<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_06_1545213</id>
	<title>Nanopillar Solar May Cost 10x Less Than Silicon</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1246899180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/" rel="nofollow">Al</a> writes <i>"A team of researchers from the University of California, Berkeley, have developed <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/22958/">a new kind of flexible solar cell</a> that could be far cheaper to make than conventional silicon photovoltaics. The cells consist of an array of 500-nanometer-high cadmium sulfide pillars printed on top of an aluminum foil &mdash; the material surrounding the pillars absorbs light and releases electrons, while the pillars themselves transport the electrons to an electrical circuit. The closely packed pillars trap light between them, helping the surrounding material absorb more. This means the electrons also have a very short distance to travel through the pillars, so there are fewer chances of their getting trapped at defects and its possible to use low-quality, less expensive materials. '"You won't know the cost until you do this using a roll-to-roll process," says lead researchers Ali Javey. "But if you can do it, the cost could be 10 times less than what's used to make [crystalline] silicon panels."'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Al writes " A team of researchers from the University of California , Berkeley , have developed a new kind of flexible solar cell that could be far cheaper to make than conventional silicon photovoltaics .
The cells consist of an array of 500-nanometer-high cadmium sulfide pillars printed on top of an aluminum foil    the material surrounding the pillars absorbs light and releases electrons , while the pillars themselves transport the electrons to an electrical circuit .
The closely packed pillars trap light between them , helping the surrounding material absorb more .
This means the electrons also have a very short distance to travel through the pillars , so there are fewer chances of their getting trapped at defects and its possible to use low-quality , less expensive materials .
' " You wo n't know the cost until you do this using a roll-to-roll process , " says lead researchers Ali Javey .
" But if you can do it , the cost could be 10 times less than what 's used to make [ crystalline ] silicon panels .
" ' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Al writes "A team of researchers from the University of California, Berkeley, have developed a new kind of flexible solar cell that could be far cheaper to make than conventional silicon photovoltaics.
The cells consist of an array of 500-nanometer-high cadmium sulfide pillars printed on top of an aluminum foil — the material surrounding the pillars absorbs light and releases electrons, while the pillars themselves transport the electrons to an electrical circuit.
The closely packed pillars trap light between them, helping the surrounding material absorb more.
This means the electrons also have a very short distance to travel through the pillars, so there are fewer chances of their getting trapped at defects and its possible to use low-quality, less expensive materials.
'"You won't know the cost until you do this using a roll-to-roll process," says lead researchers Ali Javey.
"But if you can do it, the cost could be 10 times less than what's used to make [crystalline] silicon panels.
"'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598645</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1246913400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It could be assumed.</p><p>It can not be reasonably assumed.</p><p>Is it twice as dark with the lights off, or 100 times as dark?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It could be assumed.It can not be reasonably assumed.Is it twice as dark with the lights off , or 100 times as dark ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could be assumed.It can not be reasonably assumed.Is it twice as dark with the lights off, or 100 times as dark?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597301</id>
	<title>Re:Wait a second</title>
	<author>georgenh16</author>
	<datestamp>1246907700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it cheaper or not? Make up your mind.
<br>
If it's cheaper, it's more competitive. No communist-like government price controls needed.
<br>
LehiNephi is right on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it cheaper or not ?
Make up your mind .
If it 's cheaper , it 's more competitive .
No communist-like government price controls needed .
LehiNephi is right on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it cheaper or not?
Make up your mind.
If it's cheaper, it's more competitive.
No communist-like government price controls needed.
LehiNephi is right on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597127</id>
	<title>Re:I am f tired reading about cheap solar panals</title>
	<author>bcattwoo</author>
	<datestamp>1246906920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the last line of the summary could be reworded: "We don't know how much these things will cost to make, but to get additional funding we had to come up with something less than what current technology costs and ten times less just sounds so sexy."</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the last line of the summary could be reworded : " We do n't know how much these things will cost to make , but to get additional funding we had to come up with something less than what current technology costs and ten times less just sounds so sexy .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the last line of the summary could be reworded: "We don't know how much these things will cost to make, but to get additional funding we had to come up with something less than what current technology costs and ten times less just sounds so sexy.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597413</id>
	<title>Re:I am f tired reading about cheap solar panals</title>
	<author>vertinox</author>
	<datestamp>1246908120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panals</i></p><p>Umm... No. The price to produce them has gone down and is in fact the lowest it has ever been.</p><p>It is just that the <a href="http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/2008/09/07/20080907biz-solar0907.html" title="azcentral.com">demand is outstripping supply</a> [azcentral.com] so economics is causing a price increase.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panalsUmm... No. The price to produce them has gone down and is in fact the lowest it has ever been.It is just that the demand is outstripping supply [ azcentral.com ] so economics is causing a price increase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panalsUmm... No. The price to produce them has gone down and is in fact the lowest it has ever been.It is just that the demand is outstripping supply [azcentral.com] so economics is causing a price increase.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596471</id>
	<title>Re:Wait a second</title>
	<author>Nexus7</author>
	<datestamp>1246904160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This may have made it cheaper with this innovation, but what if no one wants it because power from coal is cheaper, more reliable, plentiful, and so on? Cap 'n Trade would change the market (not technology) to make this new technology (and others) more competitive in the marketplace. That's the idea anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This may have made it cheaper with this innovation , but what if no one wants it because power from coal is cheaper , more reliable , plentiful , and so on ?
Cap 'n Trade would change the market ( not technology ) to make this new technology ( and others ) more competitive in the marketplace .
That 's the idea anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This may have made it cheaper with this innovation, but what if no one wants it because power from coal is cheaper, more reliable, plentiful, and so on?
Cap 'n Trade would change the market (not technology) to make this new technology (and others) more competitive in the marketplace.
That's the idea anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596337</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28606901</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>An Onerous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1246976580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not seeing the problem here.  If you can buy ten of one thing for the cost of another thing, why can't it be described as ten times less?</p><p>"Twice as cold" should also be a valid construction, though given the distance between the temperatures we experience and absolute zero, there's little opportunity to use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not seeing the problem here .
If you can buy ten of one thing for the cost of another thing , why ca n't it be described as ten times less ?
" Twice as cold " should also be a valid construction , though given the distance between the temperatures we experience and absolute zero , there 's little opportunity to use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not seeing the problem here.
If you can buy ten of one thing for the cost of another thing, why can't it be described as ten times less?
"Twice as cold" should also be a valid construction, though given the distance between the temperatures we experience and absolute zero, there's little opportunity to use it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28603611</id>
	<title>Trick Question for all ATT and Version Workers</title>
	<author>TimSSG</author>
	<datestamp>1246898160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the old method costs 1 dollar to make per unit. <br>
And, the new method only cost one tenth as much.  <br>
 <br>
Does to new method cost  <br>
A. 10 cents <br>
B. 0.10 dollars <br>
C. 0.10 cents <br>
D. A and B <br>
E. B and C <br>
F. None of the above. <br>
 <br>
Tim S.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the old method costs 1 dollar to make per unit .
And , the new method only cost one tenth as much .
Does to new method cost A .
10 cents B .
0.10 dollars C. 0.10 cents D. A and B E. B and C F. None of the above .
Tim S .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the old method costs 1 dollar to make per unit.
And, the new method only cost one tenth as much.
Does to new method cost  
A.
10 cents 
B.
0.10 dollars 
C. 0.10 cents 
D. A and B 
E. B and C 
F. None of the above.
Tim S.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745</id>
	<title>Low cost until scarcity kicks in....</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1246905360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How plentiful is cadmium relative to silicon?  Not so much, right?  Isn't cadmium already pretty much spoken-for in other industrial and consumer electronics applications?</p><p>Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How plentiful is cadmium relative to silicon ?
Not so much , right ?
Is n't cadmium already pretty much spoken-for in other industrial and consumer electronics applications ? Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How plentiful is cadmium relative to silicon?
Not so much, right?
Isn't cadmium already pretty much spoken-for in other industrial and consumer electronics applications?Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604059</id>
	<title>Re:Based on recent history...</title>
	<author>The Late BP Helium</author>
	<datestamp>1246902420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The technology in TFA, while a big breakthrough in PV efficiency from patterned nanowires, will not be able to compete on cost with Nanosolar and First Solar.

Nanosolar uses roll-to-roll printing, with the semiconductor spray-printed into place onto the substrate (which is quick and easy).

This new technique requires hours of anodization, a half-hour reaction, and then more time for deposition of the CdTe and top contact.  There's simply too much processing of the substrate for it to be economical to the same extent spray-printing is.

