Riding in to work this morning left me a but stunned!
This is the first day I've ridden the local rail-trail to work. Snow is finally gone from all of it. I couldn't get over just how many people on bikes I saw!
All commuters as near as I can tell. No riding shorts or tights or lime green windbreakers. Bikes with panniers, handlebar bags or milk crates on them.
I actually noted quite a few more bicycles on the road during this past winter as well, but my route was more varied so I think I might have under-noted their presence. Now the bike path is open, they're harder to miss.
Filled up my truck with gas this weekend after a two week passage of time since my last visit to the pump and was surprised to see $2.13/gal ($62 fill up)!!!
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase is correlated with the cost of gas. Given that it's barely spring here, I'd expect the summer gas price to reach a good $3/gal at least.
I suspect (and hope) I'll see quite a few more bike commuters as the year progresses!
Stephen Harding wrote:> Riding in to work this morning left me a but stunned! {snip}
Filled up my truck with gas this weekend after a two week passage> of time since my last visit to the pump and was surprised to see> $2.13/gal ($62 fill up)!!!
Dude, San Diego hasn't seen gas that /low/ for a good 5-6 months. (Was $2.39 for regular at Costco two days ago; most stations are well over $2.50 already.)
"Stephen Harding" <smharding@verizon.net> wrote in message news:9ZA4e.6451$7b.1499@trndny03...> Riding in to work this morning left me a but stunned!>
This is the first day I've ridden the local rail-trail to work. Snow is> finally gone from all of it. I couldn't get over just how many people> on bikes I saw!>
All commuters as near as I can tell. No riding shorts or tights or> lime green windbreakers. Bikes with panniers, handlebar bags or> milk crates on them.>
I actually noted quite a few more bicycles on the road during this> past winter as well, but my route was more varied so I think I might> have under-noted their presence. Now the bike path is open, they're> harder to miss.>
Filled up my truck with gas this weekend after a two week passage> of time since my last visit to the pump and was surprised to see> $2.13/gal ($62 fill up)!!!>
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase> is correlated with the cost of gas. Given that it's barely spring here,> I'd expect the summer gas price to reach a good $3/gal at least.>
Well the last prediction I heard / saw was that the *national* average was predicted for about $2.25 but seeing how many areas are above or close to this price now I suspect the actual average will be somewhat higher probably closer to $2.75.
I suspect (and hope) I'll see quite a few more bike commuters as the> year progresses!>
"Stephen Harding" <smharding@verizon.net> wrote in message news:9ZA4e.6451$7b.1499@trndny03...
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase> is correlated with the cost of gas. Given that it's barely spring here,> I'd expect the summer gas price to reach a good $3/gal at least.
It would be a good thing. But I suspect that, while there may be a mild bump in the number of bike commuters, it won't have nearly the effect we'd wish.
All the talk in the news is about the things people have to economize on in order to continue to pay for gas. I fear this reflects the prevailing attitude.
I think that, by and large, there are relatively few people who now drive to work who believe they live close enough to be able to bike.
And while I've never seen such a statistic, I strongly suspect that the majority of the bike commuters we see would, if unable to bike, be using public transportation rather than cars.
"Stephen Harding" <smharding@verizon.net> wrote in message news:9ZA4e.6451$7b.1499@trndny03...>
Filled up my truck with gas this weekend after a two week passage> of time since my last visit to the pump and was surprised to see> $2.13/gal ($62 fill up)!!!>
Since I made a concious decision to use the car less and the bike more, the fuel bill for the car has decreased dramatically, which is a good thing. I'm also a lot fitter!
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase> is correlated with the cost of gas. Given that it's barely spring here,> I'd expect the summer gas price to reach a good $3/gal at least.>
Well on this side of the pond, it doesn't, sad to say. Our fuel costs are way higher than on your side of the pond, and we still have relatively little cycle use (BAH!). What has made a positive difference over here is, for example, in London where since the introduction of the congestion charge on motor vehicles bicycle use has increased dramtically. Also a few years ago, we went through a short period of fuel shortages due to blockades of main fuel depots as a protest against fuel taxes. The number of vehicles on the road dropped dramatically and the number of bicycles increased. It was bliss for a short while!
I suspect (and hope) I'll see quite a few more bike commuters as the> year progresses!>
It would be a good thing all round if we use less on fossil fuels.
I don't commute to work yet, but one thing I have stopped doing nearly as much is putting my bike in my truck and driving somewhere else to ride. Now I almost always ride from the house to the house.
We have been spoiled with low prices for gasoline. I remember someone mentioning that gasoline was something like $4 a gallon four years ago in places like Israel. You don't see too many gas guzzlers over there.
In article <9ZA4e.6451$7b.1499@trndny03>, "Stephen Harding" <smharding@verizon.net> writes in part:
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase> is correlated with the cost of gas. Given that it's barely spring here,> I'd expect the summer gas price to reach a good $3/gal at least.
