My off grid Australian house needs the diesel generator for about an hour a day for five months of the year, and is on solar and lead acids the rest of the time. I bought $40 of fuel in May and haven't used it all yet.
16500 tons of CO2 per year per person ? Cite? I'm guessing you fucked up by a factor of 1000, which means you are a politician not a techie. So go away and boil your head.
You are creating a non existent puzzle. The 'secret ' of Pozzolan concrete is well described in Wiki. Most Mediterranean cultures had it. Sorry to burst your pathetically small bubble.
Nope. Failure of a spherical ball joint that works in compression does not necessarily cause anything other than a clunking noise, and bad static geometry (lots of camber in this case).
These joints fail soon after the boots split, boots typically split because of overtravel, wrong material choice, or occasionally a moulding fault.
That's nice. I'm a salaried mechanical engineer for a large company on 137k (it just went up while I wasn't looking) plus a car plus a pension. I work 40.0 hours a week and get 5 weeks annual leave a year, and 18 sick days and 12 flex days. Much like you I have turned down management jobs, tres boring, too many hours doing budgets and meetings and dealing with people.
I've got 20 year old solar panels. Output is about 100W/ sq m at best. So their efficiency has dropped by at least 30% in 20 years. Of course, that is actual data, not pie in the sky optimism.
Sorry, ABS has scarcely any effect on stopping distances, particularly in the dry, for cars. It does do a reasonable job of cycling around the peak braking friction of the tire, but compared with a moderately skilled driver (which is the problem) the difference in stopping distance is small. ABS is designed to permit you to steer and brake simultaneously, and also as a by product it handles split mu.
In the dry, even if you lock all four wheels, your stopping distance is around 120% of the best that can be achieved, and even better, you'll stop in a straight line. That's why your first instinct, to stomp on the brakes, wasn't such a bad idea, even before ABS.
He appears to be plotting balloon surface altitude vs RSS lower troposphere. That is not correct, he needs to use 850 mb or interpolate to match the lower troposphere definition. Also he could have looked at UAH.. Also he appears to be using an old RSS dataset, because they have a spike in 2015 which should show through on the 5 year MA.
So that's a few things worth checking. However it is great, now I've got the balloon data to play with as well. So to summarise, thanks for the blog link, but it is not definitive.
Check out the satellite data for lower tropospheric temperature, and the balloon dataset for correlation. These are both fairly robust measurements of temperature, in that urban heat island effect etc do not have to be 'adjusted' out (or not). It is also interesting to look at the trends in individual well sited terrestrial weather stations with good histories. For some reason these on average show a lesser warming trend than NOAA and GISS and all the other self publicists.
Having said that we probably will see +1 deg C relative to 1880 before long, and I wouldn't be amazed to see +1.5 by 2100 (except i'll be dead). But a sthe IPCC says anything up to +2 is on average beneficial for mankind, and there isn't enough fossil fuel left to get us much over that.
No, I work for a car company that didn't get bailed out by the US government recently. I work 38 hours because that's what my contract says. They pay me to do stuff for them, I do it. That's what contracts are for.
$132000 a year, 38 hour week, six weeks leave a year, plus public holidays. Oh, and I work one day a week from home. My commute is half an hour from one house, or an hour from my weekender.
So this whole tech worker thing sounds like wool mill workers in the 1880s. Are you the new proletariat?
Seems to be a heap of stuff in the summary that isn't in the article "Each time the deck of the bridge twisted now, it sought to return to its original position (inertial forces)" etc- all of which defies physics on Planet Earth.
As others have pointed out, "Tacoma Narrows wasn't a resonance" has been a bit of a mantra for 20 years or more, obviously things take a while to get to Texas.
The problem that your idea has is that the 6 billion third worlders who want to be first worlders have no interest in your CO2/climate conspiracy theories and are busy burning as much coal as they can, and building new coal powered generating plants at a breakneck speed. So until you can find a way of getting them on board, your pious attempt to reduce CO2 (which frankly is mostly done by exporting manufacture to the third world) then this is all hot air.
I can't imagine lifting several billion poor people into space is ever going to happen. So while you may solve the problem of humanity's extinction it doesn't actually solve the problems (if any, grins) here on Earth.
Yes. Of course at some point we have to decide what the target temperature/global climate pattern is and whether it is feasible to attain it. I'd be far more worried about a trend towards an Ice Age than a warmer world.
I disagree, if a geoengineering tool is found to work, eg sequestration (which strikes me as a completely dodgy proposition), it'll be the people-haters in the warmist camp who'll be against it.
If nothing else this project may allow some refinement of cloud/albedo modelling, thereby improving the hopeless climate models that the warmists take so seriously.
"Extreme surge pricing just means the cabs are reserved for upper income people, which some of you find perfectly acceptable. I don't, especially in an emergency."
Then what is the point of having more money? You seem to be implying that it shouldn't be used to buy harder to get services or items? Frankly that is precisely why I spent 15 years investing 50% of my earnings, so now I can have 3 houses, and work for fun, and drive a shiny car and go on fantastic holidays. I wouldn't have bothered if it just meant I could buy more cheap crap.
Slashdot Mirror
My off grid Australian house needs the diesel generator for about an hour a day for five months of the year, and is on solar and lead acids the rest of the time. I bought $40 of fuel in May and haven't used it all yet.