This technology may still be promising if it can get very high efficiencies ( &gt;20\%) and be used with solar concentrating mirrors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The technology in TFA , while a big breakthrough in PV efficiency from patterned nanowires , will not be able to compete on cost with Nanosolar and First Solar .
Nanosolar uses roll-to-roll printing , with the semiconductor spray-printed into place onto the substrate ( which is quick and easy ) .
This new technique requires hours of anodization , a half-hour reaction , and then more time for deposition of the CdTe and top contact .
There 's simply too much processing of the substrate for it to be economical to the same extent spray-printing is .
This technology may still be promising if it can get very high efficiencies ( &gt; 20 \ % ) and be used with solar concentrating mirrors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The technology in TFA, while a big breakthrough in PV efficiency from patterned nanowires, will not be able to compete on cost with Nanosolar and First Solar.
Nanosolar uses roll-to-roll printing, with the semiconductor spray-printed into place onto the substrate (which is quick and easy).
This new technique requires hours of anodization, a half-hour reaction, and then more time for deposition of the CdTe and top contact.
There's simply too much processing of the substrate for it to be economical to the same extent spray-printing is.
This technology may still be promising if it can get very high efficiencies ( &gt;20\%) and be used with solar concentrating mirrors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596735</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28623353</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>LordVader717</author>
	<datestamp>1247071920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well yes it is. Language allows for arithmetically inaccurately defined descriptions when the meaning is conclusive.<br>In this case it's clear that the inverse of the price.</p><p>Or would you insist on saying "a car came toward me at <b>minus</b>-twice the speed as me?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well yes it is .
Language allows for arithmetically inaccurately defined descriptions when the meaning is conclusive.In this case it 's clear that the inverse of the price.Or would you insist on saying " a car came toward me at minus-twice the speed as me ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well yes it is.
Language allows for arithmetically inaccurately defined descriptions when the meaning is conclusive.In this case it's clear that the inverse of the price.Or would you insist on saying "a car came toward me at minus-twice the speed as me?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596767</id>
	<title>Re:Creation of Electrons</title>
	<author>TeknoHog</author>
	<datestamp>1246905420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you always have to be so negative?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you always have to be so negative ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you always have to be so negative?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596321</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596245</id>
	<title>Great news!</title>
	<author>mc1138</author>
	<datestamp>1246903380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another major breakthrough for solar power. Especially if they can mass produce it, but even if not, I'm sure this sort of thing will just lead to further developments down the line. In addition to making it easier for a home user to purchase and have installed, think of a reduced cost for mass deployments either in power plants, or in space exploration uses such as on a permanent moon base.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another major breakthrough for solar power .
Especially if they can mass produce it , but even if not , I 'm sure this sort of thing will just lead to further developments down the line .
In addition to making it easier for a home user to purchase and have installed , think of a reduced cost for mass deployments either in power plants , or in space exploration uses such as on a permanent moon base .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another major breakthrough for solar power.
Especially if they can mass produce it, but even if not, I'm sure this sort of thing will just lead to further developments down the line.
In addition to making it easier for a home user to purchase and have installed, think of a reduced cost for mass deployments either in power plants, or in space exploration uses such as on a permanent moon base.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596521</id>
	<title>Oh Yeah!!!</title>
	<author>tgatliff</author>
	<datestamp>1246904340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well I have a car that I built that gets 100000000 miles per gallon, and never needs to be filled up!!!  But I have not yet tested it to make sure it works....</p><p>In short... I am really getting tired of all these "researchers" talking about them developing the thing that will change the world, but always seem to put the "yeah it might work, but we will not know until you actually try manufacturing it"..... Meaning,  they annouce their world discovery before actually making sure it works not yet tested the manufacturing process to prove it. If it really was that good, then why would they talk about it after they prove the concept first... Money is never a problem if you can show it works...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I have a car that I built that gets 100000000 miles per gallon , and never needs to be filled up ! ! !
But I have not yet tested it to make sure it works....In short... I am really getting tired of all these " researchers " talking about them developing the thing that will change the world , but always seem to put the " yeah it might work , but we will not know until you actually try manufacturing it " ..... Meaning , they annouce their world discovery before actually making sure it works not yet tested the manufacturing process to prove it .
If it really was that good , then why would they talk about it after they prove the concept first... Money is never a problem if you can show it works.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I have a car that I built that gets 100000000 miles per gallon, and never needs to be filled up!!!
But I have not yet tested it to make sure it works....In short... I am really getting tired of all these "researchers" talking about them developing the thing that will change the world, but always seem to put the "yeah it might work, but we will not know until you actually try manufacturing it"..... Meaning,  they annouce their world discovery before actually making sure it works not yet tested the manufacturing process to prove it.
If it really was that good, then why would they talk about it after they prove the concept first... Money is never a problem if you can show it works...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596321</id>
	<title>Creation of Electrons</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246903620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>"the material surrounding the pillars absorbs light and creates electrons."<br> <br>
Wow, creation Ex Nihilo or from other subatomic particles?  That is powerful technology.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" the material surrounding the pillars absorbs light and creates electrons .
" Wow , creation Ex Nihilo or from other subatomic particles ?
That is powerful technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the material surrounding the pillars absorbs light and creates electrons.
" 
Wow, creation Ex Nihilo or from other subatomic particles?
That is powerful technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596735</id>
	<title>Re:Based on recent history...</title>
	<author>Spoke</author>
	<datestamp>1246905300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surprise, there are <a href="http://www.nanosolar.com/" title="nanosolar.com">already</a> [nanosolar.com] <a href="http://www.firstsolar.com/" title="firstsolar.com">companies</a> [firstsolar.com] that are producing thin-film solar panels for less than $1/watt.</p><p>The problem is that demand is so high for these inexpensive cells that at least for Nanosolar, you can't even buy them unless you are buying tons and tons of them.  That leaves First Solar and those panels get significantly marked up because of the lack of competition at the low end of the market.</p><p>That said, wholesale prices of traditional silicon panels are around $3/watt and as an end user you can get them for slightly above that if you shop around.</p><p>But once the system is installed you're looking at a minimum of $6/watt currently.  So while the panels are still the most expensive part of the system, pretty soon the other components (inverter, mounting hardware, wiring, labor) will exceed the cost of the panels.</p><p>We're getting very close to the point where solar systems make financial sense for just about everyone.  It already makes sense for any high electricity users who pay a premium for electricity.  We'll probably see solar system pricing continue to drop over the next couple years as manufacturing capacity continues to come online.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surprise , there are already [ nanosolar.com ] companies [ firstsolar.com ] that are producing thin-film solar panels for less than $ 1/watt.The problem is that demand is so high for these inexpensive cells that at least for Nanosolar , you ca n't even buy them unless you are buying tons and tons of them .
That leaves First Solar and those panels get significantly marked up because of the lack of competition at the low end of the market.That said , wholesale prices of traditional silicon panels are around $ 3/watt and as an end user you can get them for slightly above that if you shop around.But once the system is installed you 're looking at a minimum of $ 6/watt currently .
So while the panels are still the most expensive part of the system , pretty soon the other components ( inverter , mounting hardware , wiring , labor ) will exceed the cost of the panels.We 're getting very close to the point where solar systems make financial sense for just about everyone .
It already makes sense for any high electricity users who pay a premium for electricity .
We 'll probably see solar system pricing continue to drop over the next couple years as manufacturing capacity continues to come online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surprise, there are already [nanosolar.com] companies [firstsolar.com] that are producing thin-film solar panels for less than $1/watt.The problem is that demand is so high for these inexpensive cells that at least for Nanosolar, you can't even buy them unless you are buying tons and tons of them.
That leaves First Solar and those panels get significantly marked up because of the lack of competition at the low end of the market.That said, wholesale prices of traditional silicon panels are around $3/watt and as an end user you can get them for slightly above that if you shop around.But once the system is installed you're looking at a minimum of $6/watt currently.
So while the panels are still the most expensive part of the system, pretty soon the other components (inverter, mounting hardware, wiring, labor) will exceed the cost of the panels.We're getting very close to the point where solar systems make financial sense for just about everyone.
It already makes sense for any high electricity users who pay a premium for electricity.
We'll probably see solar system pricing continue to drop over the next couple years as manufacturing capacity continues to come online.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596333</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596449</id>
	<title>"may" cost less</title>
	<author>Geoffrey.landis</author>
	<datestamp>1246904100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nanopillar Solar May Cost 10x Less Than Silicon</p></div><p>...and then, it may not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nanopillar Solar May Cost 10x Less Than Silicon...and then , it may not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nanopillar Solar May Cost 10x Less Than Silicon...and then, it may not.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596711</id>
	<title>Yay, Its time again for Solar technology Bingo!</title>
	<author>luckytroll</author>
	<datestamp>1246905180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thats right folks - for every time you see the words "May", "Might Somday", "Could eventually", you get to cover a number.</p><p>Bonus if you get to catch one or more instances of "In 5 years", "with continued funding", or "commercial quantities"</p><p>It seems the only people making flexibles these days are also selling them for a huge markup, and the technology is a lot less efficient than the monocrystal cells. But at least you can buy it. Today.</p><p>I used to actually follow up these articles by contacting the companies involved, and asking when they would be able to sell to me as a consumer. I still cant buy any of their products. Any of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats right folks - for every time you see the words " May " , " Might Somday " , " Could eventually " , you get to cover a number.Bonus if you get to catch one or more instances of " In 5 years " , " with continued funding " , or " commercial quantities " It seems the only people making flexibles these days are also selling them for a huge markup , and the technology is a lot less efficient than the monocrystal cells .
But at least you can buy it .
Today.I used to actually follow up these articles by contacting the companies involved , and asking when they would be able to sell to me as a consumer .
I still cant buy any of their products .
Any of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats right folks - for every time you see the words "May", "Might Somday", "Could eventually", you get to cover a number.Bonus if you get to catch one or more instances of "In 5 years", "with continued funding", or "commercial quantities"It seems the only people making flexibles these days are also selling them for a huge markup, and the technology is a lot less efficient than the monocrystal cells.
But at least you can buy it.
Today.I used to actually follow up these articles by contacting the companies involved, and asking when they would be able to sell to me as a consumer.
I still cant buy any of their products.
Any of them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28611031</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>BucketOfLard</author>
	<datestamp>1246992780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If no one else will, then I'll write the ECR:

"10x Less" should be "5x binary shift right"</htmltext>
<tokenext>If no one else will , then I 'll write the ECR : " 10x Less " should be " 5x binary shift right "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If no one else will, then I'll write the ECR:

"10x Less" should be "5x binary shift right"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28605807</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>i*rod</author>
	<datestamp>1246968120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"But if you can do it, the cost could be 10 times less than what's used to make [crystalline] silicon panels."

