Awl --

In the recent thread on solar powered homes, which displayed the Natural
Divide of opinion on solar power, Salty actually posted an inneresting ditty
on solar powered planes.
His purpose was, of course, more one-ups-manship than anything constructive,
but it was inneresting nonetheless.

The REALLY inneresting thing about it was that the plane had a whole 40 hp!!

What does this remind you of?

The old VW Beetle had a whole 36 hp, which was then souped up to... 42 hp!
An air-cooled 4 cyl engine (no heavy fluid-filled radiator/cooling system).

Incredibly, that measly 42 hp was fully capable of doing 80 mph -- mebbe not
up hill, and mebbe with a slight tailwind, but, still, 80 mph. And, iirc,
it got about 40 mpg..... or more. I never had one, and gas was 27c/gal, so
no one was really calculating mpg's then, but that was a figure floating
around. Coulda been much better than 40 mpg....

The VW Beetle was for a commuting college student what a back pack is to
grade-schoolers today..... when a whole city block of parked cars was
nothing but VWs -- in NYC.... in Greenwich Village.... of course.....

Even the VW mini-bus, the 60's breadbox equivalent to our SUV (iconized on a
Beatle album, iirc), used that same 42 hp engine.

Yet, in the rush for a viable electric car, I don't think a single design
considers anything less than 100 hp. The Nissan Leaf is already at 107 hp.
The stupidly over-priced Chevy Volt is at 160 hp.

And the ironic thing is, a small car with four 10 hp "hub motors" (like disk
brakes) would yield an incredibly versatile useful car! With the most
versatile 4 wd possible, and a potential turning radius of zero -- think
military tanks.

All-solar homes are not practical, imo, simply because our lifestyles and
"urban structure" won't *let* them be practical, even if the cost made
sense.
We engage in "spiraling habits", like air conditioning, which makes
cities -- and the planet -- disproportionately and ironically hotter.
Between the blacktop, cars (200 hp and up), and pervasive A/C, NYC is proly
10 deg hotter than surrounding areas.

Now, a GRID of solar power WOULD likely be effective -- where *every*
roof-top, *by law*, was mandated to have X% of it devoted to solar energy,
both passive (hot water), and active (grid-connected PVs et al).

THEN, we would likely see real savings and utility.

Which will not happen any time soon, cuz such a scenario is more anathema to
Big Bidniss than the Public Option was in this bull**** health care reform,
which wound up being just a brilliant Insurance Scam.

So, the moral to the story is, if we cain't figger out that 42 hp that was
"enough" in the 60's and 70s is enough today, and if "population control"
has been essentially deleted from the dictionary, and if "bonuses" is de
rigeur in the new Corporate Zeitgeist -- even for failing corporations --
then practical solar power is going to be a long time in coming.

Apropos of the "urban structure" mentioned above, we have a New Economic
Structure, epitomized by the Big Box Motif (replete with bonuses) and the
nylon Net Fishing of the Public, where we have been herded, painted --
checkmated -- into an economic corner where nothing is viable unless it's
done on a massive scale.

This is by conspiratorial design, imo, but this doesn't really matter at
this point, as this Net Fishing of the public is essentially irreversible,
and here to stay.
How it got started is just inneresting history.

The upshot of this will be the working class living in barracks, and all
that that implies.

The good news is, is that barracks generally have a lot of roof-age, and
would be tailor-made for solar cell arrays.
And given that barracks are generally not air conditioned, and have just a
few light bulbs hanging from their A-frame ceilings, there should be plenty
of energy left over for The Grid, for the A/C's of those lucky enough not
to be living in barracks.

--
EA

On Apr 8, 8:39*am, "Existential Angst"
wrote:
Awl --

In the recent thread on solar powered homes, which displayed the Natural
Divide of opinion on solar power, Salty actually posted an inneresting ditty
on solar powered planes.
His purpose was, of course, more one-ups-manship than anything constructive,
but it was inneresting nonetheless.

