm, and many other oil subsidizes.
>Rainy or cloudy, solar still works.
At a fucking diminished capacity.
>makes a good case for solar and wind.
No. Solar is too expensive and gives not enough power here. (did I mention we have winters here? With thing called SNOW. You know, layer of SNOW on solar panel... But I guess you think it makes them create more power)
Wind? We don't have strong winds here. Also, yes let's put fucking hazards every 100 meters. Say good bye to birds. Let's also cut down our forests to make sure trees don't slow winds down.
>Nuclear reactors need constant maintenance.
And yet they make cheapest and safest energy we have right now.
>You know, layer of SNOW on solar panel
They get hot from the sun and melt off it.
If you are happy with nuclear, then cool.
Around my neck of the woods in Pittsburgh, we are mainly using coal plants.
>They get hot from the sun and melt off it.
My god. You either fucking idiot or it's crappy bait.
YES! It's snowing (no sun!) It's fucking -25 degrees Celsius, layer of snow on solar panel, but solar panel STILL MANAGES TO CATCH SUN AND HEAT UP TO DEFEAT SNOW AND AIR TEMPERATURE!
>I'm still not letting you get away with that shit graph of electrical subsidizes, that totally ignores all the transportation, farm, and many other oil subsidizes.
The graph is popular because it's a well sourced one. Not the first time I've posted it and it's not going to be the last.
I'm not sure what a farm subsidy has to do with electrical generation. Or what transportation has to do with it either. If you are going to post the list of oil, gas and coal subsidies that are mostly just tax credits and accounting practices don't bother. The vast majority were legal considerations for stuff like paying taxes on unknown amounts of reserves or letting a company apply deductions instantly rather than yearly.
Once solar gets to the levels where it's the cheapest form of energy, it will make sense to use the electricity from natural gas plants to melt the snow that accumulates on solar panels. Solar can work anywhere :3
>YES! It's snowing (no sun!) It's fucking -25 degrees Celsius, layer of snow on solar panel, but solar panel STILL MANAGES TO CATCH SUN AND HEAT UP TO DEFEAT SNOW AND AIR TEMPERATURE!
Even houses tend not to melt snow when it's cold and their roofs are heated. It takes many weeks of no snow for the wind and sun to remove snow from surfaces.
>electricity from natural gas plants to melt the snow that accumulates on solar panels
Melting snow with electricity takes shit load of energy.
>Solar can work anywhere :3
No. Do you even know how winter looks? THERE IS NO FUCKING SUN. Add snow in air (fuck, let's assume you managed to melt snow off of panels) There would be not enough power made by solar.
Solar can only work in desert. And it's still too expensive.
So I can only oil subsidizes that agree with your narrow definition of what a subsidize is, but you can post a graph that includes "tax credits and accounting practices" subsidizes for solar?
We will just ignore all the important facts and keep you in the same weird world where only certain things are important.
Chewing is important for your mental faculties...
>And stop lying about solar panels melting snow off in winter.
Well they aren't gonna melt a sudden 5 feet of snow, but that never happens, so we are good. They do melt the snow better than normal roof material.
>Is this your logic?
>>kill power plants
Which is false. Solar panels will only work in deserts (IF you find how to make them cheaply). Power plants will live long and strong.
Also I am addressing lies that solar panel melts snow in winter.
Nanobots that affix themselves to all sensory neurons.
Can both prevent and cause said neurons to fire.
Modern computers can already just about handle the level of calculations needed.
Think of all the fucking possibilities!
True, full immersion VR.
Switching bodies with someone.
Sharing [sensory] experiences.
Remapping your body to that of anything.
Surgery without anesthesia, just block the signals.
Exploring digital noneuclidean space.
Shit would be nuts.
You'd have to manually remove snow during heavy snowfall.
Switching to solar poser doesn't mean that everyone has them, you could have solar "power plants", so if you don't want to deal with it, you'd pay others like you do with other kinds of electricity.
