michelel72: (DW-GeekPride)
So I have a new toy, as of this past Thursday.

A picture of my new toy. )

It's fun. It does have drawbacks relative to the Prius (primarily storage, OMG, I've never seen a wimpier glovebox, and the rear storage is both small and hard to access); but since I've been thinking about changing vehicles for a while, it's probably best to do so before the snow and ice start for the year ... and seeing a claim that I'm getting 250+ mpg is nice.

I'm not yet really charging from my solar panels**; the charge cord is short enough that I have to park under the "bird bench" (electrical and cable service lines), so I charge at night and then move the car to the other side of the driveway before the birds arrive for the day. (I'm looking into the service to install a high-speed charger in a better location.) I can get all the way to work and halfway back again on one charge in this weather, which is sweet, and it'll be sweeter if work does in fact approve on-site charging. We'll see.

Hee hee hee.

**(The electrical supply is largely fungible. I try to keep my usage to the daytime when I can, so that it's more directly tied to my solar panels rather than to the coal/nuclear network; I pay extra per net used kWh to add renewables to the mix; blah, blah. I would rather have a large solar array and battery system to go completely off-grid, but "clean" battery technology isn't really there yet. On the whole, I'm probably doing better environmentally than if I were using a straight-gas engine.)

1000 words

1 May 2006 11:40 pm
michelel72: Suzie (Default)
There's just nothing for me to add here.
michelel72: Suzie (Default)
With energy costs skyrocketing (largely due to the science of moving ethanol, replacing MTBE in summer-blend fuel), Bush recently gave a speech denouncing those you-know-whos:

"What can the government do? One of the past responses by government, particularly from the party of which I am not a member, has been to have — to propose price fixing, or increase the taxes. Those plans haven't worked in the past."

But his next words sound almost as if they might have come from Jimmy Carter (affiliation: The Party of Which Bush Is Not a Member) almost 30 years ago:

"I think we need to follow suit on what we have been emphasizing, particularly through the energy bill, and that is to encourage conservation, to expand domestic production, and to develop alternative sources of energy like ethanol."

(Leaving aside that ethanol is the current problem -- and, from what I've heard, consumes more energy in its production and distribution than the fuel volume it replaces.)

Meanwhile, today's Boston Globe has an article about Ted Kennedy's maneuverings -- including back-room deals with Ted "Psycho" Stevens -- to kill the Cape Wind project.

(According to the Globe article, "He said he's against the project because it would create a range of environmental and navigational problems and would hurt tourism, one of the area's key industries." Several high-profile environmental groups are in favor of the project, and I haven't seen a reputable environmental group arguing against it, which is why I'm cautiously in favor of the project myself. As for the tourism argument, I've heard counterarguments: Existing offshore wind farms apparently generate tourism.)

So a liberal senator for a liberal state partners with a (neo?)conservative pro-ANWR-drilling pork-barrel enthusiast to sneak-scuttle an alternative-energy project. And now, with gasoline prices climbing, a cross-party coalition is criticizing the clause because they've realized this is not a good time to kill an alternative-energy project.

I don't even know what today's lesson is. Nothing is ever entirely good or entirely bad, perhaps?
michelel72: Suzie (Default)
Attleboro now accepts "thin styrofoam" for recycling! Challah!

Profile

michelel72: Suzie (Default)
michelel72

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Page generated 8 February 2026 10:11 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios