I have ridden my (normal) bike up the Galibier and L'Alpe d'Huez in the same day, and have run 2 marathons in under 3 hours (and a 1/2 marathon in under 1:18). But because I sometimes like to ride an e-bike around town when running errands, I don't 'have what it takes'?
E-bike advantages:
- I don't sweat much- so I don't have to take 5 showers a day - Convenient parking - I'm not going to kill anyone if I hit them accidentally - Minimal (non-human) energy use
Re:Good lord...welcome to slashdot
on
E-bike E-xperiences?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
>An e-bike confers no speed advantage, at the cost of being environmetally unfriendly, and denying the user exercise
It also denies the user sweat, which is important if a shower is not available at work (or if time is at a premium), and is much more fuel efficient than another non-sweaty option, driving a car.
Why is driving a car OK, riding a bike is OK, but riding an e-bike is lazy?
I didn't even get into the fixed costs (generators, etc.), which would themselves make such a project have a negative ROI, unless you count on increased memberships via clever marketing).
My broader point is that when you think about it, energy is insanely cheap ($0.10 / kWh on the grid vs. $35 DIY), which would be good news if the external costs (pollution, geopolitical situations) were already internalized.
I recently tried Gnome 2.6 on Debian for the 1st time and found it rather clunky and kind of ugly. XFCE, on the other hand, is beautiful out of the box, is easy to configure, and is sleek.
Having said that, I think competition amongst desktop environments is good: the advantages (differentiated environments to suit different styles and needs) outweigh the disadvantages (redundancy, library bloat, poor interoperability [let's fix that!], confusion for the unsophisticated user).
By the way, did anyone else read this troll? This guy needs some educating!
I'm all for this, but you have to realize that the economics don't work.
A pretty good cyclist pedaling pretty hard (200-250W) would take 4-5 hours to generate 1 kWh (worth around 10 cents).
If you were paying the cyclist (in the case of a gym, fortunately they are paying you), you're looking at $25+ per kWh. That makes solar look damn cheap!
the fact is that over 90% of these zombie PCs could have prevented infection by simply having (a) their firewalls enabled and/or (b) having intelligent users
Can we change (b) to 'informed' users? It is possible to be intelligent about non-computer matters and still be running a zombie. It's about ignorance, not (necessarily) stupidity.
I continue to skeptical of the apparently widely held opinion on this site that (knowledge about computers/programming/security/[insert specific topic here]) == intelligence.
Maybe I'm an idiot too, but I leave my WiFi open on purpose. My private communications are encrypted (https, ssh, VPN); my private files are also reasonably well protected. I really don't care if someone wants to borrow my internet connection or even poke through my un-protected file shares.
Besides, the 'intruder' would either be one of my neighbors (whom I know aren't hackers or crackers), or some kid who I'd probably noticed prowling around my house.
And it's not like WEP is really all that secure, anyway- anyone who would bother trying to crack my network would probably see WEP as an additional challenge...
For more info, start with this paper by Wallace Broecker. One good quote:
The fact that we are unable to provide satisfactory estimates of the probability that a conveyor shutdown will occur or of its consequences is certainly reason to be extremely prudent with regard to CO2 emissions. The record of events that transpired during the last glacial period sends us the clear warning that by adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, we are poking an angry beast (Fig. 5).
It isn't very hard to find references online to that being the specific reason all the big auto manfacturers dropped their electric car programs and switched to hybrid, that combined with the fact that the total envorinmental damage when the depletion of battery packs is taken into account is more than an order of magnitude worse than the worst cars have ever been.
Your original post referred only to the generation of electricity, not disposal of the batteries. Obviously, the batteries matter, but that's not what I disputed.
If finding online references is so easy, could you post a couple? The 1st one I found was from a GM site:
The EV1 helped contribute to a cleaner environment. In California, for instance, there were 97% fewer emissions with the EV1 than a conventional gasoline engine -- this included the electricity-generating emissions from the power plant.
I think this 97% came from a CARB report- haven't found the original, although everyone and their brother seems to cite this 97%.
