Some neat pictures of Moose River Plains when it was timberlands in 1954.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/120015814699641/permalink/3628739200493934/?sfnsn=mo
The Electric Gas Station of the Future ⛽
Automobiles are going electric. Not just because of climate change concerns, but because the technology has slowly but surely matured, and gasoline motors are reaching their limits as tailpipe emission standards become tougher as the human health concerns grow over what was once seen as acceptable levels of nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide and other hydrocarbons in urban air basins.
Electricity is a much more flexible of a fuel. A highly-refined form of energy, much more of it is turned into useful work then gasoline in an internal combustion engine. When you “burn” electricity, it can come from coal, natural gas, nuclear power, hydro-electric, solar, wind among other sources. You can turn what makes sense locally into electricity. With modern inverter-drives, high-voltage three-phase inductive motors you have very good control over wheel torque, horsepower and speed. No complicated transmissions or gear boxes to control wheels. Just computer code telling the inverter to create the desired sine-wave to get the desired output on the wheels.
It’s the future. It will be a really good future for gas stations. While most people will fill their electric cars up at home to maximize their savings by using home-purchased electric power, when out on extended road trips or travel, people will need to recharge their batteries. And that’s where fast-charging at gas stations comes about. Travelers will need a place to stop and recharge their batteries — and not just their cars’ batteries but themselves.
The gas station of the future will look a lot like the modern gas station and convenience mart of today — only bigger with more full-service facilities. A typical fast charging takes around 20 minutes, which will mean time for the traveler to get out of their car, run to the bathroom, and get lunch or dinner. Many stations may be full service – you pull up, the clerk comes out, plugs your car in, and asks if you would like a bite to eat or some coffee. They will have free Wi-Fi and comfortable seating inside to drink your coffee.
Gas stations might not just be the traditional single-purpose gas station. There is no reason why McDonalds and all the fat-frier shops wouldn’t install electric charging stations, so people spend more time lingering and buying food. Gas stations, typically a dirty smelly, greasy business that lately has been trying to lure customers in, aren’t nearly as dirty or smelly if they aren’t vending volatile gasoline. Dinners would also add chargers, to get people to come and eat while they top-off their cars. Shopping mauls and other retailers may get into the business too — electricity is relatively cheap bought in bulk, and it’s an added revenue source if you install chargers in your lot.
Ultimately, many businesses may choose to add electric chargers, as most have access to 480 volt or high-voltage three-phase electricity. 240-volt Level 2 chargers are very basic, and inexpensive to install, and fast chargers aren’t that expensive to install if there is a sufficient 3-phase feed into existing businesses. And they will only get cheaper as time goes on and they are mass-produced and manufacturers find ways to further costs.
Unavoidable consumption of non-renewable resources…
That God damn flipped statement in nearly every environmental impact statement. While a true statement, it always annoys me how flipped the language comes across when they use it. Environmental analysts might just be covering their asses but it’s an obnoxious statement on its face, especially if the document doesn’t propose any mitigation towards stopping to push our planet off the cliff, expanding more of our lands into dumping grounds, fouling the air and paving over our farms and forests.
Looking out over the Catskill Mountains
Amidst the Catskill’s tranquil grace I stand,
Where emerald peaks in rugged beauty rise,
Their ancient whispers echo through the land,
Beneath the vast and cerulean skies.
With every step, the world below recedes,
As nature’s grandeur takes its rightful place,
A tapestry of green, where life succeeds,
In this secluded, untouched, sacred space.
The mountains stretch like giants to the clouds,
Their forested robes a haven for the wild,
Where streams cascade in laughter, unbound,
And serenity enfolds both man and child.
With reverence, I gaze upon this view,
A testament to nature’s wondrous art,
In the Catskill Mountains, where dreams come true,
And peace resides within each beating heart.
Competitive Markets are Better than Regulated Monopolies
Samuel Insull brought the world Commonwealth Edison of the greater Chicago area and the concept that monopolies were acceptable as long as they were regulated for the public good.
Commonwealth Edison made its profits two ways – by constant growth and by expanding the size of the generating plants so they could produce more electricity at a lower price per unit. After all, many of the costs of a generating plant are fixed – a larger facility can often put out more energy more efficiently.
With Commonwealth Edison and most large utility monopolies, prices are regulated by the government regulating agency on a cost plus basis. Capital projects like new generating facilities or additional lines are approved by the government, with the costs of construction directly paid by rate payers. Insull embraced this as it guaranteed his business would be profitable with little risk to himself.
The problem with this model is it shuns market forces to keep efficiency up and prices down. Regulators work to protect consumers but there is little incentive to economize or innovative in the grid. Why should a power company take a risk when they know they will get paid building the preferred government technology of choice?
I believe competitive markets are always a better idea than government monopolies. While everybody agrees that there has to be one owner of the physical wires that deliver power, there can be multiple companies that sell power and multiple companies that sell services to consumers. Competition can help hold prices down and give consumers the option to switch providers that meet their needs.
Cows and carbon footprints 🐮 👣
🐮 👣The other night I heard the tired old claim that beef is really bad for the environment as it has a high carbon footprint. How can that be? Cows don’t consume oil to stay alive although diesel is used in cattle trailers, tractors hauling feed, bailing hay and spreading manure.
