Wind turbines used to absorb a power surplus?

And I don't belong to either. I sometimes vote for the Republican candidate because the Democrat is a complete waste of oxygen. Beyond that neither party matches my preferences very well.

Should be possible, just pick a wavelength humans don't absorb, then make the equivalent of a microwave link like they do for communications, but f****ng powerful.

My old meter wasn't mechanical. It was digital (because they'd installed it to give me dual rate 10 years ago).

I've never heard of a woman objecting to being called a somethingman. It's just a word.

It's illegal to disrupt the mail service. Film her/it doing it.

I get my mail delivered to my house. I live in a 1st world country.

Actually, we call it post. I wonder if we'd invented email, it would be called epost?

For a couple of examples: the financial industry lobbied for the removal of the Glass-Steagall regulations and were successful in 1999. They used the new found freedom to destroy themselves within 8 years.

More regulations were imposed. The Silicon Valley Bank, among others, lobbied to have them loosened. The inevitable meltdown came even faster.

That's an entire industry of supposedly intelligent people that can't play nice without supervision. The LP assumes the vast majority of people can make intelligent decisions. I believe, almost by definition, that 50% of the population has an IQ of 100 or less.

Apparently not. There are a couple of trails I hike where there are good views of a peak with a lot of electronics -- and no cell phone coverage. Once I'm in view of year another electronics installation I have signal. There are at least 6 mountain tops with various electronics that may or may not be quasi line of sight depending on where you are.

John is correct according to convention and you are wrong, as typical.

A government guide also endorses the space:

-- Why do some people write seperate rather than separate?

Gender is statistically predictable in many professions. I don't see why you think otherwise.

Then I can only presume you are in denial that there are both poor male and female drivers yet only men will only ever be F1 Champions.

That's a blatant lie on so many counts. Your behaviour is also more akin to a 10 year old vying for attention.

When you use LTSpice and post here your netlist to predict the outcome to your diode in series with a transformer issue then I will accept your IQ may be over 100.

Until then 75 sounds a more accurate appraisal.

Larry Summers was trashed for musing that many measurable things have a wider normal distribution among males than females, which extends the extreme wings on both ends. Males have more geniuses and more idiots.

That, which seems to be true, is still no excuse to make assumptions about individuals. Most of us live near the middle of our normal distributions.

I know women who can handle power tools, and guys who can't. Guys who knit and women who program FPGAs.

One reason why Western countries are so successful is that we are willing to use 100% of our talent pool, and not 50% like some countries that won't educate or employ women. The two World Wars pulled women out of kitchens into factories and trucks and airplanes.

The secret to success: marry a woman who has a good job.

IQ is certainly correlated to electronic circuit design ability, but a high IQ isn't enough. Lots of very smart PhDs are horrible circuit designers. Read The Review Of Scientific Instruments for some hilarious examples.

Since wind and solar power are free, a few per cent transmission efficiency should be fine.

IQ is mainly correlated with the ability of the put up with formal education. You mostly need to get through some formal education before you can get into electronic design. so what correlation does exist may be pretty indirect.

I've noticed that , and got some rude comments published there to that effect.

The problem isn't lack of intelligence, but rather that most physicists don't take electronic design seriously and don't read the data sheets and the application notes. They tend not to read the instrument literature all that carefully either, even when they are publishing in Rev.Sci.Instrum.

I take it you have an old house with the meter indoors. Most are outside nowadays, damp ain't good for paper and biro.

F*ck them, I'll just use less power then.

Why would anyone want to be in credit with them? I pay after I use the power.

I have mains gas in as much as there's a pipe full of it under my drive. It doesn't go anywhere though. Gas is a neanderthal energy source.

Wind and solar power generate electricity more cheaply than burning fossil carbon does, but it isn't free. You have to pay the capital cost of of putting together your solar farms or wind farms, and keep them maintained.

It's worth spending money on low loss transmission and storage systems so you can get by with a smaller wind farm or solar farm.

John Larkin may have though that he was being satirical, and just harking back to "to cheap to meter" nuclear power, but it isn't all that obviously satirical.

It was the business model of all those minnow suppliers who are no longer. Get the suckers to switch for a headline cheap rate but then jack up the monthly DD so the punter is actually paying a lot more per KwH. Then drag your feet if they try and get their money back. Then disappear in a puff of Putin inflation and take all that credit with them.

The only suckers are those who didn't switch for nearly a decade.

It took about 6 weeks to get my money back and didn't lose a penny.

Those who got their credit returned have actually paid for much of that returned credit in higher standing charges so very soon the standing charges will be reduced to their previous levels, or will the pigs be still flying?