Also, here's an EPRI study that looks at plug-in hybrids. A quote:
Plug-in HEVs provide additional benefits because, on a gram per vehicle mile basis, emissions from power plants are much lower than that from the same vehicle running on gasoline.
As for your examples: SO2 emissions are quite dependent on the pct. of electricity that comes from coal, and what kind of coal you're burning. So in some cases EVs could be worse. But they win with regard to smog precursors and CO2.
I can't really quarrel with the lead battery argument, except that 1) you didn't specify batteries in your original post and 2) there are non-lead, non-cadmium options these days. But I honestly don't know about the environmental impact of, e.g., NiMH batteries.
Finally, my impression is that automakers weren't interested in EVs was that batteries, flywheels, etc., can't compete with the awesome energy and power density of gasoline- relative cost and performance of EVs just wasn't competitive, and was unlikely to be anytime soon.
nevermind that the coal power plant that was buying and selling pollution credits to generate the electricity to charge the batteries was pulluting 10x what the engine in a normal car would've polluted.
I'm too lazy to pull the numbers from an analysis I did on this topic about 10 years ago (emissions from power plants for powering EVs vs. emissions from ICVs), and the number (based on New England's generating mix, which is a combination of coal, hydro, oil, nukes, etc.) was most definitely *not* 10x worse for the EV. I seem to remember the EV being substantially cleaner for most pollutants, but I honestly don't remember.
Not to say that EVs don't have problems, but the parent's contention is an uninformed guess, and it is very wrong.
Though with tight domestic supply (and few imports except from Canada, if memory serves), prices would spike if nat. gas demand increases due to H2 production. We see a lot of price volatility at present.
Don't get me wrong, I'm thinking of getting a nat. gas car, but there are practical economic concerns about it's expanded use.
If both cars burn a gallon to go 30 miles, then (correct me if I'm wrong, someone, please!) by definition they've released the same amount of CO2, H2O and the rest into the atmosphere.
C02: Yeah, about the same H20: Yeah, about the same "The Rest": Not the same
It's "the rest" (NOx, CO, particulates, formaldehyde, etc.) that are responsible for local and regional (as opposed to global) air pollution. SULEVs (including most/all hybrids), etc., are much cleaner than their conventional counterparts in regard to these pollutants. CO2 emissions are (arguably) important, but it's the other stuff that messes with smog formation, etc.
I rented an older Prius for the day from LAX last December (www.evrental.com), drove it all around with plenty of hills and stop-and-go traffic, and averaged 44 MPG. I drove it more or less like I would've a normal car.
The only difference I noticed from a regular car was that the power didn't kick in unless you really floored it- the power-to-throttle seemed a lot more non-linear than I was used to.
The other responses answer this well enough, but let me make it simple:
For many reasons, it's hard to switch, plain vanilla, from Windows/Office to a Free set of OS + applications. Any tool that aids a gradual transition is, most likely, a Good Thing.
For my office work, I cannot plausibly switch away from Office right now without a major productivity hit, mostly due to file format issues (and some VBA scripts that would take time to re-create in OOo). It isn't right, but that's the way it is. I could, however, switch away from Windows if I could still run Office well enough from time to time.
That's almost exactly our average consumption in my house (3BR, 4 people) here in the U.S.
I use mostly CF light bulbs, but do have an electric range and clothes dryer that runs pretty often (2 of the 4 occupants are small and generally muddy).
(I also buy a good portion of my electricity from a small local hydro plant for a small surcharge, thanks to my friendly municipal utility).
Palm log would be cool; one suggestion: don't make it running specific (most endurance sports can have a lot of common fields: date, distance, duration, intensity, route, equipment...)
And as MPR goes...
on
Real Problems
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
These stories are lame. Therefore, rather than spending time working productively, playing with the kids, or having meaningful dialogue with my spouse, I am going to spend my time closely monitoring/. today so that I can rapidly post whiny comments every time a new (lame) story is posted.
Slashdot Mirror
The Senate bill is S.2192
The House bill is H.R.2391
See the S is for Senate, the H in H.R. is for House...
WTF?
I have ridden my (normal) bike up the Galibier and L'Alpe d'Huez in the same day, and have run 2 marathons in under 3 hours (and a 1/2 marathon in under 1:18). But because I sometimes like to ride an e-bike around town when running errands, I don't 'have what it takes'?
