Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > aus.electronics > #33059 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-26 18:08 +1100 |
| Last post | 2017-03-31 19:15 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 54 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to aus.electronics
Dang - missed Earth Hour again Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-26 18:08 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-03-30 21:21 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Colin Horsley <horsley-spam@westnet.com.au> - 2017-03-31 08:13 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-31 09:17 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-31 09:22 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-31 11:10 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Rheilly Phoull <rheilly@bigslong.com> - 2017-03-31 08:25 +0800
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-31 11:28 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Rheilly Phoull <rheilly@bigslong.com> - 2017-03-31 11:37 +0800
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 15:21 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-31 16:29 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-31 16:39 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 17:17 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-31 11:31 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-31 11:43 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-31 11:58 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-31 12:13 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-31 16:30 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-03-31 19:29 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-03-31 19:25 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-04-01 10:39 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-01 19:51 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 10:10 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-04-02 14:21 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-02 18:17 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 03:58 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-02 19:27 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 10:03 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-03 19:50 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 06:43 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-03 21:49 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 08:55 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-04 20:13 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 06:21 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2017-04-03 21:44 +0000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-04 20:16 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 06:22 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-06 19:26 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:30 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-11 19:43 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 05:35 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-04-03 08:23 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2017-04-03 12:55 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-04-03 19:52 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 15:22 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-03-31 19:19 +0100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2017-03-31 15:51 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-03-31 16:37 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again keithr0 <user@account.invalid> - 2017-03-31 20:06 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2017-04-01 17:06 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-04-01 17:03 +1100
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2017-04-01 21:05 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2017-04-02 07:42 +1000
Re: Dang - missed Earth Hour again "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> - 2017-03-31 19:15 +0100
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-01 10:39 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33126 |
On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: > > "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message > news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the UK. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>> number of >>>>>> other countries. >>>>>> >>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and burning >>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>> >>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of the >>>>> problems >>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to make a >>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a pool, >>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of magnitude >>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED lighting, but >>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate is that >>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>> >>> **How do you know? >>> >>> >> >> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not the >> way to show support. > > Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still > require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the first > place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much at all. > **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major advantages over IC cars. Including: * Maximum toque at zero RPM. * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An electric vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature (within obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles are operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly bad. Long trips suit IC engines quite well. * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for city drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise wasted as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an electric vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my transport needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus the total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-01 19:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <VESDA.528967$nT1.284321@fx44.am4> |
| In reply to | #33128 |
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... > On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >> >> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the UK. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>> number of >>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and burning >>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of the >>>>>> problems >>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to make a >>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a pool, >>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>> magnitude >>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED lighting, >>>>>> but >>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate is that >>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>> >>>> **How do you know? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not the >>> way to show support. >> >> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the first >> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much at all. >> > > **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major advantages > over IC cars. Including: > > * Maximum toque at zero RPM. > * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars were > fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car consumed around > 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle opening. When warm, that > figure fell to around 6L/100km. An electric vehicle consumes the same > amount, regardless of temperature (within obvious limits). No warm-up is > required. Since many city vehicles are operated over short trips, fuel > efficiency can be spectacularly bad. Long trips suit IC engines quite > well. > * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for city > drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise wasted as > heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. > > All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an electric > vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, for > me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my transport needs > by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus the total > nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* fossil fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - we're going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the power station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-02 10:10 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ekats3F4llmU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33134 |
"Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in message news:VESDA.528967$nT1.284321@fx44.am4... > > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>> >>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the UK. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and burning >>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of the >>>>>>> problems >>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to make a >>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a pool, >>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED lighting, >>>>>>> but >>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate is >>>>>> that >>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>> >>>>> **How do you know? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not the >>>> way to show support. >>> >>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the first >>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much at all. >>> >> >> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major advantages >> over IC cars. Including: >> >> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars were >> fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car consumed >> around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle opening. When >> warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An electric vehicle consumes >> the same amount, regardless of temperature (within obvious limits). No >> warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles are operated over short >> trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly bad. Long trips suit IC >> engines quite well. >> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for city >> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise wasted as >> heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >> >> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an electric >> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, for >> me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my transport needs >> by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus the total >> nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. > > I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* fossil fuel > unless its nuclear or renewable. > The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables Wrong, as always. > - we're going to buy French generators Wrong, as always. > and pay the Chinese to build the power station Wrong, as always. > and handle our sensitive strategic materials. Wrong, as always.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-02 14:21 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33134 |
On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: > > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>> >>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the UK. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and burning >>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of the >>>>>>> problems >>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to make a >>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a pool, >>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate is >>>>>> that >>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>> >>>>> **How do you know? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not the >>>> way to show support. >>> >>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the first >>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much at all. >>> >> >> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >> advantages over IC cars. Including: >> >> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars >> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An electric >> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature (within >> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles are >> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly bad. >> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for city >> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise wasted >> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >> >> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an electric >> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, >> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my transport >> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus the >> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. > > I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* fossil > fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely benign. It is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent petrol or Diesel car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That said, Tesla have promised to obtain all their electricity from renewable sources for their free charging stations. And, as I stated, for many city dwellers, any electric vehicle will emit significantly less CO2 (via a coal-fired power station) under day to day use. For long distance driving, the benefits will be less obvious. > > The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - we're > going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the power > station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. **Cites please. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-02 18:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4> |
| In reply to | #33137 |
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... > On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >> >> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>> >>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the UK. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and burning >>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of the >>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to make a >>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a >>>>>>>> pool, >>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate is >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>> >>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not the >>>>> way to show support. >>>> >>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the first >>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much at >>>> all. >>>> >>> >>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>> >>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars >>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An electric >>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature (within >>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles are >>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly bad. >>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for city >>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise wasted >>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>> >>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an electric >>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, >>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my transport >>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus the >>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >> >> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* fossil >> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. > > **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely benign. It > is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent petrol or Diesel > car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That said, Tesla have promised > to obtain all their electricity from renewable sources for their free > charging stations. And, as I stated, for many city dwellers, any electric > vehicle will emit significantly less CO2 (via a coal-fired power station) > under day to day use. For long distance driving, the benefits will be less > obvious. > >> >> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - we're >> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the power >> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. > > **Cites please. The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company supplying the generators fucked up a contract in some other country and is in financial trouble. They've already started preparing land in the UK to build it, but political wrangling has cast doubt over the project - so the French could find themselves in even more financial trouble. All this hasn't been helped by a company executive blowing the whistle on sub standard steel used in the containment vessel. The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of the investment in a public service facility and builds it to run as a business. The standard operating procedure is to set up various bogus contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a light bulb, which they then claim back from the treasury. It used to be just the Tories fat cat chums - but now its any hostile power that wants a piece of Britain. The word; "Tory" is derived from the Gaellic Toraidhe - which translates from Irish to English as; outlaw or bandit. They call themselves "Conservatives" to con the genteel folk. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 03:58 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ekcsf3Fg6rdU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33140 |
"Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in message news:LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4... > > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... >> On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>> >>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>> >>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the UK. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and burning >>>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of the >>>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to make a >>>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a >>>>>>>>> pool, >>>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate is >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not the >>>>>> way to show support. >>>>> >>>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >>>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the first >>>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much at >>>>> all. >>>>> >>>> >>>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>>> >>>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars >>>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >>>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An electric >>>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature (within >>>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles are >>>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly bad. >>>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for city >>>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise wasted >>>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>>> >>>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an electric >>>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, >>>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my transport >>>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus the >>>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >>> >>> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* fossil >>> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. >> >> **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely benign. It >> is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent petrol or Diesel >> car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That said, Tesla have >> promised to obtain all their electricity from renewable sources for their >> free charging stations. And, as I stated, for many city dwellers, any >> electric vehicle will emit significantly less CO2 (via a coal-fired power >> station) under day to day use. For long distance driving, the benefits >> will be less obvious. >> >>> >>> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - we're >>> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the power >>> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. >> >> **Cites please. > > The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company supplying > the generators fucked up a contract in some other country and is in > financial trouble. They've already started preparing land in the UK to > build it, but political wrangling has cast doubt over the project - so the > French could find themselves in even more financial trouble. All this > hasn't been helped by a company executive blowing the whistle on sub > standard steel used in the containment vessel. > > The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward > investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of the > investment in a public service facility and builds it to run as a > business. The standard operating procedure is to set up various bogus > contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a light bulb, which they > then claim back from the treasury. Doesn’t qualify as 'handle our sensitive strategic materials' > It used to be just the Tories fat cat chums - but now its any hostile > power that wants a piece of Britain. Corse Britain has never ever done anything like that itself, eh ? > The word; "Tory" is derived from the Gaellic Toraidhe - which translates > from Irish to English as; outlaw or bandit. They call themselves > "Conservatives" to con the genteel folk.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-02 19:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <EobEA.752090$vF2.567201@fx46.am4> |
| In reply to | #33141 |
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ekcsf3Fg6rdU3@mid.individual.net... > > > "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in > message news:LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4... >> >> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >> news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... >>> On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>> >>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the >>>>>>>>>>>> UK. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and burning >>>>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of the >>>>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to make a >>>>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a >>>>>>>>>> pool, >>>>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate is >>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not the >>>>>>> way to show support. >>>>>> >>>>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >>>>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the first >>>>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much at >>>>>> all. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>>>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>>>> >>>>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>>>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars >>>>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>>>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >>>>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An electric >>>>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature (within >>>>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles are >>>>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly bad. >>>>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>>>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for city >>>>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise wasted >>>>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>>>> >>>>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an electric >>>>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, >>>>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my transport >>>>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus the >>>>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >>>> >>>> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* fossil >>>> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. >>> >>> **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely benign. >>> It is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent petrol or >>> Diesel car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That said, Tesla have >>> promised to obtain all their electricity from renewable sources for >>> their free charging stations. And, as I stated, for many city dwellers, >>> any electric vehicle will emit significantly less CO2 (via a coal-fired >>> power station) under day to day use. For long distance driving, the >>> benefits will be less obvious. >>> >>>> >>>> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - we're >>>> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the power >>>> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. >>> >>> **Cites please. >> >> The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company supplying >> the generators fucked up a contract in some other country and is in >> financial trouble. They've already started preparing land in the UK to >> build it, but political wrangling has cast doubt over the project - so >> the French could find themselves in even more financial trouble. All this >> hasn't been helped by a company executive blowing the whistle on sub >> standard steel used in the containment vessel. >> >> The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward >> investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of the >> investment in a public service facility and builds it to run as a >> business. The standard operating procedure is to set up various bogus >> contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a light bulb, which they >> then claim back from the treasury. > > Doesn’t qualify as 'handle our sensitive strategic materials' Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we have to employ guards to stop them lifting any. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 10:03 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ekdhr0Fk8lgU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33142 |
"Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in message news:EobEA.752090$vF2.567201@fx46.am4... > > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:ekcsf3Fg6rdU3@mid.individual.net... >> >> >> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >> message news:LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4... >>> >>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>> news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>> >>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the >>>>>>>>>>>>> UK. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and burning >>>>>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of the >>>>>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to make >>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a >>>>>>>>>>> pool, >>>>>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate is >>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> way to show support. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >>>>>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the first >>>>>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much at >>>>>>> all. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>>>>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>>>>> >>>>>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>>>>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars >>>>>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>>>>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >>>>>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An electric >>>>>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature (within >>>>>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles are >>>>>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly bad. >>>>>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>>>>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for city >>>>>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise wasted >>>>>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>>>>> >>>>>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an electric >>>>>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, >>>>>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my >>>>>> transport >>>>>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus >>>>>> the >>>>>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >>>>> >>>>> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* fossil >>>>> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. >>>> >>>> **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely benign. >>>> It is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent petrol or >>>> Diesel car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That said, Tesla >>>> have promised to obtain all their electricity from renewable sources >>>> for their free charging stations. And, as I stated, for many city >>>> dwellers, any electric vehicle will emit significantly less CO2 (via a >>>> coal-fired power station) under day to day use. For long distance >>>> driving, the benefits will be less obvious. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - we're >>>>> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the power >>>>> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. >>>> >>>> **Cites please. >>> >>> The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company supplying >>> the generators fucked up a contract in some other country and is in >>> financial trouble. They've already started preparing land in the UK to >>> build it, but political wrangling has cast doubt over the project - so >>> the French could find themselves in even more financial trouble. All >>> this hasn't been helped by a company executive blowing the whistle on >>> sub standard steel used in the containment vessel. >>> >>> The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward >>> investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of the >>> investment in a public service facility and builds it to run as a >>> business. The standard operating procedure is to set up various bogus >>> contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a light bulb, which they >>> then claim back from the treasury. >> >> Doesn’t qualify as 'handle our sensitive strategic materials' > > Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we > have to employ guards to stop them lifting any. They have far more of their own already. And its so cheap they can buy it from us, and do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 19:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <UPwEA.309678$fL.212905@fx24.am4> |
| In reply to | #33144 |
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ekdhr0Fk8lgU2@mid.individual.net... > > > "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in > message news:EobEA.752090$vF2.567201@fx46.am4... >> >> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:ekcsf3Fg6rdU3@mid.individual.net... >>> >>> >>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>> message news:LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4... >>>> >>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>> news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>>> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> UK. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and burning >>>>>>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of the >>>>>>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to make >>>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a >>>>>>>>>>>> pool, >>>>>>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate >>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> way to show support. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >>>>>>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the >>>>>>>> first >>>>>>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much at >>>>>>>> all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>>>>>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>>>>>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars >>>>>>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>>>>>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >>>>>>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An electric >>>>>>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature (within >>>>>>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly bad. >>>>>>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>>>>>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for >>>>>>> city >>>>>>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise >>>>>>> wasted >>>>>>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an >>>>>>> electric >>>>>>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, >>>>>>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my >>>>>>> transport >>>>>>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >>>>>> >>>>>> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* fossil >>>>>> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. >>>>> >>>>> **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely benign. >>>>> It is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent petrol or >>>>> Diesel car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That said, Tesla >>>>> have promised to obtain all their electricity from renewable sources >>>>> for their free charging stations. And, as I stated, for many city >>>>> dwellers, any electric vehicle will emit significantly less CO2 (via a >>>>> coal-fired power station) under day to day use. For long distance >>>>> driving, the benefits will be less obvious. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - we're >>>>>> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the power >>>>>> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. >>>>> >>>>> **Cites please. >>>> >>>> The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company supplying >>>> the generators fucked up a contract in some other country and is in >>>> financial trouble. They've already started preparing land in the UK to >>>> build it, but political wrangling has cast doubt over the project - so >>>> the French could find themselves in even more financial trouble. All >>>> this hasn't been helped by a company executive blowing the whistle on >>>> sub standard steel used in the containment vessel. >>>> >>>> The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward >>>> investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of the >>>> investment in a public service facility and builds it to run as a >>>> business. The standard operating procedure is to set up various bogus >>>> contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a light bulb, which >>>> they then claim back from the treasury. >>> >>> Doesn’t qualify as 'handle our sensitive strategic materials' >> >> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we >> have to employ guards to stop them lifting any. > > They have far more of their own already. And its so cheap they can buy it > from us, and do. Who's "us"? --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-04 06:43 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ekfqg1F3i27U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33148 |
"Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in message news:UPwEA.309678$fL.212905@fx24.am4... > > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:ekdhr0Fk8lgU2@mid.individual.net... >> >> >> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >> message news:EobEA.752090$vF2.567201@fx46.am4... >>> >>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:ekcsf3Fg6rdU3@mid.individual.net... >>>> >>>> >>>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>>> message news:LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4... >>>>> >>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>> news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UK. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> burning >>>>>>>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of >>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to >>>>>>>>>>>>> make a >>>>>>>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in a >>>>>>>>>>>>> pool, >>>>>>>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate >>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> way to show support. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >>>>>>>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the >>>>>>>>> first >>>>>>>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much >>>>>>>>> at all. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>>>>>>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>>>>>>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of cars >>>>>>>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>>>>>>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >>>>>>>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An >>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature (within >>>>>>>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly >>>>>>>> bad. >>>>>>>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>>>>>>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for >>>>>>>> city >>>>>>>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise >>>>>>>> wasted >>>>>>>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an >>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That said, >>>>>>>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my >>>>>>>> transport >>>>>>>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* fossil >>>>>>> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. >>>>>> >>>>>> **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely >>>>>> benign. It is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent >>>>>> petrol or Diesel car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That >>>>>> said, Tesla have promised to obtain all their electricity from >>>>>> renewable sources for their free charging stations. And, as I stated, >>>>>> for many city dwellers, any electric vehicle will emit significantly >>>>>> less CO2 (via a coal-fired power station) under day to day use. For >>>>>> long distance driving, the benefits will be less obvious. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - we're >>>>>>> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the >>>>>>> power >>>>>>> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. >>>>>> >>>>>> **Cites please. >>>>> >>>>> The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company >>>>> supplying the generators fucked up a contract in some other country >>>>> and is in financial trouble. They've already started preparing land in >>>>> the UK to build it, but political wrangling has cast doubt over the >>>>> project - so the French could find themselves in even more financial >>>>> trouble. All this hasn't been helped by a company executive blowing >>>>> the whistle on sub standard steel used in the containment vessel. >>>>> >>>>> The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward >>>>> investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of the >>>>> investment in a public service facility and builds it to run as a >>>>> business. The standard operating procedure is to set up various bogus >>>>> contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a light bulb, which >>>>> they then claim back from the treasury. >>>> >>>> Doesn’t qualify as 'handle our sensitive strategic materials' >>> >>> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we >>> have to employ guards to stop them lifting any. >> >> They have far more of their own already. And its so cheap they can buy it >> from us, and do. > > Who's "us"? The aus in aus.electronics might actually mean something.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 21:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <bzyEA.825281$Pm3.113189@fx42.am4> |
| In reply to | #33150 |
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ekfqg1F3i27U2@mid.individual.net... > > > "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in > message news:UPwEA.309678$fL.212905@fx24.am4... >> >> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:ekdhr0Fk8lgU2@mid.individual.net... >>> >>> >>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>> message news:EobEA.752090$vF2.567201@fx46.am4... >>>> >>>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:ekcsf3Fg6rdU3@mid.individual.net... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>>>> message news:LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4... >>>>>> >>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>>> news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>> On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the UK. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> burning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common theme. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> make a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a pool, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to demonstrate >>>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is not >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> way to show support. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly still >>>>>>>>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the >>>>>>>>>> first >>>>>>>>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much >>>>>>>>>> at all. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>>>>>>>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>>>>>>>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of >>>>>>>>> cars >>>>>>>>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>>>>>>>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >>>>>>>>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An >>>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature >>>>>>>>> (within >>>>>>>>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles >>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly >>>>>>>>> bad. >>>>>>>>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>>>>>>>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for >>>>>>>>> city >>>>>>>>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise >>>>>>>>> wasted >>>>>>>>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an >>>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That >>>>>>>>> said, >>>>>>>>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my >>>>>>>>> transport >>>>>>>>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. Thus >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* >>>>>>>> fossil >>>>>>>> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely >>>>>>> benign. It is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent >>>>>>> petrol or Diesel car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That >>>>>>> said, Tesla have promised to obtain all their electricity from >>>>>>> renewable sources for their free charging stations. And, as I >>>>>>> stated, for many city dwellers, any electric vehicle will emit >>>>>>> significantly less CO2 (via a coal-fired power station) under day to >>>>>>> day use. For long distance driving, the benefits will be less >>>>>>> obvious. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - >>>>>>>> we're >>>>>>>> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the >>>>>>>> power >>>>>>>> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Cites please. >>>>>> >>>>>> The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company >>>>>> supplying the generators fucked up a contract in some other country >>>>>> and is in financial trouble. They've already started preparing land >>>>>> in the UK to build it, but political wrangling has cast doubt over >>>>>> the project - so the French could find themselves in even more >>>>>> financial trouble. All this hasn't been helped by a company executive >>>>>> blowing the whistle on sub standard steel used in the containment >>>>>> vessel. >>>>>> >>>>>> The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward >>>>>> investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of the >>>>>> investment in a public service facility and builds it to run as a >>>>>> business. The standard operating procedure is to set up various bogus >>>>>> contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a light bulb, which >>>>>> they then claim back from the treasury. >>>>> >>>>> Doesn’t qualify as 'handle our sensitive strategic materials' >>>> >>>> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we >>>> have to employ guards to stop them lifting any. >>> >>> They have far more of their own already. And its so cheap they can buy >>> it from us, and do. >> >> Who's "us"? > > The aus in aus.electronics might actually mean something. Indeed - I mentioned something that was going on in the UK and you couldn't tell the difference. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-04 08:55 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ekg27jF50g7U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33151 |
"Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in message news:bzyEA.825281$Pm3.113189@fx42.am4... > > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:ekfqg1F3i27U2@mid.individual.net... >> >> >> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >> message news:UPwEA.309678$fL.212905@fx24.am4... >>> >>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:ekdhr0Fk8lgU2@mid.individual.net... >>>> >>>> >>>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>>> message news:EobEA.752090$vF2.567201@fx46.am4... >>>>> >>>>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:ekcsf3Fg6rdU3@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>>>>> message news:LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>> On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in >>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the UK. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> burning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> theme. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a pool, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> demonstrate is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is >>>>>>>>>>>> not the >>>>>>>>>>>> way to show support. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly >>>>>>>>>>> still >>>>>>>>>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the >>>>>>>>>>> first >>>>>>>>>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win much >>>>>>>>>>> at all. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>>>>>>>>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>>>>>>>>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of >>>>>>>>>> cars >>>>>>>>>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>>>>>>>>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >>>>>>>>>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An >>>>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>>>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature >>>>>>>>>> (within >>>>>>>>>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city vehicles >>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly >>>>>>>>>> bad. >>>>>>>>>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>>>>>>>>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for >>>>>>>>>> city >>>>>>>>>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise >>>>>>>>>> wasted >>>>>>>>>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an >>>>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>>>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That >>>>>>>>>> said, >>>>>>>>>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my >>>>>>>>>> transport >>>>>>>>>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. >>>>>>>>>> Thus the >>>>>>>>>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* >>>>>>>>> fossil >>>>>>>>> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely >>>>>>>> benign. It is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent >>>>>>>> petrol or Diesel car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That >>>>>>>> said, Tesla have promised to obtain all their electricity from >>>>>>>> renewable sources for their free charging stations. And, as I >>>>>>>> stated, for many city dwellers, any electric vehicle will emit >>>>>>>> significantly less CO2 (via a coal-fired power station) under day >>>>>>>> to day use. For long distance driving, the benefits will be less >>>>>>>> obvious. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - >>>>>>>>> we're >>>>>>>>> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the >>>>>>>>> power >>>>>>>>> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **Cites please. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company >>>>>>> supplying the generators fucked up a contract in some other country >>>>>>> and is in financial trouble. They've already started preparing land >>>>>>> in the UK to build it, but political wrangling has cast doubt over >>>>>>> the project - so the French could find themselves in even more >>>>>>> financial trouble. All this hasn't been helped by a company >>>>>>> executive blowing the whistle on sub standard steel used in the >>>>>>> containment vessel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward >>>>>>> investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of >>>>>>> the investment in a public service facility and builds it to run as >>>>>>> a business. The standard operating procedure is to set up various >>>>>>> bogus contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a light bulb, >>>>>>> which they then claim back from the treasury. >>>>>> >>>>>> Doesn’t qualify as 'handle our sensitive strategic materials' >>>>> >>>>> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we >>>>> have to employ guards to stop them lifting any. >>>> >>>> They have far more of their own already. And its so cheap they can buy >>>> it from us, and do. >>> >>> Who's "us"? >> >> The aus in aus.electronics might actually mean something. > > Indeed - I mentioned something that was going on in the UK and you > couldn't tell the difference. You never could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag. There is no point in the chinese stealing any of you pom's nuclear materials when they can and do buy them very cheaply from us instead.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-04 20:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sfSEA.605497$3a3.3151@fx43.am4> |
| In reply to | #33155 |
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ekg27jF50g7U2@mid.individual.net... > > > "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in > message news:bzyEA.825281$Pm3.113189@fx42.am4... >> >> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:ekfqg1F3i27U2@mid.individual.net... >>> >>> >>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>> message news:UPwEA.309678$fL.212905@fx24.am4... >>>> >>>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:ekdhr0Fk8lgU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>>>> message news:EobEA.752090$vF2.567201@fx46.am4... >>>>>> >>>>>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:ekcsf3Fg6rdU3@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>>>>>> message news:LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>> On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in >>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the UK. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> burning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> theme. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a pool, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> demonstrate is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is >>>>>>>>>>>>> not the >>>>>>>>>>>>> way to show support. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly >>>>>>>>>>>> still >>>>>>>>>>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the >>>>>>>>>>>> first >>>>>>>>>>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win >>>>>>>>>>>> much at all. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>>>>>>>>>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>>>>>>>>>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of >>>>>>>>>>> cars >>>>>>>>>>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>>>>>>>>>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate throttle >>>>>>>>>>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An >>>>>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>>>>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature >>>>>>>>>>> (within >>>>>>>>>>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city >>>>>>>>>>> vehicles are >>>>>>>>>>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly >>>>>>>>>>> bad. >>>>>>>>>>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>>>>>>>>>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly for >>>>>>>>>>> city >>>>>>>>>>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise >>>>>>>>>>> wasted >>>>>>>>>>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an >>>>>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>>>>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That >>>>>>>>>>> said, >>>>>>>>>>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my >>>>>>>>>>> transport >>>>>>>>>>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. >>>>>>>>>>> Thus the >>>>>>>>>>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* >>>>>>>>>> fossil >>>>>>>>>> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely >>>>>>>>> benign. It is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent >>>>>>>>> petrol or Diesel car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That >>>>>>>>> said, Tesla have promised to obtain all their electricity from >>>>>>>>> renewable sources for their free charging stations. And, as I >>>>>>>>> stated, for many city dwellers, any electric vehicle will emit >>>>>>>>> significantly less CO2 (via a coal-fired power station) under day >>>>>>>>> to day use. For long distance driving, the benefits will be less >>>>>>>>> obvious. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - >>>>>>>>>> we're >>>>>>>>>> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the >>>>>>>>>> power >>>>>>>>>> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **Cites please. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company >>>>>>>> supplying the generators fucked up a contract in some other country >>>>>>>> and is in financial trouble. They've already started preparing land >>>>>>>> in the UK to build it, but political wrangling has cast doubt over >>>>>>>> the project - so the French could find themselves in even more >>>>>>>> financial trouble. All this hasn't been helped by a company >>>>>>>> executive blowing the whistle on sub standard steel used in the >>>>>>>> containment vessel. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward >>>>>>>> investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of >>>>>>>> the investment in a public service facility and builds it to run as >>>>>>>> a business. The standard operating procedure is to set up various >>>>>>>> bogus contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a light bulb, >>>>>>>> which they then claim back from the treasury. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Doesn’t qualify as 'handle our sensitive strategic materials' >>>>>> >>>>>> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if >>>>>> we have to employ guards to stop them lifting any. >>>>> >>>>> They have far more of their own already. And its so cheap they can buy >>>>> it from us, and do. >>>> >>>> Who's "us"? >>> >>> The aus in aus.electronics might actually mean something. >> >> Indeed - I mentioned something that was going on in the UK and you >> couldn't tell the difference. > > You never could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag. And you only ever have one response to being caught in the wrong. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-05 06:21 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ekidjdFj7ljU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33163 |
"Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in message news:sfSEA.605497$3a3.3151@fx43.am4... > > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:ekg27jF50g7U2@mid.individual.net... >> >> >> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >> message news:bzyEA.825281$Pm3.113189@fx42.am4... >>> >>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:ekfqg1F3i27U2@mid.individual.net... >>>> >>>> >>>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>>> message news:UPwEA.309678$fL.212905@fx24.am4... >>>>> >>>>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:ekdhr0Fk8lgU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>>>>> message news:EobEA.752090$vF2.567201@fx46.am4... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:ekcsf3Fg6rdU3@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote >>>>>>>> in message news:LmaEA.523473$fZ.122334@fx41.am4... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in >>>>>>>>> message news:ekbctsF74isU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>> On 2/04/2017 4:51 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>> news:ek881dFj6o5U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/04/2017 5:25 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ek5n0uF3vscU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:31 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 11:10 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:22 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 9:17 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2017 7:21 AM, Benderthe.evilrobot wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ejp7o7Fj307U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish they'd advertise it better, so that I can ignore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that an Australian thing? - Never heard of it here in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the UK. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was started here, to our shame, but it got picked up >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> number of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other countries. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Showing support by turning off efficient lighting, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> burning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inefficient CO2 emitting candles instead, is a common >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> theme. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Earth hour is, above all, a demonstration of ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **Well, not really. It was designed to make people aware >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this planet faces and that we ALL need to work together to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference. Certainly, turning off pool pumps (or filling >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a pool, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like I did), or air conditioners will make several orders >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> magnitude >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more impact on the environment than turning off some LED >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lighting is easy to see. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whatever the intent behind it, all it's managed to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> demonstrate is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people have little understanding of the issues. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **How do you know? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because if they did, they're realise that burning candles is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> way to show support. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Most people don't even think about all electric cars mostly >>>>>>>>>>>>> still >>>>>>>>>>>>> require burning fossil fuel to generate the electricity in the >>>>>>>>>>>>> first >>>>>>>>>>>>> place - countries with coal fired power stations didn't win >>>>>>>>>>>>> much at all. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> **Probably more than you think. Electric cars have some major >>>>>>>>>>>> advantages over IC cars. Including: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> * Maximum toque at zero RPM. >>>>>>>>>>>> * Around 90%+ efficiency at ALL RPM figures. My last couple of >>>>>>>>>>>> cars >>>>>>>>>>>> were fitted with fuel consumption computers. When cold, the car >>>>>>>>>>>> consumed around 20L/100km on flat ground, with moderate >>>>>>>>>>>> throttle >>>>>>>>>>>> opening. When warm, that figure fell to around 6L/100km. An >>>>>>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>>>>>> vehicle consumes the same amount, regardless of temperature >>>>>>>>>>>> (within >>>>>>>>>>>> obvious limits). No warm-up is required. Since many city >>>>>>>>>>>> vehicles are >>>>>>>>>>>> operated over short trips, fuel efficiency can be spectacularly >>>>>>>>>>>> bad. >>>>>>>>>>>> Long trips suit IC engines quite well. >>>>>>>>>>>> * Regenerative braking. This is the big one and particularly >>>>>>>>>>>> for city >>>>>>>>>>>> drivers. As much as 60% of the energy which would be otherwise >>>>>>>>>>>> wasted >>>>>>>>>>>> as heat, can be used to recharge the batteries. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> All of which demonstrates the the average fuel economy of an >>>>>>>>>>>> electric >>>>>>>>>>>> vehicle can be quite low, in terms of CO2 production/km. That >>>>>>>>>>>> said, >>>>>>>>>>>> for me, if I had an electric vehicle, I could easily meet my >>>>>>>>>>>> transport >>>>>>>>>>>> needs by using an array of PV cells on the roof of my garage. >>>>>>>>>>>> Thus the >>>>>>>>>>>> total nett CO2 contribution would be zero. YMMV. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I know all those advantages exist - but it still burns *SOME* >>>>>>>>>>> fossil >>>>>>>>>>> fuel unless its nuclear or renewable. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> **Duh. No one ever claimed that an electric car was completely >>>>>>>>>> benign. It is, however, significantly cleaner than an equivalent >>>>>>>>>> petrol or Diesel car, even when powered by coal-fired power. That >>>>>>>>>> said, Tesla have promised to obtain all their electricity from >>>>>>>>>> renewable sources for their free charging stations. And, as I >>>>>>>>>> stated, for many city dwellers, any electric vehicle will emit >>>>>>>>>> significantly less CO2 (via a coal-fired power station) under day >>>>>>>>>> to day use. For long distance driving, the benefits will be less >>>>>>>>>> obvious. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The UK government has cancelled all subsidies for renewables - >>>>>>>>>>> we're >>>>>>>>>>> going to buy French generators and pay the Chinese to build the >>>>>>>>>>> power >>>>>>>>>>> station and handle our sensitive strategic materials. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> **Cites please. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The news has gone quiet on this recently - The French company >>>>>>>>> supplying the generators fucked up a contract in some other >>>>>>>>> country and is in financial trouble. They've already started >>>>>>>>> preparing land in the UK to build it, but political wrangling has >>>>>>>>> cast doubt over the project - so the French could find themselves >>>>>>>>> in even more financial trouble. All this hasn't been helped by a >>>>>>>>> company executive blowing the whistle on sub standard steel used >>>>>>>>> in the containment vessel. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The Chinese involvement is the Tories favourite phrase "inward >>>>>>>>> investment" - PFI in other words. A private company makes most of >>>>>>>>> the investment in a public service facility and builds it to run >>>>>>>>> as a business. The standard operating procedure is to set up >>>>>>>>> various bogus contractors to charge themselves £400 to change a >>>>>>>>> light bulb, which they then claim back from the treasury. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Doesn’t qualify as 'handle our sensitive strategic materials' >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if >>>>>>> we have to employ guards to stop them lifting any. >>>>>> >>>>>> They have far more of their own already. And its so cheap they can >>>>>> buy it from us, and do. >>>>> >>>>> Who's "us"? >>>> >>>> The aus in aus.electronics might actually mean something. >>> >>> Indeed - I mentioned something that was going on in the UK and you >>> couldn't tell the difference. >> >> You never could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag. > > And you only ever have one response to being caught in the wrong. You never could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag. I was never caught in the wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 21:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <obufn8$9j0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #33142 |
Benderthe.evilrobot <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote: > > Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we have > to employ guards to stop them lifting any. I'm afraid it's a little late to start worrying about the Chinese building nuclear weapons: http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/wrjp159c.html -- __ __ #_ < |\| |< _#
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-04 20:16 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <0iSEA.451810$QJ4.350477@fx26.am4> |
| In reply to | #33152 |
"Computer Nerd Kev" <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote in message news:obufn8$9j0$1@gioia.aioe.org... > Benderthe.evilrobot <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote: >> >> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we >> have >> to employ guards to stop them lifting any. > > I'm afraid it's a little late to start worrying about the Chinese > building nuclear weapons: But they needn't bother making missiles if they're handling a pile of nuclear material right here................. All they need is set the reactor to blow and then leave. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-05 06:22 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ekidlbFj83eU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33164 |
"Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in message news:0iSEA.451810$QJ4.350477@fx26.am4... > > "Computer Nerd Kev" <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote in message > news:obufn8$9j0$1@gioia.aioe.org... >> Benderthe.evilrobot <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we >>> have >>> to employ guards to stop them lifting any. >> >> I'm afraid it's a little late to start worrying about the Chinese >> building nuclear weapons: > > But they needn't bother making missiles if they're handling a pile of > nuclear material right here................. > > All they need is set the reactor to blow and then leave. Stupid to do that, they wouldn't get any more work building nukes, stupid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-06 19:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5LvFA.319938$Iy2.131493@fx28.am4> |
| In reply to | #33166 |
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ekidlbFj83eU2@mid.individual.net... > > > "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in > message news:0iSEA.451810$QJ4.350477@fx26.am4... >> >> "Computer Nerd Kev" <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote in message >> news:obufn8$9j0$1@gioia.aioe.org... >>> Benderthe.evilrobot <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we >>>> have >>>> to employ guards to stop them lifting any. >>> >>> I'm afraid it's a little late to start worrying about the Chinese >>> building nuclear weapons: >> >> But they needn't bother making missiles if they're handling a pile of >> nuclear material right here................. >> >> All they need is set the reactor to blow and then leave. > > Stupid to do that, they wouldn't get any more work building nukes, stupid. Seriously?!!! Are you really that thick? AFAIK: the Chinese don't advertise building nuclear power stations in other countries as a business venture. The UK Tories invited them to build and operate the plant on the Private Finance Initiative model. Its really quite simple - get someone else to pay for the nuclear power station, and that's a few £Billion the Tories can shovel into their offshore accounts. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 14:30 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <el34f1Fr95jU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #33186 |
"Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in message news:5LvFA.319938$Iy2.131493@fx28.am4... > > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:ekidlbFj83eU2@mid.individual.net... >> >> >> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >> message news:0iSEA.451810$QJ4.350477@fx26.am4... >>> >>> "Computer Nerd Kev" <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote in message >>> news:obufn8$9j0$1@gioia.aioe.org... >>>> Benderthe.evilrobot <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if we >>>>> have >>>>> to employ guards to stop them lifting any. >>>> >>>> I'm afraid it's a little late to start worrying about the Chinese >>>> building nuclear weapons: >>> >>> But they needn't bother making missiles if they're handling a pile of >>> nuclear material right here................. >>> >>> All they need is set the reactor to blow and then leave. >> >> Stupid to do that, they wouldn't get any more work building nukes, >> stupid. > Seriously?!!! Yep. > Are you really that thick? We've seen who doesn't have a fucking clue. > AFAIK: the Chinese don't advertise building nuclear power stations in > other countries as a business venture. Even a terminal fuckwit such as yourself should have noticed that fuck all are building nukes, currently. > The UK Tories invited them to build and operate the plant on the Private > Finance Initiative model. And if they were observed stealing nuclear material instead of just buying it from us, they wouldn't get any more invitations like that, fuckwit. > Its really quite simple We'll see... > - get someone else to pay for the nuclear power station, and that's a few > £Billion the Tories can shovel into their offshore accounts. Even sillier than you usually manage.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 19:43 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ls9HA.921822$qK5.149488@fx45.am4> |
| In reply to | #33234 |
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message news:el34f1Fr95jU1@mid.individual.net... > > > "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in > message news:5LvFA.319938$Iy2.131493@fx28.am4... >> >> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:ekidlbFj83eU2@mid.individual.net... >>> >>> >>> "Benderthe.evilrobot" <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote in >>> message news:0iSEA.451810$QJ4.350477@fx26.am4... >>>> >>>> "Computer Nerd Kev" <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote in message >>>> news:obufn8$9j0$1@gioia.aioe.org... >>>>> Benderthe.evilrobot <Benderthe.evilrobot@virginmedia.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hardly worth getting the Chinese to handle the nuclear materials if >>>>>> we have >>>>>> to employ guards to stop them lifting any. >>>>> >>>>> I'm afraid it's a little late to start worrying about the Chinese >>>>> building nuclear weapons: >>>> >>>> But they needn't bother making missiles if they're handling a pile of >>>> nuclear material right here................. >>>> >>>> All they need is set the reactor to blow and then leave. >>> >>> Stupid to do that, they wouldn't get any more work building nukes, >>> stupid. > >> Seriously?!!! > > Yep. > >> Are you really that thick? > > We've seen who doesn't have a fucking clue. > >> AFAIK: the Chinese don't advertise building nuclear power stations in >> other countries as a business venture. > > Even a terminal fuckwit such as yourself should have > noticed that fuck all are building nukes, currently. > >> The UK Tories invited them to build and operate the plant on the Private >> Finance Initiative model. > > And if they were observed stealing nuclear material > instead of just buying it from us, they wouldn't get > any more invitations like that, fuckwit. > >> Its really quite simple > > We'll see... > >> - get someone else to pay for the nuclear power station, and that's a few >> £Billion the Tories can shovel into their offshore accounts. > > Even sillier than you usually manage. They've been caught red handed stashing money in offshore accounts - people just don't realise the scale of it. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | aus.electronics
csiph-web