IRC logs for #openttd on OFTC at 2011-10-05
⏴ go to previous day
02:25:00 *** rhaeder1 has joined #openttd
04:02:46 *** Zeknurn has joined #openttd
04:05:44 *** joho^_^ has joined #openttd
04:56:27 *** Eddi|zuHause has joined #openttd
05:46:11 *** Cybertinus has joined #openttd
06:12:16 *** Br33z4hSlut5 has joined #openttd
06:14:45 *** z-MaTRiX has joined #openttd
06:16:15 *** Adambean has joined #openttd
06:19:01 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
06:35:15 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
06:41:50 *** norbert79 has joined #openttd
06:50:42 *** valhallasw has joined #openttd
07:17:15 *** AndrewV has joined #openttd
07:18:19 *** AndrewV is now known as Pawz
07:21:21 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
08:04:57 *** Progman has joined #openttd
08:40:15 *** joho^_^ is now known as joho
09:01:54 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
09:14:05 *** Zeknurn has joined #openttd
09:41:48 *** norbert79 has joined #openttd
09:51:06 *** norbert79 has joined #openttd
10:23:32 *** KenjiE20 has joined #openttd
11:21:39 <MNIM> I kinda like the Canadian station sets, but I kinda wish there were more options with building 'parking space' pretties on top of the lines.
12:10:10 <Terkhen> I just noticed that houses can produce any number of cargos using callback 0x2E :O
12:10:50 <planetmaker> yeah... quite... powerful
12:10:54 <planetmaker> compared to industries ;-)
12:11:03 <Terkhen> and quite a headache for fixing subsidies :)
12:12:55 <Terkhen> I need to know what type of cargo is produced / accepted by all houses and industries
12:14:54 <Terkhen> it seems that there are functions for doing that already :P
12:15:37 <planetmaker> It sometimes makes one wonder :-)
12:23:00 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
12:27:42 *** norbert79 has joined #openttd
12:44:01 *** norbert79 has joined #openttd
13:21:32 *** Kurimus has joined #openttd
13:27:06 <Belugas> ghrrr.... reboot time... be back
13:31:38 *** Belugas has joined #openttd
13:31:38 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o Belugas
13:45:35 <b_jonas> I think I'll play with fewer industries (and possibly fewer towns) in the next game so that I have more space
13:47:24 <Terkhen> hmm... playing the game
14:00:55 <planetmaker> wait... it can actually be _played_?
14:03:35 <Terkhen> maybe we should try to demonstrate empirically if it can be played or not
14:08:39 <Kogut> yes, only minimal coding is needed to create ai :)
14:08:46 *** norbert79 has joined #openttd
14:25:19 *** TWerkhoven has joined #openttd
14:44:10 <Terkhen> subsidies are confusing
14:44:44 * planetmaker sometimes uses AI to have them test the game ;-)
14:45:16 <planetmaker> like "cargo support needs testing and you're feeling lazy? - Just start 10 AIs and see what they can come up with" ;-)
14:52:38 <Terkhen> I'll do that once I finish with subsidies :P
14:58:15 <Terkhen> good luck fixing it in OpenTTD source then :P
14:58:33 <Terkhen> I learned the word from there, it's everywhere
14:58:34 <Eddi|zuHause> no, it's something entirely different
14:59:13 <Eddi|zuHause> "subsidy" = government funding to aid development, "subsidiary" = subcompanies
14:59:44 <Eddi|zuHause> (basically multiple companies controlled by the same player)
14:59:57 <Terkhen> oh, I understand now :P
15:04:48 <peter1138> aka an ancient patch
15:04:50 <Terkhen> stupid msys, the console window hang up so badly that I can't even kill it
15:05:32 <Terkhen> what was that patch for?
15:06:13 <Terkhen> like infrastructure sharing?
15:06:23 <peter1138> yes, but it went further
15:06:45 <peter1138> you could charge people for using your tracks, etc...
15:10:04 <Terkhen> hmmm... sounds complicated :P
15:11:58 <peter1138> guess why it never hit trunk :)
15:13:26 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
15:19:41 *** Biolunar has joined #openttd
15:25:18 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd
15:30:56 *** DayDreamer1 has joined #openttd
15:32:21 *** supermop has joined #openttd
15:32:29 *** DayDreamer1 has left #openttd
15:36:04 <frosch123> damn, it took me ages to understand today's xkcd
15:36:47 <norbert79> frosch123: Well, yeah, me too
15:37:03 <norbert79> frosch123: Wasn't that funny imo :)
15:37:13 <norbert79> frosch123: I am this crazy by default
15:37:22 <peter1138> it works if you knew about the fedex logo thing
15:37:38 <frosch123> i first had to look up the fedex logo to understand what they were talking about
15:37:46 <frosch123> then i could interpret the joke :)
15:41:38 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
15:45:49 * Terkhen wonders if OnNewMonth is called when a game starts
15:48:25 <Eddi|zuHause> that's like a one line patch :)
15:48:44 <Eddi|zuHause> printf("this line is executed")
15:49:47 <Terkhen> meh, that means compiling code
15:49:53 *** Hyronymus has joined #openttd
15:50:05 *** mahmoud has joined #openttd
15:51:35 *** Prof_Frink has joined #openttd
15:54:05 <frosch123> i would expect it is not called
15:54:11 <frosch123> but the tileloop is called
15:55:58 <Terkhen> hmm... there are no subsidies in the first month anyways
15:56:19 <Terkhen> I don't need to calculate town cargo acceptance / production before that
16:14:34 *** valhallasw has joined #openttd
16:20:46 <ercole> I would like to use the seaplane.grf on openttd 1.1.3 but it gives me an attempt to use wrong ID error
16:21:27 <ercole> Is there a new version of this grf
16:22:08 <planetmaker> "wrong ID error"?
16:23:24 <MNIM> hmmmh, service vastly improved at all IC stations when I adopted TGV duplex across all intercities, but my profits dropped 50%
16:23:42 <planetmaker> nor can we answer your question at all, as we don't even know which newgrf (version) you use
16:24:33 <Rubidium> planetmaker: he meant STR_NEWGRF_ERROR_INVALID_ID
16:25:27 * planetmaker wonders when that is triggered
16:26:01 <Rubidium> probably when it tries to assign aircraft stuff to a non-aircraft?
16:26:04 <ercole> I use openttd 1.1.3 on ubuntu linux, if I download a new grf from the online resource it works OK, but seaplane.grf is not there, so I got the archive from the forums for windows and got the seaplane.grf file and added it manually to the data folder of openttd on linux
16:26:29 *** Progman has joined #openttd
16:26:33 <MNIM> huh, I think some train just delivered a huge load
16:26:51 <Rubidium> ercole: that NewGRF is likely for some custom build of OpenTTD and as such you need that custom build
16:26:52 <glx> doesn't seeplane need some newairport stuff ?
16:26:54 <ercole> when I start openttd it recognises the grf and allows me to select it but when I start a new game I get the error
16:26:57 <planetmaker> hm, ho. Seaplane. I guess that's a NewGRF written for a never released testing version of OpenTTD
16:27:09 <MNIM> suddenly my year profit was higher than last year already in april
16:27:11 <planetmaker> yes, iirc it's something from an (old) NewAirports branch
16:27:18 <planetmaker> Thus it won't work with OpenTTD (yet)
16:27:44 *** DayDreamer1 has joined #openttd
16:28:20 <ercole> So why was the project halted?
16:28:21 <planetmaker> of course we got the trademark on (tm)!. And you did use it without permission! ;-)
16:29:30 <planetmaker> ercole: long story short: there are things which need consideration and careful thought on how to implement in order to keep it both maintainable, a sane spec for airports and it needs implementation
16:29:41 <planetmaker> who said it's halted?
16:30:49 <planetmaker> and a very common reason for not immediately continuing with something is also "I got distracted" :-)
16:30:52 <MNIM> hmmmh, increased profit seems to be a trend
16:31:08 <MNIM> perhaps my halved profit resulted from unfinished upgrades :S
16:31:30 <ercole> so there will be a seaplane implementation in openttd then
16:31:31 <MNIM> planetmaker: tell me about it.
16:31:43 <MNIM> I build aircraft for xplane.
16:31:59 <MNIM> I still have an old plane from a year back or so that I need to finish.
16:32:15 <MNIM> in the meantime I have another almost ready to release >.<
16:32:20 <planetmaker> ercole: somewhen: very likely. when? No idea
16:32:31 <Terkhen> ercole: as soon as someone codes it and maintains it until it is deemed good enough for inclusion :)
16:32:53 <Kogut> like morehightlevels...
16:33:10 <planetmaker> which still needs lots of work
16:33:18 <planetmaker> it's not even finished once
16:33:27 <planetmaker> all newgrf support is lacking there
16:33:43 <ercole> The archivr I got for windows runs OK on windows and allows you to build seaport fro aeroplanes, it only does not work on openttd 1.1.3
16:34:57 <planetmaker> as said: that newgrf was written for a development version which implemented stuff which has not yet been entirely made it into trunk this way
16:35:27 <planetmaker> thus it works for the custom openttd build found adjacent to it. But with no other openttd version
16:40:44 <ercole> there was also airportsextended.grf which also caused same problem
16:44:54 <planetmaker> ercole: yes... might well be, if they're written for that ancient development branch
16:46:11 <planetmaker> Hm... though... I guess in principle a sea airport could already be done
16:46:28 <planetmaker> via NewGRFs. Such NewGRF simply does not yet exist
16:46:59 <ercole> Hope to see one in the future
16:49:51 <planetmaker> Such hope can easily be made reality oneself ;-)
16:52:09 <planetmaker> depending on POV, writing a newgrf is more or less work than one might expect
16:53:43 <ercole> I decoded the seaplane.grf into the pcx & nfo file but the don't know what parameters to change in the nfo file
16:54:14 <planetmaker> the main problem would be to get sea airports, wouldn't it?
16:54:52 <planetmaker> if you want to make those planes available, I'd suggest to not write it in nfo but in nml if you have no prior grf coding experience
16:55:07 *** |Jeroen| has joined #openttd
16:55:39 <Terkhen> but doesn't it need special support that vanilla openttd does not have?
16:56:38 <planetmaker> yes and no... I got the idea that it might be possible to take one of the default statemachines and just attache seaport sprites to it
16:56:48 <planetmaker> any plane could fly there... but that's up to the player then
16:57:07 <planetmaker> it would be a marvelous extension for ogfx+airports
16:57:39 <planetmaker> not each statemachine would lend itself to this, but some probably could be made to look ok on sea
16:59:08 <planetmaker> but one will not get support like "this plane can't go to that airport" in vanilla openttd
16:59:21 <planetmaker> and it will definitely look funny when an A380 lands in the ocean...
17:00:11 <ercole> AT the bottom of the thread is the file and picture
17:00:47 <planetmaker> yes, I see that. It *should* be feasible to get something like that with vanilla openttd
17:00:58 <planetmaker> it "just" needs coding of both, the plane and the airport
17:01:44 <planetmaker> as you see in the screenshot it is made with a really VERY ancient version of openttd from an indeed discontinued branch
17:01:58 <planetmaker> and the new attempt has not yet been finished
17:02:26 <ercole> The helicopter can land in both airports and heliports, while aeroplanes are allowed to land only in aerports. So make seaplanes in same way
17:03:44 <supermop> most seaplanes can typically only land on water
17:03:56 <ercole> the seaport could be a modified heliport
17:04:19 <planetmaker> the picture there shows a modified small airport ;-)
17:04:25 <planetmaker> and planes cannot land on heliports
17:04:37 <ercole> so seaplanes can land in aerports and seaports but normal aeroplanes can only land in airports
17:04:57 <planetmaker> currently every plane will be able to land everywhere
17:05:09 <planetmaker> there's no concept of sea planes in openttd trunk
17:05:29 <planetmaker> what one could do, is provide graphics, thus that one has sea planes and seaports
17:05:37 <Kogut> all AIs are supposed to do commands via AIObject::DoCommand and it requires DEF_CMD (like CMD_BUILD_RAIL_WAYPOINT)
17:05:49 <planetmaker> with the "benefit" that normal planes could land there, too. And seaplanes on a mountain-top airport as well
17:05:58 <Kogut> as I want to add new DEF_CMD definition
17:06:43 <Kogut> it is required to add it to command.cpp (sth like DEF_CMD(CmdBuildRailWaypointRectangle, 0, CMDT_LANDSCAPE_CONSTRUCTION), // CMD_BUILD_RAIL_WAYPOINT_RECTANGLE)
17:07:16 <Kogut> and to command_type.h (sth like CMD_BUILD_RAIL_WAYPOINT_RECTANGLE, ///< build a waypoint rectangle)
17:07:17 <ercole> have to go now, nice talking
17:07:49 <Kogut> is it required to regenerate sth (like with new squirrel function)?
17:07:50 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: planetmaker * r23004 /trunk/src/newgrf.cpp: -Feature [FS#4795]: Allow to use offsets for all types of action5 except sea shores
17:08:34 <Kogut> Or maybe it is bad idea to add new command type and new fuction to waypoint_cmd.cpp file?
17:17:54 <frosch123> "World population reaches 18,437! Senior citizens complain about crowded neighbourhoods!"
17:18:57 <Eddi|zuHause> yeah, we should have more such messages, like "company XYZ builds 100th vehicle"
17:19:16 <frosch123> do you know the source of that quote?
17:20:11 <frosch123> i am browsing forum topics from 2005 :p
17:21:55 <Terkhen> I'm thinking about subsidies... if all cargos are the same (we don't assume anymore that passengers are the only thing that towns can produce and that everything else is produced by industries), does it make sense to start by choosing a random cargo instead of a random town / industry?
17:22:56 <frosch123> i would start with something with poor serivce
17:23:32 <frosch123> i.e. something unserviced
17:23:45 <Terkhen> hmm... can I measure poor service for any cargo produced in a town?
17:24:16 <Eddi|zuHause> towns measure transported cargos just like industries
17:24:43 <frosch123> hmm, i guess may idea gets pointless in later game stages
17:24:57 <Terkhen> I only remember them measuring cargos with a town effect, let me check
17:25:12 <Kogut> "start by choosing a random cargo" - wgat with strange cargos like regearing?
17:25:29 <Kogut> Or maybe secondary, unproduced
17:25:41 <Terkhen> Kogut: I can easily filter regearing cargos away
17:25:50 <Terkhen> but what's the problem with subsidizing secondary cargos?
17:26:00 <Kogut> I guess that sth with production>0 but with low service rate may be good idea
17:26:32 <Terkhen> there is a %transported limit already
17:26:44 <Terkhen> it must be lesser than 42
17:26:54 <Kogut> and still - there is single factory on map. 1/cargo_count subsidies will be awarded to this industry
17:27:19 *** Chris_Booth has joined #openttd
17:27:35 <Terkhen> true, choosing cargos scales badly with map size
17:27:47 <Terkhen> towns have GetPercentPassTransported and GetPercentMailTransported
17:27:51 <Kogut> and is it possible to increase maximal length of subsided route?
17:28:07 <Kogut> now it is completely pointless
17:28:08 <Terkhen> maybe I should expand those functions to all cargos
17:28:26 <Terkhen> in fact I must, otherwise this won't work
17:28:49 <Terkhen> Kogut: distance is a single constant in the code
17:28:58 <Terkhen> making it a setting is out of the scope of my patch for now, though
17:29:09 <Terkhen> although it could be added later
17:29:21 <Kogut> @Terkhen - well, maybe this is kind of patch that is doable for me
17:30:12 <Terkhen> yes, it is a small patch... but you probably shouldn't start with it until I'm done with subsidies, I could mess your patch :P
17:30:32 <Terkhen> hmmm... I remember adding something like that to my patch pack years ago, maybe there is a patch already at the forums somewhere
17:30:54 <Kogut> @Terkhen - I am trying to add new function to NoAI API
17:31:33 <Terkhen> meh, adapting towns will take a while
17:31:52 <Terkhen> I should have suspected it, the patch was too simple :)
17:32:13 <Terkhen> Kogut: adding a setting for subsidy distance will probably be simpler
17:32:21 <Terkhen> I haven't fiddled much with the NoAI code
17:32:52 <Kogut> and I wonder - is it possible to group AIObject::DoCommand in way "do all or nothing"
17:33:20 <Kogut> @Terkhen - well, my AIAI requires this function
17:33:51 <Eddi|zuHause> imho subsidies should work completely different. like "transport >X cargo per year from A to B, gain exclusive rights for 10 years"
17:33:52 <Kogut> and as I see nobody is interested in adding new noai API functions
17:33:58 <Terkhen> not building stuff partially like when you build a road up to an obstacle?
17:34:16 <Terkhen> I have some code for you, let me check the revision
17:35:00 <Terkhen> Eddi|zuHause: I agree that subsidies should be different, but for now I'm only fixing the source/destination mess
17:37:16 <DorpsGek> Terkhen: Commit by terkhen :: r18986 /trunk/src (3 files in 2 dirs) (2010-02-02 21:25:01 UTC)
17:37:17 <DorpsGek> Terkhen: -Fix (r18803): Make building long roads fail for AIs if there is an obstacle in the way.
17:39:21 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: planetmaker * r23005 /trunk/src/newgrf.cpp: -Fix (r23004): Of course there's still the 16-sprite version for shore tiles... we should continue to handle it.
17:43:42 <Kogut> @Terkhen - it changes behaviour of CMD_BUILD_LONG_ROAD
17:43:56 <Terkhen> it is something "wrong" to do
17:44:08 <Terkhen> but if someone requested the normal behavior for AIs I would code a switch
17:44:14 <Kogut> and I cannot change behaviour of existing functions
17:44:24 <Terkhen> I just assumed that every NoAI author would prefer the specific behavior :)
17:44:59 <Kogut> As changing from AIRail::BuildRailWaypoint(TileIndex tile) to AIRail::BuildRailWaypoint(TileIndex tile, StationID waypoint_id) will break all AIs using this function
17:45:36 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: translators * r23006 /trunk/src/lang/ (latvian.txt portuguese.txt unfinished/persian.txt):
17:45:36 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: -Update from WebTranslator v3.0:
17:45:36 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: latvian - 4 changes by Parastais
17:45:36 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: persian - 20 changes by Peymanpn
17:45:36 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: portuguese - 1 changes by JayCity
17:45:44 <Kogut> and stupid squirrel is unable to use default parameters or function overloading
17:46:09 <Kogut> maybe I will add CMD_BUILD_RAIL_WAYPOINT_RECTANGLE
17:46:16 <Terkhen> IIRC you need to code a compatibility function for older versions o fthe NoAI API
17:46:22 <Terkhen> adding new commands is not a good option IMO
17:46:27 <Terkhen> anyways, I have to go now :)
17:46:34 <Terkhen> sorry, we can continue this conversation tomorrow
17:48:26 *** KenjiE20 has joined #openttd
18:06:11 <appe> something is up with my trains
18:06:35 <appe> look at that. the train takes the shortcut instead of going to the sunningwell refinery
18:06:41 <appe> although it has orders to go there
18:07:52 <PeanutHorst> you need to change your signals to force it to go to the sunningwell refinery, i'd guess
18:08:39 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
18:17:33 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
18:49:50 <Elukka> "But not everybody is enthusiastic. Around 10 people demonstrated outside Wednesday's news conference in Helsinki, carrying plaques saying "E.ON E.OFF - German nuclear power to Finland? No thank you."
18:49:55 <Elukka> i love how 10 people is news
18:51:41 <Eddi|zuHause> is that some follow-up to siemens announcing to pull out of a nuclear project in finland?
18:52:00 <Eddi|zuHause> (and all other nuclear projects as well)
18:55:36 <Elukka> they got around to picking the site of a new plant
18:55:56 <Elukka> supposedly environmentalists, but you'd think if they were real environmentalists they'd be complaining about the coal power
18:56:52 <__ln__> the green party here has the perfect solution for all the energy we need in the future.
18:57:58 <Elukka> i'd even vote for a green party if 1. their other politics were sensible 2. their 'green' politics were sensible
18:58:06 <__ln__> "we shall make new innovations, which create both environmentally-friendly energy and new jobs for people"
18:58:57 <Elukka> nuclear is currently the only form of power that's both environmentally friendly and economical enough for large scale implementation
18:59:13 <Elukka> well, hydro works too but it's limited to how many suitable rivers you have...
18:59:38 <planetmaker> and can be argued to not be environmental friendly, too ;-)
18:59:46 <Eddi|zuHause> i guess finland has plenty of water, but is too flat for water power
19:01:26 <__ln__> i found a page that says there are 207 hydro power plants in here.
19:01:57 <Elukka> we have plenty, just it isn't really possible to build any more
19:02:25 <Elukka> dams certainly have their own environmental issues too
19:05:17 <Elukka> really, i think the sensible thing to do would be to replace coal with nuclear
19:06:01 <Elukka> and with wind and solar to the degree feasible... probably not very much
19:06:17 <Elukka> fusion has the issue of always being 30 years in the future
19:06:28 <planetmaker> Elukka: Germany had last year about 10 nuclear plants running on average.
19:06:32 <Elukka> it'll be great once they figure it out but you can't really make plans on it
19:06:43 <planetmaker> Now it has one on standby. Which is about 10GW of installed power
19:06:50 <V453000> planetmaker: even currently? I have no clue about the current situation tbh
19:07:00 <planetmaker> obviously shutting down them, had no detrimental effect ;-)
19:07:17 <planetmaker> V453000: now there's none running
19:07:18 <Elukka> germany's phasing out of nuclear power must be one of the most misguided and environmentally harmful things anyone has done in a good while
19:07:23 <planetmaker> or one. Not entirely sure
19:07:40 <V453000> well you are online so I see you have electricity :P
19:07:47 <Elukka> they're building a dozen coal plants
19:07:51 <Elukka> many of them burn lignite
19:07:53 <planetmaker> Germany still exports more electricity than it imports
19:07:55 <Elukka> it's the dirtiest fuel available
19:08:25 <Eddi|zuHause> __ln__: 10MW is really nothing...
