and they probably closed the area when they put up the scaffolding.
and they probably closed the area when they put up the scaffolding.
I heard of one architect who was staying in an earthquake-proof hotel that he designed, when there was a huge earthquake. The hotel survived with no damage. Not surprising since it looked like an Egyptian pyramid.
If 'ordinary' means 'gross pollutor'
A Porsche 911 or a Land Rover Discovery only put out just over 300g per mile
Try a Dacia Sandero 99g/km :)
Don;t they usually 'fake' the stats by using cars without brakes or proper clutches so they get the best figures for mpg amonst other things, I've heard they even take out all the seats except the drivers to get the best result. They certainly don't test using real driving conditions such as on road that aren't 100% straight woithout hills or dumps or stops at lights etc...
Wouldn;t suprise me if they drove them in a vacumm container in zero G simulation, I just hope I've not just given them a new idea ;-)
I wonder what a cyclists is, if they survive a whole mile through bow flyover that is. A couple of weeks ago a cyclist was killed outside my building.
To get any meaningful comparison, you'd need to test cars and aircraft in the same sort of way. The government figures for cars are merely for taxation purposes.
You've heard wrong.
Well, no, because that wouldn't be in any way reproducible.
"Dave Plowman (News)" :
And for comparison *between* cars, presumably.
Can anyone answer me this? ISTM that the amount of carbon coming out of an engine is exactly the same as the amount going in. If that were precisely true there would be an exact reciprocal relationship between measured fuel consumption and measured emissions for a given fuel. Yet that doesn't seem to be the case. Is that to do with the form of carbon emitted (elemental, monoxide, dioxide) or something else?
The figures for emissions are usually CO2 equivalent, which includes an allowance for the effects of any methane or nitrous oxide present. Methane is weighted at 21 times and nitrous oxide at 310 times, to give the equivalent amount of CO2.
Colin Bignell
Indeed, an area not the whole bridge. So they could quite easily scoffold out an area of the airport
Excellent, thanks. They're presumably "equivalent" in the greenhouse effect sense.
The point is though that people go on these flights just because they can. Often there's no sensible reason. The CO2 per mile thing is misleading because most aeroplane journeys are very long, and needn't be. I think aeroplane travel should be heavily taxed, and the money given to those who live under the flightpath.
Bill
I found the TV/sat socket in one corner of each largish room; the nearest power point in the opposite corner.
There's a hospital where the room layout was planned with no regard for the internal steel columns. Result: some rooms can't be used because the boxed-in column almost fills the space behind the door.
At another place the room layout ignores the positions of the windows.
Bill
??
Really?
My wife's car runs at 45MPG, which is a nice easy 10 miles per litre. Or
80g per mile. I'm sure the manufacturing, oil and tyres don't add _that_ much.Andy
What makes you think it's a wind up?
Yip, no wonder air fares are stupidly high. Why didn't they just hire a local tradesman to do it?
The LED bulbs will last longer (alledgedly), although most of the one's Iive bought fail prematurely (in under a year). They're 50W equivalent GU10 spots though, probably run too hot.
Health and softy loonies have increased. The day will come when everybody is scared to do everything, and civilisation will crumble.
I'm willing to bet it doesn't do 45 mpg or better at all times.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.