>So I can only oil subsidizes that agree with your narrow definition of what a subsidize is, but you can post a graph that includes "tax credits and accounting practices" subsidizes for solar?
Oil is a tiny fraction of the electrical production. Talk about nuclear, natural gas, coal or hydro. Let me put it to you like this.
If you want to include oil then please be sure to count the energy produced by the oil products, IE the amount of kinetic energy it releases. Oh and an average oil refinery, it produces about 40GW of power. Which is about twice the electrical output of the largest nuclear reactor complex.
So if you want to cry about oil 'subsidies' then please do, in terms of megawatt hours.
>We will just ignore all the important facts and keep you in the same weird world where only certain things are important.
They will not melt even 1 cm of snow.
>They do melt the snow better than normal roof material.
1.They will not melt winter worth of snow with winter sun (aka clods and sun low on horizon )
2. Where the fuck you got that shit in first place? Solar panels don't generate heat on their own. If blacktop roads don't melt snow off how the fuck will your solar panel melt snow?
>Solar panels don't generate heat on their own.
Of course not. That is what the sun is for.
>So if you want to cry about oil 'subsidies' then please do, in terms of megawatt hours.
How can you convert the billions of federal subsidizes into fracking as a mega-watt hour number? Are you arguing that fracking isn't a major source of power plant natural gas?
But not better than road ways. I live in a northern Canadian city, it takes about a week for plowed roads with heavy traffic to become clear after it snows. Most homes keep snow on the roof until a warm snap comes and then you get ice dams.
>Germany is a desert?
Are they making ALL of their energy needs from solar? No. Are they making any solar power in winter? No.
cm of snow stops all solar power!
>Oh my god you people are cracking me up.
Go ahead. Scientific proof that solar panel will melt 1cm of snow in winter conditions. I will make it easy - Let's say outside temperature is merely -1 degree celsius.
let me explain how it will happen:
>Winter - no sun, 1cm of snow on solar panel, -1degree Celsius
>Solar panel is cold because IT LOST IT'S SOLAR HEAT AFTER FUCKING NIGHT.
>You'd have to manually remove snow during heavy snowfall.
No sun in winter = no power. Also do you know how much cleaning solar panels will cost?
>Of course not. That is what the sun is for.
covered under snow
Sub zero temperature
Yah, I would like to see your panel melting snow.
>Quick, someone tell the Germans that they don't make any solar power in winter!
Look at energy makings in winter by solar panels and cost to clean them. Then calculate how much that energy costs and how much of it they make. Go ahead.
>How can you convert the billions of federal subsidizes into fracking as a mega-watt hour number? Are you arguing that fracking isn't a major source of power plant natural gas?
Natural gas is 911 TW a year in the US. The US total electrical production is 4,370 TW/year.
Do you have any numbers for the amount of gas from fracking wells that is used for electrical generation? Do you have any numbers for your subsidy of fracking?
Also... are you accepting that nuclear, coal and hydro get subsidies inline with what I posted and solar + wind gets subsidies that are also inline?
More to the point, do you have anything that disproves my posted graph's numbers? Or are you just crying about them oil companies?
>solar power is a bad idea because it snows sometimes in some places
Are you guys for real?
This butthurt solar hating Polish peasant ITT :3
I was gonna post a guy cleaning a solar panel of snow with a brush. Then I was gonna post a solar panel in Antarctica. Then I found a pic of a guy cleaning a solar panel in Antarctica. Finally I saw one of these things and couldn't resist.
>>solar power is a bad idea because it snows sometimes in some places
Sometimes = half of year with snow and almost no sun.
Other half year there is no sun.
So yes - It's bad idea for good part of the world
Not polish. Try again americunt.
Heavy snow storm - have fun.
Also is that shit sun powered? Have even more fun powering it under almost no sun after snowing.
Heary snow storm, you don't use the solar panels.
Since you save up more than you use, not a problems.
Also every you don't just have yours, but a whole network consisting of other individual houses and big power plants.
People use solar power in areas with a lot of snow and it works even in the current state that's not very advanced.
>All windows clean of snow in pic.
because they are vertical. Snow doesn't stick. It might pile up next to window depending on wind.
>Somehow you think solar panels will be covered with snow, but windows won't.
Because solar panels are vertical and not between horizontal and 30degrees.
Bonus points if you think that much sun will be enough to make energy to clean them.
Can haz Antarctica solar panels, but not in snowy town.
Why are you still trying?
>Heary snow storm, you don't use the solar panels.
OH... so we use solar panels when there is sun and use everything else when there is no sun!
Well that clears everything up!
since solar panel life time ticks away even when they are not used it's sure economically goo idea to use them 25% of the time!
>People use solar power in areas with a lot of snow and it works even in the current state that's not very advanced.
If you have climate where it snows and then it's sun again then yes. Not where I live.
>Why are you still trying?
Oh so now you are suggesting moving solar panels that track sun. Good, even more expensive to keep functional. Have fun with expensive electricity that works only in good conditions.
>Why are you still trying?
I will wait few more years until you fuckwits waste all economy to build this useless shit. I will come back to laugh at you then (on a sunny day when we will have energy to power computers and 4chan servers).
>Can haz Antarctica solar panels, but not in snowy town.
>Why are you still trying?
You do understand that in the summer it gets round the clock sun light? And by definition it's also a desert?
Solar power plants, not everything else.
Materials decay over time, that's true for everything, not unique to solar cells.
Also, if you really need it, you can have extra vertical panels like windows if the area really requires it.
Your reasons are just nitpicking.
>If it storms that bad, then you are likely a candidate for wind and geothermal.
>Implying snowstorm comes with shitload of wind all the time.
>implying wind energy is cheaper
don't know enough about geothermal
>But no other power source has as much output fallout as PV solar.
What are you walking about?
They last like 20yrs.
You make it sound like you are at half capacity after a few years, which is total bulltroll.
>Imagine a future with jocks and supermodels living like gods while the robots make everything.
>All the neckbeards are enslaved in basements
>they are the only ones who can do all the robot programming
>given their vital position, they tried to rebel but were quickly subjugated
>a slut said to a nerd that it would be "so cool" a device that could control the will of the wearer.
>with this device all the neckbeards could be treated like cattle without any fear
>jock overlord: I'm tired of fucking supermodels, build me a sex robot, anon.
>*whips your back just for sadism, because of the device there's no way for you to refuse
>also you cannot touch it, you are forbidden to use any technology for personal joy.
I'm scared of the future, hold me /g/
The idea that 3D printers will kill factories is idiotic because if they are any good they will just be placed in factories and replace less efficient machines there instead of giving everyone their own little factory at home.
This is why you should not use or support proprietary software. Only by joining us now and sharing the software can you be free, hacker. Sharing the code means everyone has power over none.
I've been collecting high power wifi amplifiers and antennae (get old ones through my work) for some time now. I only have four complete sets, but if I can get my hands on more, I really want to get some people together and try to set up a meshnet in my town.
That's not my idea.
I said they extrapolate, and extrapolation is always dangerous.
The point of printers is not that they made printing press reduntandt. The point is that you don't necessarily require the press to do printing.
Same with 3D printing, it doesn't replace mass production, but makes smaller quantities more efficient and in some cases even possible at all.
>Same with 3D printing, it doesn't replace mass production, but makes smaller quantities more efficient and in some cases even possible at all.
Yeah, but I still see no home application.
I have no need for a continuous supply of low quality plastic items and neither does anyone I know.
It think businesses can get cheaper customization from it, and it could lower the cost for certain kinds of components but I don't see how it will revolutionize anything.
Can someone explain how close we are to molecular printers? What exactly are they capable of producing? Are they capable of creating certain chemicals which in turn make certain atomic structures, or are they somehow able to be Philosopher's Stones and generate any element known to man? Also, does it require a large amount of something put into it, e.g. air or some other material in order to create something new out of it?