Back in the day when print media ruled, editors got to be editors because they knew their stuff and applied it. Nowadays it seems a certain facility with "spell check" and "font size" apps is more than enough to climb the flagpole to that erstwhile estimable position.

Somebody at "Technology Review" evidently scanned the article. They took the time to intrude the redundant "[crystalline]" as if to differentiate the atomic structure of silicon wafers from what is used in breast implants and bath tub sealants. But they overlooked the need to clarify Patel's intent WRT the estimated manufacturing cost of the nanopillar solar cell technology.

The burden of catching and correcting grammatical imprecision is on TR&#226;(TM)s editorial staff. 'Back in the day&#226;&#166;'  if an editor had been disinclined to confer with the author, the line might have been 'blue penciled to read:

"But if you can do it, the cost could be [about one tenth] what's used to make silicon panels."

We should give edit where edit&#226;(TM)s due: eh?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" But if you can do it , the cost could be 10 times less than what 's used to make [ crystalline ] silicon panels .
" Back in the day when print media ruled , editors got to be editors because they knew their stuff and applied it .
Nowadays it seems a certain facility with " spell check " and " font size " apps is more than enough to climb the flagpole to that erstwhile estimable position .
Somebody at " Technology Review " evidently scanned the article .
They took the time to intrude the redundant " [ crystalline ] " as if to differentiate the atomic structure of silicon wafers from what is used in breast implants and bath tub sealants .
But they overlooked the need to clarify Patel 's intent WRT the estimated manufacturing cost of the nanopillar solar cell technology .
The burden of catching and correcting grammatical imprecision is on TR   ( TM ) s editorial staff .
'Back in the day     ' if an editor had been disinclined to confer with the author , the line might have been 'blue penciled to read : " But if you can do it , the cost could be [ about one tenth ] what 's used to make silicon panels .
" We should give edit where edit   ( TM ) s due : eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"But if you can do it, the cost could be 10 times less than what's used to make [crystalline] silicon panels.
"

Back in the day when print media ruled, editors got to be editors because they knew their stuff and applied it.
Nowadays it seems a certain facility with "spell check" and "font size" apps is more than enough to climb the flagpole to that erstwhile estimable position.
Somebody at "Technology Review" evidently scanned the article.
They took the time to intrude the redundant "[crystalline]" as if to differentiate the atomic structure of silicon wafers from what is used in breast implants and bath tub sealants.
But they overlooked the need to clarify Patel's intent WRT the estimated manufacturing cost of the nanopillar solar cell technology.
The burden of catching and correcting grammatical imprecision is on TRâ(TM)s editorial staff.
'Back in the dayâ¦'  if an editor had been disinclined to confer with the author, the line might have been 'blue penciled to read:

"But if you can do it, the cost could be [about one tenth] what's used to make silicon panels.
"

We should give edit where editâ(TM)s due: eh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597751</id>
	<title>Re:Low cost until scarcity kicks in....</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1246909320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cadmium is used for red and yellow paints for artists, both oil and acrylic based paints. They're really bright yellows and reds, so the bright orange and yellow jackets road crews wear probably have cadmium pigments.</p><p>I wonder what color these cells are? Will everyone's roof be red in the future?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cadmium is used for red and yellow paints for artists , both oil and acrylic based paints .
They 're really bright yellows and reds , so the bright orange and yellow jackets road crews wear probably have cadmium pigments.I wonder what color these cells are ?
Will everyone 's roof be red in the future ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cadmium is used for red and yellow paints for artists, both oil and acrylic based paints.
They're really bright yellows and reds, so the bright orange and yellow jackets road crews wear probably have cadmium pigments.I wonder what color these cells are?
Will everyone's roof be red in the future?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596337</id>
	<title>Wait a second</title>
	<author>georgenh16</author>
	<datestamp>1246903680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought we needed to pass the massive cap&amp;tax bill before we saw any innovation in green technology! How can this be?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought we needed to pass the massive cap&amp;tax bill before we saw any innovation in green technology !
How can this be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought we needed to pass the massive cap&amp;tax bill before we saw any innovation in green technology!
How can this be?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597373</id>
	<title>Re:Low cost until scarcity kicks in....</title>
	<author>Waffle Iron</author>
	<datestamp>1246907940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics.</p></div><p>And leave it to random slashdot posters to not RTFA before posting bitchy comments:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The researchers also intend to try other semiconductor materials for the pillars and surrounding material. Javey says that the fabrication process is compatible with a wide range of semiconductors, and other combinations could up the efficiency.</p><p>Trying other semiconductor materials might also be important given cadmium's toxicity issues, Berkeley's Yang points out. Nevertheless, he says, "architecture is most important--materials we can continue working on. The beauty of this paper is the demonstration of how well the architecture works."</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics.And leave it to random slashdot posters to not RTFA before posting bitchy comments : The researchers also intend to try other semiconductor materials for the pillars and surrounding material .
Javey says that the fabrication process is compatible with a wide range of semiconductors , and other combinations could up the efficiency.Trying other semiconductor materials might also be important given cadmium 's toxicity issues , Berkeley 's Yang points out .
Nevertheless , he says , " architecture is most important--materials we can continue working on .
The beauty of this paper is the demonstration of how well the architecture works .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics.And leave it to random slashdot posters to not RTFA before posting bitchy comments:The researchers also intend to try other semiconductor materials for the pillars and surrounding material.
Javey says that the fabrication process is compatible with a wide range of semiconductors, and other combinations could up the efficiency.Trying other semiconductor materials might also be important given cadmium's toxicity issues, Berkeley's Yang points out.
Nevertheless, he says, "architecture is most important--materials we can continue working on.
The beauty of this paper is the demonstration of how well the architecture works.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597565</id>
	<title>Re:Low cost until scarcity kicks in....</title>
	<author>StellarFury</author>
	<datestamp>1246908540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The real question is "how plentiful is ANYTHING relative to silicon?"</p><p>The answer: really, really, goddamned scarce, unless you're oxygen.</p><p><a href="http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/tables/elabund.html" title="gsu.edu" rel="nofollow">http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/tables/elabund.html</a> [gsu.edu]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The real question is " how plentiful is ANYTHING relative to silicon ?
" The answer : really , really , goddamned scarce , unless you 're oxygen.http : //hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/tables/elabund.html [ gsu.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real question is "how plentiful is ANYTHING relative to silicon?
"The answer: really, really, goddamned scarce, unless you're oxygen.http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/tables/elabund.html [gsu.edu]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597419</id>
	<title>Re:I am f tired reading about cheap solar panals</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1246908120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Solar panels have dropped in price over the last 5 years....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Solar panels have dropped in price over the last 5 years... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Solar panels have dropped in price over the last 5 years....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599607</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>severoon</author>
	<datestamp>1246874280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is <tt>5 - 2</tt>? What is <tt>132 - 129</tt>?
</p><p>In both cases, the differences are the same: 3.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is 5 - 2 ?
What is 132 - 129 ?
In both cases , the differences are the same : 3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is 5 - 2?
What is 132 - 129?
In both cases, the differences are the same: 3.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28628513</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>n0tquitesane</author>
	<datestamp>1247048340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>A</b> is expensive! <b>B</b> is much more efficient, and costs half as much. <b>C</b> is even more efficient than <b>B</b> - <i>ten times</i> less expensive than <b>A</b>, compared to <b>B</b>.</p></div><p>It's the efficiency I want to know about.</p><p>
I run diesel that costs more because my truck gets 2.5 times the gas mileage as it's gas version.</p><p>
I'd gladly pay more for a solar panel that worked better than what is currently available (or alternatively drove down the price of the less efficient models. </p><p>
But telling me something is better because it costs less is stupid. </p><p>
The computer you are reading this on likely cost less than $1000, probably less than $500.  Roadrunner costs  <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/147220/ibms\_cellbased\_roadrunner\_supercomputer\_is\_worlds\_fastest.html" title="pcworld.com" rel="nofollow">1-200K</a> [pcworld.com] as much.  Are you going to tell me that your computer is better because it cost less?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A is expensive !
B is much more efficient , and costs half as much .
C is even more efficient than B - ten times less expensive than A , compared to B.It 's the efficiency I want to know about .
I run diesel that costs more because my truck gets 2.5 times the gas mileage as it 's gas version .
I 'd gladly pay more for a solar panel that worked better than what is currently available ( or alternatively drove down the price of the less efficient models .
But telling me something is better because it costs less is stupid .
The computer you are reading this on likely cost less than $ 1000 , probably less than $ 500 .
Roadrunner costs 1-200K [ pcworld.com ] as much .
Are you going to tell me that your computer is better because it cost less ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> A is expensive!
B is much more efficient, and costs half as much.
C is even more efficient than B - ten times less expensive than A, compared to B.It's the efficiency I want to know about.
I run diesel that costs more because my truck gets 2.5 times the gas mileage as it's gas version.
I'd gladly pay more for a solar panel that worked better than what is currently available (or alternatively drove down the price of the less efficient models.
But telling me something is better because it costs less is stupid.
The computer you are reading this on likely cost less than $1000, probably less than $500.
Roadrunner costs  1-200K [pcworld.com] as much.
Are you going to tell me that your computer is better because it cost less?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599307</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>relguj9</author>
	<datestamp>1246873200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I was buying a car or signing some contract I'd worry about shit like that......<br> <br>

If you had trouble with the title though, here's some help... "less" is some constant variable representing the "new cost" that when multiplied by 10 equals the "old cost".<br> <br>

silicon.cost = 10 * lesser.nanopillar.cost</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I was buying a car or signing some contract I 'd worry about shit like that..... . If you had trouble with the title though , here 's some help... " less " is some constant variable representing the " new cost " that when multiplied by 10 equals the " old cost " .
silicon.cost = 10 * lesser.nanopillar.cost</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I was buying a car or signing some contract I'd worry about shit like that...... 