I've made similar observations and wondered the same thing about the price of gas encouraging more riding and less driving. Actually my observations consist largely of seeing many more transportational bikes parked around town, often in my own favourite parking spots. Yesterday during a pizza run I had to park three parking meters up from my usual spot directly in front of the pizza joint, each meter already having a bike locked to it. I suddenly felt a little less unusual.
I've seen lots more bikes in motion on the streets too, but I'm not sure how much of that is simply fair-weather cyclists coming out of hibernation. There's also a Big street construction/repair/altering push going on locally, with all the associated traffic delays. So maybe a lot of folks have figured out that by cycling they can avoid much of that hassle.
BTW, talking on the phone to my brother the farmer in the BC Interior -- he tells me that up there diesel is more expensive gasoline. He's also wondering why bottle propane (e.g: BBQ refills) is more expensive than car propane when it all comes out the same tank.
Gas in Vancouver is hovering around the $1.00/litre mark.
cheers, Tom
-- -- Nothing is safe from me. Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase>is correlated with the cost of gas. Given that it's barely spring here,>I'd expect the summer gas price to reach a good $3/gal at least.>
I suspect (and hope) I'll see quite a few more bike commuters as the>year progresses!
I think you're probably seeing a little bit of "It's January 3rd and, dammit, I'm going to the gym..." syndrome. First nice day. Best intentions. I expect you'll see the usual attrition, too.
Also, didn't we just recently bomb the pi$$ out of, and occupy, an oil producing nation? And doesn't it still cost about $5/barrel to *extract* oil from the ground?? How come we're (well, not me but...) still paying so much for gas, anyway??
I feel like we've (pick one)
- invaded Canada and can't put together a decent hockey team (or) - invaded France and can't get decent pastry/wine (or) - invaded Italy and still can't get a decent veal piccata . . . .
Also, didn't we just recently bomb the pi$$ out of, and occupy, an oil> producing nation? And doesn't it still cost about $5/barrel to> *extract* oil from the ground?? How come we're (well, not me but...)> still paying so much for gas, anyway??>
I feel like we've (pick one)>
- invaded Canada and can't put together a decent hockey team (or)> - invaded France and can't get decent pastry/wine (or)> - invaded Italy and still can't get a decent veal piccata . . . .
So you're suggesting we should just /take/ all the oil instead of letting the Iraqi people keep it?
Also, didn't we just recently bomb the pi$$ out of, and occupy, an oil>> producing nation? And doesn't it still cost about $5/barrel to>> *extract* oil from the ground?? How come we're (well, not me but...)>> still paying so much for gas, anyway??>>
I feel like we've (pick one)>>
- invaded Canada and can't put together a decent hockey team (or)>> - invaded France and can't get decent pastry/wine (or)>> - invaded Italy and still can't get a decent veal piccata . . . .>
So you're suggesting we should just /take/ all the oil instead of letting>the Iraqi people keep it?>
Interesting.
Oh, heck no. I'm the guy who thinks we ought to pay what Europe and Canada pay for gas.
I'm just curious why it *didn't* get cheap, considering we bombed the guys who *didn't* have any WMD, rather than the little Korean guy who *did* have WMD . . . ostensibly because the former had oil, which is in our strategic interests, and the latter did not.
While China becomes more like we were several decades ago, we become more like China was several decades ago? Hmmm. -- Bob C.
"Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts." T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia) "Stephen Harding" <smharding@verizon.net> wrote in message news:9ZA4e.6451$7b.1499@trndny03...> Riding in to work this morning left me a but stunned!>
This is the first day I've ridden the local rail-trail to work. Snow is> finally gone from all of it. I couldn't get over just how many people> on bikes I saw!>
All commuters as near as I can tell. No riding shorts or tights or> lime green windbreakers. Bikes with panniers, handlebar bags or> milk crates on them.>
I actually noted quite a few more bicycles on the road during this> past winter as well, but my route was more varied so I think I might> have under-noted their presence. Now the bike path is open, they're> harder to miss.>
Filled up my truck with gas this weekend after a two week passage> of time since my last visit to the pump and was surprised to see> $2.13/gal ($62 fill up)!!!>
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase> is correlated with the cost of gas. Given that it's barely spring here,> I'd expect the summer gas price to reach a good $3/gal at least.>
I suspect (and hope) I'll see quite a few more bike commuters as the> year progresses!>
Neil Brooks wrote:> "Stephen Harding" <smharding@verizon.net> wrote:>
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase>>is correlated with the cost of gas. Given that it's barely spring here,>>I'd expect the summer gas price to reach a good $3/gal at least.>>
I suspect (and hope) I'll see quite a few more bike commuters as the>>year progresses!>
I think you're probably seeing a little bit of "It's January 3rd and,> dammit, I'm going to the gym..." syndrome. First nice day. Best> intentions. I expect you'll see the usual attrition, too.>
Also, didn't we just recently bomb the pi$$ out of, and occupy, an oil> producing nation? And doesn't it still cost about $5/barrel to> *extract* oil from the ground?? How come we're (well, not me but...)> still paying so much for gas, anyway??>
I feel like we've (pick one)>
- invaded Canada and can't put together a decent hockey team (or)> - invaded France and can't get decent pastry/wine (or)> - invaded Italy and still can't get a decent veal piccata . . . .