But what the activist types are really saying is cows digest grass and dried grass in the form of hay and as part of the conversion of grass to energy they chew their cud and in part loose some of the material that escapes their mouths as methane. Some manure also breaks down as methane when in an oxygen deprived environment like a slurry tank.
Methane is a moderately powerful green house gas. It’s 28 times more potent than carbon dioxide although it lasts only about a decade in the atmosphere before hydroxyl radicals break it down into carbon dioxide. Far lower of an impact then much more powerful warming gases like common refrigerants such as the CFCs and their HFC replacements. At the same time new grass is being grown to feed cows, so they are absorbing the carbon dioxide at the same rate it’s being broke down by the methane. Ultimately, farming is a carbon neutral activity, bar fuel used in tractors or trucks.
The carbon footprint of beef and cattle more generally is grossly over estimated, because while methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas then carbon dioxide, ultimately most farming activity is carbon neutral, as crops absorb in the carbon that livestock exhale and methane they burp up. Moreover, many cattle get a significant portion of their feed from grazing pastures that requires minimal diesel-fired equipment work to maintain. Grazing might have an initially higher greenhouse output, as grass produces more methane when burped up compared to other feeds, but because grass is absorbing carbon constantly, it’s ultimately carbon neutral.
Beef and dairy might be more of a climate concern where new land is being developed, forests converted into crop land. But with the increasing efficiency of crop and livestock production, it’s rare that forests are being converted to farm or grazing land at least in the first world. But in contrast, farms are being replaced with housing and commercial use, that bring in more vehicles, more buildings to heat, and more wildlife habitat forever displaced. Burped methane from grass isn’t warming the planet, burning fossil fuels like oil, natural gas and coal is.
Why I Am Not a Libertarian or a Conservative
Many people I know giggle or maybe take a gasp when I tell them I am a liberal Democrat, or something like that. I mean, I voted for both Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, and for Jill Stein in 2016. I did consider voting for Donald Trump in 2016, but ultimately went with Stein as protest vote against both Trump and Clinton. I voted for Senator Sanders in the Democratic primary, but honestly I wasn’t thrilled about either candidate in the primary. I thought Donald Trump would be a change, much like Obama was a change, and a fresh voice in 2008. I was very impressed with Barack Obama’s work as president, even if many of his best ideas got held up by the Republican Congress. I’m mostly indifferent to all the candidates that run for office, not liking many of them.
I believe it’s important for government to regulate big corporations and big urban concerns, when we are talking about thousands or millions of people. As they used to say, individually people are really beautiful, but together there is a lot of collective ugliness. Most human impact is limited, but becomes more problematic when thousands or millions of humans act together – like driving automobiles in cities, generating solid waste, or using megawatts of electricity. Your 100 watt light bulb doesn’t impact shit, but burning coal to power millions of homes and oil to power millions of automobiles is producing such an incredible amount of carbon dioxide, it’s warming the planet.
I am not a believer in individual action or lifestyle statements, except for political lobbying. Replacing your incandescent bulbs with LED bulbs or buying a hybrid car is going to nothing to change the trajectory of our planet as it continues to warm. Neither will trading in your SUV for a hybrid or taking the bus is going to alone change a thing on the planet. But fuel economy standards can force manufacturers to make millions of more efficient cars, and investing in convenient transit options, can move millions in ways that reduce carbon emissions.
I am also not a believer in expanding social programs per se. I do see the need for universal healthcare, but it should be provided a mix of a public and private partnership. The government should be the insurer of expensive healthcare operations, while private insurers can cover ancillary needs like lost wages, premium parking, cable television or Internet at hospital rooms, or other non-essential benefits that will help to make health care pleasant. I also think college education should be highly subsidized, so students who work summer jobs and live conservatively, can afford it without going to debt.
I do not agree with welfare or providing certain individuals with special government subsidies just because they are poor – government shouldn’t be providing the poor with vochures to buy food or rental assistance. But government should work to ensure that there is an adequate supply of affordable healthy food for all regardless of income, and same with safe, decent housing for all.
At the same, I am a believer in the government creating good public places for all to use, without consideration of income. Every community should have good public spaces where people can get together and work on issues of common interest. Public libraries, free and open to all, are important in every community, so people can learn and access the Internet. Learning shouldn’t end just because you graduate from a publicly funded school. I also think parks that are free and open to all are important, as people need a chance to get some fresh air and enjoy healthy recreation. Public forest lands can provide numerous recreational opportunities from hunting to fishing to camping and hiking, and can also provide important products to industry like timber, oil, and coal – which in turn can fund their use for all.
I don’t think government has much of a role regulating individual lives. I don’t support gun control, instead I think government should be working to produce healthy communities that are largely free of violence, because people have other ways to work out problems. Strong communities have good jobs, good schools, good community centers, and a mix of people that always are keeping an eye on their street. Neighborhood watches, and local anti-crime citizen groups should always be the preference over more cops and government regulation.
In urbanized areas, there needs to more regulation of private property, to protect community character, but sometimes regulation gets a little out of hand. In rural areas, there can be more freedom, because there is less of a chance of conflict. But I think there should be more review of regulations, and repeal of outdated regulations, and implementing regular sunsets of laws. It seems like there too many laws, especially on the local level, that don’t always make sense to continue.
![Untitled [Expires October 31 2025]](https://andyarthur.org//data/photo_021026_large.jpg)
That’s my take on it.
