We have more than enough surplus to feed the entire world. It's because markets are inefficient.
I'd argue that it's not so much a lack of free market, as the interference of government and other hostile parties. I'd also like to point out that the Communist nations have far more problems with nutrition than the USA ever has. The USSR and China starved tens to hundreds of millions to death. Warlords and Dictators in Africa create the problems there.
Only a small minority in India are benefitting from any of this outsourcing, the rest are just as poor as they ever were.
Except that minority is better off. They create a demand for services, which are then provided by the other poor people. Those people then demand more services, etc. It's a positive feedback loop. Everybody gets better.
when those employees go home, they still live in the same 3rd world standards that they had before
For a while, but from my reading, while they're still not up to american standards by any stretch, they're living better than ever before. It's creating a new housing market, requiring more construction workers, etc. Back to positive feedback loop.
reality is that the wealth is being distributed to the rich
Ask yourself this: Are you more pissed about the 'rich' getting richer, or the idea that the poor aren't advancing as fast?
The goal is to drive wages down to the lowest level. Small miniorities of rich people will benefit, both in the US and in the 3rd world, but everyone else will suffer.
Actually, the goal is to produce the most goods for the least amount. Wages are only one expense of many. Whether this is outsourcing, or deploying new machines to make production more efficient, it's the same thing: efficiency.
If setting up a factory in the USA, while twice as expensive as setting it up elsewhere, is twice as productive, it makes sense to set it up in the USA. If it's cheaper to set it up and operate elsewhere, then that's the correct decision.
Eventually, education levels and standard of living should equalize. Hopefully not worse in the USA, as I believe that new technology will allow it to remain the same or even improve. It's just a matter that India's standard of living might be increasing at the equivalent of 20% a year, versus the USA/Europe's gain of 1%. For one thing, I've read that in the areas that these factories have opened, child labor has dropped precipitously. Education for the kids have skyrocketed. These first generation workers are serious about education. Kinda like my grandparents, who went hungry on occasion to ensure that my parents got a good education.
I think that you'll find the numbers of KKK types hanging around in rural areas to be less than you think. Sure, there are some small towns with issues, but they're fairly rare. It's going to take some time for you to be accepted, but then, that's to be expected when you are around people to can name every single person in their graduating class, and often every person in the school.
As for violence, I'll counter with the point that cities, which are democrat strongholds, have far higher violent crime rates than mostly republican small towns.
all those Republicans who mysteriously disappeared. Or, maybe a few staunch 'Ditto-heads' who were found swinging from a tree?
Where's the Democrats & NPR listeners hanging from trees?
As for history, I'd like to point out that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, and the KKK were mostly Democrats(IE the non-Lincoln party).
The reason for excess checkout lanes/teller windows is to handle surges, as well as old places that had them to begin with.
cashiers/tellers are a continuing(and expensive!) expense, but one that can be adjusted quickly. Adding extra teller windows, even cashier spots is a difficult process.
Most of the banks in my area are better than 20 years old, long before cash machines became common. Thus, they have a large number of spots. In the newer branches, I'll often see two cash machines, as well as a drive-through machine, and only 3-4 walkup cashier spots. 2-3 drive through ones. Space is tight inside, the cashier row runs the length of the glass for the drive through windows.
Walmart(and co) might normally only man a quarter to half of their checkout lanes, but come christmas rush...
I've tried the automated check outs at walmart, and they often piss me off because of all the coded age checks(I'm constantly suprised what walmart restricts), which lock up the process until the worker comes by and ok's it. Sure, sound the alert, but let me keep scanning, please. The weight checks are fairly sensitive too, often making me reposition my goods a bit to make it happy. In short, it's often quicker for me to just go to a live cashier.
So you're one of the reasons that Lincoln's had that huge housing boom? I hardly recognize the place when I come back.
But yeah, I live 14 miles from work, and it takes me about 20-30 minutes to get there during non-winter periods. All but four miles are highway. Of course, it was bad when they were working on the gates.
The biggest example I've personally seen is the difference between Minot, ND, and the surrounding small towns. You'll pay 50-100% more for a comparable place in town versus out in the 'boondocks'*. Of course, I'm looking at new construction because all the places available were built back in the early 1900's and the electrical systems haven't been updated, as well as heating, etc. A house they want $60k for in the city would sell for $30-40k in the smaller towns.