Forget Canada, we're paying even more for gas, saw 89.1 cents/litre on the way home, US$2.77/US gallon..... I expect that it will be $3.10 by the end of the summer....
Neil Brooks wrote:> "Bill Sornson" <NoSpamSorniNoSpam@SpamMeNotBot.san.rr.com> wrote:>
Neil Brooks wrote:
I feel like we've (pick one)>>>
- invaded Canada and can't put together a decent hockey team (or)>>> - invaded France and can't get decent pastry/wine (or)>>> - invaded Italy and still can't get a decent veal piccata . . . .>>
So you're suggesting we should just /take/ all the oil instead of>> letting the Iraqi people keep it?>>
Interesting.>
Oh, heck no. I'm the guy who thinks we ought to pay what Europe and> Canada pay for gas.>
I'm just curious why it *didn't* get cheap, considering we bombed the> guys who *didn't* have any WMD, rather than the little Korean guy who> *did* have WMD . . . ostensibly because the former had oil, which is> in our strategic interests, and the latter did not.
Maybe that's a clue that it had nothing to do with oil.
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase> is correlated with the cost of gas.
What is the legality in the English-speaking nations about converting car-engines to alcohol? Here in France it is _illegal_ because the government wants to collect a fat tax on gas. Pollute, pollute, pollute so that you can pay taxes. So far, there has been one nerd on the news who has started running his car on alcohol and he seemed to be challenging the authorities to come after him and make a case out of it. But he was so isolated that they just ignored him and laughed.
I think the thing to do, apart from cycling of course, is to convert your engines, have a moonshine still in your cellar to make your garden waste into fuel and practice civil disobedience to challenge the law, if there is one.
"Neil Brooks" <Neil0502@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Oh, heck no. I'm the guy who thinks we ought to pay what Europe and> Canada pay for gas.
So what's stopping you? The next time you buy gas tell the cashier you don't feel you're paying enough. I'm pretty sure he'll take as much as you want to pay.
"Cheto" <presidentofmars@hotmail.com> wrote in message newsvN4e.6603$xI2.6030@fe07.lga...>
"Neil Brooks" <Neil0502@yahoo.com> wrote in message>
Oh, heck no. I'm the guy who thinks we ought to pay what Europe and> > Canada pay for gas.>
So what's stopping you? The next time you buy gas tell the cashier you> don't feel you're paying enough. I'm pretty sure he'll take as much as
want to pay.>
Cheto>
Yeah I am sure the cashier would take the extra, however 1 person paying what Europe pays won't do any good. Now if the real price of gasoline was what the EU nations pay then there would be less people that feel the need to drive a huge suv half a block to get a slushy from the local quick-mart! And that would be an improvement. Ken
Stephen Harding 6 April 2005 16:20:52 [ permanent link ]
catzz66 wrote:
We have been spoiled with low prices for gasoline. I remember someone > mentioning that gasoline was something like $4 a gallon four years ago > in places like Israel. You don't see too many gas guzzlers over there.
It was about $4.50/gal in the Netherlands a couple years ago when I was there.
I was rather surprised at the larger than expected number of American gas guzzlers (some pickup trucks, but mostly SUV types) I saw. Wasn't expecting that at all.
Then of course, there was the Smart (minicar). Sorta neat.
Stephen Harding 6 April 2005 16:32:00 [ permanent link ]
wafflycat wrote:
relatively little cycle use (BAH!). What has made a positive difference > over here is, for example, in London where since the introduction of the > congestion charge on motor vehicles bicycle use has increased > dramtically. Also a few years ago, we went through a short period of > fuel shortages due to blockades of main fuel depots as a protest against > fuel taxes. The number of vehicles on the road dropped dramatically and > the number of bicycles increased. It was bliss for a short while!
Read about the London "congestion charge". Don't think it would be tolerated over here.
I do think traffic congestion is another factor besides fuel costs that *might* get more people biking to work.
A recent US census report on commuting (based on 2003 survey data I think) put 5% of Americans having 90 minute or more *one way* commute time. Overall commuting time had risen 3 or 4 minutes from the previous study results. Average commute time for the US was 25 minutes or so IIRC (one way). New York had the highest state average.
Perhaps with $10/gal fuel costs, and 90 minute commute times, especially balled up in traffic (going faster on the bike, which I can sometimes do), is the only hope. Sad but perhaps true.
Stephen Harding 6 April 2005 16:38:07 [ permanent link ]
Neil Brooks wrote:
Also, didn't we just recently bomb the pi$$ out of, and occupy, an oil> producing nation? And doesn't it still cost about $5/barrel to> *extract* oil from the ground?? How come we're (well, not me but...)> still paying so much for gas, anyway??
That's the liberal spin on why the US does anything: Oil!
In fact, the cost of gas should illustrate that oil acquisition wasn't the sole criteria for the action.
I feel like we've (pick one)>
- invaded Canada and can't put together a decent hockey team (or)> - invaded France and can't get decent pastry/wine (or)> - invaded Italy and still can't get a decent veal piccata . . . .
