FORD New Focus 1560 D 70.6
I sure hope so, considering the Ford dealership just sold me one. Doesn't get 70 mpg, though. I've got 41 without A/C so far, though- that's with the manual transmission and approximately 20% stop-and-go city traffic. With the A/C on, it drops to about 32 mpg.
Also, those areas typically do not have the moisture conservation pressure and wind erosion issues to the extent we have, both of which are addressed by low/no-till...
...
Well, I don't think there's any difference in US policy and other Western economies other than style. And certainly the Chinese, Indians, Brazilians, etc., are going to overarch anything we're doing now in the very near term. Not to even mention the past abuses in former Iron Curtain industrial areas...
I think your viewpoint is quite narrowly focussed by a political bent not closely related to reality, unfortunately. (Not to feel badly, there are many in the US w/ the same myopia and wishful thinking... :) )
What is your solution to raising economic status of those on the lower rungs in both the developed countries as well as the rest of the world other than growth? Wishing for the "haves" to slide back is both unrealistic and counter-productive.
Zero-till is quite common, and becoming more so, north of the 49th, actually.
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 10:05:17 GMT, the opaque Tom Quackenbush spake:
Since -she- fielded the main dissention paper, it seems doubtful that he would be able to. O'Connor, Thomas, Scalia, and Rehnquist were the
4 Conservative(+ Mod) dissenters. The Libs pulled this one themselves and Souter is about to pay for it heavily. His land may be next. Is this justice, or what?I'm surprised there haven't been any shootings yet.
- This product cruelly tested on defenseless furry animals - --------------------------------------------------------
This is why in order to change economic workings its first necessary to undo the connection of wellbeing and economic growth in our minds. Also the american way of life is sill presented as the way to go and therefore influences all the world.
[...]
None. This is why I don't have children and why I also do not really engage in political action: I think it's futile, we will be assimilated.
I am not so much considering American economic growth, on our small planet we should always consider all of the planet and all of the people. Of course America as leader in economics (and waste of energy) and influencing the way we think everywhere is the single most important country if something is to change.
True. Economic growth worked and enabled a vast array of very good things. I do not deny that. I just say that it can't go on like this forever, and the less we plan for the era after the growth the worse it will hit.
Juergen Hannappel wrote: ...
But otoh, in your reply to me you pointed out specifically you have no clue of to do nor do you intend to help in creating or drafting a solution... :(
Whiners and hand-wringers the world has plenty of already...
That's a big drop with AC. Both my cars have 3.8 liter engines and the difference is no more than 1 mpg. Neither gets 42 mpg and struggle to get
30 on all highway
I understand, believe me. Not many people out here have a full quarter, though. Lots of family farms, lots of custom farmers working other folks' land.
It's very spotty, and surprising which people are doing new stuff and which aren't. Again, the custom for-hire guys seem to do the tech more so than the guy who's using his dad's stuff from the 1950's.
Well, I was thinking about this last night; the effort I've got in those trees, combined with the fact that I've got to keep the weeds down _anyway_, well, I think I'll renew at whatever price I can get - within reason.
Ah, got it. I thought that it was the species they wanted you to plant, but I admit I didn't read it twice or anything.
Me, I'd like them to help with the purple loostrife problem. Sure, I can _buy_ the beetles to eat it, from the DNR, for LOTS of money, or I should be able to call 'em up, tell 'em 'Hey, your 180 acres behind my house has a problem, come fix it" and they should. But, they seem not to. But, God Forbid if I have some of it on my land, or I get the letter. AARGH.
Well, the trees I've put in are Spruce, Pine, Fir, Oak (Red & white around here), Walnut, Maple, and the Ash trees have just decided that they like it here so there's many thousands of those. A few cherry trees, but I'm not sure which variety. Looks like maybe chokecherry, I'll know in a few years. Way I look at it, the lumber-worthy trees, I trim up for straight trunks; the non-lumber trees I let be whatever shape they want so they can do the whole "turn CO2 into Oxygen" thing. At some point, the prairie will decide it's a forest, but I figure I'll let the plants work that out amongst themselves. I mow a 4' path around the wildflower areas to keep the weeds out; the wildflowers seem to be expanding about a foot per year so I move the mowed path out that much.
Current project is picking rocks, and a closely coupled project of building a rock wall. Want some rocks? My hill is a glacial deposit...
So, why does this table show 70.6 and you see 41? Even the empirical vs. USA'n gallon size doesn't wash with the numbers.
I have no idea wha the hp of the Focus is, but the A/C load is much larger fraction in comparison...