16500 tons of CO2 per year per person ? Cite? I'm guessing you fucked up by a factor of 1000, which means you are a politician not a techie. So go away and boil your head.
You are creating a non existent puzzle. The 'secret ' of Pozzolan concrete is well described in Wiki. Most Mediterranean cultures had it. Sorry to burst your pathetically small bubble.
You seem to assume (s)he is a citizen of the USA. woi, oh woi?
Plus one on the first part of that post.
Nope. Failure of a spherical ball joint that works in compression does not necessarily cause anything other than a clunking noise, and bad static geometry (lots of camber in this case).
These joints fail soon after the boots split, boots typically split because of overtravel, wrong material choice, or occasionally a moulding fault.
If only we had data...
That's nice. I'm a salaried mechanical engineer for a large company on 137k (it just went up while I wasn't looking) plus a car plus a pension. I work 40.0 hours a week and get 5 weeks annual leave a year, and 18 sick days and 12 flex days. Much like you I have turned down management jobs, tres boring, too many hours doing budgets and meetings and dealing with people.
I've got 20 year old solar panels. Output is about 100W/ sq m at best. So their efficiency has dropped by at least 30% in 20 years. Of course, that is actual data, not pie in the sky optimism.
Sorry, ABS has scarcely any effect on stopping distances, particularly in the dry, for cars. It does do a reasonable job of cycling around the peak braking friction of the tire, but compared with a moderately skilled driver (which is the problem) the difference in stopping distance is small. ABS is designed to permit you to steer and brake simultaneously, and also as a by product it handles split mu.
In the dry, even if you lock all four wheels, your stopping distance is around 120% of the best that can be achieved, and even better, you'll stop in a straight line. That's why your first instinct, to stomp on the brakes, wasn't such a bad idea, even before ABS.
So birds in their wisdom can adapt to climate change but the weeping willies say humans can't.
He appears to be plotting balloon surface altitude vs RSS lower troposphere. That is not correct, he needs to use 850 mb or interpolate to match the lower troposphere definition. Also he could have looked at UAH.. Also he appears to be using an old RSS dataset, because they have a spike in 2015 which should show through on the 5 year MA.
So that's a few things worth checking. However it is great, now I've got the balloon data to play with as well. So to summarise, thanks for the blog link, but it is not definitive.
Thank you for the link. I'll have a read and a think.
Check out the satellite data for lower tropospheric temperature, and the balloon dataset for correlation. These are both fairly robust measurements of temperature, in that urban heat island effect etc do not have to be 'adjusted' out (or not). It is also interesting to look at the trends in individual well sited terrestrial weather stations with good histories. For some reason these on average show a lesser warming trend than NOAA and GISS and all the other self publicists.
Having said that we probably will see +1 deg C relative to 1880 before long, and I wouldn't be amazed to see +1.5 by 2100 (except i'll be dead). But a sthe IPCC says anything up to +2 is on average beneficial for mankind, and there isn't enough fossil fuel left to get us much over that.
No, I work for a car company that didn't get bailed out by the US government recently. I work 38 hours because that's what my contract says. They pay me to do stuff for them, I do it. That's what contracts are for.
$132000 a year, 38 hour week, six weeks leave a year, plus public holidays. Oh, and I work one day a week from home. My commute is half an hour from one house, or an hour from my weekender.
So this whole tech worker thing sounds like wool mill workers in the 1880s. Are you the new proletariat?
Car companies don't use PEs, at two I have worked at we were discouraged from putting it on our business cards. Industry exemption and all that.
Seems to be a heap of stuff in the summary that isn't in the article "Each time the deck of the bridge twisted now, it sought to return to its original position (inertial forces)" etc- all of which defies physics on Planet Earth.
As others have pointed out, "Tacoma Narrows wasn't a resonance" has been a bit of a mantra for 20 years or more, obviously things take a while to get to Texas.
Inane
The problem that your idea has is that the 6 billion third worlders who want to be first worlders have no interest in your CO2/climate conspiracy theories and are busy burning as much coal as they can, and building new coal powered generating plants at a breakneck speed. So until you can find a way of getting them on board, your pious attempt to reduce CO2 (which frankly is mostly done by exporting manufacture to the third world) then this is all hot air.
I can't imagine lifting several billion poor people into space is ever going to happen. So while you may solve the problem of humanity's extinction it doesn't actually solve the problems (if any, grins) here on Earth.
Yes. Of course at some point we have to decide what the target temperature/global climate pattern is and whether it is feasible to attain it. I'd be far more worried about a trend towards an Ice Age than a warmer world.
I disagree, if a geoengineering tool is found to work, eg sequestration (which strikes me as a completely dodgy proposition), it'll be the people-haters in the warmist camp who'll be against it.
If nothing else this project may allow some refinement of cloud/albedo modelling, thereby improving the hopeless climate models that the warmists take so seriously.
"Extreme surge pricing just means the cabs are reserved for upper income people, which some of you find perfectly acceptable. I don't, especially in an emergency."
Then what is the point of having more money? You seem to be implying that it shouldn't be used to buy harder to get services or items? Frankly that is precisely why I spent 15 years investing 50% of my earnings, so now I can have 3 houses, and work for fun, and drive a shiny car and go on fantastic holidays. I wouldn't have bothered if it just meant I could buy more cheap crap.
1 go to a toy shop
2 buy a train set
3 play with it
4 ????
5 profit!