E-bike advantages:
- I don't sweat much- so I don't have to take 5 showers a day
- Convenient parking
- I'm not going to kill anyone if I hit them accidentally
- Minimal (non-human) energy use
>An e-bike confers no speed advantage, at the cost of being environmetally unfriendly, and denying the user exercise
It also denies the user sweat, which is important if a shower is not available at work (or if time is at a premium), and is much more fuel efficient than another non-sweaty option, driving a car.
Why is driving a car OK, riding a bike is OK, but riding an e-bike is lazy?
I didn't even get into the fixed costs (generators, etc.), which would themselves make such a project have a negative ROI, unless you count on increased memberships via clever marketing).
My broader point is that when you think about it, energy is insanely cheap ($0.10 / kWh on the grid vs. $35 DIY), which would be good news if the external costs (pollution, geopolitical situations) were already internalized.
I recently tried Gnome 2.6 on Debian for the 1st time and found it rather clunky and kind of ugly. XFCE, on the other hand, is beautiful out of the box, is easy to configure, and is sleek.
Having said that, I think competition amongst desktop environments is good: the advantages (differentiated environments to suit different styles and needs) outweigh the disadvantages (redundancy, library bloat, poor interoperability [let's fix that!], confusion for the unsophisticated user).
By the way, did anyone else read this troll? This guy needs some educating!
I'm all for this, but you have to realize that the economics don't work.
A pretty good cyclist pedaling pretty hard (200-250W) would take 4-5 hours to generate 1 kWh (worth around 10 cents).
If you were paying the cyclist (in the case of a gym, fortunately they are paying you), you're looking at $25+ per kWh. That makes solar look damn cheap!
the fact is that over 90% of these zombie PCs could have prevented infection by simply having (a) their firewalls enabled and/or (b) having intelligent users
Can we change (b) to 'informed' users? It is possible to be intelligent about non-computer matters and still be running a zombie. It's about ignorance, not (necessarily) stupidity.
I continue to skeptical of the apparently widely held opinion on this site that (knowledge about computers/programming/security/[insert specific topic here]) == intelligence.
... but maybe algae does...
Maybe I'm an idiot too, but I leave my WiFi open on purpose. My private communications are encrypted (https, ssh, VPN); my private files are also reasonably well protected. I really don't care if someone wants to borrow my internet connection or even poke through my un-protected file shares.
Besides, the 'intruder' would either be one of my neighbors (whom I know aren't hackers or crackers), or some kid who I'd probably noticed prowling around my house.
And it's not like WEP is really all that secure, anyway- anyone who would bother trying to crack my network would probably see WEP as an additional challenge...
Here's another good site.
Ok, now can anyone tell me what 1 'bar' of signal strengh represents?
tgd stated:
It isn't very hard to find references online to that being the specific reason all the big auto manfacturers dropped their electric car programs and switched to hybrid, that combined with the fact that the total envorinmental damage when the depletion of battery packs is taken into account is more than an order of magnitude worse than the worst cars have ever been.
Your original post referred only to the generation of electricity, not disposal of the batteries. Obviously, the batteries matter, but that's not what I disputed.
If finding online references is so easy, could you post a couple? The 1st one I found was from a GM site:
The EV1 helped contribute to a cleaner environment. In California, for instance, there were 97% fewer emissions with the EV1 than a conventional gasoline engine -- this included the electricity-generating emissions from the power plant.
I think this 97% came from a CARB report- haven't found the original, although everyone and their brother seems to cite this 97%.
Also, here's an EPRI study that looks at plug-in hybrids. A quote:
Plug-in HEVs provide additional benefits because, on a gram per vehicle mile basis, emissions from power plants are much lower than that from the same vehicle running on gasoline.
As for your examples: SO2 emissions are quite dependent on the pct. of electricity that comes from coal, and what kind of coal you're burning. So in some cases EVs could be worse. But they win with regard to smog precursors and CO2.
I can't really quarrel with the lead battery argument, except that 1) you didn't specify batteries in your original post and 2) there are non-lead, non-cadmium options these days. But I honestly don't know about the environmental impact of, e.g., NiMH batteries.
