The problem is that this table doesn't seem to take into consideration dividends.

Here's a reference:
http://energytaxincentives.org/business/renewables.php#geothermalhp
The tax credit goes to 2016. It doesn't apply to rental properties, but if you are paying for heat, I would say that it could pay for itself in 3-5 years.

USA seems to have the most options for potential customers to trade into and for your company to trade out of bitcoins.

That is too low.

When you scroll down, what does it say is the average of the last 10 rounds? By now it should be accurate (when you first start, it will be low because of non-participation in the previous rounds).

Can you double check all of your miners to be sure they have the right credentials and urls set?

Here's a basics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ajqiPe_9Ko

They have a loop that pumps ground water up to near the surface. This water is normally about 60-70 degrees F (15-20 C) even during the winter. Then there is a "heat pump" that extracts heat from the water and warms the air. This is the exact opposite action as an air conditioner, and because most heat pumps are reversible, it can be used to provide cold air in the summer (it's more efficient to pump heat into 70 degree water vs 90 degree air). Because the heat really comes from the ground water and not the energy source, it produces more heat than you spend.

420 makes a good point on ducting, but that would apply to a furnace as well.

That's not really true. The key metric here is continuous watts/capital outlay, because ROI will drive how many ASICs are purchased. In this regard, ASICs beat GPUs by an order of magnitude, and FPGAs by about a factor of 2.

It seems that's a client thing. The network recognizes them in 100.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_rules

For each input, if the referenced output transaction is coinbase (i.e. only 1 input, with hash=0, n=-1), it must have at least COINBASE_MATURITY (100) confirmations; else reject this transaction

Many pools pay out in 100.

Economies are iterative cycles that need to be modeled with differential equations. A future miner could buy 110 coins and then get a 1299 ASIC from BFL, who then sells the 110 coins on the market to another future miner buying 110 coins. I don't think any of these calculations hold water.

If you wipe your wallet.dat, then you lose them all, but you aren't going to lose your namecoins. At any time in the future, you can start namecoind in one window, let it sync (this can take a while if you haven't run namecoind for a while), and then in another command prompt do

namecoind getinfo

and you'll see your coins. You can get that address again with

namecoind listreceivedbyaddress

Upload it to imgur.com and then link it with [img ]http://imgur url.jpg[/img]

(take out the space in the first [img ], or press "Insert Image")

This guy did.

Another option for economics and efficiency is geothermal. Because it's a heat pump, it will put out more heat than it uses in energy (about 5-7x). Natural gas has come down a lot in price, though, and geothermal units are expensive to install, so you'd need to weigh it out.

I would worry about collusion and sockpuppetry.

Ah gotcha. That makes more sense. Actually, it's a pretty cool game. Too bad no one played.

You should have way more than that, more like .96 btc. Are you looking at total reward or confirmed reward? You will only have a confirmed reward if 100 blocks have confirmed it, which means over 20 hours, only 3.33 hours would be confirmed.

Looking at it, 3.33/20 * .96 = 0.16, so I'm almost sure you're only looking at confirmed.

Women's breasts can contain toxins that can transfer in the milk to the infant. Unfortunately, this leaves people with a complicated choice because breast milk on its own is better for a baby, but it could overall be more harmful because of the environmental pollutants.

I'm using the same flags and I'm only getting 4680 MHps 

He had at least 225 entries, for a total cost of $675. The bars at spot are worth $688.50.

I say at least, because the listing for 101 was not in the original post, so it might have been 226 entries with a cost of $678.

I missed this game, but I am looking at this line and wondering why a player wouldn't send 5 btc to each address (or 5000 for that matter). It's guaranteed to have equal to or greater than the amount sent, and so in each case the bet would be doubled.

Even splitting in proportion the number of coins behind the door doesn't work (it's still a guaranteed win, although it's limited to 5 btc total).

You are lucky only one person played.

I had a good trade with Jermainé

See this topic : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112902.0