I like your analogies. Does seem like something ain't quite right.
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase>> is correlated with the cost of gas. >
What is the legality in the English-speaking nations about converting > car-engines to alcohol? Here in France it is _illegal_ because the > government wants to collect a fat tax on gas. Pollute, pollute, pollute > so that you can pay taxes. So far, there has been one nerd on the news > who has started running his car on alcohol and he seemed to be > challenging the authorities to come after him and make a case out of it. > But he was so isolated that they just ignored him and laughed.>
I think the thing to do, apart from cycling of course, is to convert > your engines, have a moonshine still in your cellar to make your garden > waste into fuel and practice civil disobedience to challenge the law, if > there is one.>
EFR
Ethanol only reduces the pollution since it is still a hydrocarbon you will get the usual water and CO2from the exhaust. C6H12O2 is the generic hydrocarbon formula, and varies mainly in how many C, H, or O atoms are in each. In essence the H12O2 component comes out as H2O (water) and the C component comes out as CO2,so it is not as clean as you might think. The only really pure combustible fuel is Hydrogen, which when burned makes pure H2O (water). Making the hydrogen by way means other than Hydro, Wind, Solar, ocean wave energy harvesting, or the dreaded nuclear, results in CO2 from even the cleanest coal or oil burning plant to make the electricity to do the hydrolysis. Hydrogen vehicles are not the answer yet until we can produce hydrogen without burning stuff to generate electricity. I think gigantic wind farms and solar farms (Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, California) could power the whole country with passive energy generation.
This scenario will be interesting to watch and see if the government does something right or just drills and screws up the Alaskan refuge. Bill Baka
We have been spoiled with low prices for gasoline. I remember someone >> mentioning that gasoline was something like $4 a gallon four years ago >> in places like Israel. You don't see too many gas guzzlers over there.>
It was about $4.50/gal in the Netherlands a couple> years ago when I was there.>
I was rather surprised at the larger than expected> number of American gas guzzlers (some pickup trucks,> but mostly SUV types) I saw. Wasn't expecting that> at all.>
Then of course, there was the Smart (minicar). Sorta> neat.>
The minicar was indeed a very neat way to get around but I believe the US government in their infinite wisdom (yeah, right) banned them for being too small and possibly killing their drivers. One up on that is the go-go-mobile of the 1960's which was a one passenger only with a sub 1 liter engine and the front of the car swung out to get in or out. gain I bet it was government interference that killed them. Bill Baka
Stephen Harding 6 April 2005 16:56:11 [ permanent link ]
Ken wrote:
Yeah I am sure the cashier would take the extra, however 1 person paying> what Europe pays won't do any good. Now if the real price of gasoline was> what the EU nations pay then there would be less people that feel the need> to drive a huge suv half a block to get a slushy from the local quick-mart!
Do Europeans pay "the real" cost of gas?
I thought they simply tax it at a higher rate, or force supply priorities on the types of fuel produced, that result in the price consumers pay. Is that "real"?
Here in the US, I think half, or close to half, the price of a gallon of gas is state/federal tax.
Europe has simply chosen to prioritize fuel in such a way that its cost is extremely high compared with that in the US. Nothing wrong with that if voters don't mind.
One word...SUVs.>Maybe also the tendency to way oversize pickup just to run mom to the >grocery store.
Today's SUVs, while larger than they need to be, still get the same sort of gas mileage than the cars moms drove in the 60's and 70's (on average). That's due to advances in motor technology and materials, offsetting the shed-like proportions of today's vehicle of choice.
Neil Brooks wrote:>> "Bill Sornson" <NoSpamSorniNoSpam@SpamMeNotBot.san.rr.com> wrote:>>
Neil Brooks wrote:>
I feel like we've (pick one)>>>>
- invaded Canada and can't put together a decent hockey team (or)>>>> - invaded France and can't get decent pastry/wine (or)>>>> - invaded Italy and still can't get a decent veal piccata . . . .>>>
So you're suggesting we should just /take/ all the oil instead of>>> letting the Iraqi people keep it?>>>
Interesting.>>
Oh, heck no. I'm the guy who thinks we ought to pay what Europe and>> Canada pay for gas.>>
I'm just curious why it *didn't* get cheap, considering we bombed the>> guys who *didn't* have any WMD, rather than the little Korean guy who>> *did* have WMD . . . ostensibly because the former had oil, which is>> in our strategic interests, and the latter did not.>
Maybe that's a clue that it had nothing to do with oil.>
Blasphemous Bill>
Or . . . equally likely . . . an intentional decision to avoid the appearance of the starkly obvious.
The masses, somehow, are ok with deposing a brutal, and unimaginably lethal despot . . . even if he's a puppy-dog with a water pistol hiding in a hole.
They don't like blood for oil. They also b*tch to the high heavens about the price of gas and expect the gummint to do something about it.