If you had trouble with the title though, here's some help... "less" is some constant variable representing the "new cost" that when multiplied by 10 equals the "old cost".
silicon.cost = 10 * lesser.nanopillar.cost</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598725</id>
	<title>Re:I am f tired reading about cheap solar panals</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246913820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panals<br>5 years later - in some cases panels went up in price</i></p><p>Whine whine whine. It's been going on for much longer than 5 years. When I was in 5th grade, I did a report on PV electricity, and I read numerous reports that PV panels could be much cheaper soon.</p><p>Truth is, <a href="http://www.frozennorth.org/C197109377/E20080427143258/index.html" title="frozennorth.org">all those funky predictions were right. Solar power HAS been dropping very steadily and very predictably all along </a> [frozennorth.org] in its own version of Moore's law - PV prices drop about 6\% per year per watt, cutting in half every 10.5 years. It's not dropping like a stone, but it's very predictable and very steady.</p><p>What's been going on the last 5 years? <b>Simple: supply and demand. </b> For many reasons, people have become wary of using fossil fuels and are willing to invest more into solar, causing a sudden, worldwide deficiency in production capacity. Low-cost production companies like <a href="http://www.nanosolar.com/" title="nanosolar.com">Nano-Solar</a> [nanosolar.com] are ramping up production literally as fast as they are physically able.</p><p>For example, Nano-Solar has, for all intents and purposes, unlimited funding, and has already sold out several years worth of production, even that which is not actually happening yet. They are buying huge rafts of warehouse space in the Bay Area, in what used to be automotive manufacturing areas.</p><p>So the laws of supply and demand are working their magic, even though the response isn't instant. Your children will bask in a society powered by cheap solar electricity that you are funding right now, just as you benefit from the electrical power infrastructure built by your parents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panals5 years later - in some cases panels went up in priceWhine whine whine .
It 's been going on for much longer than 5 years .
When I was in 5th grade , I did a report on PV electricity , and I read numerous reports that PV panels could be much cheaper soon.Truth is , all those funky predictions were right .
Solar power HAS been dropping very steadily and very predictably all along [ frozennorth.org ] in its own version of Moore 's law - PV prices drop about 6 \ % per year per watt , cutting in half every 10.5 years .
It 's not dropping like a stone , but it 's very predictable and very steady.What 's been going on the last 5 years ?
Simple : supply and demand .
For many reasons , people have become wary of using fossil fuels and are willing to invest more into solar , causing a sudden , worldwide deficiency in production capacity .
Low-cost production companies like Nano-Solar [ nanosolar.com ] are ramping up production literally as fast as they are physically able.For example , Nano-Solar has , for all intents and purposes , unlimited funding , and has already sold out several years worth of production , even that which is not actually happening yet .
They are buying huge rafts of warehouse space in the Bay Area , in what used to be automotive manufacturing areas.So the laws of supply and demand are working their magic , even though the response is n't instant .
Your children will bask in a society powered by cheap solar electricity that you are funding right now , just as you benefit from the electrical power infrastructure built by your parents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panals5 years later - in some cases panels went up in priceWhine whine whine.
It's been going on for much longer than 5 years.
When I was in 5th grade, I did a report on PV electricity, and I read numerous reports that PV panels could be much cheaper soon.Truth is, all those funky predictions were right.
Solar power HAS been dropping very steadily and very predictably all along  [frozennorth.org] in its own version of Moore's law - PV prices drop about 6\% per year per watt, cutting in half every 10.5 years.
It's not dropping like a stone, but it's very predictable and very steady.What's been going on the last 5 years?
Simple: supply and demand.
For many reasons, people have become wary of using fossil fuels and are willing to invest more into solar, causing a sudden, worldwide deficiency in production capacity.
Low-cost production companies like Nano-Solar [nanosolar.com] are ramping up production literally as fast as they are physically able.For example, Nano-Solar has, for all intents and purposes, unlimited funding, and has already sold out several years worth of production, even that which is not actually happening yet.
They are buying huge rafts of warehouse space in the Bay Area, in what used to be automotive manufacturing areas.So the laws of supply and demand are working their magic, even though the response isn't instant.
Your children will bask in a society powered by cheap solar electricity that you are funding right now, just as you benefit from the electrical power infrastructure built by your parents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596367</id>
	<title>Not off to a good start</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246903800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"May cost 10x less"</p></div><p> How much less did the Silicon ones cost (compared to some third, unnamed product) in order to make the difference here "10 times" less?  Yes, what you meant was "May cost 1/10th as much as Silicon" but you didn't.  Try again.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" May cost 10x less " How much less did the Silicon ones cost ( compared to some third , unnamed product ) in order to make the difference here " 10 times " less ?
Yes , what you meant was " May cost 1/10th as much as Silicon " but you did n't .
Try again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"May cost 10x less" How much less did the Silicon ones cost (compared to some third, unnamed product) in order to make the difference here "10 times" less?
Yes, what you meant was "May cost 1/10th as much as Silicon" but you didn't.
Try again.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604277</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>rnturn</author>
	<datestamp>1246905180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What frustrates me even <i>more</i> is that it appears to have been taken from a quote by one of the researchers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What frustrates me even more is that it appears to have been taken from a quote by one of the researchers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What frustrates me even more is that it appears to have been taken from a quote by one of the researchers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596779</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Yeah!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246905420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about using a few more punctuation marks, you nearly got your message through.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about using a few more punctuation marks , you nearly got your message through .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about using a few more punctuation marks, you nearly got your message through.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28601773</id>
	<title>It means "less, by a factor of ten".</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246885320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>10x less = One tenth original value<br>5x less = One fifth original value<br>5x more = Five times original value<br>10x more = Ten times original value</p><p>The analogy to "cold" doesn't match:  "Cost" is a positive value with a distinct zero point ($0). "Cold" has no distinct zero-point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>10x less = One tenth original value5x less = One fifth original value5x more = Five times original value10x more = Ten times original valueThe analogy to " cold " does n't match : " Cost " is a positive value with a distinct zero point ( $ 0 ) .
" Cold " has no distinct zero-point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10x less = One tenth original value5x less = One fifth original value5x more = Five times original value10x more = Ten times original valueThe analogy to "cold" doesn't match:  "Cost" is a positive value with a distinct zero point ($0).
"Cold" has no distinct zero-point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596333</id>
	<title>Based on recent history...</title>
	<author>OpenSourced</author>
	<datestamp>1246903680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't tell me. It'll be ready for mass production in 3 to 5 years. Somehow, I seem to remember stories like this from more than five years ago, and still, nothing happens and the solar cells are more or less the same as always.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't tell me .
It 'll be ready for mass production in 3 to 5 years .
Somehow , I seem to remember stories like this from more than five years ago , and still , nothing happens and the solar cells are more or less the same as always .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't tell me.
It'll be ready for mass production in 3 to 5 years.
Somehow, I seem to remember stories like this from more than five years ago, and still, nothing happens and the solar cells are more or less the same as always.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604047</id>
	<title>Re:Photovoltaics are for rich dummies</title>
	<author>whhyohwhyslashdot</author>
	<datestamp>1246902300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>e.g.
<a href="http://ducts.lbl.gov/calducts.htm" title="lbl.gov" rel="nofollow">http://ducts.lbl.gov/calducts.htm</a> [lbl.gov] </p></div><p> <b>man, who is the looney who wrote that crap?</b>
</p><p>
I particularly liked <i>"There are about 1700 active HVAC contractors in California. If we assume that each contractor has at least two work crews, it should be possible to easily find the approximately 3000 work crews required to fix 3 million systems over a period of two years."</i> it should be "easy" since they are obviously all just sitting around twiddling their thumbs now.

</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>e.g .
http : //ducts.lbl.gov/calducts.htm [ lbl.gov ] man , who is the looney who wrote that crap ?
I particularly liked " There are about 1700 active HVAC contractors in California .
If we assume that each contractor has at least two work crews , it should be possible to easily find the approximately 3000 work crews required to fix 3 million systems over a period of two years .
" it should be " easy " since they are obviously all just sitting around twiddling their thumbs now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>e.g.
http://ducts.lbl.gov/calducts.htm [lbl.gov]  man, who is the looney who wrote that crap?
I particularly liked "There are about 1700 active HVAC contractors in California.
If we assume that each contractor has at least two work crews, it should be possible to easily find the approximately 3000 work crews required to fix 3 million systems over a period of two years.
" it should be "easy" since they are obviously all just sitting around twiddling their thumbs now.