I do, however, feel the lack of services. I end up purchasing most of my electronics online, but I think that I'd do that anyways for the lower prices. I also love my 2mbit DSL. Many larger cities actually have lower broadband availability. Minot has pretty much 100% coverage, as well as the best customer service I've ever seen out of a phone company. The lack of a *good* chinese restraunt is the biggest lack in my book. I don't get the 'limited release' movies, but to be honest, I'm not interested in 99.9% of them anyways, and I'll visit the live entertainment places when I go on vacation.
My problem is that there are three-four people who forget to turn their cell phone off(and jammers are illegal in the US), the one who brings the young kid(who starts yelling during the film). It's enough to distract, and is memorable after the film.
Being a mellowed rabid non-smoker(used to steal grandma's smokes so she couldn't do it), I don't generally think of smoking as a 'feature'.;)
I pretty much missed the great age of screen theater. By the time I was old enough to remember it, the theaters were dingy. We mostly enjoyed renting movies for $3-5(local grocery store), and watching them on our home TV. The people were generally still polite though. If you go on the off times, generally still are.
As far as the Home theater, I saw people quoting $5000, and I think that's high. You can get a decent surround sound system for $200-500, and a BIG TV for $1000-2000. Heck, the big tv comes with speakers, do you really need surround sound?
Doesn't have to be 20ft. The only reason the screen is so big in theaters is so you can stuff alot of people in there. While a 30" screen might not be as 'immersive', you can get 50" screens easily today, and a projector isn't much more. You simply sit closer to the screen.
Heck, look at the difference between old movie theaters and new movie theaters. I'd tend to say that the new theaters have half the screen size and a quarter of the seating. Heck, I remember hearing some double decker theaters in larger cities. The sharp reduction in seating is due to larger, almost bucket seats as well as a sharper floor pitch. This was mandated because people don't like being packed that tightly, so the theaters responded.
Like what was said, going to the movies just isn't as good of a bargain anymore:
$7 popcorn vs. Homecooked meal, $2 microwave, or whatever you want to pick $7 drink vs. $2 two liter botter, or your choice of other drinks, to include alchohol. $7.50 movie ticket per person per viewing vs. $5-30 for the DVD. Travel to Theater, have to deal with crying babies, kids, talking people, cellphones, people talking on cellphones(arrgghhh!!!). Or your house(milage may vary).
As for the sound, I often find movies to be set too loud. Spare my eardrums! Besides, a properly set up surround sound system can be supprisingly quiet.
You'd have to have a vehicle a bit like a trailer/caravan with a bed, toilet, shower, TV etc.
Since when do planes have beds or showers? Heck, I remember when they didn't have TV's! When I peruse the PRT sites, they tend to say that it'll replace airplanes for travel of less than 500 miles. At 100mph, that's 5 hours of travel time. One site that I looked at said that 125-150 were perfectly doable. That's cut it down to 4 hours or even 3 hours 20 minutes.
A TV isn't a big deal anymore. A small LCD one should be sufficienty. Put them in nice bucket seats that can go close enough to horizontal (there's some magic number, and planes don't reach it) and the majority of people can even sleep. As for shower or toilet, you can bang the 'next rest stop' button for that, just like a car.
The weight of the vehicle would be a couple of tonnes which means the infrastructure would have to be able to cope, which means it'd be expensive to build the infrastructure so you're back to the train/sleeper services.
You're overbuilding. No need for getting up, no need for restrooms or meal service(provided by regular, optional rest stops), entertainment either provided by the passenger or a LCD TV/DVD type system. It'd be nice if it came with AV plugs and a power system so you could play with your personal game system.
If you're traveling by PRT, you should be going from pretty much origin to destination, so no need for a vehicle. The one consession I might make would be to transit from a smaller, lighter 'commuter' car to a slightly larger, heavier 'long distance' car that provides some more luxuries and power at the city exit. Ideally, the shift would be accomplished by you standing up and moving to the new car while robotics grabs the luggage box and moves it over.