"Cheto" <presidentofmars@hotmail.com> wrote in message>newsvN4e.6603$xI2.6030@fe07.lga...>>
"Neil Brooks" <Neil0502@yahoo.com> wrote in message>>
Oh, heck no. I'm the guy who thinks we ought to pay what Europe and>> > Canada pay for gas.>>
So what's stopping you? The next time you buy gas tell the cashier you>> don't feel you're paying enough. I'm pretty sure he'll take as much as>you>> want to pay.>>
Cheto>>
Yeah I am sure the cashier would take the extra, however 1 person paying>what Europe pays won't do any good. Now if the real price of gasoline was>what the EU nations pay then there would be less people that feel the need>to drive a huge suv half a block to get a slushy from the local quick-mart!>And that would be an improvement.
Thank you, Ken. I always feel like I'm on the phone with Rush Limbaugh when a comment like Cheto's comes out.
Lots of bluster, but nothing substantive added to the discussion.
Cheto: note the inclusion of the word "we" in my post.
"bbaka" wrote in message> The minicar was indeed a very neat way to get around but I believe the> US government in their infinite wisdom (yeah, right) banned them for> being too small and possibly killing their drivers. One up on that is> the go-go-mobile of the 1960's which was a one passenger only with a sub> 1 liter engine and the front of the car swung out to get in or out. gain> I bet it was government interference that killed them.> Bill Baka
I don't think Mercedes ever tried to certify the Smart minicar for importation to the US. I do recall reading an article by a New York travel writer who bought one in France, brought it back to the US, and finally got it licensed to drive in the US.
The Isetta was a German bubble car whose front swung out to allow the driver to enter/exit. Two wheels in front, one in back IIRC. The Goggomobil was another German threewheeler, I think the engine was under 500cc. Both were built in the '50s & early '60s, when Germany was still rebuilding it's society and industrial infrastructure and was a much less prosperous place than it is today. Both cars were fairly rare by the late '60s, when most Germans could afford cars with four wheels. No government interference required to kill those things, just market forces in a more prosperous society. -- mark
"Elisa Francesca Roselli" > wrote> What is the legality in the English-speaking nations about converting> car-engines to alcohol? Here in France it is _illegal_ because the> government wants to collect a fat tax on gas. Pollute, pollute, pollute> so that you can pay taxes. So far, there has been one nerd on the news> who has started running his car on alcohol and he seemed to be> challenging the authorities to come after him and make a case out of it.> But he was so isolated that they just ignored him and laughed.>
I think the thing to do, apart from cycling of course, is to convert> your engines, have a moonshine still in your cellar to make your garden> waste into fuel and practice civil disobedience to challenge the law, if> there is one.>
EFR
Gasoline blended with ethanol is sold in lots of corn growing areas, it seems to get more popular whenever the price of gas goes up.
There are people in this country who convert diesel powered cars and trucks to run on biodiesel, a very few of them run their vehicles exclusively on discarded cooking oil from fast food joints: http://www.patagonia.com/culture/fieldreports/larefrita.shtml .
The masses, somehow, are ok with deposing a brutal, and unimaginably> lethal despot . . . even if he's a puppy-dog with a water pistol> hiding in a hole.
Other than slobbering, Saddam Hussein doesn't resemble a puppy-dog to me at all. You channeling Michael Moore again?
By the way, did you see or hear about the recent comments by Al Gore's former campaign manager re. Bush and the Middle East? (Hopefully your Googling is better than mine.) Refreshingly honest.
OK, now I /really/ have to get to work (as soon as I read another 60-70 posts)... BS
"The Wogster" <wogsterca@yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:FhU4e.5433$6k4.663716@news20.bellglobal.com...> mark wrote:
I don't think Mercedes ever tried to certify the Smart minicar for>> importation to the US. I do recall reading an article by a New York >> travel>> writer who bought one in France, brought it back to the US, and finally >> got>> it licensed to drive in the US.>
It has not been certified in the US, although you don't need to go to > Europe to see one, they are certified in Canada, and DC is selling them > here, saw one about a week ago, here in Toronto, plated and on the road. > The rules for "federalizing" a car in Canada, are different then the > United States.
Yah. I saw one as well in Guelph. I felt like I could have picked it up and carried it on my my bike.
