Die fossilen Kraftwerke existieren bereits. Ja, auch in den nächsten Jahren werden wir noch Geld in die fossile Infrastruktur stecken müssen. Aber das ist trotzdem die günstigste Lösung.
Nicht alle fossile Kraftwerke laufen mit Dampf. Insbesondere Gaskraftwerke sind gut zum regeln geeignet. Mit einem zusätzlichen Dampfkreislauf erhöht sich der Wirkungsgrad. Aber ob sich das für ein reines Reservekraftwerk lohnt, kann ich dir pauschal nicht sagen.
So oder so. Ohne entsprechende Speichertechnologien können wir aktuell keine 100% erneuerbare erreichen. Und die zusätzlich benötigte fossile Infrastruktur kostet Geld. Und auch die Effizienz der verbliebenen fossilen Kraftwerke wird etwas geringer. Aber: Insgesamt ist das trotzdem die günstigste Lösung und die CO2 Einsparungen sind enorm. Irgendwann werden wir auch die Energie speichern können, und dann wird's noch mal günstiger und umweltfreundlicher.
Erster Satz:
Wenn Sonne und Wind als Energiequelle ausfallen, müssen fossile Kraftwerke zugeschaltet werden.
Wo ist also das Problem? 90% Erneuerbare sind ein hervorragendes Ziel. Nur weil mit aktuellen Speichertechnologien keine 100% machbar sind tun einige gerne so, als ob die Energiewende gescheitert sei und nur Atomkraft uns retten kann.
Rogan is rich. The rules don't apply to the rich. His daughters will thrive in an unequal world.
Your assumption is that it's a Cartesian coordinate system with 90° angles. But that's not necessarily the case. You can apply a sheer transformation to correct for the unusual appearance. When you do that, the angles change, but straight lines stay straight and parallels stay parallel. There's a mathematical term for that, which I can't remember right now.
Für alle anderen Spiele gibt es einen Steam-Fragebogen, den Entwickler eigenständig ausfüllen können.
Naja, sollen die Entwickler halt den Fragebogen ausfüllen.
Exactly this. He was born rich, and yet he came up with an endless stream of grifts throughout his life. This is unnecessary and reckless. I believe he does it because he has a deep inferiority complex and ripping off people gives him a feeling of superiority.
I'm Prinzip hast du ja Recht, aber hier geht es um Grundlagenforschung für eine gesamtgesellschaftlich sehr wichtige Technologie und das auch noch zu einer absolut kritischen Zeit. Da sollte der Staat schon dafür sorgen, dass es so schnell wie möglich vorwärts geht.
Trotzdem erklärte Stark-Watzinger das Vertrauen für zerstört, schickte ihre Staatssekretärin in den vorzeitigen Ruhestand – und erteilte ihr einen beamtenrechtlichen Maulkorb. Döring darf sich weder öffentlich noch vor Bundestagsgremien zu den Vorgängen äußern.
Läuft.
I think the point he's trying to make here is about the undemocratic nature of the election system, in which only the two frontrunners have a chance.
Please read the article before posting!
This is going to be my last message since your last message has made it clear to me that you believe in Russian propaganda and I don't care debating with you about lies.
From day 1, Russia has made it clear that it wants to grab the contested territories, and demilitarize Ukraine as a consequence of unimpeded NATO expansion. NATO has ignored Russia's demands and pressed further.
NATO didn't press eastwards. It welcomed countries that wanted to join because they felt threatened. And it is obvious now that they were right to be scared. Russia demands a sphere of influence. But this is unacceptable for its neighbors. Russia is a colonial empire that can only think in these terms. That's why they believe that these countries that want to join NATO don't have a will of their own and are US puppets. Which makes them fair game. This is not only wrong but also inhumane. It takes away the people's dignity and their right for peace.
And for the love of God. Don't forget the war crimes committed by Russian soldiers on a systematic and large scale. Mass executions, torture, rape, etc. Those weren't isolated incidents, they were part of the plan. And Putin himself handed out medals for the commanders of the most notorious units.
Slow and steady wins are wins
That's the point. Since the run on Kiev the russians have lost far more territory than they gained.
With respect to what?
With respect to the Russians. Given the Ukrainian wins, they are clearly doing a better job than the Russians.
You're saying Ukraine will fight to their last breath? The war is becoming increasingly unpopular as time goes on, do you expect this trend to reverse at some point?
I'm saying they won't accept a deal in which Ukraine becomes demilitarized and at Russia's mercy. And that's the only deal the Russians are offering right now. Even if they lose the resources to launch offensives, they will dig in and defend as long as they can. And this might go on not for years, but decades.
Wouldn't any agreed upon peace-deal be acceptable?
Again, the only deal Russia is willing to give Ukraine at the moment is equal to unconditional surrender. That's not a peace deal. It's a farce.
Can they hold it? It seems Kursk is taking away from Ukraine's ability to hold onto key territory.
That remains to be seen. It's also taking away from Russia's ability to attack in those other regions. Also, this attack shows that Russia has been concentrating its troops on the active front (probably because they felt safe because of western weapon restrictions). Russia was enjoying an asymmetrical advantage. Ukraine took that away.
Surrender is out of the question for Ukraine. Russia has shown from the first day of the invasion on, that this war is as much a land grab, as it is a punishment for not being Russian enough.
Russia has been grinding for years now with only miniscule wins, while Ukraine has made some very successful counter offensives. Ukraine simply has the better army. Whether they can win back their territory depends on international support. But even if that fades, I don't see a scenario in which they just give up. And Russia will only give them an acceptable peace deal if Putin fears for his power or has been removed. This is in part why they launched the Kursk offensive. They need to pressure Putin or continue grinding.
Also: Holding Russian land is maybe the best bargaining chip they have for future negotiations.
Yes, Ukraine faces a lot of the same problems. That's why it needs international help. The difference is that even if Ukranians don't want to fight. At least they have a good reason to.
I'm not saying that victory will be easy. All I'm saying is that it's very much possible.
Ukraine needs a steady supply of modern weapons and the freedom to use them on Russian territory. That way they can continue dismantling the Russian military and minimize casualties. The Russians are pulling a lot of equipment from storage and are refurbishing it. But those storages won't last forever. Also, Russia may have a large population (so does Ukraine), but pretty much everybody willing to fight is already fighting. Also economic hardships are only going to increase. In other words, political instability in Russia is increasing and with it Putin's ability to mobilize troops. Don't forget, Putin can pull out at any time without loosing his power. For Ukraine it's about survival.
And Tesla shareholders just gave Musk a $56 billion bonus. Money well spent!
I'm not sure how to understand your comment. Currently neither side is winning or loosing. Which is why neither side is willing to give up. The west needs to decide if they want to keep it that way, or give Ukraine enough support so they can finish the job "fast".
Russia's current position is, that for ceasefire negotiations to start, Ukraine first has to demilitarize. In other words, no. There aren't any ceasefire negotiations starting any time soon.
The path to victory lies not in symbolic acts of defiance, but in the methodical, relentless pursuit of territorial liberation.
That's just stupid. Are they really suggesting Ukraine should focus solely on grinding through fortified Russian defenses? War is more complicated than "just liberate the occupied territory". And while it's true that this counteroffensive has its risks. Everything they do or don't do has its risks.