19:08:48 <planetmaker> it's the equivalent of _one_ modern wind turbine
19:08:50 * peter1138 puts Eddi|zuHause on a treadmill
19:08:57 <panna> i heard there's uranium in the coal
19:09:09 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
19:09:12 <planetmaker> I heart there's uranium within you, panna
19:09:17 <Elukka> they're replacing an environmentally friendly, economical form of power with the worst kind imaginable
19:09:19 <Eddi|zuHause> "sizeable" power stations start around 100MW, "large" ones more likely around 1GW
19:09:20 <V453000> hm I thought turbine makes even less :)
19:09:23 <Elukka> it makes no damned sense
19:09:27 <__ln__> Eddi|zuHause: i know. anyway, 4% of all electricity comes from water.
19:09:39 <planetmaker> Elukka: tell that someone living in Chernobyl of Fukushima
19:10:29 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai
19:10:29 <V453000> but was it someones actual fault in fukushima or was it just the quakes and whatnot?
19:10:30 <Eddi|zuHause> the only way you can get nuclear power to be both "economical" and "environmental" is if you discount the possibility of it blowing up
19:10:32 <Elukka> fukushima wasn't half as bad as chernobyl... and should we stop building dams because there was a catastrophic dam accident that ruined a whole area and killed a hundred thousand in china?
19:11:03 <Elukka> eddi, nuclear hurts people and the environment when it blows up which is very rare
19:11:10 <Elukka> coal hurts people and the environment under normal operation
19:11:11 <planetmaker> Elukka: the difference between a catastrophic dam failure and a catastrophic nuclear plant failure is the long-term effect
19:11:22 <Belugas> a dam causes damages one time and not for an extensive lenght of time
19:11:23 <Eddi|zuHause> Elukka: actually, the amount of radiation believed to have been released from fukushima until now is higher than the one released by tschernobyl
19:11:42 <planetmaker> and yes, what eddi says
19:11:42 <Eddi|zuHause> and fukushima is still far from being "under control"
19:11:48 <Elukka> i recall in china coal kills around 200 people per terawatt hour
19:11:53 <planetmaker> and the amount of people impacted is not less either
19:12:19 <andythenorth> coal kills coal miners with regularity
19:12:45 <andythenorth> did someone just commit roadtypes? :o
19:12:46 <Eddi|zuHause> and uranium doesn't kill uranium miners?
19:12:48 <Elukka> if nuclear killed 200 people would be calling for all nuclear plants to be shut down right now
19:13:00 <Elukka> they just don't notice that coal is worse in all respects
19:13:28 <Eddi|zuHause> everybody knows that coal is bad
19:13:33 <planetmaker> Elukka: your perception might be wrong on some aspects ;-)
19:13:34 <Elukka> if we want to talk long term, how about the way we've increased the co2 concentration in the atmosphere by a third and how it's bound to have all sorts of fun global effects
19:13:51 <Eddi|zuHause> the difference is accidents with coal are generally locally confined
19:14:03 <Elukka> well, since we agree coal is bad, what do you suppose we should replace it with?
19:14:05 <Eddi|zuHause> there is no 30km evacuation radius around any coal plant in the world
19:14:21 <Elukka> yeah because coal spreads its poison all around on a regular basis
19:14:23 <planetmaker> Elukka: regenerative energy: wind, solar, geo-thermal, ...
19:14:42 <andythenorth> hmm hmmm hm hmmm
19:14:43 <planetmaker> tidal on coastal regions.
19:14:55 * andythenorth lives close to multiple nuclear plants
19:14:59 <Eddi|zuHause> Elukka: there's still a difference from effects being "bad" (coal) or "devastating" (nuclear)
19:15:02 <Elukka> none of those are economical enough for large scale implementation
19:15:05 <__ln__> 30 km evacuation zone is insignificant compared to the landarea of a continent.
19:15:05 * andythenorth is also in a tsunami zone
19:15:09 <Elukka> nuclear isn't 'devastating'
19:15:23 <Elukka> it's kinda like how car accident deaths aren't reported because they happen all the time, but plane accidents are because they're rare and spectacular... planes are still safer than cars, though
19:15:38 *** TWerkhoven[l] has joined #openttd
19:15:42 <planetmaker> uhm... ? What could be a worse accident than Chernobyl or Fukushima?
19:15:45 <V453000> or we can send the unemployed to hamster-like running machines so they produce electricity and suddenly zero unemployment globally \o/
19:16:06 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: volcanos with unspeakable names :p
19:16:20 <Elukka> coal in general is a much worse accident than chernobyl and fukushima combined
19:16:43 <Elukka> it's a slow, steady, constant accident instead of one spectacular event, so people don't notice
19:16:53 <__ln__> yes, and coal emits more radiation all the time than nucular power plants do.
19:17:06 *** TWerkhoven[l] has joined #openttd
19:17:13 <Eddi|zuHause> Elukka: actually, there have been spectacular coal-events, but those were in the 1950s
19:17:17 <planetmaker> it's not nice, but it can be solved in time as it's a slow problem
19:17:19 <Elukka> it kills people, ruins the environment and causes what is essentially uncontrolled global geoengineering
19:17:24 <Rubidium> planetmaker: coal plants' radiation?
19:17:50 <Eddi|zuHause> radiation in low dosages is (practically) harmless
19:18:04 <V453000> I agree with using nuclear energy, but on the other hand with your point when someone notices something, if you drink 1 beer per evening is also better than if you dont drink for a year and then drink several kegs :P
19:18:17 <Eddi|zuHause> hiking through the mountains gives you more radiation than any coal power plant nearby
19:18:21 <planetmaker> Rubidium: yes. Their ashes contain more radioactive material than is released by a nuclear plant under "normal" operation
19:18:25 <Kogut> In Poland there are large areas of cities destroyed due to coal mines below
19:19:07 <planetmaker> V453000: good analogy :-)
19:19:30 <planetmaker> the nuclear plant is unfortunately the "now drink this whole barrel" type
19:19:53 <Elukka> there have been two serious nuclear accident in the world ever
19:20:18 <Eddi|zuHause> there were like 20
19:20:19 <Elukka> consider the scale of the entire world for a second
19:20:23 <andythenorth> Elukka: quite a lot more than 2
19:20:28 <V453000> there were 2 officially
19:20:40 <Eddi|zuHause> three mile island
19:20:43 <andythenorth> is there an official scale of 'serious'
19:20:46 <Elukka> three mile island sure wasn't a serious accident
19:20:57 <Rubidium> planetmaker: but when you drink a whole barrel you'll vomit, i.e. you'd go away ;)
19:21:00 <Elukka> if it kills nobody and doesn't ruin any amount of land i don't think it counts as serious
19:21:12 <andythenorth> also, didn't we discuss this before :P
19:21:20 <supermop> it was a serious meltdown, but the containment building didnt fail
19:21:26 <planetmaker> Elukka: agreed. But then there are even more than 20
19:21:26 <Elukka> anyway, one of the real ones was caused by a catastrophic earthquake and tsunami... that dwarfed the nuclear accident itself
19:21:32 <andythenorth> can we not go and troll some stupid forum threads?
19:21:43 <supermop> that building is still completely sealed and useless
19:21:46 <planetmaker> Elukka: did the tsunami dwarf it? Sure?
19:21:52 <planetmaker> The tsunami is gone.