-- 'Trying is the first step towards failure' -homer simpson
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase>>> is correlated with the cost of gas. >>
What is the legality in the English-speaking nations about converting >> car-engines to alcohol? Here in France it is _illegal_ because the >> government wants to collect a fat tax on gas. Pollute, pollute, >> pollute so that you can pay taxes. So far, there has been one nerd on >> the news who has started running his car on alcohol and he seemed to >> be challenging the authorities to come after him and make a case out >> of it. But he was so isolated that they just ignored him and laughed.>>
I think the thing to do, apart from cycling of course, is to convert >> your engines, have a moonshine still in your cellar to make your >> garden waste into fuel and practice civil disobedience to challenge >> the law, if there is one.>>
Ethanol only reduces the pollution since it is still a hydrocarbon you > will get the usual water and CO2from the exhaust. C6H12O2 is the generic > hydrocarbon formula, and varies mainly in how many C, H, or O atoms are > in each. In essence the H12O2 component comes out as H2O (water) and the > C component comes out as CO2,so it is not as clean as you might think. > The only really pure combustible fuel is Hydrogen, which when burned > makes pure H2O (water). Making the hydrogen by way means other than > Hydro, Wind, Solar, ocean wave energy harvesting, or the dreaded > nuclear, results in CO2 from even the cleanest coal or oil burning plant > to make the electricity to do the hydrolysis. Hydrogen vehicles are not > the answer yet until we can produce hydrogen without burning stuff to > generate electricity. I think gigantic wind farms and solar farms > (Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, California) could power the whole country > with passive energy generation.>
This scenario will be interesting to watch and see if the government > does something right or just drills and screws up the Alaskan refuge.> Bill Baka
The hydrogen situation is even worse then that. You are operating under the incorrect assumption that hydrogen will be produced by the electrolysis of water. This false idea has been put forth by hydrogen advocates even though they know that is not the way most hydrogen is produced. Electrolysis requires enormous amounts of electricity and is therefore very expensive. In practice the overwhelming majority of hydrogen is produced by the steam reforming of natural gas in which methane from natural gas (or coal gas) is combined with water steam under heat and pressure which can be cheaply obtained by burning the gas.
CH4 + 2H2O ------> 4H2 + CO2
The CO2 is released into the atmosphere producing as much carbon emissions as if the gas was just burned in the first place. In spite of the large industrial plant required for this, this process costs only about one fifth as much as the electrolysis of water. In order to produce sufficient hydrogen to even partially replace gasoline in automobiles, steam reforming is the only economically possible method. Which means zero reduction of carbon emissions. Given no environmental benefits and the enormous difficulty of transporting and storing hydrogen, why not just burn the natural gas? The hydrogen economy is a boondoggle.
"Americans are broad-minded people. They'll accept the fact that a person can be an alcoholic, a dope fiend, a wife beater, and even a newspaperman, but if a man doesn't drive there's something wrong with him." Art Buchwald
"Neil Brooks" <Neil0502@yahoo.com> wrote in message>
But, but, but . . . I'm subsidizing the Right's little pet war . . .>> and a (roughly) $16B annual tax break for churches, and humongous>> tax-breaks for people driving the biggest, least fuel-efficient SUV's,>> and, and, and....>
I think gigantic wind farms and solar farms > (Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, California) could power the whole country > with passive energy generation.
If that could be done economically, it'd be done now, as it's cheap energy people are after. We currently pay $5 extra for every 100kwh we use for wind power. Unforunately, most people'd rather save the $ and burn the coal.
Riding in to work this morning left me a but stunned!>
This is the first day I've ridden the local rail-trail to work. Snow is> finally gone from all of it. I couldn't get over just how many people> on bikes I saw!>
All commuters as near as I can tell. No riding shorts or tights or> lime green windbreakers. Bikes with panniers, handlebar bags or> milk crates on them.>
I actually noted quite a few more bicycles on the road during this> past winter as well, but my route was more varied so I think I might> have under-noted their presence. Now the bike path is open, they're> harder to miss.>
Filled up my truck with gas this weekend after a two week passage> of time since my last visit to the pump and was surprised to see> $2.13/gal ($62 fill up)!!!>
Couldn't help but wonder if the commuter bike population increase> is correlated with the cost of gas. Given that it's barely spring here,> I'd expect the summer gas price to reach a good $3/gal at least.>
I suspect (and hope) I'll see quite a few more bike commuters as the> year progresses!>
SMH
I know there are bikes in my neck of the woods but I don't see many. I see their tracks in the mud, sand, and dust on the extreme right side of streets and roads. The numbers of can't-see-around-'em-or-through-'em minivans, clattering diesel pickups, and SUVs seem not to be changing, though I heard on the news that sales of some makes of those aren't selling now as well as a year ago. The self-serve where I occasionally drop in to top off a tire seems to still be doing a land office business in fuels.
I haven't bought gas since November 2004. Every December I pull the battery out of my '86 Saab and pull the garage door down for the winter. That battery is still sitting in the back hall as I write this.
"Stephen Harding" <smharding@verizon.net> wrote in message news:4FQ4e.6444$7b.3153@trndny01...>
Perhaps with $10/gal fuel costs, and 90 minute commute times,> especially balled up in traffic (going faster on the bike,> which I can sometimes do), is the only hope. Sad but perhaps> true.>
We are now over £4 a gallon. Admittedly our gallon is larger than the Stateside gallon. Current exchange rate about 1.885$ to £1, so that puts our price at about $7.54 a gallon. And that has no effect on denting demand for fuel. The only thing which did over here was, apart from the current congestion charge in London) when the fuel depots were blockaded a few years ago, for a short time. Only then was there a noticeable drop in the number of cars on the road as effectively rationing was introduced as people tried to eke out their fuel supply as they did not know if they would be able to fill the tanks again easily for the duration. From a cycling point of view, it was bliss, clear roads, far more people out on bikes. Oh, and our fuel prices now are higher than the ones complained about when the blockade was on.