The REALLY inneresting thing about it was that the plane had a whole 40 hp!!

What does this remind you of?

The old VW Beetle had a whole 36 hp, which was then souped up to... *42 hp!
An air-cooled 4 cyl engine (no heavy fluid-filled radiator/cooling system).

Incredibly, that measly 42 hp was fully capable of doing 80 mph -- mebbe not
up hill, and mebbe with a slight tailwind, but, still, 80 mph. *And, iirc,
it got about 40 mpg..... *or more. *I never had one, and gas was 27c/gal, so
no one was really calculating mpg's then, but that was a figure floating
around. *Coulda been much better than 40 mpg....

The VW Beetle was for a commuting college student what a back pack is to
grade-schoolers today..... *when a whole city block of parked cars was
nothing but VWs -- in NYC.... *in Greenwich Village.... *of course......

Even the VW mini-bus, the 60's breadbox equivalent to our SUV (iconized on a
Beatle album, iirc), used that same 42 hp engine.

Yet, in the rush for a viable electric car, I don't think a single design
considers anything less than 100 hp. *The Nissan Leaf is already at 107 hp.
The stupidly over-priced Chevy Volt is at 160 hp.

And the ironic thing is, a small car with four 10 hp "hub motors" (like disk
brakes) would yield an incredibly versatile useful car! *With the most
versatile 4 wd possible, and a potential turning radius of zero -- think
military tanks.

All-solar homes are not practical, imo, simply because our lifestyles and
"urban structure" won't *let* them be practical, even if the cost made
sense.
We engage in "spiraling habits", like air conditioning, which makes
cities -- and the planet -- disproportionately and ironically hotter.
Between the blacktop, cars (200 hp and up), and pervasive A/C, *NYC is proly
10 deg hotter than surrounding areas.

Now, a GRID of solar power WOULD likely be effective -- where *every*
roof-top, *by law*, was mandated to have X% of it devoted to solar energy,
both passive (hot water), and active (grid-connected PVs et al).

THEN, we would likely see real savings and utility.

Which will not happen any time soon, cuz such a scenario is more anathema to
Big Bidniss than the Public Option was in this bull**** health care reform,
which wound up being just a brilliant Insurance Scam.

So, the moral to the story is, if we cain't figger out that 42 hp that was
"enough" in the 60's and 70s is enough today,


The VW beetle had HP in the 40's in the 1960's, but by the 1970's it
had been increased into the 55hp range. And today you can buy a
SmartCar that has about 70hp. The obvious problem is that neither
of these cars fits the lifestyle or needs we have today. And the
SmartCar has fuel economy that is less than a Toyota Prius or a mid
size MB Bluetec diesel, both of which are decent size real cars. One
application they could fit is to be used primarily as a commuter car
to get you from your house to mass transit.

A real car of even modest size with only 40hp also has safety
limitations. I would not want to be trying to enter a freeway in a
major city driving one.








and if "population control"
has been essentially deleted from the dictionary, and if "bonuses" is de
rigeur in the new Corporate Zeitgeist -- even for failing corporations -- *
then practical solar power is going to be a long time in coming.

A non-sequitur.




Apropos of the "urban structure" mentioned above, we have a New Economic
Structure, epitomized by the Big Box Motif (replete with bonuses) and the
nylon Net Fishing of the Public, where we have been herded, painted -- *
checkmated -- into an economic corner where nothing is viable unless it's
done on a massive scale.


Yeah, funny how volume factors into basic economics.




This is by conspiratorial design, imo, but this doesn't really matter at
this point, as this Net Fishing of the public is essentially irreversible,
and here to stay.

Uh huh, it's just one big old conspiracy. Obviously Ford is talking
and sharing evil plans with Sony and John Deere.




How it got started is just inneresting history.

The upshot of this will be the working class living in barracks, and all
that that implies.