One idea I liked was the ability to join up to other cars into a almost hybrid train/convoy situation on the fly. This allows the cars in the back to benefit from 'slipstreaming'. The car in the lead benefits from the cars in the rear pushing as well. The way it works, the more cars you have in a convoy, the more drive force for the amount of air friction. This allows higher speeds or less energy usage at a given amount of speed.
I agree with skytran for inner city usage, but I think that long-haul lines do need to be heavier for higher weights and speed. I also think that 4-6 person pods should be available as most people might commute alone, but a significant number travel with family. If you have alot of luggage, you rent a 'cargo pod', and travel as a two+ pod convoy.
Just think about how much Fedex and them would love the system. You'd have Fedex and UPS pods running all over the place. Cart rentals for taking your luggage back&forth from your house/apartment. Heck, there are places that'd be willing to pay millions to have lines put in.
And with current designs, with very carefull placement and timing, they might get three families. Twelve people. Compare that to the hundreds from a well placed subway/train strike, or airplane bombing.
They'd have to cut/collapse the line over a longer bridge, on both sides, while people are on it. The moment you cut the line, power stops, and the vehicles apply the brakes. They're talking about 6G stops potentially, so if they only cut 1 side, the car with remain on the line, if seriously inconvenienced. Otherwise, it'd be about as effective as trying to individually car bomb america.
There will always be an hour's drive to the airport, a two hour security buffer time, then 1 hour of customs on the other side. It gets even worse when you consider that Japan might not be your final destination.
I'd also give ~30 minutes to an hour for loading and taxying to the runway.
Rail/subways have proven to be a target for terrorists as well, so I imagine that even if we switched to a high speed fuel efficient railway system for long distance travel(advantage: take your family vehicle with you for a nominal fee!), that the security checks would eat up major time.
I think that a good solution would be the so called personal raid/pods systems. That way you never have too many people in a station, car or anything to make a large target. If you can get the individual electric rail up to ~120mph outside the cities, it'd beat planes easily, as you'll be going door to door practically, not having to detour through a hub.
Maybe so, but I'm very sure that your laptop doesn't have the performance and reliability of a similarly priced desktop type system.
I'll agree, this is a seriously overspecced power supply. Then again, it might find use in specialty applications. If you're going for efficiency(in a specialty app, of course), and you need 700 watts, this might be a good, very efficient PSU to use.
70% efficiency is actually pretty much industry standard for yum-cha power supplies.
efficiency also varies by load. It's alot like car engines. It's inefficient at low loads as well as when it's pushing it's limits. They quoted 70% efficiency at maximum power. From what I've read, 70% of max is around where most power supplies hit their best efficiency.
Geosynchronous orbit is 35,786 KM, where you'd place your station.
At 7 meters/minute, it's right around 10KM a day. 5112285 Minutes. 85204 Hours 3550 Days 9.73 Years. You can have two machines working, one dropping cable, one releasing cable to a higher orbit(for balance).
Chances are that mom&pop console purchaser isn't going to bother with the upgrade at all.
After all, we're talking about people who's TV's are on average better than 6 years old. Many are 10-12. HD is virtually non-existant. Old fashioned DVD will do for them for the life of the XBOX-360.
By one outlier study that takes the most pessimistic yields and figures. Newer studies and processes show a substantial gain when modern, efficient processes are used.
Modern studies show that the net gain is positive, and increasing. Nothing compared to extracting oil, but then, pumping stuff out of the ground is easy.
What I often wonder about is what the yield would be for different crops? Sugarbeets, sugarcane, even wheat, barley, and soybeans. Then again, those plants might require different agricultural conditions, or more work.
If you're lucky enough for that to work, great. My thought on it is that while it'll work for grocery/mall runs, your work should be within reasonable distance for your remaining travel methods(walking, bike, bus, or train/subway).
Meanwhile, I live 14 miles away from work, there's no bus system, and the weather's not good enough to bike for at least half the year(subzero farenheight weather, with the occasional blizzard, and don't forget the ice). Oh, and I often work twelve hour shifts. I'll bicycle to the grocery store(~2 miles), but work?
So I tend to think of at least a primary vehicle necessary. Might as well use it for other places as well. But I drive a smaller vehicle than I would otherwise get, since if I need to move or something, I'll simply rent a van.
That's what they do. When you accelerating(hard), both the motor and the engine are pushing.