"bbaka" <bbaka@syix.com> wrote in message news:1112791745.412848@news01.syix.com...> Stephen Harding wrote:>> catzz66 wrote:>>
We have been spoiled with low prices for gasoline. I remember someone >>> mentioning that gasoline was something like $4 a gallon four years ago >>> in places like Israel. You don't see too many gas guzzlers over there.>>
The minicar was indeed a very neat way to get around but I believe the US > government in their infinite wisdom (yeah, right) banned them for being > too small and possibly killing their drivers. One up on that is the > go-go-mobile of the 1960's which was a one passenger only with a sub 1 > liter engine and the front of the car swung out to get in or out. gain I > bet it was government interference that killed them.
-which has lots of excellent pictiures of all the "contenders". I had first experience of several of these in the late 50's. The Bond Minicar sold fairly well in Britain as well as the Isetta and Heinkel. However by far the most enjoyable to drive was the Messerschmitt. It had (relatively) lots of power and featured direct steering with a pilot's yoke father than a steering wheel.. Check out the TG 500 which had four wheels and a much more powerful engine. The cornering was reported to be phenomenal.
Stephen Harding 8 April 2005 02:47:02 [ permanent link ]
bbaka wrote:
We may have to go nuclear, like it or not if people insist on, A. > multiplying. B. Driving. C. Third world countries driving with no > pollution controls in place.
Well I actually agree with you on this. I think nuclear can be a good choice now, and certainly Europe, France in particular I think, has had good experience with it over a long time.
Disposal of waste is the big black part of it still and will be for some time.
Unfortunately, nukes still come with too much political baggage. Starting up a nuke power building program will still be hard to do.
Apparently, there is a new way to charge an electric bike's>battery (batteries?) in 15 minutes.>
In ebay, offered under Item number: 5570288521>
Claims 5 miles charge in 15 minutes, by modification to>existing electric bicycles, scooters, mopeds, and motorcycles>(there are a few, see Can-EV website)
Thing is, the faster you charge a battery, the more damage you do to it (particularly if it's a NiCad). Unless it's a VERY special cell, a five minute charge to that kind of level sounds VERY dangerous (both to the battery and anything near it while it's charging).
Well I actually agree with you on this. I think nuclear can>be a good choice now, and certainly Europe, France in particular>I think, has had good experience with it over a long time.>
Disposal of waste is the big black part of it still and will be>for some time.
This is probably less of an issue than most folks realize since dry cask storage systems have been developed. Before the utilities were between a rock and a hard spot as their fuel pools filled up. Now they can add really robust spent fuel storage on an as-needed basis.
I think the U.S. will be wrestling with Yucca Mountain politics for awhile, yet the DOE got their WIPP facility online with few complications, and most other nuclear nations have operational high-level waste facilities.
Unfortunately, nukes still come with too much political baggage.>Starting up a nuke power building program will still be hard to>do.
You may get to see it yet. A group of utilities are looking real hard at testing the water with a new plant.
Interesting times,
Chris Neary diabloridr@comcast.net
"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh
Stephen Harding 9 April 2005 15:41:22 [ permanent link ]
Ken wrote:
"Stephen Harding" <smharding16@msn.com> wrote in message>>
Is burning coal "bad" if that's the electricity source for>>recharging your electric car?>
Yes it is, I would prefer hydro-dymanic, solar or wind.
So damming up every river in sight is what you want to do? The salmon wouldn't like that much, not to mention all the other traumatic ecological changes that result to riverine habitats when you dam them. Plus, there's only so many rivers you can dam, and they're not homogeneously placed around the country.
Wind power? The proposed wind farm out in Nantucket Sound is running into all sorts of problems. It's right on a major bird migration route. The wind farm built a while ago is now known to be severely disrupting bat migrations, something no one really thought of until after the fact. Some of these species are threatened.
Solar? What if the sun isn't out, as it often isn't during winter months in the North. A solar energy farm is even more ugly to look at than a wind farm.
Not to mention that they just aren't especially efficient or reliable.
"Stephen Harding" <smharding16@msn.com> wrote in message news:CbP5e.986$nt3.968@trndny04...> Ken wrote:>
"Stephen Harding" <smharding16@msn.com> wrote in message> >>
Is burning coal "bad" if that's the electricity source for> >>recharging your electric car?> >
Yes it is, I would prefer hydro-dymanic, solar or wind.>
So damming up every river in sight is what you want to do?> The salmon wouldn't like that much, not to mention all the> other traumatic ecological changes that result to riverine> habitats when you dam them. Plus, there's only so many> rivers you can dam, and they're not homogeneously placed> around the country.>
Wind power? The proposed wind farm out in Nantucket Sound> is running into all sorts of problems. It's right on a major> bird migration route. The wind farm built a while ago is> now known to be severely disrupting bat migrations, something> no one really thought of until after the fact. Some of these> species are threatened.>
Solar? What if the sun isn't out, as it often isn't during> winter months in the North. A solar energy farm is even more> ugly to look at than a wind farm.>
Not to mention that they just aren't especially efficient or> reliable.>
Well maybe we should all just pray that all the fossil fuels re-generate themselves, and the enniroment heals itself from all the pollution! Ken
"Birds are seldom bothered by wind turbines. Radar studies from Tjaereborg in the western part of Denmark, where a 2 megawatt wind turbine with 60 metre rotor diameter is installed, show that birds - by day or night - tend to change their flight route some 100-200 metres before the turbine and pass above the turbine at a safe distance. In Denmark there are several examples of birds (falcons) nesting in cages mounted on wind turbine towers. The only known site with major bird collision problems is located in the Altamont Pass in California. A "wind wall" of turbines on lattice towers is literally closing off the pass. There, a few bird kills from collisions have been reported."