Finally, my impression is that automakers weren't interested in EVs was that batteries, flywheels, etc., can't compete with the awesome energy and power density of gasoline- relative cost and performance of EVs just wasn't competitive, and was unlikely to be anytime soon.
OK, your turn.
nevermind that the coal power plant that was buying and selling pollution credits to generate the electricity to charge the batteries was pulluting 10x what the engine in a normal car would've polluted.
I'm too lazy to pull the numbers from an analysis I did on this topic about 10 years ago (emissions from power plants for powering EVs vs. emissions from ICVs), and the number (based on New England's generating mix, which is a combination of coal, hydro, oil, nukes, etc.) was most definitely *not* 10x worse for the EV. I seem to remember the EV being substantially cleaner for most pollutants, but I honestly don't remember.
Not to say that EVs don't have problems, but the parent's contention is an uninformed guess, and it is very wrong.
Though with tight domestic supply (and few imports except from Canada, if memory serves), prices would spike if nat. gas demand increases due to H2 production. We see a lot of price volatility at present.
Don't get me wrong, I'm thinking of getting a nat. gas car, but there are practical economic concerns about it's expanded use.
If both cars burn a gallon to go 30 miles, then (correct me if I'm wrong, someone, please!) by definition they've released the same amount of CO2, H2O and the rest into the atmosphere.
C02: Yeah, about the same
H20: Yeah, about the same
"The Rest": Not the same
It's "the rest" (NOx, CO, particulates, formaldehyde, etc.) that are responsible for local and regional (as opposed to global) air pollution. SULEVs (including most/all hybrids), etc., are much cleaner than their conventional counterparts in regard to these pollutants. CO2 emissions are (arguably) important, but it's the other stuff that messes with smog formation, etc.
I rented an older Prius for the day from LAX last December (www.evrental.com), drove it all around with plenty of hills and stop-and-go traffic, and averaged 44 MPG. I drove it more or less like I would've a normal car.
The only difference I noticed from a regular car was that the power didn't kick in unless you really floored it- the power-to-throttle seemed a lot more non-linear than I was used to.
You can tell OPEC to rotate.
Unless the cheapest source of hydrogen is...
The other responses answer this well enough, but let me make it simple:
For many reasons, it's hard to switch, plain vanilla, from Windows/Office to a Free set of OS + applications. Any tool that aids a gradual transition is, most likely, a Good Thing.
For my office work, I cannot plausibly switch away from Office right now without a major productivity hit, mostly due to file format issues (and some VBA scripts that would take time to re-create in OOo). It isn't right, but that's the way it is. I could, however, switch away from Windows if I could still run Office well enough from time to time.
Oh man, I haven't even thought of that song in a long time.
The lyrics are here
'Bitchin' Camaro, Bitchin' Camaro!
I ran over my neighbors
Bitchin' Camaro, Bitchin' Camaro!
Now I'm in all the papers
My folks bought me a bitchin' Camaro
With no insurance to match
So if I happen to run you down
Please don't leave a scratch'
Somehow that seemed more clever when I was 16...
That's almost exactly our average consumption in my house (3BR, 4 people) here in the U.S.
I use mostly CF light bulbs, but do have an electric range and clothes dryer that runs pretty often (2 of the 4 occupants are small and generally muddy).
(I also buy a good portion of my electricity from a small local hydro plant for a small surcharge, thanks to my friendly municipal utility).
Palm log would be cool; one suggestion: don't make it running specific (most endurance sports can have a lot of common fields: date, distance, duration, intensity, route, equipment...)
Unions are many things, but above all, they are a reaction to bad management.
Engaging in what is essentially part-time slavery is bad management; those who engage in it, or look the other way, are criminals.
The journalist quotes a couple
How'd you like to spend your time at work reading Sla... oh, wait...
These stories are lame. Therefore, rather than spending time working productively, playing with the kids, or having meaningful dialogue with my spouse, I am going to spend my time closely monitoring /. today so that I can rapidly post whiny comments every time a new (lame) story is posted.
Did I mention the stories are lame?