The good news is, is that barracks generally have a lot of roof-age, and
would be tailor-made for solar cell arrays.
And given that barracks are generally not air conditioned, and have just a
few light bulbs hanging from their A-frame ceilings, there should be plenty
of energy left over for The Grid, *for the A/C's of those lucky enough not
to be living in barracks.

--
EA

More negative hogwash.

On 2010-04-08, Existential Angst wrote:

The old VW Beetle had a whole 36 hp, which was then souped up to... 42 hp!
An air-cooled 4 cyl engine (no heavy fluid-filled radiator/cooling system).

I had the older 36bhp model and it only got around 30-32mpg. It
could hit 75mph on a good day, but cruise at 65mph all day. I went
cross country in it at least twice.

Yet, in the rush for a viable electric car, I don't think a single design
considers anything less than 100 hp.

See the Who Killed the Electric Car? Even the first one had 137bhp:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59hAG-QG6dE

I've lamented the loss of fuel efficient cars for yrs, now. My '91 Honda
Civic Si hatchback got 38mpg and hit 87mph. It was the sporty model.

Why are cars of just 20 yrs ago no longer efficient? I think a lot
has to do with safety and convenience. My Si had no electric windows,
mirrors, door locks, etc. If I got center punched by anything heavier
than a Schwinn Varsity, I'd no doubt be taking a dirt nap right now.
All those motors have heavy copper in them. Front, side, top/bottom
airbags, reinforced crash cages, blah blah blah.... That's all dead
weight and needs more power to get one down the road.

The stupidly over-priced Chevy Volt is at 160 hp.

We demand it, we gotta pay for it.


The upshot of this will be the working class living in barracks, and all
that that implies.

I really don't see what your rant is about, other than just to whine.
No matter. At the rate we're net fishing the oceans dry, I figure the
human species has about 20 yrs, on the outside, left on the beat up
old orb. Enjoy it while you can.

nb

On Apr 8, 10:44*am, notbob wrote:
On 2010-04-08, Existential Angst wrote:



The old VW Beetle had a whole 36 hp, which was then souped up to... *42 hp!
An air-cooled 4 cyl engine (no heavy fluid-filled radiator/cooling system).

I had the older 36bhp model and it only got around 30-32mpg. *It
could hit 75mph on a good day, but cruise at 65mph all day. *I went
cross country in it at least twice. *

Yet, in the rush for a viable electric car, I don't think a single design
considers anything less than 100 hp. *

See the *Who Killed the Electric Car? *Even the first one had 137bhp:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59hAG-QG6dE

I've lamented the loss of fuel efficient cars for yrs, now. *My '91 Honda
Civic Si hatchback got 38mpg and hit 87mph. *It was the sporty model.

Why are cars of just 20 yrs ago no longer efficient? *I think a lot
has to do with safety and convenience. *My Si had no electric windows,
mirrors, door locks, etc. *If I got center punched by anything heavier
than a Schwinn Varsity, I'd no doubt be taking a dirt nap right now.
All those motors have heavy copper in them. *Front, side, top/bottom
airbags, reinforced crash cages, blah blah blah.... *That's all dead
weight and needs more power to get one down the road.


Actually, the current Civics get almost exactly the same highway MPG
as those from 1991 In 2009, excluding the hybrid, the averages for
all the other models is 34 MPG highway. In 1991, it was 35. For
city, it is 24 MPG in 2009 compared to 31 MPG in 1991. So, the city
mileage did go down substantially. The engine grew from 1.5/1.6L to
1.8/2.0L today. I'd suspect it has more to do with pepping up the
cars with bigger engines in line with the performance people want and
also meeting tougher emission requirements.









The stupidly over-priced Chevy Volt is at 160 hp.

We demand it, we gotta pay for it.

The upshot of this will be the working class living in barracks, and all
that that implies.

