With respect, you don't understand the free market, though you got close.
Free market capitalism is predicted on self interest, the most powerful force in society. If a person considers how a given purchase might help their families or what they can do to help others, then there are a variety of methods (driven by blatant self interest) to do so--buy local produce, contribute to charities, volunteer at a food shelter.
I have a '73 GMC Suburban. One of the biggest danged SUVs ever built. Gets 10mpg on a good day. It's survived more than one little rice-burner hitting it over the years with nary a dent.
It gets driven two, three times a year when I need that power and transport space. The rest of the time I drive a 2007 Honda Fit (about 36mpg in the city). In the meantime, the Suburban is NOT rusting away in a landfill somewhere, so that's a big plus for the environment.
My experience is that SUVs are wonderful vehicles, and people have them for all kinds of reasons. It's sad that some folks think there aren't any reasons to own one--shows they're kinda narrow minded, really.
We just had 400 scientists--distinguished folks who are mostly of the climate persuasion--announce that they basically thought human-induced global warming is just so much hookum. I'm sure of course you'll find some reason to discredit them, of course--the levels to which the Global Warming Hysterics will stoop are astounding.
Gotta agree with the general sentiment of supporting small, local stores here (though not the silly rant against capitalism). There are two small, local stores here that I frequent regularly with satisfactory results, rarely venturing into the big stores like CompUSA unless there was something in particular I was looking for.
Hey, you're being silly...."they" don't "give" an 18-year old a gun. Though I got my first gun at age 12, come to think of it.
Though that WOULD be a neat idea...
"Howdy boy, you're a man now. Here's your gun, here's your driver's license, here's your Voter Card--now go be a good citizen and remember not to vote Democratic!".
The Grid may or may not be subsidized as much as you think (it's a debatable point), but on balance it doesn't matter. Until/unless "grid" costs are passed through on each utility bill, for most people it *looks* like off-grid is far more expensive.
So you know my bonafides, I'm building an off-grid house that will be powered primarily by wind with (probably) a bit of solar. The costs of bringing power out there would just be horrific, and I'm sure it would be the single lowest priority in the county if/when it broke in a snowstorm.
You were doing pretty good up until your silly bias cropped up with that "McMansion" crack. I'm afraid there you showed that you're less interested in solving the problem than in trying to address some perceived economic inequality.
Let's focus instead on helping increase efficiency and decreasing reliance on carbon-based fuels--that's something everybody can probably agree on and it's a big enough problem for smart engineers as it is.
Nuclear waste has never really been a problem...people's FEAR of it has been the problem.
If you want to "solve" the nuclear waste problem it's pretty easy:
Glassify the nuclear waste (well known process invented decades ago), essentially encasing it in blocks of non-reactive glass;
Stack these blocks up in a big pile in the desert. I think I read somewhere that all the nuclear waste ever generated would take up a space something like 1000 feet on a side;
Put a fence around the pile and guards every 100 feet. Hang big signs that say "cross this fence and die".
Funding really has absolutely nothing to do with it here.....they're trying to get students more interested in their futures. I don't think they're doing very well, mind you, but that's their intent.
Well, if it's anything like the other electric cars I've seen the "battery" is really a rack of a bunch of batteries...and they ain't easy to pick up and move. Good idea though.
Gotta disagree with you there, Charcharodon...sorry.
Oh sure people spending three grand on an iPod is just crazy...it's just a sign of the fantastic wealth that is America. But that's got a tangible, immediate benefit that people experience directly. The biggest problem with any alternative energy solution (my house is fully wind- and solar-powered so I'm pretty comfortable with my knowledge base here) is the long term payback...many folks just can't afford that. (This is an area where I think the government can help--tax rebates for these kinds of installation can really make a difference; some states are doing this but many aren't.)