I've several GM 3.8L and a Chrysler 3.5L...they do similar, but the 3.5L is in a 300M which is geared more "peppy" so doesn't do quite as well as Mom's LeSabre for mileage, but is more entertaining to drive... :)
I believe most cars get better mileage on the highway with the AC turned on and the windows closed than with the AC off and the windows open. The added aerodynamic drag introduced by opening the windows is worse than turning the AC on.
Best mileage is with the AC off and the windows up :-)
No-till around here usually involves round-up or similar. Same where you are? I suppose it kills the old whatever, while giving it more time to decompose while the next crop is growing.
The tests are simply that--tests. What bearing they have on actual driving results is minimal, at best. Their only value imo is to compare gross differences between themselves, but in most cases that is self-evident anyway. Miniscule differences between models, otoh, while perhaps "statistically significant" in the scope of the test, will be completely overshadowed by the difference in conditions between the test environment and actual usage.
Mythbusters just did this one, actually. Two identical vehicles, one with AC on, the other with the windows open. It was a Ford Expedition, which is hardly an example of an aerodynamic, efficient vehicle, but they found that the one with the A/C ran out of gas first, by a few percent. I don't have exact numbers, but google might.
This might be vastly different with a more aerodynamic vehicle, where the aerodynamic change made by opening the windows takes it from "good" to "bad", rather than from "bad" to "more bad".
Way I look at it, I'll run the A/C and be a bit more comfortable, either way.
Kills the weeds. Rolling it under used to reduce them enough to allow the crop to sprout and defend itself. Still, it's tough to use a cultipacker with corn stubble in place.
Corn stubble. A million years ago (well, about 33) I moved to Wisconsin. Rented a farmhouse surrounded by acres of corn, which got cut along about mid-October. I rode my OSSA Six Days up and down the rows but since that part of Wisconsin has no hills, it was dull. So I rode across the rows. Yumpin' yiminey! And you do NOT want to unload in corn stubble.
: We ran a story a couple of weeks ago about a research pproject that was : close to producing bio-diesel from the animal parts that can no longer : be rendered due to the BSE scare and the closure of the US border to : our cattle.
Thermal depolymerization. Interesting article here:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 09:38:06 -0500, Duane Bozarth wrote:
The views espoused by Dr. Hannappel and those of his political bent are driven by the vision of the world's economy as a zero-sum game. i.e., if one person gains, by definition, another person must lose. This is certainly true of many economic systems and those of the Eastern block countries as well as the model which many European countries seem to be following. These economic systems tend to concentrate decisions and control in the hands of a few people. This is not necessarily true in a market driven economy, when one person gains, others gain as well by the utilization of the wealth created by that person. Is the system perfect? No, that's because humans are not perfect, but it certainly has proven to be the most durable and consistent with human nature. There is simply no way in which an economy can survive at a steady-state for a sustained period of time, the economy is either going to grow, or it will become stagnant and wane. The benefit of the free market economy is that decisions (both good and bad) are spread among a broad, diverse group of people. The downfall of planned economies is that decisions are concentrated in the hands of a few (sometimes very few) people. These may be highly educated, intelligent, and maybe in a few cases, wise people, but they are still people, subject to error and mistakes. Since the decisions in such economies are concentrated in a few hands, the results of mistakes have a much larger impact upon a much greater number of people who have no power over those decisions. We were recently subjected to a seminar by a leading "expert" who was the head of a consulting company that was going to help our company build "green" products. Some of his ideas had merit. However, one of his comments really struck me. This man was very enamoured with China and how they do things, pointing to 5000 year old rice paddies and how the locals had to know exactly how to balance all their inputs and outputs to keep farming those same places for 5000 years. He then went on to mention his conversations with one of the leaders who was in charge of a large housing planning bureau. She told him she was responsible for the construction of approximately 24 million houses to house those in her charge. He marvelled at how she had such responsiblity and how she needed to be sure that the decisions she made took all factors into account. I sat there wondering why anyone would *want* an economy in which one person was responsible for the construction of 24 million houses.
As far as the view that "this small planet" is desperately impacted by the actions of those within it; this seems to be hubris of a high order. Can one mess up one's local environment? Absolutely, 19'th century London is a prime example of that, as are some of our own industrial cities at the beginning of the industrial revolution. Can we "destroy the planet"? That is highly debateable; consider the amount of energy and pollution that just
*one* volcanic explosion can produce compared to the output of an industrialized nation. Should we callously waste resources? Of course not, but to be miserly and live in misery with the idea that this is somehow a noble cause is equally ridiculous. When you look at the small amount of land mass that humans actually occupy, we are certainly not pushing the limits of growth at this time. There are resources both on land and sea that have not yet been utilized. +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+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.