I really don't see what your rant is about, other than just to whine.
No matter. *At the rate we're net fishing the oceans dry, I figure the
human species has about 20 yrs, on the outside, left on the beat up
old orb. *Enjoy it while you can.

nb

On 4/8/2010 10:43 AM, wrote:
On Apr 8, 8:39 am, "Existential
wrote:
Awl --

In the recent thread on solar powered homes, which displayed the Natural
Divide of opinion on solar power, Salty actually posted an inneresting ditty
on solar powered planes.
His purpose was, of course, more one-ups-manship than anything constructive,
but it was inneresting nonetheless.

The REALLY inneresting thing about it was that the plane had a whole 40 hp!!

What does this remind you of?

The old VW Beetle had a whole 36 hp, which was then souped up to... 42 hp!
An air-cooled 4 cyl engine (no heavy fluid-filled radiator/cooling system).

Incredibly, that measly 42 hp was fully capable of doing 80 mph -- mebbe not
up hill, and mebbe with a slight tailwind, but, still, 80 mph. And, iirc,
it got about 40 mpg..... or more. I never had one, and gas was 27c/gal, so
no one was really calculating mpg's then, but that was a figure floating
around. Coulda been much better than 40 mpg....

The VW Beetle was for a commuting college student what a back pack is to
grade-schoolers today..... when a whole city block of parked cars was
nothing but VWs -- in NYC.... in Greenwich Village.... of course.....

Even the VW mini-bus, the 60's breadbox equivalent to our SUV (iconized on a
Beatle album, iirc), used that same 42 hp engine.

Yet, in the rush for a viable electric car, I don't think a single design
considers anything less than 100 hp. The Nissan Leaf is already at 107 hp.
The stupidly over-priced Chevy Volt is at 160 hp.

And the ironic thing is, a small car with four 10 hp "hub motors" (like disk
brakes) would yield an incredibly versatile useful car! With the most
versatile 4 wd possible, and a potential turning radius of zero -- think
military tanks.

All-solar homes are not practical, imo, simply because our lifestyles and
"urban structure" won't *let* them be practical, even if the cost made
sense.
We engage in "spiraling habits", like air conditioning, which makes
cities -- and the planet -- disproportionately and ironically hotter.
Between the blacktop, cars (200 hp and up), and pervasive A/C, NYC is proly
10 deg hotter than surrounding areas.

Now, a GRID of solar power WOULD likely be effective -- where *every*
roof-top, *by law*, was mandated to have X% of it devoted to solar energy,
both passive (hot water), and active (grid-connected PVs et al).

THEN, we would likely see real savings and utility.

Which will not happen any time soon, cuz such a scenario is more anathema to
Big Bidniss than the Public Option was in this bull**** health care reform,
which wound up being just a brilliant Insurance Scam.

So, the moral to the story is, if we cain't figger out that 42 hp that was
"enough" in the 60's and 70s is enough today,


The VW beetle had HP in the 40's in the 1960's, but by the 1970's it
had been increased into the 55hp range. And today you can buy a
SmartCar that has about 70hp. The obvious problem is that neither
of these cars fits the lifestyle or needs we have today. And the
SmartCar has fuel economy that is less than a Toyota Prius or a mid
size MB Bluetec diesel, both of which are decent size real cars. One
application they could fit is to be used primarily as a commuter car
to get you from your house to mass transit.


It totally depends on what someones "lifestyles and needs" are. You have
to admit that a very large percentage of folks who drive giant fluffed
up trucks don't do anything more than transport themselves and maybe a
large beverage.

A real car of even modest size with only 40hp also has safety
limitations. I would not want to be trying to enter a freeway in a
major city driving one.








and if "population control"
has been essentially deleted from the dictionary, and if "bonuses" is de
rigeur in the new Corporate Zeitgeist -- even for failing corporations --
then practical solar power is going to be a long time in coming.

A non-sequitur.




Apropos of the "urban structure" mentioned above, we have a New Economic
Structure, epitomized by the Big Box Motif (replete with bonuses) and the
nylon Net Fishing of the Public, where we have been herded, painted --
checkmated -- into an economic corner where nothing is viable unless it's
done on a massive scale.