On the other hand spending five grand on a solar-powered hot water heater has a number of issues, some of which are fairly severe:
First off, that's more cash than the three grand you were decrying earlier, and hence it's harder for folks to come up with that cash (I know my sister, mother, and most of my friends couldn't, natch);
Second, depending on your house there can be significant extra work for plumbing to get this system installed, not something people are wild about;
Third, (here's where the eco-freaks will flame me) they're honestly not all that reliable in the colder months, depending on where you live. YES, I do know what I'm talking about here--these puppies work great during the hot summer but almost always need a supplemental gas heater in the winter (and our winters are longer here in the mountains of Colorado). It's definitely a technology that is of more use to some folks than others--but that also means that indiscrimately flaming folks who spend their money on an iPod instead is just not helpful, frankly.
Do I think solar-power hot water is a Good Idea (tm)? Absolutely--that's stated clearly here, so let's not have some folks go all flamy on me and ignore what I'm saying. Building them into new housing in the hot areas of the country (Texas, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico) makes a lot of sense as that's where the biggest bang for the buck will be. But let's not try to overblow its promises or understate its costs...it's a useful tool and might be great for many folks in many areas.
Personally I much prefer the "on demand" systems, since it's silly to keep 50 or more gallons of hot water sitting around all the time for what amounts to an hour of use a day. Coupling that with a solar-powered system might be the best option for those who can afford it.
I want to buy what I want to buy. Out of the 70-odd channels I've got I only really watch maybe 15 or 20 and that's pretty irregular. There is absolutely nothing I care about on (for example) the three shopping network channels I've been inflicted with.
I switched my house to CFLs and started saving $15-20 per month. If everyone did this then the big power companies would see a dent in their bottom line and so they start spreading lies like this.
Actually that's not true...shame on you. Around here the power companies (big and small) are pushing everybody to use CFLs like mad, and I think that'a a very good thing.
As for the mercury, an incandescent light releases more mercury into the environment than a CFL bulb would if you were to take it, crack it open, and run it through an aerosolizer. How? Power plant mercury emissions. A CFL also has 1/125th as much mercury as a typical mercury thermometer, and 1/750th as much as an old-style mercury thermostat (which some of you in old houses might have).
Both facts are interesting and even true, but certainly not particularly relevant here.
While burning coal certainly does produce mercury, you're overlooking that a.) not all power plants burn coal and b.) you can collect the hazardous waste produced as a result of coal burning through scrubbers and other emmissions capture devices.
Secondly, while all those other items you listed might well have more mercury in them than a typical CFL, that really doesn't address the fact that all of them have more than EPA guidelines allow. You're making the case that all those other users of mercury should be regulated and/or changed, not a case for CFLs.
Personally I love the CFLs, but let's not give them any more credit than they're due, or try to talk away any of their drawbacks. They're at best an interim solution...a dang good one and one which I personally have no issues with, but clearly a step towards something else (such as LED bulbs, maybe).
I suspect it just varies by person. I love the things, hue and all, and the slight warmup doesn't bother me particuarly.
But that's just our experience, really. The things definitely don't last remotely like the 10 years they're advertised, but the effective 3-4 years we're seeing is still pretty good. Love the lesser power usage...that's the big win here.
Finding a place to recycle the things can be hard. There's only one here in Colorado Springs, so I end up saving several over a few months and taking them in when the bucket they're in gets full. It works, although it never seems like the recycling place is ever open when I get there!
Slashdot Mirror
So you feel qualified to "force" (your word) people to do what you think it a better idea?
Hmmmmm....slippery slope, that one.
With respect, you don't understand the free market, though you got close.
Free market capitalism is predicted on self interest, the most powerful force in society. If a person considers how a given purchase might help their families or what they can do to help others, then there are a variety of methods (driven by blatant self interest) to do so--buy local produce, contribute to charities, volunteer at a food shelter.
And wherever you live has expensive pickles! Wow.
That's absolutely correct--they DID vote for it, with their wallets. That's how a free market works dude....
I think you're doing SUVs a disservice.