>Also, does it require a large amount of something put into it, e.g. air or some other material in order to create something new out of it?
If we can truly manipulate atoms (not molecules) then ANY matter would do. But that shit only happens in laboratories and nuclear reactors I don't see it happening anytime soon.
>>kill power plants
This will have a much larger economic impact that anyone realizes.
coal plants produce huge amounts of gypsum which is used in a lot of building materials.
They also produce bottom ash, an asphalt filler, and coal waste is used as fertilizer that farms use. Also a lot of by-products are used in cement as well.
Thats a lot of jobs a power plant indirectly provides.
>Thats a lot of jobs a power plant indirectly provides.
Oh fuck off
Manual labor is a thing of the past when robots are wide-spread. The transition, which we are at the beginning of now, is going to be awful for people that have manual labor jobs.
Well, all I remember is a facility that can make gold , but it's practically a few ounces and it costs thousands or more just to produce it. That's why I'm having a huge amount of trouble believing a molecular printer could work at that microscopic level.
Though you're absolutely right, he was talking about more than just jobs.
Physical byproducts we need and use are important to consider too.
Though, we'll figure it out I'm sure - I don't see it as too much of a problem.
When we're too the point of resetting the last hundred years of carbon emissions via mass filtration of the air or some shit, worries like how to obtain gypsum will be pretty trivial.
I...I don't know who they are. I don't really study this in-depth and frankly I don't have the patience to read literature that takes me weeks to finish compared to a summary that explains their fundamental beliefs. Sue me. I was just saying I've heard of distributivism, that's all.
How are robots cheaper? People are absolutely the cheapest things. Just keep them fed (food is surely less expensive than electricity for robots) and they'll live a few decades, automatically repair minor damage to themselves, and even produce more people all by themselves.
Robots are going to enslave humans, not replace them with costly robots.
We're just at the balancing point now trying to determine who will benefit.
If we fuck up, we can prolly fix it at some point - I'd just rather start out on a good path from the get go.
That said, if we REALLY fuck up, the earth can't support another iron or industrial age.
All the easily accessible necessary minerals have been mined - Obtaining more requires our huge infrastructure to already be in place and working.
He does have a point though.
Right now, in many cases, humans ARE cheaper.
In India and places, it's cheaper to pay someone to stand on something all day, than to buy a fucking sandbag.
I see this as a disgusting terrible sadness.
Owning a slave isn't as cheap as hiring some random guy on the street.
If you would calculate a slave's worth today with the prices of back then it comes to $100,000 PER SLAVE
A robot arm is what? 20k for the average one?
This is the genius of the wage slave.
Same result, but they now have to pay to take care of themselves, rather than you, the owner.
Slavery is alive and well.
You're our only hope robot guy.
That's if you BUY a slave. You don't need to buy a slave if you just enslave existing people.
Especially in the future with technology to get inside somebody's head and fuck with their thoughts. What was the term from that book with the opium? Eejit, I think? Humans who've had their thoughts messed with to effectively turn them into robots, with all the benefits of being a biological organism.
Have you not noticed that the military is the first system headed to be fully automated and operated solely by elite personnel?
This war will be a massacre and the result will be the genocide of the proles aka everyone whos not a member of the military, economic and political elite.
Libertards and gnutards tried to warn you. Snowden was too late, this is the irreversible future
>end of inefficient power plants
>cheap electricity will then be taken for granted
Telsa releasing patents to public
>Adoption of efficient electric car designs for all
>I can elaborate on why this will happen in 10-15 years if need be
I have more but those are my homemade ideas lol
My point was that, you no longer have to own them or pay for their upkeep, but can still get the same work from them.
And yes, as sad and disgusting as it is, this is often much cheaper than current robot tech and upkeep.
>Why aren't people installing wind turbines again?
Because they cost too much, don't provide dependable or predictable power, their total output is far lower than their base plate capacity because of their ongoing electrical demands. (for the large 2MW units).