Yeah, funny how volume factors into basic economics.




This is by conspiratorial design, imo, but this doesn't really matter at
this point, as this Net Fishing of the public is essentially irreversible,
and here to stay.

Uh huh, it's just one big old conspiracy. Obviously Ford is talking
and sharing evil plans with Sony and John Deere.




How it got started is just inneresting history.

The upshot of this will be the working class living in barracks, and all
that that implies.


The good news is, is that barracks generally have a lot of roof-age, and
would be tailor-made for solar cell arrays.
And given that barracks are generally not air conditioned, and have just a
few light bulbs hanging from their A-frame ceilings, there should be plenty
of energy left over for The Grid, for the A/C's of those lucky enough not
to be living in barracks.

--
EA

More negative hogwash.

"notbob" wrote in message
...
On 2010-04-08, Existential Angst wrote:

The old VW Beetle had a whole 36 hp, which was then souped up to... 42
hp!
An air-cooled 4 cyl engine (no heavy fluid-filled radiator/cooling
system).

I had the older 36bhp model and it only got around 30-32mpg. It
could hit 75mph on a good day, but cruise at 65mph all day. I went
cross country in it at least twice.

Yet, in the rush for a viable electric car, I don't think a single design
considers anything less than 100 hp.

See the Who Killed the Electric Car? Even the first one had 137bhp:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59hAG-QG6dE

I've lamented the loss of fuel efficient cars for yrs, now. My '91 Honda
Civic Si hatchback got 38mpg and hit 87mph. It was the sporty model.

Why are cars of just 20 yrs ago no longer efficient? I think a lot
has to do with safety and convenience. My Si had no electric windows,
mirrors, door locks, etc. If I got center punched by anything heavier
than a Schwinn Varsity, I'd no doubt be taking a dirt nap right now.
All those motors have heavy copper in them. Front, side, top/bottom
airbags, reinforced crash cages, blah blah blah.... That's all dead
weight and needs more power to get one down the road.

The stupidly over-priced Chevy Volt is at 160 hp.

We demand it, we gotta pay for it.

India's Tata is $2500.
I'll bet that a frame, bunch of batteries, and a motor would go for $1150.

An electric car is little more than a belt sander that can steer.
For $30,000??? Bend over and spread.... once again.




The upshot of this will be the working class living in barracks, and all
that that implies.

I really don't see what your rant is about, other than just to whine.

The segue was admittedly a little subtle, but still relevant -- and more
imporantly, causal.
Whining, however, is always a good justification.

Note, however, that as long as we whine/moan, but don't scream, nothing will
change.
And even with screaming, "they" know impotent screaming when they hear it,
which is why the bonuses continue, and continue, and continue..... ****
you and me....


No matter. At the rate we're net fishing the oceans dry, I figure the
human species has about 20 yrs, on the outside, left on the beat up
old orb. Enjoy it while you can.

Indeed. In the meantime, ahma work on some ripped abs. I figger I need to
rev up my metabolism, so's I can eat even more.... Heh, they can make
bigger nets, can't they??
--
EA




nb

On 2010-04-08, Existential Angst wrote:

India's Tata is $2500.

People in India make eight cents a week. Duh! Equate that to a
living wage in US.

An electric car is little more than a belt sander that can steer.
For $30,000??? Bend over and spread.... once again.

The bending and spreading is your choice, not mine. Electric cars are
no more a solution than going back to wood burning stoves/fireplaces.
Electricity is an unbelievably dirty industry in this country (US),
most power plants being coal fired. Even solar energy in the form of
panels and the tandem storage battery technology are incredibly toxic
industries. Face it. We're doomed.

nb

"notbob" wrote in message
...
On 2010-04-08, Existential Angst wrote:

India's Tata is $2500.

People in India make eight cents a week. Duh! Equate that to a
living wage in US.