19:21:54 <Elukka> so TMI ruined a building
19:22:00 <Elukka> the tsunami destroyed huge swathes of land
19:22:11 <planetmaker> The plant will continue to have a dead-zone around for decades to come
19:22:12 <Elukka> it'll cost endless billions to rebuild
19:22:27 <planetmaker> which is more billions than the tsunami for sure
19:22:37 <z-MaTRiX> p=printf\ ;$p\%q "The Matrix has you..."|while read -n1 c;do $p\%s "$c";usleep $(($RANDOM*20));done;$p\\n;
19:22:41 <planetmaker> and totally avoidable :-)
19:22:46 <planetmaker> while the tsunami was not ;-)
19:23:00 <Elukka> either way, a nuclear accident due toa 15 meter tsunami wave is hardly an argument against nuclear as a whole
19:23:09 * andythenorth considers nuclear plant for FIRS
19:23:36 <supermop> it is an argument against keeping 40+ year old boilig water reactors around
19:23:51 <Elukka> fukushima would have been avoidable
19:23:58 <MNIM> andythenorth: that's actually kinda cool.
19:23:58 <V453000> andythenorth: will it go BOOM? :D
19:24:10 <supermop> but yes, coal plants kill many more people
19:24:13 <planetmaker> or do you argue also a coal power plant at that site would have such aftermath?
19:24:23 <MNIM> uranium mine -> uranium enrichment plant -> nuke plant?
19:24:44 <Elukka> to be logically consistent, you must also be against water power as it has caused a truly catastrophic accident that resulted in a hundred thousand deaths
19:25:08 <Elukka> no, if it was a coal power plant it'd instead have contributed to a global catastrophe for the past few decades
19:25:26 <V453000> andythenorth, MNIM... and the uranium enrichment plant should require chemicals or something from other FIRS stuff :)
19:25:28 <supermop> well hydro is worse due to destruction of land, see 3 gorges
19:25:48 <Elukka> and the only one with significant death toll in that list is chernobyl..
19:25:59 *** Progman has joined #openttd
19:26:09 <Elukka> it is absolutely dwarfed by the death toll from coal or even hydro
19:26:13 <MNIM> exactly, V453000: I was thinking of something to tie it in the chain, but didn't find anything in an instant
19:26:25 <MNIM> elukka: you're being incredibly shortsighted here.
19:26:27 <V453000> I suppose chemicals are best
19:26:43 <planetmaker> MNIM: he's incredibly trolling ;-)
19:26:51 <V453000> Alcohol solves _everything_
19:26:51 <Elukka> i am also thinking from the viewpoint of what is good for the coming centuries...
19:27:14 <Elukka> the entire argument against nuclear is emotionally based, it doesn't seem to matter if one shows it has objectively less deaths than other forms of power
19:27:24 <MNIM> anyway, a coal plant may cause destruction of the environment /if all goes well/ for centuries to come
19:27:31 <V453000> I dont have too distanced opinion from Elukka, but I know I dont know much about it so I dont express it :)
19:28:05 * andythenorth is moderately convinced by nuclear
19:28:19 <MNIM> but the damage a coal plant causes (sulphur and carbon in the atmosphere) can be minimized and/or compensated.
19:28:24 <Elukka> i wouldn't be surprised if our overall distaste for nuclear will be what will end us, if sufficiently severe global warming occurs
19:28:35 <Eddi|zuHause> Elukka: how is something good for the "upcoming centuries" when the already accumulated waste has to be watched over for 10.000 years?
19:28:38 <MNIM> if all does not go well, it may cause, say, a hundred deaths over the course of a week.
19:28:45 <planetmaker> also... from a fuel supply perspective nuclear is not a future technology. Uranium supply won't last longer than coal either
19:29:00 <Elukka> coal deposits the waste in the atmosphere... nuclear deposits it in the bedrock
19:29:34 <Elukka> planetmaker, almost all of that waste is usable nuclear fuel
19:29:37 <Elukka> we have the technology
19:29:46 <Elukka> additionally, thorium reactors are an attractive near term prospect
19:29:50 <Eddi|zuHause> Elukka: and now count the instances of civilization "forgetting" the existence of anything in the last 10.000 years
19:30:00 <Eddi|zuHause> which is basically the complete history of mankind
19:30:16 <Elukka> it's 800 meters underground, what harm will it cause?
19:30:16 <MNIM> the best solution for nuclear waste is letting it go through it's entire decay chain until it causes no harm
19:30:28 <Elukka> either way it's still less bad than the waste coal power constantly pumps in the atmosphere
19:30:53 <Elukka> using the waste as fuel has some safety issues that would make it less economical to use, though... for one, it's significantly radioactive
19:30:56 <Elukka> traditional nuclear fuel isn't
19:31:01 <Eddi|zuHause> Elukka: politicians can't even plan 5 years ahead. how do you expect them to plan 10.000 years ahead?
19:31:21 <Elukka> they've already built a waste repository deep underground over here, so i guess they managed
19:31:28 <MNIM> if that waste is properly taken care of, or if nuclear fusion becomes a viable option in the next couple of decades or so, nuclear waste is not an issue, and your only problem is safety
19:31:39 <Eddi|zuHause> Elukka: what if seismic activity pushes the 800m deep deposit into a water supply, which poisons whole rivers?
19:31:59 <planetmaker> Elukka: nuclear waste in the "bedrock" is as good as nuclear waste in your drinking water ;-)
19:32:00 <Elukka> that's why you carefully choose your location so that cannot happen
19:32:00 <V453000> andythenorth: that is bloody cute :D
19:32:10 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: nuclear waste is totally useless to fusion plants
19:32:20 <Elukka> yeah but nuclear waste is useful to fission plants
19:32:44 <MNIM> there is no (read, negligible) waste from a fusion plant.
19:32:50 <Kogut> @10.000 year - there are plans, including "how to mark it?"
19:32:56 <Eddi|zuHause> Elukka: that's the point, nobody knows what the proper criteria are to choose the location carefully enough
19:33:01 <Elukka> fusion would be in every way superior to fission, at least if it ends up economical
19:33:05 <Elukka> it's just it doesn't exist yet...
19:33:33 <Elukka> are we really worried that in 4000 years some archeologist stumbles upon our waste canisters and dies of radiation poisoning?
19:33:35 <planetmaker> the advantage is its lack of catastrophic failure
19:33:51 <__ln__> if it did exist, oil companies would buy all the rights to the technology
19:33:55 <MNIM> anyway, your biggest danger will come from terrorism, bad maintenance and poorly skilled operators, and freak tsunamis and earthquakes, like they're afraid of in the netherlands.
19:34:06 <Elukka> and is that a more significant concern than the 30 gigatonnes of waste coal pumps into the atmosphere?
19:34:44 <V453000> I think that world ends in 2012 so we dont have to give a crap about what is in 4000 years. Period :-D :P
19:34:50 <Elukka> what i do agree with is that 30 year old reactors should be decommissioned
19:34:56 <Elukka> they should be replaced with new reactors, though
19:35:18 <MNIM> However, even if one single wrongly turned screw cracks, you might not be looking at a hundred deaths over a week, but more likely thousands, even millions of deaths and diseases caused indirectly by nuclear release.
19:35:33 <Elukka> that seems rather unlikely
19:35:36 <Rubidium> Elukka: it's not necessarily the old ones, it's also the ones at dangerous locations
19:35:54 <Eddi|zuHause> if one can't even find a politically accepted way to build a train station, or 3km of highway, how do you expect to get through with building a nuclear power station? :)
19:36:06 <MNIM> and, in the worst case scenario, seven /billion/ deaths and diseases
19:36:08 * andythenorth will be annoyed if the world ends in 2012
19:36:11 <Rubidium> but heh... you want cheap electricity, so they run them as long as possible to make them make as much money as possible
19:36:14 <andythenorth> it means roadtypes won't get done :(
19:36:17 <MNIM> EG - the whole world population
19:36:42 <V453000> andythenorth: :D yeah that would suck
19:36:45 <Elukka> how will nuclear power kill 7 billion
19:37:00 <MNIM> elukka: ever heard of the phrase 'nuclear winter'?