They were talking about doing this on at least one vehicle (probably a chevy or ford suv) and it wouldn't get better mileage, but just have more power.
I think you're talking about the Ford Escape Hybrid SUV. It's got a V-6, but many full size SUV's have eight cylinders. It demonstrated all of this behavior.
Benefit: While getting half the gas milage of many hybrids, that's no different than a standard SUV vs. Car comparison. It does advertise great gas milage for a full size SUV, and handles pretty well.
By one outlier study that takes the most pessimistic yields and figures. Newer studies and processes show a substantial gain when modern, efficient processes are used.
Don't forget the fuel savings of going fuel cell or hybrid. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think it's anything near a universal solution, of course. But it can help.
Electric for close range, and heck, let's [b]get most semis off the road and their cargos back onto trains![/b]. I'd like to see electric rail. Heck, most trains are diesel-electric already, so just put a setup so that for accelerations out of a yard, they get their juice from the rail.
As for the pollution problem, I feel that that can be solved by designing an engine around ethanol, rather than adapting a gasoline engine. It's a different fuel, you can't just mess with the timing and maybe the compression ratio and expect it to lower emissions, or even get full efficiency.
How about doing what I do when I need to (very) occasionally move large amounts of stuff:
Rent a more suitable vehicle.
Seriously. If it gets to the point that an all electric vehicle will save you a couple thousand* a year, and will cover 98% of your driving needs, it's probably worth it. 98% translates out to you needing a different vehicle 7 days of the year.
Rental car companies don't like making their rates public, but Alamo currently offers a compact car for $164 for a week, Minivan $239, SUV $249. Sure, there's some hassle with getting a rental, but many deliver, and if it became common, I'm sure they'd offer 'swap services' where they keep your car in their lot(and even charge it!) for the duration of your rental of one of their gasoline vehicles for your trip.
If you know that you're going to need two vehicles, I'd seriously consider how often you'll need the 'larger vehicle' before you pay that multi-thousand dollar increase. Don't forget that you'll be paying more in insurance and fuel.
*numbers in current dollars. Inflation may skew results in the future.
[i] The batteries on hybrids produces power to make the car run[/i]
No, they don't. They store power to make the car run. The power comes from the engine. The engine runs, turns an alternator, which is used to charge the batteries. It's usually more efficient to just drive the car straight off the engine (why hybrids often get worse highway milage).
What the batteries do is allow the makers to get by with a smaller, more efficient engine, and combined with a CVT, to keep the engine in it's most efficient power band more.
Just cruising along: engine runs at best speed, charges the batteries. Accellerating: engine runs at best speed, uses the batteries for more oomph. crawling along: engine is off, using the battery Stopped at the red light: engine is off, using no fuel. Starting from stop: engine starts up without you noticing because electric motor is so much more powerful that standard starter motor that there's not really any 'crank time' and electric excels at low-rpm torque, allowing the car to start moving before the gasoline engine is even producing power. By the time it's started, RPMs are such that it's in it's powerband(efficent).
But it's an expensive toy until it does save money. Especially since they're currently heavily subsidized with programs that won't scale.
Heck, why haven't I seen a FFV hybrid? I'd like to see one that can burn ethanol.
Until it makes economic sense to purchase one, people won't. I'd love to get a hybrid, I always love neat new technology, I'm something of a green. But a vehicle costing $6k more, which will cost me more to insure, maybe more to register(though my current state charges by vehicle weight), has currently unknown failure rate and repair costs is too much for a 'neat toy'. At least at my income level. Especially when the hybrid version gets only ~6mpg more in city driving, and 1 mpg worse in highway, where I do half to three-quarters my driving.
I mean, I'm looking at building my house with extra insulation, a geo-thermal heatpump, I've looked at solar heating(but I'm too far north for that), etc. I figure that in the next ~10 years, electricity will end up being cheaper than hydrocarbon heating, so I'm leaning that way, especially with the effective better than 100% heating efficiency of a heat pump(1 unit of electricity places three units of heat into the house).
Slashdot Mirror
We have more than enough surplus to feed the entire world. It's because markets are inefficient.