Denmark the world leader in wind power is having to build bio-thermal plants at near to a 1:1 ration to backstop their wind power. Their peak wind output was followed by a week of their lowest power production.
Without a huge grid to sell into (Germany) and without the access to the instant supply of hydro power (Norway) the Danish wind power would work.
Even with those two factors, their power is still hugely expensive. Pic related. Canada is about 60% hydro electric, 20% nuclear, 10% coal 10% gas.
Robots require regular high level maintenance to function, especially in adverse environments. When they break beyond repair, a replacement is expensive. There are many tasks they can perform better, of course-- That's why they're so widely used in manufacturing. Any repetitive task with repetitive motions that require precision is ideal for a robot.
But you don't see robot bricklayers or concrete-pourers or post hole diggers, because those tasks aren't well suited to robots. It's possible for robots to do those tasks, but they'd need to be very complicated.
Complicated robots mean more expensive and more frequent maintenance. But we already have very complicated organisms with sophisticated control systems that respond well to training: human beings. They self-reproduce and heal when damaged, and all they require to continue functioning is water and some nutrition.
>Also, yyou're forgetting NIMBY for the turbines. Shit's loud and leaves bird gore errywhere.
The big ones don't kill birds, but they are loud as fuck and their shadows flashing make people sick.
I wish it happened tomorrow. I'm sick of human civilization being based on toil and misery. If the objective of science is making human lives easier, the logical endpoint is a society where nobody needs to do anything for any reason other than because they felt like it.
>But you don't see robot bricklayers or concrete-pourers or post hole diggers, because those tasks aren't well suited to robots
I'd argue that they're perfectly well suited for robots, but it's (at the moment) cheaper to hire an infinite amount of illiterate brown people to do the job for you. This will not last forever.
Like Startrek right, where people only do what they really enjoy in life. Where no person is forced into working, because everything is provided. That's my dream too man, but on a more optimistic note hehe
Awww thx anon
I fucking hate this excuse and mindset.
I just don't get it.
Human nature is irrelevant.
We can change and manipulate ourselves and our views of the world.
Human nature is living in trees eating grubs and being eaten by lions.
The power of choice, knowledge, and will should never be marginalized.
You don't have to passively float through existence, you can be an active agent.
There is no such things as human nature, and to whatever extent there is, it is mitigated by itself in our ability to adapt.
>people think technology will continue to advance
we're on the verge of entering a new dark age.
The thing that drives technology & civilization is a well adjusted male population, which relies on a traditional family unit, and gender roles.
With those things almost completely destroyed, modern civilization and technological advancement can't continue.
>Blame testosterone, but don't fucking deny it.
lol, fucking fag, without testosterone (males) we'd still be living in africa like bonobos
>still need power plants for peaks
in Australia power plants are discouraging people from putting excess energy into the grid
instead people are encouraged to set up batteries in their homes that would completely eradicate the need for any outside source of electricity
The cleaner isn't solar powered. It's to prevent power loss by covering a solar panel while it's covering the main solar panels. It's obviously powered by the battery of the grid.
>How are robots cheaper? People are absolutely the cheapest things
lolooolol What is industrial revolution?
It had such large success because productivity went down extremely and production itself became more expensive, right?
Even if 98% of all people lock themselves up in their rooms and do nothing but play video games all day - Actually, this would be preferable. They weren't contributing anyway and never would - This gets them out of the way of the few that are.
Food, water, shelter, healthcare, access to the network and education and toys and materials, should all still be the most basic of human rights.
The right to contribute nothing and still live comfortably.
Soon (and I think in many aspects we already have) we will reach a level of production where this will be possible.
I had never thought about subsidies in quite that term before because they almost never get talked about like that, normally people want to talk about all the billions of dollars the oil, gas, and coal companies get without putting it into the context of how much energy they produce.