19:37:01 <Elukka> nuclear weapons couldn't kill that many
19:37:22 <MNIM> directly? no. indirectly? several times over.
19:37:31 <Elukka> yes, the idea of a nuclear winter (which is considered very doubtful now) comes from nuclear weapons, not power plants, lifting enough matter to the atmosphere to block out a significant amount of heating from the sun
19:37:33 <Rubidium> pff... just shut down the largest nuclear source of energy and you'll see pretty quickly
19:37:33 <andythenorth> the thing with world-ending prophecies is that eventually, if enough are made, one will be correct
19:37:36 <Elukka> pwoer plants... can't do that
19:38:17 <Elukka> (the reason it's considered doubtful is that during the gulf war those burning oil wells, which released gobs of stuff, didn't have much of an effect)
19:38:20 <planetmaker> Elukka: but the nuclear ones are far better targets for terrorists than any other power plant ;-)
19:38:31 <planetmaker> (there that you argued with the terrorism comparison)
19:38:36 <supermop> would you mind giving me ome feedback on my grf if you get a chance?
19:38:36 <MNIM> your average powerplant has the munition for several nukes
19:38:50 <Elukka> it's not sufficiently enriched
19:38:53 <MNIM> and burning powerplants cause CO2, not dust
19:38:54 <Eddi|zuHause> wasn't there one other world ending prophecy that was supposed to happen in spring, and then was postponed to autumn?
19:38:54 <Elukka> and that's not a small difference
19:38:58 <Eddi|zuHause> did that happen yet?
19:39:14 <Elukka> that... doesn't make sense either :/
19:39:32 <MNIM> well, actually, CO2 /could/ cause a cold, but long before that we'd be more worried about not suffocating.
19:39:36 <Elukka> you know, saddam had a nuclear power plant
19:39:40 <MNIM> dust. oil doesn't give much ash
19:39:48 <Elukka> he did not have the years of research and massive industrial facilities required to build a nuclear weapon, though
19:39:55 <Elukka> a nuclear plant simply cannot cause a nuclear explosion
19:40:01 <supermop> the dangerous emissions from coal plants are the particulates that cause asthma and lung cancer
19:40:07 <TrueBrain> welcome to #openttd . We do not talk about OpenTTD. We are that elite in this club :D
19:40:08 <Elukka> it's physically impossible
19:40:18 <TrueBrain> Elukka: wanna bet? :)
19:40:23 <Rubidium> Elukka: then why do all trucks and cars need filters because the amount of particles in the air gets too high near highways and in cities?
19:40:25 <Eddi|zuHause> TrueBrain: nothing new there :p
19:40:39 <Rubidium> that's pretty much ash from oil
19:40:41 <MNIM> I like my lungs nuclear-dust free, thanks
19:40:42 <Elukka> i meant that a nuclear power plant causing a nuclear explosion is physically impossible, rubidium
19:40:55 <supermop> anyway, isnt there an energy policy channel somewhere?
19:41:16 <planetmaker> supermop: it's not yet on bananas, is it?
19:41:24 <MNIM> it is not, elukka. unlikely? yes. we're talking about the worst case scenario of a worst case scenario.
19:41:26 <planetmaker> got the link for me lazy?
19:41:30 <Elukka> no it's literally impossible
19:41:38 <Eddi|zuHause> Elukka: and what's your physics degree that you base your opinion on?
19:41:39 <V453000> hm I actually also thought nuclear plant cant make a nuclear explosion
19:41:48 <MNIM> no such thing is absolutely impossible.
19:42:05 <Elukka> it's extremely basic knowledge
19:42:08 <Eddi|zuHause> the problem about nuclear weapons is not how to make it explode
19:42:10 <MNIM> faster-than-sound travel was thought impossible just until six decades ago!
19:42:16 <Eddi|zuHause> but how to make it explode the _right_ way
19:42:41 <planetmaker> MNIM: not quite... Sputnik was 1954.
19:42:59 <Elukka> yes, NMIN, it is absolutely impossible
19:43:13 <supermop> NML stations are absolutely impossible
19:43:19 <TrueBrain> nothing is impossible
19:43:23 <TrueBrain> the impossible just take a little bit longer
19:43:25 <Kogut> it is "impossible" as in "it is not predicted by any theory that can be considered as science"
19:43:37 <planetmaker> "faster than light is impossible" ;-)
19:43:39 <Elukka> nuclear fuel is not the same stuff as what goes into a nuclear weapon
19:43:43 <TrueBrain> unless you are some all-knowing-being, you can't say it is absolutely impossible
19:43:50 <Elukka> wait are you now arguing science is all wrong
19:44:19 <supermop> again, where is the energy policy channel?
19:44:35 <TrueBrain> supermop: we don't have a policy for energy in this channel
19:44:44 <Kogut> well, it is possible that wearing red socks can cause invisible demons to kill aliens on Saturn
19:44:51 <Prof_Frink> supermop: Over there -->, but they're too busy nattering about some transport game they found on the interwebs.
19:45:14 <Kogut> but it is hard to use it as reason to not wear red socks
19:45:15 <MNIM> elukka: nope. nuclear fuel is generally lower grade, true.
19:45:25 <Elukka> it is always lower grade
19:45:36 <MNIM> what it does mean is that your margin for criticality will be higher.
19:45:51 <Elukka> criticality is what you have when a nuclear reactor is operating under normal conditions
19:45:55 <Elukka> this means there's a chain reaction
19:45:59 <Elukka> this means it makes electricity
19:46:36 <Elukka> supercriticality is probably what you mean, though fuel still can't cause a nuclear explosion
19:46:42 <Elukka> it'll easily cause a steam explosion by heating things up, though
19:46:55 <Eddi|zuHause> a nuclear power plant actually makes no electricity
19:47:02 <Eddi|zuHause> it generates heat
19:47:08 <MNIM> elukka: the difference between a nuke going boom and a nuclear plant is that this critical margin has far more space between 'no chain reaction' and 'boom'
19:47:09 <supermop> well anyway, Nuclear plants can go into ottd because there would never be a terrorist or earthquake, or rogue state to reprocess the fuel into weapons
19:47:15 <Elukka> yeah and it turns a turbine with steam it's basically a steam engine :P
19:47:31 <Elukka> what i was trying to say is 'criticality' is the normal state of an operating nuclear power plant
19:47:32 <MNIM> but there's always room for boom behind that margin
19:47:38 <Kogut> like coal plant - it also generates heat -> steam -> electricity
19:48:02 <Elukka> and... nuclear fuel cannot make a nuclear explosion
19:48:10 <Elukka> don't you think saddam and other such people would love if it could?
19:48:29 <Elukka> every two bit dictator can get nuclear fuel... but they can't get materials for nuclear weapons
19:48:30 <__ln__> saddam wouldn't, because he's dead
19:48:36 <Eddi|zuHause> btw. there's plenty of other things that can explode in a nuclear power plant besides the fuel
19:49:02 <TrueBrain> Elukka: define nuclear explosion ;)
19:49:17 <TrueBrain> as in chernobyl there was a lot of nuclear particles thrown in the air after an explosion .. :D
19:49:19 <Eddi|zuHause> __ln__: but hitler is alive and lives on the back side of the moon
19:49:41 <Elukka> yes but nothing in a plant can make a nuclear explosion
19:49:45 <V453000> yeah but chernobyl wasnt a nuclear explosion, just the steam, right?