	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28603861</id>
	<title>Re: derr</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246900320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you are a fool.<br>it is quite simple.<br>A is X times less than Y simply means A is 1/X times as much as Y.<br>Just because you anally refuse to accept this meaning does not change the fact that that's what it means.<br>The common reason for fools to get anal about this is that they are mixing it up with stupid statements like this:</p><p>X has 1/2 less blah than Y does</p><p>when it should be X has 1/2 as much blah as Y does,</p><p>or Y has twice as much blah as X does</p><p>or X has 2 times fewer blahs than Y has<br>or Y has 2 times more blahs than Y has</p><p>or X is 2 times less expensive than Y     (blahs are discrete items, expense is not.<br>or Y is 2 times more expensive than X</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you are a fool.it is quite simple.A is X times less than Y simply means A is 1/X times as much as Y.Just because you anally refuse to accept this meaning does not change the fact that that 's what it means.The common reason for fools to get anal about this is that they are mixing it up with stupid statements like this : X has 1/2 less blah than Y doeswhen it should be X has 1/2 as much blah as Y does,or Y has twice as much blah as X doesor X has 2 times fewer blahs than Y hasor Y has 2 times more blahs than Y hasor X is 2 times less expensive than Y ( blahs are discrete items , expense is not.or Y is 2 times more expensive than X</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you are a fool.it is quite simple.A is X times less than Y simply means A is 1/X times as much as Y.Just because you anally refuse to accept this meaning does not change the fact that that's what it means.The common reason for fools to get anal about this is that they are mixing it up with stupid statements like this:X has 1/2 less blah than Y doeswhen it should be X has 1/2 as much blah as Y does,or Y has twice as much blah as X doesor X has 2 times fewer blahs than Y hasor Y has 2 times more blahs than Y hasor X is 2 times less expensive than Y     (blahs are discrete items, expense is not.or Y is 2 times more expensive than X</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271</id>
	<title>I am f tired reading about cheap solar panals</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246903440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panals<br>5 years later - in some cases panels went up in price</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panals5 years later - in some cases panels went up in price</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panals5 years later - in some cases panels went up in price</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596361</id>
	<title>Conspiracy buffs rejoice!</title>
	<author>ArhcAngel</author>
	<datestamp>1246903800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once you install these on your roof you will only need to wear your tinfoil hat when you are outdoors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once you install these on your roof you will only need to wear your tinfoil hat when you are outdoors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once you install these on your roof you will only need to wear your tinfoil hat when you are outdoors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597815</id>
	<title>Re:Cadmium ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246909500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In another word, it cannot be used due to its toxicity to the environment.<br>Why would someone research a potential product using chemicals that is already banned in EU and so to be in Asia and may be California?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In another word , it can not be used due to its toxicity to the environment.Why would someone research a potential product using chemicals that is already banned in EU and so to be in Asia and may be California ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In another word, it cannot be used due to its toxicity to the environment.Why would someone research a potential product using chemicals that is already banned in EU and so to be in Asia and may be California?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596317</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28600767</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1246879980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Along these lines another one that drives me nuts is something like "The older technology uses 150\% more material" when they really mean "50\% more material". If they want to say 150\%, they should say "150\% <i>as much material" or "1.5 times the material" (but <i>not</i> "1.5 times more material").</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Along these lines another one that drives me nuts is something like " The older technology uses 150 \ % more material " when they really mean " 50 \ % more material " .
If they want to say 150 \ % , they should say " 150 \ % as much material " or " 1.5 times the material " ( but not " 1.5 times more material " ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Along these lines another one that drives me nuts is something like "The older technology uses 150\% more material" when they really mean "50\% more material".
If they want to say 150\%, they should say "150\% as much material" or "1.5 times the material" (but not "1.5 times more material").</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598883</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds poisonous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246871340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>cadmium sulfide</i></p> </div><p>For some reason I initially read that as "cadmium waffle".</p><p>(Mmm... cadmium waffles....)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>cadmium sulfide For some reason I initially read that as " cadmium waffle " . ( Mmm.. .
cadmium waffles.... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> cadmium sulfide For some reason I initially read that as "cadmium waffle".(Mmm...
cadmium waffles....)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596467</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598303</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>donut1005</author>
	<datestamp>1246911780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same difference.<br> <br>

(Which is a phrase I never understood.  If two things are different in the same way, aren't they not different but instead similar?)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same difference .
( Which is a phrase I never understood .
If two things are different in the same way , are n't they not different but instead similar ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same difference.
(Which is a phrase I never understood.
If two things are different in the same way, aren't they not different but instead similar?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596937</id>
	<title>Re:Great news!</title>
	<author>JustinOpinion</author>
	<datestamp>1246906080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>For those with access, here's the actual paper:<br>
Fan, Zhiyong, Haleh Razavi, Jae-won Do, Aimee Moriwaki, Onur Ergen, Yu-Lun Chueh, Paul W. Leu, et al. "<a href="http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nmat2493.html" title="nature.com">Three-dimensional nanopillar-array photovoltaics on low-cost and flexible substrates</a> [nature.com]." Nature Materials advanced online publication (July 5, 2009). <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat2493" title="doi.org">http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat2493</a> [doi.org].<br> <br>

One of the cool things is that this new process results in a flexible photovoltaic. In the paper they show that efficiency is maintained even after repeated bending of the material. Even if the energy collection efficiency is lower than conventional silicon photovoltaics, there are tons of applications for flexible photovoltaics, like having tents coated in the material (both for things like camping, but could also be hugely useful for the military, for temporary tents for disaster relief, and so on...), clothing that generates power, and so on... (Maybe even fanciful things like kites that collect solar and wind power?)<br> <br>

It's not a commercial device yet (and oftentimes these kinds of lab devices just don't scale to mass production that well), but it's an encouraging step towards more robust solar cells, which would aid in the more widespread deployments of solar energy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For those with access , here 's the actual paper : Fan , Zhiyong , Haleh Razavi , Jae-won Do , Aimee Moriwaki , Onur Ergen , Yu-Lun Chueh , Paul W. Leu , et al .
" Three-dimensional nanopillar-array photovoltaics on low-cost and flexible substrates [ nature.com ] .
" Nature Materials advanced online publication ( July 5 , 2009 ) .
http : //dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat2493 [ doi.org ] .
One of the cool things is that this new process results in a flexible photovoltaic .
In the paper they show that efficiency is maintained even after repeated bending of the material .
Even if the energy collection efficiency is lower than conventional silicon photovoltaics , there are tons of applications for flexible photovoltaics , like having tents coated in the material ( both for things like camping , but could also be hugely useful for the military , for temporary tents for disaster relief , and so on... ) , clothing that generates power , and so on... ( Maybe even fanciful things like kites that collect solar and wind power ?
) It 's not a commercial device yet ( and oftentimes these kinds of lab devices just do n't scale to mass production that well ) , but it 's an encouraging step towards more robust solar cells , which would aid in the more widespread deployments of solar energy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those with access, here's the actual paper:
Fan, Zhiyong, Haleh Razavi, Jae-won Do, Aimee Moriwaki, Onur Ergen, Yu-Lun Chueh, Paul W. Leu, et al.
"Three-dimensional nanopillar-array photovoltaics on low-cost and flexible substrates [nature.com].
" Nature Materials advanced online publication (July 5, 2009).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat2493 [doi.org].
One of the cool things is that this new process results in a flexible photovoltaic.
In the paper they show that efficiency is maintained even after repeated bending of the material.
Even if the energy collection efficiency is lower than conventional silicon photovoltaics, there are tons of applications for flexible photovoltaics, like having tents coated in the material (both for things like camping, but could also be hugely useful for the military, for temporary tents for disaster relief, and so on...), clothing that generates power, and so on... (Maybe even fanciful things like kites that collect solar and wind power?
) 

It's not a commercial device yet (and oftentimes these kinds of lab devices just don't scale to mass production that well), but it's an encouraging step towards more robust solar cells, which would aid in the more widespread deployments of solar energy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596245</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596409</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>mbenzi</author>
	<datestamp>1246903920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Arrrrgh "10x Less".  This frustrates me that it made it into the title.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Arrrrgh " 10x Less " .
This frustrates me that it made it into the title .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Arrrrgh "10x Less".
This frustrates me that it made it into the title.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599269</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>dontmakemethink</author>
	<datestamp>1246872960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even better is how the cells "create electrons".  All we need now are cells to create protons and neutrons, and solar powered replicators will be on the market in no time!</p><p>(TFA reads "creates free electrons", also a misnomer, should read "frees electrons")</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even better is how the cells " create electrons " .
All we need now are cells to create protons and neutrons , and solar powered replicators will be on the market in no time !
( TFA reads " creates free electrons " , also a misnomer , should read " frees electrons " )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even better is how the cells "create electrons".
All we need now are cells to create protons and neutrons, and solar powered replicators will be on the market in no time!
(TFA reads "creates free electrons", also a misnomer, should read "frees electrons")</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597477</id>
	<title>Re:Low cost until scarcity kicks in....</title>
	<author>JustinOpinion</author>
	<datestamp>1246908300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Their device uses a cadmium telluride (CdTe) active layer. Actually the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tellurium#Occurrence" title="wikipedia.org">tellurium</a> [wikipedia.org] is the limiting factor since it is even rarer than cadmium. Of course that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadmium\_telluride\_photovoltaics#Tellurium\_supply" title="wikipedia.org">could change</a> [wikipedia.org] depending on the economics of exploitation and what new sources are discovered. Whether Cd or Te is the limiting factor, devices based on CdTe (including the one in the scientific article) use a CdTe layer only 1 micrometer thick. So a metric ton of raw material would be enough for <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=((1+metric+ton)\%2F(5.85+g\%2Fcubic+cm)\%2F(1+micrometer)+)+in+square+m&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=&amp;aqi=" title="google.com">roughly</a> [google.com] 171,000 m^2 of solar cells. This gives us 1 GW of power per <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadmium\_telluride\_photovoltaics#cite\_note-26" title="wikipedia.org">66 metric tons</a> [wikipedia.org]. Not great, perhaps, but probably good enough to justify manufacture and distribution.<br> <br>