If the average cost of a kWh of energy in the US is $0.12 then that means the government funds:
0.21% of a kWh of Oil & Natural Gas
0.37% of a kWh of of Coal
0.56% of a kWh of of Hydro
0.74% of a kWh of of Biomass
0.77% of a kWh of of Geothermal
1.3% of a kWh of of Nuclear
19.5% of a kWh of of Wind
20.3% of a kWh of of Solar
That's... kinda staggering when you look at it in such terms to realize how fast the bottom of such industries would fall out if the government stopped paying.
In fact its almost worse than that. When the government stopped giving out subsidies for Wind in an up front fashion (30% of the cost of the unit) with an immediate tax break and instead only offered the 2.3 cent per kWh generated credit then deployment completely stopped. They would still get very generous subsidies but when it was just not a quick payoff anymore nobody installed any more wind generation.
So in that case even with funding but not the kind of funding an industry wanted it was not viable anymore.
The whole premise of using kWh like that is bullshit.
Oil has tons of energy in it. In terms of kWh there isn't much better. That said you can't convert that to electricity without losing most of those kWh.
>Check for yourself, they really don't.
Where does this show seasonal power variations? All I see is current production of 13% of Germans total solar power.
Lower right, click the calendar icon and pick a few days in the winter.
And just to be clear that is how much power these monitored panels are generating relative to their total nameplate capacity, not how much of Germany's total power its generating.
The chart is titled "Federal Electric Subsidies per Unit of Production", it is all about energy to the grid and not pulled out of the ground vs into the grid.
Even if it was out of the ground for stuff that comes that way then you can basically multiply the costs by about 3 to cover for generation losses and you still see its funded peanuts compared to solar and wind.
>In fact its almost worse than that. When the government stopped giving out subsidies for Wind in an up front fashion (30% of the cost of the unit) with an immediate tax break and instead only offered the 2.3 cent per kWh generated credit then deployment completely stopped. They would still get very generous subsidies but when it was just not a quick payoff anymore nobody installed any more wind generation.
Exactly. Wind power is pretty much worthless from a financial point of view if it isn't subsidized. In Finland (where I'm from), just like in Germany we will have huuuge problems when the government removes all the subsidies. Prices will skyrocket if we have been so dumb to rely on windpower by then. Today you could put an electrical motor to power the wind generator and still make a 2-3 cent profit for every kWh you sell. Think about how fucked up for the market and the consumers that is.
>kill wired battery charging
Petrol to Electricity engine converters
>kill green house gas emitting car engines
>kill internet providing companies
Smart Motor Vehicles
>kill human error causing road deaths
W.C (wireless currents)
>kill D.C (direct current) cables
Bio genetic food created in labs
>kill world hunger and animal mistreatment
>kill human moderation on websites
Graphene mass production
Virtual life forms
>kill animal and human experimentation
>kill human inefficiency
Just bomb out all of the great plains states and turn every square inch of the area into a massive fuck-all solar grid. If you don't live in California or New England, no one cares about you anyway.
I don't know about you but I actually like eating, it's one of the few things left in the world that I can truly enjoy. Food pills would be a nightmare for me, unless it's that Willy Wonka gum shit that tastes like a four-course meal.
>Can only make shitty plastic as of yet.
There are 3D printers for a wide variety of materials, granted a lot of them are thermoplastics. What you should be complaining about is that none of them(except that bigass MIT printer) allow you to use multiple materials at once. When we get to the point where one machine can print several materials at once, then it's going to be futuristic.
It's not just jobs, it's materials that are important. You might not understand this, but there are innumerable processes that require petroleum products. And without the oil to refine and get these products, we will be SOL for a lot of things unless a scientist comes up with a workaround. Robots are not the end-all be-all to this problem, scarcity will be the problem(as it always has been).
Some futurists say that there will be a period of post-scarcity but I highly doubt that will ever happen. Humans just consume, we are going to suck the Earth dry.
what if we like
made 3d printers
In 2009 the US spent 326BILLION on clothes
with metal printers we could make jewellery, or ceramic for casts, and with chemical vapor deposition we could make assortments of most precious and semiprecious gemstones
>You will never explore space
>You will never fuck alines
>You will never be an immortal space pirate