Jim Smith wrote:> "Ken" <kcmarcet-dispose-trash@hotpop.com> writes:>
Well other than some bird death, wind isn't that bad...>
They are profoundly ugly too. Not as bad looking as freshly clear cut> forest, but pretty close.
I think a modern wind-farm looks great. Far better then a smoke belching coal plant. And have you seen the piles of waste next to a coal mine? Or a strip mine?
Wind farms look great. And they're clean. We just need to develop some way to store the energy for those times when the wind isn't blowing.
making it harder for seniors on fixed incomes> to get around, will somehow make things better.
I'd be happy to be on a "fixed income" of 100K a year. If it were poor people the republicans cared about they'd stop using the term "fixed income" and start using the term "poor". But then they couldn't mislead people into thinking they actually cared about the poor people (senior or not).
I think nuclear can>> be a good choice now, and certainly Europe, France in particular>> I think, has had good experience with it over a long time.>>
Disposal of waste is the big black part of it still and will be>> for some time.>
Right now it is stored in a huge underground mountain facility somewhere > near or in the rockies. > Bill Baka
More made-up crap from Little Bill. Right now the waste is sitting in water next to the reactors that created it. Nobody wants it, and nobody wants it transported by their town.
Jim Smith wrote:>> "Ken" <kcmarcet-dispose-trash@hotpop.com> writes:>>
Well other than some bird death, wind isn't that bad...>> They are profoundly ugly too. Not as bad looking as freshly clear>> cut>> forest, but pretty close.>
I think a modern wind-farm looks great. Far better then a smoke> belching coal plant. And have you seen the piles of waste next to a> coal mine? Or a strip mine?
Wind may be preferable to coal, but the windmills are still ugly.
I think nuclear can>>> be a good choice now, and certainly Europe, France in particular>>> I think, has had good experience with it over a long time.>>>
Disposal of waste is the big black part of it still and will be>>> for some time.>>
Right now it is stored in a huge underground mountain facility >> somewhere near or in the rockies. Bill Baka>
More made-up crap from Little Bill. Right now the waste is sitting in > water next to the reactors that created it. Nobody wants it, and nobody > wants it transported by their town.>
Please stop making stuff up Little Bill.>
Rich
Why do we have to have this obvious MORON posting. The waste is trucked or railed under heavy federal guard to Yucca mountain where there is a huge underground storage facility. I am not making this up, it is a fact. Maybe Rich needs to take the sanity test, because he seems to be a little lacking upstairs. Nobody wants it going through their town but it does at about 3:00 A.M. with lots of big government escorts closing the roads that it takes. Even the railroad routes are examined and closed while these shipments take place. It isn't my imagination, it is a fact that the government does do it. Wake up Rich, your delusion of being intelligent is just a dream. Bill Baka
Why do we have to have this obvious MORON posting.
I wonder that everytime you post. Please start checking your facts before you post. Google's easy to use, but if you can't quite figure it out I'm sure you can find a 12 year old to help you.
The waste is trucked > or railed under heavy federal guard to Yucca mountain where there is a > huge underground storage facility. I am not making this up, it is a > fact.
Your "facts" are made up, as usual. Nothing is currently going to Yucca mountain, and won't for at least 5 more years, if even then....
The only known site with major bird >collision problems is located in the Altamont Pass in California. A >"wind wall" of turbines on lattice towers is literally closing off the >pass. There, a few bird kills from collisions have been reported."
I shudder to think that 1000 birds per year = "a few"
Wind farms look great. And they're clean. We just need to develop >some way to store the energy for those times when the wind isn't blowing.
The most obvious choice is pumped hydro.
Compressed air storage has been around for a couple of decades but has never really caught on.
At least in California, on of the really neat things about wind is that the daily profile of electrical production by wind nicely tracks the electrical demand profile.
Chris Neary diabloridr@comcast.net
"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh
The waste is trucked or railed under heavy federal guard to Yucca >> mountain where there is a huge underground storage facility. I am not >> making this up, it is a fact. >
Your "facts" are made up, as usual. Nothing is currently going to > Yucca mountain, and won't for at least 5 more years, if even then....>
Watch the History channel or the discovery channel when you get bored. Sometimes even someone as blatantly stupid as you can get a touch of education. They don't just pile up radioactive waste in the back yard of a nuclear plant, you know. Bill Baka, dimwit intolerant, Rich in this case.