Moreover, I don't understand the pessimism of:<p><div class="quote"><p>Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics.</p></div><p>How else do we consider these ugly realities if not to study available materials, test the limits of what works and what doesn't, build prototypes, publish results, and work towards commercialization... ? Other materials may eventually be used in real devices (either after a period of using the relatively rare Cd and Te, or perhaps well in anticipation of those supply problems). Even if the device, as presented, doesn't mesh up with the realities of current supply-and-demand, it is part of the process of getting from a problem ('we need energy') to economically-viable solutions.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Their device uses a cadmium telluride ( CdTe ) active layer .
Actually the tellurium [ wikipedia.org ] is the limiting factor since it is even rarer than cadmium .
Of course that could change [ wikipedia.org ] depending on the economics of exploitation and what new sources are discovered .
Whether Cd or Te is the limiting factor , devices based on CdTe ( including the one in the scientific article ) use a CdTe layer only 1 micrometer thick .
So a metric ton of raw material would be enough for roughly [ google.com ] 171,000 m ^ 2 of solar cells .
This gives us 1 GW of power per 66 metric tons [ wikipedia.org ] .
Not great , perhaps , but probably good enough to justify manufacture and distribution .
Moreover , I do n't understand the pessimism of : Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics.How else do we consider these ugly realities if not to study available materials , test the limits of what works and what does n't , build prototypes , publish results , and work towards commercialization... ? Other materials may eventually be used in real devices ( either after a period of using the relatively rare Cd and Te , or perhaps well in anticipation of those supply problems ) .
Even if the device , as presented , does n't mesh up with the realities of current supply-and-demand , it is part of the process of getting from a problem ( 'we need energy ' ) to economically-viable solutions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their device uses a cadmium telluride (CdTe) active layer.
Actually the tellurium [wikipedia.org] is the limiting factor since it is even rarer than cadmium.
Of course that could change [wikipedia.org] depending on the economics of exploitation and what new sources are discovered.
Whether Cd or Te is the limiting factor, devices based on CdTe (including the one in the scientific article) use a CdTe layer only 1 micrometer thick.
So a metric ton of raw material would be enough for roughly [google.com] 171,000 m^2 of solar cells.
This gives us 1 GW of power per 66 metric tons [wikipedia.org].
Not great, perhaps, but probably good enough to justify manufacture and distribution.
Moreover, I don't understand the pessimism of:Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics.How else do we consider these ugly realities if not to study available materials, test the limits of what works and what doesn't, build prototypes, publish results, and work towards commercialization... ? Other materials may eventually be used in real devices (either after a period of using the relatively rare Cd and Te, or perhaps well in anticipation of those supply problems).
Even if the device, as presented, doesn't mesh up with the realities of current supply-and-demand, it is part of the process of getting from a problem ('we need energy') to economically-viable solutions.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</id>
	<title>That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>albedoa</author>
	<datestamp>1246903080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>"10x Less"? Is that like "twice as cold"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" 10x Less " ?
Is that like " twice as cold " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"10x Less"?
Is that like "twice as cold"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28613619</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246959720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"10x Less"? Is that like "twice as cold"?</p></div><p>no, definitely not, it is like 10x as cold.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" 10x Less " ?
Is that like " twice as cold " ? no , definitely not , it is like 10x as cold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"10x Less"?
Is that like "twice as cold"?no, definitely not, it is like 10x as cold.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596467</id>
	<title>Sounds poisonous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246904160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>cadmium sulfide</i>
<br>
<br>
It's all fun and games until someone sprouts a 3rd eye.</htmltext>
<tokenext>cadmium sulfide It 's all fun and games until someone sprouts a 3rd eye .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cadmium sulfide


It's all fun and games until someone sprouts a 3rd eye.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28600027</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246876260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I could care less about people not saying what they mean out of sheer laziness and/or stupidity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I could care less about people not saying what they mean out of sheer laziness and/or stupidity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I could care less about people not saying what they mean out of sheer laziness and/or stupidity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28607347</id>
	<title>Re:I am f tired reading about cheap solar panals</title>
	<author>An Onerous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1246978560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For example, Nano-Solar has, for all intents and purposes, unlimited funding, and has already sold out several years worth of production, even that which is not actually happening yet. They are buying huge rafts of warehouse space in the Bay Area, in what used to be automotive manufacturing areas.</p></div></blockquote><p>This is probably a dumb question, but why do they need so much warehouse space if their output is going out the door as fast as they can print it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For example , Nano-Solar has , for all intents and purposes , unlimited funding , and has already sold out several years worth of production , even that which is not actually happening yet .
They are buying huge rafts of warehouse space in the Bay Area , in what used to be automotive manufacturing areas.This is probably a dumb question , but why do they need so much warehouse space if their output is going out the door as fast as they can print it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For example, Nano-Solar has, for all intents and purposes, unlimited funding, and has already sold out several years worth of production, even that which is not actually happening yet.
They are buying huge rafts of warehouse space in the Bay Area, in what used to be automotive manufacturing areas.This is probably a dumb question, but why do they need so much warehouse space if their output is going out the door as fast as they can print it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598725</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597537</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Yeah!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246908480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does it use water as a fuel, with uranium as a catlyst?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it use water as a fuel , with uranium as a catlyst ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it use water as a fuel, with uranium as a catlyst?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596423</id>
	<title>Nanopillar Solar May Cost 10x Less...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246903980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've got a nanopillar for you that costs...  no wait, that sounded much better in my head.  Um, nevermind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got a nanopillar for you that costs... no wait , that sounded much better in my head .
Um , nevermind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got a nanopillar for you that costs...  no wait, that sounded much better in my head.
Um, nevermind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>ScentCone</author>
	<datestamp>1246906260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maddening, isn't it?
<br> <br>
The only way "ten times less" makes <i>any</i> sense is when you're talking about <i>three</i> costs.
<br> <br>
<b>A</b> is expensive! <b>B</b> is much more efficient, and costs half as much. <b>C</b> is even more efficient than <b>B</b> - <i>ten times</i> less expensive than <b>A</b>, compared to <b>B</b>.
<br> <br>
Otherwise, when you only have <i>two</i> things to compare to one another, just say that "<b>B</b> is one tenth the cost of <b>A</b>."
<br> <br>
Why is this so damn hard for people to process? If they could just think about it, they'd save me ten times the typing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maddening , is n't it ?
The only way " ten times less " makes any sense is when you 're talking about three costs .
A is expensive !
B is much more efficient , and costs half as much .
C is even more efficient than B - ten times less expensive than A , compared to B . Otherwise , when you only have two things to compare to one another , just say that " B is one tenth the cost of A .
" Why is this so damn hard for people to process ?
If they could just think about it , they 'd save me ten times the typing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maddening, isn't it?
The only way "ten times less" makes any sense is when you're talking about three costs.
A is expensive!
B is much more efficient, and costs half as much.
C is even more efficient than B - ten times less expensive than A, compared to B.
 