I'd argue that it's not so much a lack of free market, as the interference of government and other hostile parties. I'd also like to point out that the Communist nations have far more problems with nutrition than the USA ever has. The USSR and China starved tens to hundreds of millions to death. Warlords and Dictators in Africa create the problems there.
Only a small minority in India are benefitting from any of this outsourcing, the rest are just as poor as they ever were.
Except that minority is better off. They create a demand for services, which are then provided by the other poor people. Those people then demand more services, etc. It's a positive feedback loop. Everybody gets better.
when those employees go home, they still live in the same 3rd world standards that they had before
For a while, but from my reading, while they're still not up to american standards by any stretch, they're living better than ever before. It's creating a new housing market, requiring more construction workers, etc. Back to positive feedback loop.
reality is that the wealth is being distributed to the rich
Ask yourself this: Are you more pissed about the 'rich' getting richer, or the idea that the poor aren't advancing as fast?
The goal is to drive wages down to the lowest level. Small miniorities of rich people will benefit, both in the US and in the 3rd world, but everyone else will suffer.
Actually, the goal is to produce the most goods for the least amount. Wages are only one expense of many. Whether this is outsourcing, or deploying new machines to make production more efficient, it's the same thing: efficiency.
If setting up a factory in the USA, while twice as expensive as setting it up elsewhere, is twice as productive, it makes sense to set it up in the USA. If it's cheaper to set it up and operate elsewhere, then that's the correct decision.
Eventually, education levels and standard of living should equalize. Hopefully not worse in the USA, as I believe that new technology will allow it to remain the same or even improve. It's just a matter that India's standard of living might be increasing at the equivalent of 20% a year, versus the USA/Europe's gain of 1%. For one thing, I've read that in the areas that these factories have opened, child labor has dropped precipitously. Education for the kids have skyrocketed. These first generation workers are serious about education. Kinda like my grandparents, who went hungry on occasion to ensure that my parents got a good education.
I think that you'll find the numbers of KKK types hanging around in rural areas to be less than you think. Sure, there are some small towns with issues, but they're fairly rare. It's going to take some time for you to be accepted, but then, that's to be expected when you are around people to can name every single person in their graduating class, and often every person in the school.
As for violence, I'll counter with the point that cities, which are democrat strongholds, have far higher violent crime rates than mostly republican small towns.
all those Republicans who mysteriously disappeared. Or, maybe a few staunch 'Ditto-heads' who were found swinging from a tree?
Where's the Democrats & NPR listeners hanging from trees?
As for history, I'd like to point out that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, and the KKK were mostly Democrats(IE the non-Lincoln party).
The reason for excess checkout lanes/teller windows is to handle surges, as well as old places that had them to begin with.
cashiers/tellers are a continuing(and expensive!) expense, but one that can be adjusted quickly. Adding extra teller windows, even cashier spots is a difficult process.
Most of the banks in my area are better than 20 years old, long before cash machines became common. Thus, they have a large number of spots. In the newer branches, I'll often see two cash machines, as well as a drive-through machine, and only 3-4 walkup cashier spots. 2-3 drive through ones. Space is tight inside, the cashier row runs the length of the glass for the drive through windows.
Walmart(and co) might normally only man a quarter to half of their checkout lanes, but come christmas rush...
I've tried the automated check outs at walmart, and they often piss me off because of all the coded age checks(I'm constantly suprised what walmart restricts), which lock up the process until the worker comes by and ok's it. Sure, sound the alert, but let me keep scanning, please. The weight checks are fairly sensitive too, often making me reposition my goods a bit to make it happy. In short, it's often quicker for me to just go to a live cashier.
So you're one of the reasons that Lincoln's had that huge housing boom? I hardly recognize the place when I come back.
But yeah, I live 14 miles from work, and it takes me about 20-30 minutes to get there during non-winter periods. All but four miles are highway. Of course, it was bad when they were working on the gates.
The biggest example I've personally seen is the difference between Minot, ND, and the surrounding small towns. You'll pay 50-100% more for a comparable place in town versus out in the 'boondocks'*. Of course, I'm looking at new construction because all the places available were built back in the early 1900's and the electrical systems haven't been updated, as well as heating, etc. A house they want $60k for in the city would sell for $30-40k in the smaller towns.