Hmmm.... I thought it *was* the adjusted price.... mebbe someone knows for
sure what the "real" relative cost of a Tata is, wrt to say, the Smart
car -- which is actually more expensive than the Honda Fit.
iirc, the Smart car sure did *look* like a Tata.


An electric car is little more than a belt sander that can steer.
For $30,000??? Bend over and spread.... once again.

The bending and spreading is your choice, not mine.

Well, I don't think it's really a choice at all. You *are* going to bend
over and spread, it's just a matter of when, for whom, and for what.

And what the Proctologist's bill is going to be....


Electric cars are
no more a solution than going back to wood burning stoves/fireplaces.

Did you know that some -- mebbe many -- municipalities ban burning wood in
fireplaces????

Electricity is an unbelievably dirty industry in this country (US),
most power plants being coal fired.

This is a good point, suggesting that electric cars be "marketed" in
hydro-electric regions.
AND that more hydroelectric be built, or expanded, so that extra energy can
be piped elsewhere.

I wonder, in Niagara Falls, for example, what fraction of the total volume
of water is diverted to generators?
On just casual inspection, it looks like no more than 15,20%.



Even solar energy in the form of
panels and the tandem storage battery technology are incredibly toxic
industries.

This is something I mention often, very few people are aware of it. Ergo
overseas production.
Let the little -- foreign -- people pay taxes and suffer with hydrofluoric
acid.

Face it. We're doomed.

Not such a big problem for me.
I just object to being shoved to the front of the Doom Line.
--
EA







nb

On Apr 8, 5:12�pm, George wrote:
On 4/8/2010 10:43 AM, wrote:





On Apr 8, 8:39 am, "Existential
wrote:
Awl --

In the recent thread on solar powered homes, which displayed the Natural
Divide of opinion on solar power, Salty actually posted an inneresting ditty
on solar powered planes.
His purpose was, of course, more one-ups-manship than anything constructive,
but it was inneresting nonetheless.

The REALLY inneresting thing about it was that the plane had a whole 40 hp!!

What does this remind you of?

The old VW Beetle had a whole 36 hp, which was then souped up to... �42 hp!
An air-cooled 4 cyl engine (no heavy fluid-filled radiator/cooling system).

Incredibly, that measly 42 hp was fully capable of doing 80 mph -- mebbe not
up hill, and mebbe with a slight tailwind, but, still, 80 mph. �And, iirc,
it got about 40 mpg..... �or more. �I never had one, and gas was 27c/gal, so
no one was really calculating mpg's then, but that was a figure floating
around. �Coulda been much better than 40 mpg....

The VW Beetle was for a commuting college student what a back pack is to
grade-schoolers today..... �when a whole city block of parked cars was
nothing but VWs -- in NYC.... �in Greenwich Village.... �of course.....

Even the VW mini-bus, the 60's breadbox equivalent to our SUV (iconized on a
Beatle album, iirc), used that same 42 hp engine.

Yet, in the rush for a viable electric car, I don't think a single design
considers anything less than 100 hp. �The Nissan Leaf is already at 107 hp.
The stupidly over-priced Chevy Volt is at 160 hp.

And the ironic thing is, a small car with four 10 hp "hub motors" (like disk
brakes) would yield an incredibly versatile useful car! �With the most
versatile 4 wd possible, and a potential turning radius of zero -- think
military tanks.

All-solar homes are not practical, imo, simply because our lifestyles and
"urban structure" won't *let* them be practical, even if the cost made
sense.
We engage in "spiraling habits", like air conditioning, which makes
cities -- and the planet -- disproportionately and ironically hotter.
Between the blacktop, cars (200 hp and up), and pervasive A/C, �NYC is proly
10 deg hotter than surrounding areas.

Now, a GRID of solar power WOULD likely be effective -- where *every*
roof-top, *by law*, was mandated to have X% of it devoted to solar energy,
both passive (hot water), and active (grid-connected PVs et al).

THEN, we would likely see real savings and utility.