Otherwise, when you only have two things to compare to one another, just say that "B is one tenth the cost of A.
"
 
Why is this so damn hard for people to process?
If they could just think about it, they'd save me ten times the typing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597673</id>
	<title>Photovoltaics are for rich dummies</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1246908960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of our electricity is used for the creation or movement of heat. Which is spectacularly dumb and inefficient.</p><p>e.g.<br><a href="http://ducts.lbl.gov/calducts.htm" title="lbl.gov">http://ducts.lbl.gov/calducts.htm</a> [lbl.gov]</p><p>Solar thermal panels can be up to 90\% efficient. The vacuum tubes work in cold and cloudy climates. The energy they displace will <b>directly</b> reduce electricity generation costs, reduce CO2 emmissions and they are far far far cheaper than photovoltaics.</p><p>For cooling look at evaporative cooling or simply pumping the heat into a local river or ocean... Most of California's cities are sited near the Pacific... Yet air conditioning is the single largest consumer of electricity, by far.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of our electricity is used for the creation or movement of heat .
Which is spectacularly dumb and inefficient.e.g.http : //ducts.lbl.gov/calducts.htm [ lbl.gov ] Solar thermal panels can be up to 90 \ % efficient .
The vacuum tubes work in cold and cloudy climates .
The energy they displace will directly reduce electricity generation costs , reduce CO2 emmissions and they are far far far cheaper than photovoltaics.For cooling look at evaporative cooling or simply pumping the heat into a local river or ocean... Most of California 's cities are sited near the Pacific... Yet air conditioning is the single largest consumer of electricity , by far .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of our electricity is used for the creation or movement of heat.
Which is spectacularly dumb and inefficient.e.g.http://ducts.lbl.gov/calducts.htm [lbl.gov]Solar thermal panels can be up to 90\% efficient.
The vacuum tubes work in cold and cloudy climates.
The energy they displace will directly reduce electricity generation costs, reduce CO2 emmissions and they are far far far cheaper than photovoltaics.For cooling look at evaporative cooling or simply pumping the heat into a local river or ocean... Most of California's cities are sited near the Pacific... Yet air conditioning is the single largest consumer of electricity, by far.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599625</id>
	<title>Re:Low cost until scarcity kicks in....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246874400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Cadmium is used for red and yellow paints for artists, both oil and acrylic based paints. They're really bright yellows and reds, so the bright orange and yellow jackets road crews wear probably have cadmium pigments.</p></div></blockquote><p>Cadmium pigments have been almost entirely phased out.  While many paints are still called cadmium this or that, they are not toxic and don't contain cadmium.  I doubt anyone makes fabric with cadmium dyes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cadmium is used for red and yellow paints for artists , both oil and acrylic based paints .
They 're really bright yellows and reds , so the bright orange and yellow jackets road crews wear probably have cadmium pigments.Cadmium pigments have been almost entirely phased out .
While many paints are still called cadmium this or that , they are not toxic and do n't contain cadmium .
I doubt anyone makes fabric with cadmium dyes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cadmium is used for red and yellow paints for artists, both oil and acrylic based paints.
They're really bright yellows and reds, so the bright orange and yellow jackets road crews wear probably have cadmium pigments.Cadmium pigments have been almost entirely phased out.
While many paints are still called cadmium this or that, they are not toxic and don't contain cadmium.
I doubt anyone makes fabric with cadmium dyes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28606087</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246971360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're doing the maths wrong.</p><p>10x less.<br>A = $100<br>B is the new product, B= 10x cost of A = $1000.</p><p>You save 10x less.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're doing the maths wrong.10x less.A = $ 100B is the new product , B = 10x cost of A = $ 1000.You save 10x less .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're doing the maths wrong.10x less.A = $100B is the new product, B= 10x cost of A = $1000.You save 10x less.
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28601611</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>Atario</author>
	<datestamp>1246884540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>A is expensive! B is much more efficient, and costs half as much. C is even more efficient than B - ten times less expensive than A, compared to B.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>I'm having trouble processing what that means -- are you saying that C costs 1/20 what A does?  Or 1/10?</p><p>Furthermore, none of that makes sense unless you accept the concept of "N times less" as stated in the headline in the first place.</p><p>I really don't see the problem, in fact.  If "N times more" is acceptable, then surely "N times less" must be, too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A is expensive !
B is much more efficient , and costs half as much .
C is even more efficient than B - ten times less expensive than A , compared to B. I 'm having trouble processing what that means -- are you saying that C costs 1/20 what A does ?
Or 1/10 ? Furthermore , none of that makes sense unless you accept the concept of " N times less " as stated in the headline in the first place.I really do n't see the problem , in fact .
If " N times more " is acceptable , then surely " N times less " must be , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> A is expensive!
B is much more efficient, and costs half as much.
C is even more efficient than B - ten times less expensive than A, compared to B. I'm having trouble processing what that means -- are you saying that C costs 1/20 what A does?
Or 1/10?Furthermore, none of that makes sense unless you accept the concept of "N times less" as stated in the headline in the first place.I really don't see the problem, in fact.
If "N times more" is acceptable, then surely "N times less" must be, too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596863</id>
	<title>Micro Generation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246905720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The BIG problem with micro generation is that it takes money straight out of the pockets of Big Oil.<br>Those with a vested interest in current generation techniques will not spend their money investing in technologies which give "Power to the People"</p><p>I for one expect to see more headlines like this:<br>"BP has shut down its alternative energy headquarters in London, accepted the resignation of its clean energy boss and imposed budget cuts in moves likely to be seen by environmental critics as further signs of the oil group moving "back to petroleum" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jun/28/bp-alternative-energy) Guardian Newspaper</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The BIG problem with micro generation is that it takes money straight out of the pockets of Big Oil.Those with a vested interest in current generation techniques will not spend their money investing in technologies which give " Power to the People " I for one expect to see more headlines like this : " BP has shut down its alternative energy headquarters in London , accepted the resignation of its clean energy boss and imposed budget cuts in moves likely to be seen by environmental critics as further signs of the oil group moving " back to petroleum " ( http : //www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jun/28/bp-alternative-energy ) Guardian Newspaper</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The BIG problem with micro generation is that it takes money straight out of the pockets of Big Oil.Those with a vested interest in current generation techniques will not spend their money investing in technologies which give "Power to the People"I for one expect to see more headlines like this:"BP has shut down its alternative energy headquarters in London, accepted the resignation of its clean energy boss and imposed budget cuts in moves likely to be seen by environmental critics as further signs of the oil group moving "back to petroleum" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jun/28/bp-alternative-energy) Guardian Newspaper</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28605995</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>Godwin O'Hitler</author>
	<datestamp>1246970340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's the problem? The expression is perfectly parsable.<br>Let me explain: ten times ten is a hundred, right?. So if something costs 10 bogodollars, ten times less means 100 bogodollars less, i.e., you get the solar panel and a 90 bogodollar cashback.<br>Hey, I'm having one of them things!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the problem ?
The expression is perfectly parsable.Let me explain : ten times ten is a hundred , right ? .
So if something costs 10 bogodollars , ten times less means 100 bogodollars less , i.e. , you get the solar panel and a 90 bogodollar cashback.Hey , I 'm having one of them things !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the problem?
The expression is perfectly parsable.Let me explain: ten times ten is a hundred, right?.
So if something costs 10 bogodollars, ten times less means 100 bogodollars less, i.e., you get the solar panel and a 90 bogodollar cashback.Hey, I'm having one of them things!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596317</id>
	<title>Cadmium ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246903620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look at the toxicity of cadmium and all the environmental regulations that come with it. It's regulated to 1/10th the level of mercury in the EU RoHS (Reduction of Hazardous Substances in Electronics) legislation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at the toxicity of cadmium and all the environmental regulations that come with it .
It 's regulated to 1/10th the level of mercury in the EU RoHS ( Reduction of Hazardous Substances in Electronics ) legislation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at the toxicity of cadmium and all the environmental regulations that come with it.
It's regulated to 1/10th the level of mercury in the EU RoHS (Reduction of Hazardous Substances in Electronics) legislation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28601537</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>Twinbee</author>
	<datestamp>1246884180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was err.. 'guilty' of this myself once (in an old<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. post, I said something was ten times lighter - as in weight).</p><p>I don't see much of a problem at all. 10 times slower = 0.1 times as fast. 10 times lighter = 0.1 times as heavy etc. etc. It's pretty intuitive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was err.. 'guilty ' of this myself once ( in an old / .
post , I said something was ten times lighter - as in weight ) .I do n't see much of a problem at all .
10 times slower = 0.1 times as fast .
10 times lighter = 0.1 times as heavy etc .
etc. It 's pretty intuitive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was err.. 'guilty' of this myself once (in an old /.
post, I said something was ten times lighter - as in weight).I don't see much of a problem at all.
10 times slower = 0.1 times as fast.
10 times lighter = 0.1 times as heavy etc.
etc. It's pretty intuitive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596165</id>
	<title>Sarah Pallin In 2012</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246903080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wrapped in nothing but aluminum foil for solar: Very disgusting.</p><p>Yours In Democracy,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrapped in nothing but aluminum foil for solar : Very disgusting.Yours In Democracy,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrapped in nothing but aluminum foil for solar: Very disgusting.Yours In Democracy,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596505</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>TomTraynor</author>
	<datestamp>1246904280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same here.  The person should have said it could cost 1/10 as using current technology.  Assuming current cost is for this example  $1.00 per unit.  The current expression would be 100/100 (when expressed in cents).  Anything compared to that can be expressed as a fraction.  If they can produce it for 90 cents then you can express it as 90/100 or 9/10.  The way he phrased it sound like they will give you 10x the cost to make the product.</p><p>I see this all of the time and I keep trying to correct people, but, they tell me they are correct.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here .
The person should have said it could cost 1/10 as using current technology .
Assuming current cost is for this example $ 1.00 per unit .
The current expression would be 100/100 ( when expressed in cents ) .
Anything compared to that can be expressed as a fraction .
If they can produce it for 90 cents then you can express it as 90/100 or 9/10 .
The way he phrased it sound like they will give you 10x the cost to make the product.I see this all of the time and I keep trying to correct people , but , they tell me they are correct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here.
The person should have said it could cost 1/10 as using current technology.
Assuming current cost is for this example  $1.00 per unit.
The current expression would be 100/100 (when expressed in cents).
Anything compared to that can be expressed as a fraction.
If they can produce it for 90 cents then you can express it as 90/100 or 9/10.
The way he phrased it sound like they will give you 10x the cost to make the product.I see this all of the time and I keep trying to correct people, but, they tell me they are correct.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604599</id>
	<title>Re: No surprise math nerd ScentCone gets it wrong!</title>
	<author>itsybitsy</author>
	<datestamp>1246909740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone with half a brain or two times your brain capacity should know that saying "B is ten times less than the cost of A" means "B is one tenth the cost of A"!</p><p>Just like someone says "A is ten times more than B" you know they mean "A<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:= B * 10".</p><p>Your just too literal minded ScanMan/RainMan ScentCone dude. English is a flexible language. Take you math nerd hat off for a change and a challenge in comprehening what others are saying to you rather than imposing your New World Order unto them.</p><p>Now all you need to do is to ask a clarifying question to make sure your "translation" into your narrowly focused math-nerd version of English meets your perfect way of talking. If they go yeah, that's what they meant then you've passed the primary Powel Janulus [who spoke over 80 human languages and was fluent in 50+ of them] test of communication, understanding others need not require perfect speach! You then become less of a math nerd to the outside world ScanMan/RainMan ScentCone. Good luck learning your new found social skills.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone with half a brain or two times your brain capacity should know that saying " B is ten times less than the cost of A " means " B is one tenth the cost of A " ! Just like someone says " A is ten times more than B " you know they mean " A : = B * 10 " .Your just too literal minded ScanMan/RainMan ScentCone dude .
English is a flexible language .
Take you math nerd hat off for a change and a challenge in comprehening what others are saying to you rather than imposing your New World Order unto them.Now all you need to do is to ask a clarifying question to make sure your " translation " into your narrowly focused math-nerd version of English meets your perfect way of talking .
If they go yeah , that 's what they meant then you 've passed the primary Powel Janulus [ who spoke over 80 human languages and was fluent in 50 + of them ] test of communication , understanding others need not require perfect speach !
You then become less of a math nerd to the outside world ScanMan/RainMan ScentCone .
Good luck learning your new found social skills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone with half a brain or two times your brain capacity should know that saying "B is ten times less than the cost of A" means "B is one tenth the cost of A"!Just like someone says "A is ten times more than B" you know they mean "A := B * 10".Your just too literal minded ScanMan/RainMan ScentCone dude.
English is a flexible language.
Take you math nerd hat off for a change and a challenge in comprehening what others are saying to you rather than imposing your New World Order unto them.Now all you need to do is to ask a clarifying question to make sure your "translation" into your narrowly focused math-nerd version of English meets your perfect way of talking.
If they go yeah, that's what they meant then you've passed the primary Powel Janulus [who spoke over 80 human languages and was fluent in 50+ of them] test of communication, understanding others need not require perfect speach!
You then become less of a math nerd to the outside world ScanMan/RainMan ScentCone.
Good luck learning your new found social skills.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597623</id>
	<title>Re:Based on recent history...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246908780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MASS PRODUSU WA!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MASS PRODUSU WA !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MASS PRODUSU WA!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596333</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597957</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246910220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did they mean to write "1/10th the cost?"  Or not?  This is confusing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did they mean to write " 1/10th the cost ?
" Or not ?
This is confusing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did they mean to write "1/10th the cost?
"  Or not?
This is confusing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599759</id>
	<title>OK, if we really want to get OCD...</title>
	<author>relguj9</author>
	<datestamp>1246875000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is cost represented on a linear scale?  What does cost really represent?  Would the cost vary by nation of manufacture?  What point in time was the cost estimation created?<br> <br>