I have a '73 GMC Suburban. One of the biggest danged SUVs ever built. Gets 10mpg on a good day. It's survived more than one little rice-burner hitting it over the years with nary a dent.
It gets driven two, three times a year when I need that power and transport space. The rest of the time I drive a 2007 Honda Fit (about 36mpg in the city). In the meantime, the Suburban is NOT rusting away in a landfill somewhere, so that's a big plus for the environment.
My experience is that SUVs are wonderful vehicles, and people have them for all kinds of reasons. It's sad that some folks think there aren't any reasons to own one--shows they're kinda narrow minded, really.
He also conveniently forgets that Klinton endorsed them too....Al and company had 8 years to "fix" the designs and didn't do diddly.
Feretman
Oh Rei, please get a grip.
We just had 400 scientists--distinguished folks who are mostly of the climate persuasion--announce that they basically thought human-induced global warming is just so much hookum. I'm sure of course you'll find some reason to discredit them, of course--the levels to which the Global Warming Hysterics will stoop are astounding.
He's 100% man; you'll see.
Gotta agree with the general sentiment of supporting small, local stores here (though not the silly rant against capitalism). There are two small, local stores here that I frequent regularly with satisfactory results, rarely venturing into the big stores like CompUSA unless there was something in particular I was looking for.
Indeed! There was a Computer City right up the road from me--tiny store, but immensely well stocked. I went there first every time.
Hey, you're being silly...."they" don't "give" an 18-year old a gun. Though I got my first gun at age 12, come to think of it.
Though that WOULD be a neat idea...
"Howdy boy, you're a man now. Here's your gun, here's your driver's license, here's your Voter Card--now go be a good citizen and remember not to vote Democratic!".
Ferretman
Dude, I didn't notice him "arguing" at all.
If anybody is posting flamebait it's you. Try some decaf....
Ferretman
Besides....this movie ain't all that.....enough is enough already....
Ferretman
The Grid may or may not be subsidized as much as you think (it's a debatable point), but on balance it doesn't matter. Until/unless "grid" costs are passed through on each utility bill, for most people it *looks* like off-grid is far more expensive.
So you know my bonafides, I'm building an off-grid house that will be powered primarily by wind with (probably) a bit of solar. The costs of bringing power out there would just be horrific, and I'm sure it would be the single lowest priority in the county if/when it broke in a snowstorm.
Ferretman
You were doing pretty good up until your silly bias cropped up with that "McMansion" crack. I'm afraid there you showed that you're less interested in solving the problem than in trying to address some perceived economic inequality.
Let's focus instead on helping increase efficiency and decreasing reliance on carbon-based fuels--that's something everybody can probably agree on and it's a big enough problem for smart engineers as it is.
Ferretman
Oh please....Malthus has been so discredited that he's primarily used as the "classic mistake" example....
Ferretman
Indeed. I plan to use wind for my new house rather than solar (there might be a little solar but not much) since it's much more cost effective.
If you want to "solve" the nuclear waste problem it's pretty easy:
Funding really has absolutely nothing to do with it here.....they're trying to get students more interested in their futures. I don't think they're doing very well, mind you, but that's their intent.
Ferretman
Well, if it's anything like the other electric cars I've seen the "battery" is really a rack of a bunch of batteries...and they ain't easy to pick up and move. Good idea though.
Ferretman
Oh sure people spending three grand on an iPod is just crazy...it's just a sign of the fantastic wealth that is America. But that's got a tangible, immediate benefit that people experience directly. The biggest problem with any alternative energy solution (my house is fully wind- and solar-powered so I'm pretty comfortable with my knowledge base here) is the long term payback...many folks just can't afford that. (This is an area where I think the government can help--tax rebates for these kinds of installation can really make a difference; some states are doing this but many aren't.)