I do, however, feel the lack of services. I end up purchasing most of my electronics online, but I think that I'd do that anyways for the lower prices. I also love my 2mbit DSL. Many larger cities actually have lower broadband availability. Minot has pretty much 100% coverage, as well as the best customer service I've ever seen out of a phone company. The lack of a *good* chinese restraunt is the biggest lack in my book. I don't get the 'limited release' movies, but to be honest, I'm not interested in 99.9% of them anyways, and I'll visit the live entertainment places when I go on vacation.
*It's all relative.
Yeah, after 10 minutes...
My problem is that there are three-four people who forget to turn their cell phone off(and jammers are illegal in the US), the one who brings the young kid(who starts yelling during the film). It's enough to distract, and is memorable after the film.
Being a mellowed rabid non-smoker(used to steal grandma's smokes so she couldn't do it), I don't generally think of smoking as a 'feature'. ;)
I pretty much missed the great age of screen theater. By the time I was old enough to remember it, the theaters were dingy. We mostly enjoyed renting movies for $3-5(local grocery store), and watching them on our home TV. The people were generally still polite though. If you go on the off times, generally still are.
As far as the Home theater, I saw people quoting $5000, and I think that's high. You can get a decent surround sound system for $200-500, and a BIG TV for $1000-2000. Heck, the big tv comes with speakers, do you really need surround sound?
Doesn't have to be 20ft. The only reason the screen is so big in theaters is so you can stuff alot of people in there. While a 30" screen might not be as 'immersive', you can get 50" screens easily today, and a projector isn't much more. You simply sit closer to the screen.
Heck, look at the difference between old movie theaters and new movie theaters. I'd tend to say that the new theaters have half the screen size and a quarter of the seating. Heck, I remember hearing some double decker theaters in larger cities. The sharp reduction in seating is due to larger, almost bucket seats as well as a sharper floor pitch. This was mandated because people don't like being packed that tightly, so the theaters responded.
Like what was said, going to the movies just isn't as good of a bargain anymore:
$7 popcorn vs. Homecooked meal, $2 microwave, or whatever you want to pick
$7 drink vs. $2 two liter botter, or your choice of other drinks, to include alchohol.
$7.50 movie ticket per person per viewing vs. $5-30 for the DVD.
Travel to Theater, have to deal with crying babies, kids, talking people, cellphones , people talking on cellphones(arrgghhh!!!). Or your house(milage may vary).
As for the sound, I often find movies to be set too loud. Spare my eardrums! Besides, a properly set up surround sound system can be supprisingly quiet.
A TV isn't a big deal anymore. A small LCD one should be sufficienty. Put them in nice bucket seats that can go close enough to horizontal (there's some magic number, and planes don't reach it) and the majority of people can even sleep. As for shower or toilet, you can bang the 'next rest stop' button for that, just like a car.
You're overbuilding. No need for getting up, no need for restrooms or meal service(provided by regular, optional rest stops), entertainment either provided by the passenger or a LCD TV/DVD type system. It'd be nice if it came with AV plugs and a power system so you could play with your personal game system.
If you're traveling by PRT, you should be going from pretty much origin to destination, so no need for a vehicle. The one consession I might make would be to transit from a smaller, lighter 'commuter' car to a slightly larger, heavier 'long distance' car that provides some more luxuries and power at the city exit. Ideally, the shift would be accomplished by you standing up and moving to the new car while robotics grabs the luggage box and moves it over.
One idea I liked was the ability to join up to other cars into a almost hybrid train/convoy situation on the fly. This allows the cars in the back to benefit from 'slipstreaming'. The car in the lead benefits from the cars in the rear pushing as well. The way it works, the more cars you have in a convoy, the more drive force for the amount of air friction. This allows higher speeds or less energy usage at a given amount of speed.
I agree with skytran for inner city usage, but I think that long-haul lines do need to be heavier for higher weights and speed. I also think that 4-6 person pods should be available as most people might commute alone, but a significant number travel with family. If you have alot of luggage, you rent a 'cargo pod', and travel as a two+ pod convoy.
Just think about how much Fedex and them would love the system. You'd have Fedex and UPS pods running all over the place. Cart rentals for taking your luggage back&forth from your house/apartment. Heck, there are places that'd be willing to pay millions to have lines put in.