19:49:47 <TrueBrain> it was in the plant
19:49:50 <TrueBrain> it was an explosion
19:49:55 <MNIM> elukka: they /can't/ get their hands on it, contrary to popular belief.
19:49:56 <TrueBrain> V453000: many many explosions happened in that plant :D
19:50:15 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
19:50:28 <Elukka> a nuclear explosion is a very rapid nuclear chain reaction that mostly releases energy in x-rays and gamma rays (that are then absorbed by the atmosphere, causing the fireball)
19:50:29 <Prof_Frink> Nuclear energy is a lie.
19:50:35 <Elukka> it is extremely different to any other kind of explosion
19:50:35 <supermop> why are we even talking about this
19:50:46 <Prof_Frink> They just spread radiation to hide what *reall* goes on inside.
19:51:23 * andythenorth returns from the energy policy channel
19:51:32 <andythenorth> turns out they just had loads of feature requests for FIRS
19:51:34 <Elukka> yes NMIN, because weapons grade uranium/plutonium is much harder to make than fuel grade
19:51:45 <Prof_Frink> Get yourself a hazmat suit and go inside.
19:52:12 <Prof_Frink> You'll find... banks and banks of cat/toast generators.
19:52:17 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: did they at least request nuclear power stations?
19:52:37 <MNIM> elukka: I challenge you to acquire a kilo of fuel-grade uranium
19:53:22 <TrueBrain> you do know the CIA monitors this channel, right?
19:53:31 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: that's probably easy, just social-engineer you into the right university
19:53:32 <Elukka> well, several corporations have it... i suppose the best way would be to gain ownership of one
19:53:42 <andythenorth> start buying shares...
19:53:43 <Elukka> oh yeah, universities have reactors too!
19:54:10 <Elukka> there are many un-nice people in the world who would very much love it if nuclear fuel could make a nuclear explosion... and every other country would have nukes
19:54:54 <V453000> wiki says that power plant has 2-4% uranium, bomb 95%
19:55:29 <Eddi|zuHause> V453000: the problem is not uranium, but the right isotope
19:55:31 <planetmaker> supermop: the "special" tiles kinda glitch
19:55:42 <planetmaker> there's a stray roof further up on them
19:56:03 <Kogut> And it is possible to extract it using centrifuges
19:56:19 <MNIM> the chart on there is not complete, though
19:56:21 <Kogut> but sometimes Stuxnet happen
19:56:34 <MNIM> several nato nuke-sharing countries aren't on their
19:58:05 <MNIM> also, the baltic states aren't colored, which is odd
20:00:13 <Elukka> oh here's a fun quote from the university of pitthsburgh's site
20:00:17 <Elukka> "In 2 out of 3 melt-downs there would be no deaths, in 1 out of 5 there would be over 1000 deaths, and in 1 out of 100,000 there would be 50,000 deaths. The average for all meltdowns would be 400 deaths. Since air pollution from coal burning is estimated to be causing 10,000 deaths per year, there would have to be 25 melt-downs each year for nuclear power to be as dangerous as coal burning."
20:01:06 <Elukka> probabilistic risk analysis
20:01:58 *** TWerkhoven[l] has joined #openttd
20:02:21 <MNIM> not counting disease, grave injuries, lethal, incapacitating or mutilating genetic faults caused in aftermaths over centuries.
20:02:27 <Elukka> no, that is counting everything
20:03:14 <Elukka> "There has been much misunderstanding on genetic diseases due to radiation. The risks are somewhat less than the cancer risks; for example, among the Japanese A-bomb survivors from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there have been about 400 extra cancer deaths among the 100,000 people in the follow-up group, but there have been no extra genetic diseases among their progeny."
20:03:18 <Kogut> coal mining/burning also causes diseases, grave injuries
20:03:20 <MNIM> I would like to see the scientific tests that confirmed those 10000 deaths by coal burning though
20:04:05 <Elukka> it's surprisingly hard to find sources
20:04:06 <MNIM> whereas nuke power has the advantage that we know the condition of the planet before it started.
20:04:07 <supermop> planetmaker: the extra roofs are the point
20:04:20 <Elukka> the guardian says coal kills a hundred thousand each year
20:04:47 <andythenorth> guaranteed science
20:05:29 <MNIM> journalists are not very well known for the comprehension of numbers.
20:05:36 <Elukka> the university is probably more reliable
20:05:40 <V453000> hm :( I fucking suck at making old-looking engines :( I always start making decorations to it and it starts looking modern again :|
20:05:49 <Elukka> of course it's impossible to make a certain assessment of how many people coal kills
20:06:34 <MNIM> coal burning started hundreds of years ago, before medicine was even able to cure a simple cold
20:06:49 <Elukka> the world health organization pegs the world's air pollution deaths (not just coal, this includes traffic and such) at 2 million a year
20:06:50 <MNIM> as such, you have no control group or zero measurement
20:07:12 <MNIM> which effectively means that anything you claim upon research is very, very void
20:07:33 <Elukka> coal burning on the current scale didn't start hundreds of years ago
20:07:49 * V453000 puts on the "As long as the beer is cheap, I am fine" opinion stance
20:08:02 <planetmaker> supermop: what's their point? Roofed tracks?
20:08:40 <MNIM> it started during the industrial revolution, which, according to my calender at least, is several hundreds of years ago
20:09:04 <planetmaker> supermop: I think they need some additional conditions to show that roof then
20:09:25 <supermop> planetmaker: yes! for hiding yards within a building that looks like a large locomotive shed
20:09:34 <Elukka> yeah but the scale is dwarfed by what's done today
20:09:58 <planetmaker> hm.... why do I need to hide normal tracks when the train can wait in the station, too?
20:10:14 <V453000> I am wondering who is going to make a 100% covered network with it :P
20:10:25 <Elukka> i'm not really familiar with their research methods, but i wouldn't be so hasty to declare all research on the subject void as i doubt you are either
20:13:59 <Elukka> yeah, sweden is well known for its several yearly meltdowns and a huge mutant population
20:14:33 <Eddi|zuHause> large-scale coal burning in europe started around 1800, with a peak around the 1950's
20:14:51 <Eddi|zuHause> after that, oil took over as the main energy source
20:16:27 <Elukka> in germany they seem to be about equal
20:17:15 <MNIM> mostly brown coal dug in northwestern open mines.
20:17:33 <Elukka> hmm... nuclear power would be kind of boring in openttd as the amounts of fuel and waste transported would be quite tiny compared to coal :P
20:17:57 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, we know that
20:18:07 <MNIM> far smaller volumes, yes.
20:18:14 <Eddi|zuHause> which is why it is not implemented.
20:18:56 <MNIM> but nuclear fuel transports require /FAR/ more measures in place than cheap coal.
20:19:26 <Eddi|zuHause> now model protesters and police protection in the game :p
20:19:41 <MNIM> nuclear transport trains are practically empty, transporting only a fraction of fuel
20:19:51 <MNIM> eddi: that's probably not a good idea.
20:20:14 <MNIM> however, the trains also carry their own army, pretty much
20:20:24 <Eddi|zuHause> people are already rallying up for the next CASTOR transport to gorleben expected in december
20:20:24 <Rubidium> MNIM: yet nuclear fuel transports are safer than say... trains filled with chlorine gas (or any other poisonous gas)
20:20:27 <MNIM> say, a wagon would transport only a single unit of nuke fuel
20:20:45 <MNIM> rubidium: quite possibly because of those measures.