On the other hand spending five grand on a solar-powered hot water heater has a number of issues, some of which are fairly severe:
-
First off, that's more cash than the three grand you were decrying earlier, and hence it's harder for folks to come up with that cash (I know my sister, mother, and most of my friends couldn't, natch);
-
Second, depending on your house there can be significant extra work for plumbing to get this system installed, not something people are wild about;
-
Third, (here's where the eco-freaks will flame me) they're honestly not all that reliable in the colder months, depending on where you live. YES, I do know what I'm talking about here--these puppies work great during the hot summer but almost always need a supplemental gas heater in the winter (and our winters are longer here in the mountains of Colorado). It's definitely a technology that is of more use to some folks than others--but that also means that indiscrimately flaming folks who spend their money on an iPod instead is just not helpful, frankly.
Do I think solar-power hot water is a Good Idea (tm)? Absolutely--that's stated clearly here, so let's not have some folks go all flamy on me and ignore what I'm saying. Building them into new housing in the hot areas of the country (Texas, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico) makes a lot of sense as that's where the biggest bang for the buck will be. But let's not try to overblow its promises or understate its costs...it's a useful tool and might be great for many folks in many areas.Personally I much prefer the "on demand" systems, since it's silly to keep 50 or more gallons of hot water sitting around all the time for what amounts to an hour of use a day. Coupling that with a solar-powered system might be the best option for those who can afford it.
Ferretman
Exactly right, MibileDude!
I want to buy what I want to buy. Out of the 70-odd channels I've got I only really watch maybe 15 or 20 and that's pretty irregular. There is absolutely nothing I care about on (for example) the three shopping network channels I've been inflicted with.
Bring on ala cart!
Ferretman
I switched my house to CFLs and started saving $15-20 per month. If everyone did this then the big power companies would see a dent in their bottom line and so they start spreading lies like this.
/ toronto-hydro-conservation.html
Actually that's not true...shame on you. Around here the power companies (big and small) are pushing everybody to use CFLs like mad, and I think that'a a very good thing.
The more likely thing to happen, though, is that if everybody did switch to CFLs the power companies would lose enough money that they'd raise rates! That's what happened in several places; here's one link. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2007/03/22
Ferretman
As for the mercury, an incandescent light releases more mercury into the environment than a CFL bulb would if you were to take it, crack it open, and run it through an aerosolizer. How? Power plant mercury emissions. A CFL also has 1/125th as much mercury as a typical mercury thermometer, and 1/750th as much as an old-style mercury thermostat (which some of you in old houses might have).
Both facts are interesting and even true, but certainly not particularly relevant here.
While burning coal certainly does produce mercury, you're overlooking that a.) not all power plants burn coal and b.) you can collect the hazardous waste produced as a result of coal burning through scrubbers and other emmissions capture devices.
Secondly, while all those other items you listed might well have more mercury in them than a typical CFL, that really doesn't address the fact that all of them have more than EPA guidelines allow. You're making the case that all those other users of mercury should be regulated and/or changed, not a case for CFLs.
Personally I love the CFLs, but let's not give them any more credit than they're due, or try to talk away any of their drawbacks. They're at best an interim solution...a dang good one and one which I personally have no issues with, but clearly a step towards something else (such as LED bulbs, maybe).
Ferretman
Yeah...except they're just too danged expensive right now.
Ferretman
I suspect it just varies by person. I love the things, hue and all, and the slight warmup doesn't bother me particuarly.
But that's just our experience, really. The things definitely don't last remotely like the 10 years they're advertised, but the effective 3-4 years we're seeing is still pretty good. Love the lesser power usage...that's the big win here.
Finding a place to recycle the things can be hard. There's only one here in Colorado Springs, so I end up saving several over a few months and taking them in when the bucket they're in gets full. It works, although it never seems like the recycling place is ever open when I get there!
Ferretman
Ah...so you have an "excuse".
Interesting.
Maybe other people have equally valid "excuses"....whaddya think?
Just tossing it out there....
Ferretman