And with current designs, with very carefull placement and timing, they might get three families. Twelve people. Compare that to the hundreds from a well placed subway/train strike, or airplane bombing.
They'd have to cut/collapse the line over a longer bridge, on both sides, while people are on it. The moment you cut the line, power stops, and the vehicles apply the brakes. They're talking about 6G stops potentially, so if they only cut 1 side, the car with remain on the line, if seriously inconvenienced. Otherwise, it'd be about as effective as trying to individually car bomb america.
There will always be an hour's drive to the airport, a two hour security buffer time, then 1 hour of customs on the other side. It gets even worse when you consider that Japan might not be your final destination.
I'd also give ~30 minutes to an hour for loading and taxying to the runway.
Rail/subways have proven to be a target for terrorists as well, so I imagine that even if we switched to a high speed fuel efficient railway system for long distance travel(advantage: take your family vehicle with you for a nominal fee!), that the security checks would eat up major time.
I think that a good solution would be the so called personal raid/pods systems. That way you never have too many people in a station, car or anything to make a large target. If you can get the individual electric rail up to ~120mph outside the cities, it'd beat planes easily, as you'll be going door to door practically, not having to detour through a hub.
Maybe so, but I'm very sure that your laptop doesn't have the performance and reliability of a similarly priced desktop type system.
I'll agree, this is a seriously overspecced power supply. Then again, it might find use in specialty applications. If you're going for efficiency(in a specialty app, of course), and you need 700 watts, this might be a good, very efficient PSU to use.
70% efficiency is actually pretty much industry standard for yum-cha power supplies.
efficiency also varies by load. It's alot like car engines. It's inefficient at low loads as well as when it's pushing it's limits. They quoted 70% efficiency at maximum power. From what I've read, 70% of max is around where most power supplies hit their best efficiency.
Geosynchronous orbit is 35,786 KM, where you'd place your station.
;).
At 7 meters/minute, it's right around 10KM a day.
5112285 Minutes.
85204 Hours
3550 Days
9.73 Years. You can have two machines working, one dropping cable, one releasing cable to a higher orbit(for balance).
I think they need to speed it up a bit
Chances are that mom&pop console purchaser isn't going to bother with the upgrade at all.
After all, we're talking about people who's TV's are on average better than 6 years old. Many are 10-12. HD is virtually non-existant. Old fashioned DVD will do for them for the life of the XBOX-360.
use your trademark in an ad, or are bought to trigger on your trademark?
I'd say that that is two different things.
addressed, very first sentence.
By one outlier study that takes the most pessimistic yields and figures. Newer studies and processes show a substantial gain when modern, efficient processes are used.
Modern studies show that the net gain is positive, and increasing. Nothing compared to extracting oil, but then, pumping stuff out of the ground is easy.
What I often wonder about is what the yield would be for different crops? Sugarbeets, sugarcane, even wheat, barley, and soybeans. Then again, those plants might require different agricultural conditions, or more work.
If you're lucky enough for that to work, great. My thought on it is that while it'll work for grocery/mall runs, your work should be within reasonable distance for your remaining travel methods(walking, bike, bus, or train/subway).
Meanwhile, I live 14 miles away from work, there's no bus system, and the weather's not good enough to bike for at least half the year(subzero farenheight weather, with the occasional blizzard, and don't forget the ice). Oh, and I often work twelve hour shifts. I'll bicycle to the grocery store(~2 miles), but work?
So I tend to think of at least a primary vehicle necessary. Might as well use it for other places as well. But I drive a smaller vehicle than I would otherwise get, since if I need to move or something, I'll simply rent a van.
89,000 americans have also taken the plunge.
There's more people with piercings.
where'd you get the "1 mpg worse in highway" figure from?
EPA figures. I know they're not accurate, but highway driving is pretty much the best scenario for standard engines, and worst for hybrids.
As for the figures, well, I'm not getting a Honda if it's not a hybrid. There's a feature set that I want that's not standard for them.
Maybe I'm just paranoid because it's greater than a 200 mile drive to see one.
That's what they do. When you accelerating(hard), both the motor and the engine are pushing.
They were talking about doing this on at least one vehicle (probably a chevy or ford suv) and it wouldn't get better mileage, but just have more power.