Which will not happen any time soon, cuz such a scenario is more anathema to
Big Bidniss than the Public Option was in this bull**** health care reform,
which wound up being just a brilliant Insurance Scam.

So, the moral to the story is, if we cain't figger out that 42 hp that was
"enough" in the 60's and 70s is enough today,

The VW beetle had HP in the 40's in the 1960's, but by the 1970's it
had been increased into the 55hp range. � �And today you can buy a
SmartCar that has about 70hp. � � The obvious problem is that neither
of these cars fits the lifestyle or needs we have today. �And the
SmartCar has fuel economy that is less than a Toyota Prius or a mid
size MB Bluetec diesel, both of which are decent size real cars. �One
application they could fit is to be used primarily as a commuter car
to get you from your house to mass transit.

It totally depends on what someones "lifestyles and needs" are. You have
to admit that a very large percentage of folks who drive giant fluffed
up trucks don't do anything more than transport themselves and maybe a
large beverage.



A real car of even modest size with only 40hp also has safety
limitations. �I would not want to be trying to enter a freeway in a
major city driving one.

and if "population control"
has been essentially deleted from the dictionary, and if "bonuses" is de
rigeur in the new Corporate Zeitgeist -- even for failing corporations --
then practical solar power is going to be a long time in coming.

A non-sequitur.

Apropos of the "urban structure" mentioned above, we have a New Economic
Structure, epitomized by the Big Box Motif (replete with bonuses) and the
nylon Net Fishing of the Public, where we have been herded, painted --
checkmated -- into an economic corner where nothing is viable unless it's
done on a massive scale.

Yeah, funny how volume factors into basic economics.

This is by conspiratorial design, imo, but this doesn't really matter at
this point, as this Net Fishing of the public is essentially irreversible,
and here to stay.

Uh huh, it's just one big old conspiracy. � Obviously Ford is talking
and sharing evil plans with Sony and John Deere.

How it got started is just inneresting history.

The upshot of this will be the working class living in barracks, and all
that that implies.

The good news is, is that barracks generally have a lot of roof-age, and
would be tailor-made for solar cell arrays.
And given that barracks are generally not air conditioned, and have just a
few light bulbs hanging from their A-frame ceilings, there should be plenty
of energy left over for The Grid, �for the A/C's of those lucky enough not
to be living in barracks.

--
EA

More negative hogwash.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There will never be electric cars for the masses. The national power
systems of both UK and USA is not up to charging millions of them,
even by night.

On 2010-04-08, Existential Angst wrote:

Not such a big problem for me.
I just object to being shoved to the front of the Doom Line.

Sucks to be young. Imma geezer who will be happy to see 10 more yrs.
I weep for my daughter and granddaughers, but am no less optimistic.
Feel free to nurture any fantasies you may have.

nb

On Apr 8, 7:39*am, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

snip

Cut & paste this and let us know what you think:

http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04...siness-models/

Joe

On 2010-04-08, Existential Angst wrote:

I myself have thought about something roughly equivalent, like retiring in
jail.
I'm too good looking to consider that right now, but mebbe in another 15-20
years.....
I just hope I get generous liberry privileges, and am allowed to take my
vitamins......

It occurs to me you've not really existed long enough to claim any
knowledge of existentialism, a bogus term created by self-proclaimed
intellectuals who had nothing importannt to add to anything. Hello!
Anyone who was born and lived longer than 8 seconds existed. DUH!!

Get back to us when you have some actual revelations we haven't all
considered in passing between beers or while taking a dump.

nb

"notbob" wrote in message
...
On 2010-04-08, Existential Angst wrote:

I myself have thought about something roughly equivalent, like retiring
in
jail.
I'm too good looking to consider that right now, but mebbe in another
15-20
years.....
I just hope I get generous liberry privileges, and am allowed to take my
vitamins......

It occurs to me you've not really existed long enough to claim any
knowledge of existentialism, a bogus term created by self-proclaimed
intellectuals who had nothing importannt to add to anything. Hello!
Anyone who was born and lived longer than 8 seconds existed. DUH!!