20:21:11 <planetmaker> supermop: I guess I don't quite know how I should properly use them
20:21:18 <planetmaker> can you enlighten me?
20:21:18 <Rubidium> just because it's solids vs. gas
20:21:41 <MNIM> besides fuel, I would not be surprised if a large amount of what's on these wagons is decoy.
20:22:30 <Rubidium> it's mostly lead anyway
20:22:57 <Eddi|zuHause> unspent nuclear fuel is pretty unspectacular
20:22:58 <supermop> yes, 1 second please
20:23:07 <Eddi|zuHause> spent nuclear fuel is the dangerous kind
20:23:46 <Rubidium> ah well... it all has a relatively short half life compared to me ;)
20:23:51 <MNIM> anyway, I live within biking distance of one of those dangerous lines with chemicals coming from both rotterdam and antwerpen
20:24:06 <Elukka> well, nuclear fuel isn't particularly radioactive (besides MOX)
20:24:10 <Elukka> it's the waste that's the nasty stuff
20:26:04 * andythenorth considers playing the game
20:26:25 <MNIM> some cities along that line are lucky to have a bypass along their stations, but in the city I used to study the wagons with chloride in it will quite literally pass within arms reach if you are waiting on the platform
20:26:43 * TWerkhoven[l] thinks andy should
20:27:02 <MNIM> most goods transport happens overnight, but still, the railway passes right next to the city center
20:27:59 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: and out of 10.000 such transports, how many explode and contaminate a 30km area, rendering it uninhabitable for at least 500 years?
20:28:34 <MNIM> considering Id be pretty fucked in that case
20:31:55 * andythenorth tries to remember what silly patch Eddi|zuHause wrote for him recently
20:32:31 <andythenorth> my game is still interesting
20:32:34 <Eddi|zuHause> or actually, "yearlength"
20:32:56 <Eddi|zuHause> just avoid the year 2050
20:32:57 <MNIM> anyway, I think nuke transport would be kinda interesting in ottd.
20:32:59 <andythenorth> I do have totally insane amounts of cargo waiting due to FIRS station rating modification
20:33:39 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: there are no war materials in the game.
20:33:52 <MNIM> eh, I meant nuke as in nuclear fuel
20:34:01 <Eddi|zuHause> i think RRT had war materials
20:34:01 <MNIM> my bad, I was being lazy :P
20:34:37 * andythenorth needs a new map colour for industry
20:34:40 <MNIM> anyway, the chain would look something like this:
20:35:01 <MNIM> Uranium mine ==> enrichment plant ==> power plant
20:35:13 <MNIM> ==> waste processing plant
20:35:14 <andythenorth> it's an old idea :)
20:35:26 <andythenorth> I ruled it out of main FIRS
20:35:48 <andythenorth> the main problem was gameplay: it would only need a delivery about once every 12 months :P
20:36:22 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: the game is not prepared to handle infrequent small-amount services
20:36:30 <MNIM> andy: decrease wagon capacity? one wagon = one fuel unit
20:36:32 <supermop> power plants dont make sense in tt until they can affect the growth/production of towns and industries
20:37:03 <TWerkhoven[l]> since when is tt about making sense?
20:37:06 <Eddi|zuHause> power plants were completely removed from FIRS
20:37:24 <andythenorth> that was because there is no point dropping coal or fuel oil into them
20:37:30 <supermop> the idea came about in spring 2010
20:37:38 <andythenorth> nuclear is a valid add-on to FIRS, but we're out of cargos
20:38:00 <planetmaker> supermop: the screenshots don't show to me the need for tiles which cover an adjacent tile
20:38:00 <supermop> as a way to create eye candy depots that worked 'better'
20:38:23 <supermop> so you can have things like switches and signal 'inside'
20:38:42 <Rubidium> andythenorth: just stuffify everything ;)
20:39:21 <planetmaker> hm, switches and signals
20:39:50 <andythenorth> planetmaker: any idea where they industry map colours are defined in nml firs?
20:39:52 <supermop> so that a 3 tile wide shed is actually a depot that can have multiple entries, and can stable trains waiting to enter the depot or leave for the mainline
20:40:20 <Elukka> you removed coal power plants?
20:40:23 <planetmaker> hm, I see now, supermop
20:40:43 <V453000> Elukka: they used coal anyway :P
20:40:51 <andythenorth> planetmaker: nvm, found them :)
20:40:56 <andythenorth> they're in the action 0
20:41:14 <planetmaker> grep for them to get a list, andythenorth ;-)
20:41:26 <andythenorth> they were a set of defines in nfo
20:41:29 <planetmaker> grep -Ri "propertyname" sprites/nml/industries/*.pnml
20:41:41 <andythenorth> defines might be overkill, but made it easy to check colours used
20:42:11 <planetmaker> you could use defines again. If it helps
20:42:23 <planetmaker> not sure, though :-)
20:44:07 <planetmaker> supermop: motivationally I probably should not say it: personally I'd stick to the per-tile station-tiles. Using the special ones requires too much thought during building :-)
20:45:12 <planetmaker> but personally I never tried to build a station like you show in your usage examples either
20:45:25 <planetmaker> so that might be 90% of the explanation :-)
20:46:00 *** tokai|mdlx has joined #openttd
20:50:49 <supermop> i never wanted to until i had this idea!
20:54:07 *** JVassie has joined #openttd
20:56:12 <andythenorth> I can't find anything to upgrade HEQS log trucks to :P
20:56:26 <andythenorth> and they remain like that :P
20:56:54 <planetmaker> needs an earlier model?
20:57:33 <andythenorth> planetmaker: yeah, probably
20:57:45 <andythenorth> there is a long gap before they are available
20:59:00 <Eddi|zuHause> well, historically, wood was often gathered by narrow gauge trains
20:59:09 <andythenorth> got that covered
20:59:41 <planetmaker> bed time. good night
21:00:02 <Eddi|zuHause> CETS will contain two-part log wagons :)
21:00:28 <z-MaTRiX> p=printf\ ;a="The Matrix has you...";while [ "$a" ];do $p\%c "$a";a=${a:1};usleep $(($RANDOM*20));done;$p\\n
21:07:10 <MNIM> augh, something is eating my cpu and it is pissing me off to no end
21:31:18 *** Chris_Booth has joined #openttd
21:38:26 *** AD is now known as Guest12658
22:11:56 <Eddi|zuHause> that was intended for the berlin S-Bahn, before they decided to go DC instead of AC
22:12:23 <Elukka> so they took the compartment coaches and attached an engine to the end of one
22:13:30 <Eddi|zuHause> the early prussian electric engines also consisted of such units underneath
22:16:20 <Eddi|zuHause> (in slightly larger variants)
22:34:01 <Eddi|zuHause> that must be a dutch invention :p
22:34:18 <Elukka> top gear, very british
22:35:10 <Eddi|zuHause> obviously because "caravan" and "dutch" are immediate associations ;)
22:42:20 <MINM> actually, down here, we will sooner think of germans
22:43:09 <MINM> well, indirectly, since caravan = tourist = german
22:47:49 <Elukka> sometimes trains have breakdowns
22:48:25 <Eddi|zuHause> that does not look good
23:18:31 *** George|2 has joined #openttd
23:18:31 *** George is now known as Guest12675
23:18:31 *** George|2 is now known as George
23:42:31 <__ln__> what's the probability that at least 40 out of 60 randomly guessed answers to true/false questions are correct?
continue to next day ⏵