I think you're talking about the Ford Escape Hybrid SUV. It's got a V-6, but many full size SUV's have eight cylinders. It demonstrated all of this behavior.
Benefit: While getting half the gas milage of many hybrids, that's no different than a standard SUV vs. Car comparison. It does advertise great gas milage for a full size SUV, and handles pretty well.
By one outlier study that takes the most pessimistic yields and figures. Newer studies and processes show a substantial gain when modern, efficient processes are used.
Don't forget the fuel savings of going fuel cell or hybrid. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think it's anything near a universal solution, of course. But it can help.
Electric for close range, and heck, let's [b]get most semis off the road and their cargos back onto trains![/b]. I'd like to see electric rail. Heck, most trains are diesel-electric already, so just put a setup so that for accelerations out of a yard, they get their juice from the rail.
As for the pollution problem, I feel that that can be solved by designing an engine around ethanol, rather than adapting a gasoline engine. It's a different fuel, you can't just mess with the timing and maybe the compression ratio and expect it to lower emissions, or even get full efficiency.
artificially cheap due to government subsidizing
It's more along the lines of 'not taxing as much' than subsidizing.
How about doing what I do when I need to (very) occasionally move large amounts of stuff:
Rent a more suitable vehicle.
Seriously. If it gets to the point that an all electric vehicle will save you a couple thousand* a year, and will cover 98% of your driving needs, it's probably worth it. 98% translates out to you needing a different vehicle 7 days of the year.
Rental car companies don't like making their rates public, but Alamo currently offers a compact car for $164 for a week, Minivan $239, SUV $249. Sure, there's some hassle with getting a rental, but many deliver, and if it became common, I'm sure they'd offer 'swap services' where they keep your car in their lot(and even charge it!) for the duration of your rental of one of their gasoline vehicles for your trip.
If you know that you're going to need two vehicles, I'd seriously consider how often you'll need the 'larger vehicle' before you pay that multi-thousand dollar increase. Don't forget that you'll be paying more in insurance and fuel.
*numbers in current dollars. Inflation may skew results in the future.
[i] The batteries on hybrids produces power to make the car run[/i]
No, they don't. They store power to make the car run. The power comes from the engine. The engine runs, turns an alternator, which is used to charge the batteries. It's usually more efficient to just drive the car straight off the engine (why hybrids often get worse highway milage).
What the batteries do is allow the makers to get by with a smaller, more efficient engine, and combined with a CVT, to keep the engine in it's most efficient power band more.
Just cruising along: engine runs at best speed, charges the batteries.
Accellerating: engine runs at best speed, uses the batteries for more oomph.
crawling along: engine is off, using the battery
Stopped at the red light: engine is off, using no fuel.
Starting from stop: engine starts up without you noticing because electric motor is so much more powerful that standard starter motor that there's not really any 'crank time' and electric excels at low-rpm torque, allowing the car to start moving before the gasoline engine is even producing power. By the time it's started, RPMs are such that it's in it's powerband(efficent).
But it's an expensive toy until it does save money. Especially since they're currently heavily subsidized with programs that won't scale.
Heck, why haven't I seen a FFV hybrid? I'd like to see one that can burn ethanol.
Until it makes economic sense to purchase one, people won't. I'd love to get a hybrid, I always love neat new technology, I'm something of a green. But a vehicle costing $6k more, which will cost me more to insure, maybe more to register(though my current state charges by vehicle weight), has currently unknown failure rate and repair costs is too much for a 'neat toy'. At least at my income level. Especially when the hybrid version gets only ~6mpg more in city driving, and 1 mpg worse in highway, where I do half to three-quarters my driving.
I mean, I'm looking at building my house with extra insulation, a geo-thermal heatpump, I've looked at solar heating(but I'm too far north for that), etc. I figure that in the next ~10 years, electricity will end up being cheaper than hydrocarbon heating, so I'm leaning that way, especially with the effective better than 100% heating efficiency of a heat pump(1 unit of electricity places three units of heat into the house).
Google is your friend, but I found this one interesting.
Game Revolution
It's simple and very readable, and points out that violent crime because of kids has been dropping. Enough that 1985-2000 looks like an anomoly.
There's even a PBS article
Result: Violent games don't really lead to more crime.