8 seconds, eh?


Get back to us when you have some actual revelations we haven't all
considered in passing between beers or while taking a dump.

Methinks you strained too hard on yer last dump.
You should relax more, and just let it come out smooth.
Drink more water, fibre. Exercise helps.

Hey, you don't like Existential Angst??
You'da LOVED my old handle... Proctologically Violated®©
The Wife made me change it, tho....
--
EA


nb

On 2010-04-08, Existential Angst wrote:

Methinks you strained too hard on yer last dump.

You would.

You'da LOVED my old handle... Proctologically Violated®©
The Wife made me change it, tho....

You actually have someone who hangs with you for longer than a couple
days?

nb

"Existential Angst" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
wrote:

And you'd like to
force your way on the rest of us, because we are just too stupid to be
free.


he wont have to force his way on you!!

There are "limits" to this "system" we call earth....
and your wasteful ways will bounce up against that
ceiling soon enough by your own doing and the onus will
be on you!

Yeah, but because the majority is composed of profligate rationalized
assholes like Trader, who proly lives by himself AND has a king-sized
bed -- AND a Hummer -- we will ALL pay.

Chest-thumping dick-waving assholes like Trader Salty et al are why we
have nothing but Reality TV, murder/crime shows, and occult shows. Even
PBS has caved in to these semi-litirit ditzies.

Heh, even better: Reality TV in yer Escalade, on 25" spinning rims, with
a boom box that will set off car alarms.. Dats d'ticket....

And Trader essentially got it right:
The majority IS too stupid to be free, which we have revealed in 64
million colors via the P4 chip/internet, where we tip our philistinic hand
with every click, every keystroke.
And finally the power-dat-be are taking full advantage of it, able to
paint us so tightly in an economic corner that we have
claustrophobia-induced vertigo. We are free.... on paper. Free to work
double shifts, per multiperson household.

It used to be the mantra of the powers-dat-be, Make'em moan, but don't
let'em scream....
Well, now, it dudn't even matter. We can scream all we want, and there's
not a fukn thing anyone can do about anything. It's all a dog and pony
show.

Congress will vote themselves raises, **** us up to our collective
ileocecal valves (or in Trader/Salty's case, up to their epiglotti, cuz
they think it's just a rectal exam), execs will cream us with bonuses we
pay for (directly and indirectly), and there's not a fukn thing anyone can
do about it.
Not even in the '60s -- Woodstock *proved* that. goodgawd....

One *can*, however, leave the country. But then, you will just become
another victim of Merka's foreign policy.
Heh, pick yer poison, eh?

It STILL doesn't register to Trader that 40 hp got you 80 mph and near 40
mpg in 1960...
Today, that same 40 hp could proly reach 90-100 mph, and get 65 mpg at 50
mph. Or run much more easily on batteries.
Cuz, well, HE needs 300+ hp, and proly a can-ful of Viagra.
--
EA

For the love of God buy a spell checker.

--
They can have my command prompt when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.

wrote:
wrote:

And you'd like to
force your way on the rest of us, because we are just too stupid to
be free.


he wont have to force his way on you!!

There are "limits" to this "system" we call earth....
and your wasteful ways will bounce up against that
ceiling soon enough by your own doing and the onus will
be on you!

And what would those "limits" be?

Please check out the Simon-Ehrlich Wager he
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon-Ehrlich_wager

Existential Angst wrote:

It STILL doesn't register to Trader that 40 hp got you 80 mph and
near 40 mpg in 1960...
Today, that same 40 hp could proly reach 90-100 mph, and get 65 mpg
at 50 mph. Or run much more easily on batteries.

Cuz, well, HE needs 300+ hp, and proly a can-ful of Viagra.

He does not NEED 300+ horsepower (and probably not Viagra). He WANTS 300+
horspower (and maybe Viagra).

If you have a WANT and the ability to satisfy that want, why should anyone -
or the government - stand in your way?