Maybe a more accurate title would be:<br>
As of the writing of this article, the monetary manufacturing cost in the US, including labor and materials, of Nanopillar Solar may be lower by a factor of 10 than that of current Silicon based solar technologies.<br> <br>

Too bad the title line is only 50 characters.  And I still made a lot of assumptions even there, there are still a lot of leaps to be made regarding cost.<br> <br>

Maybe you just don't realize how many assumptions you are making even by saying "1/10 the cost".  That one more assumption to say "10x less" isn't really that much of a leap.  Or better yet, <b>maybe the title of an article isn't supposed to explain the entire article</b>, it's just supposed to tell you what it's about and get you to read it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is cost represented on a linear scale ?
What does cost really represent ?
Would the cost vary by nation of manufacture ?
What point in time was the cost estimation created ?
Maybe a more accurate title would be : As of the writing of this article , the monetary manufacturing cost in the US , including labor and materials , of Nanopillar Solar may be lower by a factor of 10 than that of current Silicon based solar technologies .
Too bad the title line is only 50 characters .
And I still made a lot of assumptions even there , there are still a lot of leaps to be made regarding cost .
Maybe you just do n't realize how many assumptions you are making even by saying " 1/10 the cost " .
That one more assumption to say " 10x less " is n't really that much of a leap .
Or better yet , maybe the title of an article is n't supposed to explain the entire article , it 's just supposed to tell you what it 's about and get you to read it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is cost represented on a linear scale?
What does cost really represent?
Would the cost vary by nation of manufacture?
What point in time was the cost estimation created?
Maybe a more accurate title would be:
As of the writing of this article, the monetary manufacturing cost in the US, including labor and materials, of Nanopillar Solar may be lower by a factor of 10 than that of current Silicon based solar technologies.
Too bad the title line is only 50 characters.
And I still made a lot of assumptions even there, there are still a lot of leaps to be made regarding cost.
Maybe you just don't realize how many assumptions you are making even by saying "1/10 the cost".
That one more assumption to say "10x less" isn't really that much of a leap.
Or better yet, maybe the title of an article isn't supposed to explain the entire article, it's just supposed to tell you what it's about and get you to read it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597283</id>
	<title>Re:That title makes me cringe.</title>
	<author>euxneks</author>
	<datestamp>1246907640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"10x Less"? Is that like "twice as cold"?</p></div><p>Couldn't it reasonably be assumed he's saying "a factor of ten less" i.e. {current\_cost}*0.1 ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" 10x Less " ?
Is that like " twice as cold " ? Could n't it reasonably be assumed he 's saying " a factor of ten less " i.e .
{ current \ _cost } * 0.1 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"10x Less"?
Is that like "twice as cold"?Couldn't it reasonably be assumed he's saying "a factor of ten less" i.e.
{current\_cost}*0.1 ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597505</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Yeah!!!</title>
	<author>StellarFury</author>
	<datestamp>1246908420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What they're announcing is that in the lab, they HAVE produced solar cells in which the raw materials for the process cost 10x less than silicon. They've already proven it. They aren't addressing economic viability, if they were, it would be a company's press release.</p><p>You're tired of researchers saying these things that may never work in the consumer market. The reason they keep saying these things is because it's their fucking job, you twit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What they 're announcing is that in the lab , they HAVE produced solar cells in which the raw materials for the process cost 10x less than silicon .
They 've already proven it .
They are n't addressing economic viability , if they were , it would be a company 's press release.You 're tired of researchers saying these things that may never work in the consumer market .
The reason they keep saying these things is because it 's their fucking job , you twit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What they're announcing is that in the lab, they HAVE produced solar cells in which the raw materials for the process cost 10x less than silicon.
They've already proven it.
They aren't addressing economic viability, if they were, it would be a company's press release.You're tired of researchers saying these things that may never work in the consumer market.
The reason they keep saying these things is because it's their fucking job, you twit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596463</id>
	<title>Solar Powered Tin Foilhat...</title>
	<author>MosesJones</author>
	<datestamp>1246904100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come on do they really think we'll fall for printing solar cells on aluminium so we use them as tin-foil hats?  We all know that in reality this is just a government plot to subvert the tin-foil hat movement and convert the hats into powerful mind-reading devices powered by the rays of the sun.</p><p>Evil I tell you, evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on do they really think we 'll fall for printing solar cells on aluminium so we use them as tin-foil hats ?
We all know that in reality this is just a government plot to subvert the tin-foil hat movement and convert the hats into powerful mind-reading devices powered by the rays of the sun.Evil I tell you , evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on do they really think we'll fall for printing solar cells on aluminium so we use them as tin-foil hats?
We all know that in reality this is just a government plot to subvert the tin-foil hat movement and convert the hats into powerful mind-reading devices powered by the rays of the sun.Evil I tell you, evil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596747</id>
	<title>Re:Not off to a good start</title>
	<author>oneiros27</author>
	<datestamp>1246905360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would assume that they'd have to pay you 9 times the cost of the silicon product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would assume that they 'd have to pay you 9 times the cost of the silicon product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would assume that they'd have to pay you 9 times the cost of the silicon product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596367</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28601537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596321
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28600767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596747
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596367
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28605807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28611031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28600027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28628513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28607347
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598725
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596333
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28601773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599625
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597373
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28603861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597815
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596467
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28613619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28601611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596521
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28606087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28605995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599269
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28606901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28603611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596779
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596521
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596333
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28623353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596245
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596521
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_06_1545213_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596321
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596767
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596337
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596471
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597301
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596423
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596245
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596937
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596317
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596167
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28613619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28603611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599269
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596997
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28606087
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604599
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28601537
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599307
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28600767
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28628513
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28601611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28603861
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596505
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28601773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28611031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28605995
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596409
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28605807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28606901
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598303
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599607
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597283
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28600027
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598645
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28623353
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596361
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596745
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597477
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597751
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28599625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597373
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596747
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596333
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596735
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604059
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596165
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597673
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28604047
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597127
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598725
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28607347
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597419
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596521
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597505
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28597537
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_06_1545213.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28596467
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_06_1545213.28598883
</commentlist>
</conversation>
