I always find year end lists interesting. The Google Zeitgest is a summary of popular searches and they have published the most popular searches of 2006.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/zeitgeist2006.html
Friday, December 29, 2006
Monday, November 13, 2006
Climate Change Report by Economist Sir Nicholas Stern
Sir Nicholas Stern, Chief Economist and Senior Vice-President of the World Bank from 2000 to 2003, released a climate change report on 30 October 2006. The report suggests that the global economy could be forced to shrink by 20% due to the effects of climate change. However, the report says taking action now would only reduce global gross domestic product (GDP) by 1%.
I've heard of several previous studies on the economics associated with climate change prevention policies, and most suggest a small reduction in economic growth to make dramatic impacts on our emissions. A lot of the information in the Stern Report is not new, but this is definitely the first global economic report produced by such a prominent economists.
Are there any more excuses left for not pursuing climate change prevention policies? Initially, lack of scientific evidence for climate change was cited as a reason not to take action. There is an overwhelming abundance of data supporting climate change, so that excuse certainly won't work. Another excuse often used is that climate change prevention is too costly, but as the Stern Report and others have shown, the cost is minor, and the cost of not taking action is significantly higher. The only excuses left are self-interest and shortsightedness, which are not good excuses at all - unfortunately they tend to be powerful ones.
Here are some of the findings of the report
- "The benefits of strong, early action on climate change outweigh the costs"
"Our actions over the coming few decades could create risks of major disruption to economic and social activity, later in this century and in the next, on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the economic depression of the first half of the 20th century. And it will be difficult or impossible to reverse these changes. Tackling climate change is the pro-growth strategy for the longer term, and it can be done in a way that does not cap the aspirations for growth of rich or poor countries. The earlier effective action is taken, the less costly it will be."
- "Scientific evidence points to increasing risks of serious, irreversible impacts from climate change associated with business-as-usual paths for emissions."
"The current level or stock of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is equivalent to around 430 parts per million (ppm) CO2, compared with only 280 ppm before the Industrial Revolution."
- "The impacts of climate change are not evenly distributed - the poorest countries and people will suffer earliest and most. And if and when the damages appear it will be too late to reverse the process. Thus we are forced to look a long way ahead."
- "Emissions have been, and continue to be, driven by economic growth; yet stabilisation of greenhouse-gas concentrations in the atmosphere is feasible and consistent with continued growth."
- "Policy to reduce emissions should be based on three essential elements: carbon pricing, technology policy, and removal of barriers to behavioural change."
- "An effective response to climate change will depend on creating the conditions for international collective action."
- "There is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change if strong collective action starts now."
Below is a link to a BBC article on the Stern Report's release and a link to a 27 page summary of the report.
BBC Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6096084.stm
Report Summary: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/30_10_06_exec_sum.pdf
Entire Report: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm
I've heard of several previous studies on the economics associated with climate change prevention policies, and most suggest a small reduction in economic growth to make dramatic impacts on our emissions. A lot of the information in the Stern Report is not new, but this is definitely the first global economic report produced by such a prominent economists.
Are there any more excuses left for not pursuing climate change prevention policies? Initially, lack of scientific evidence for climate change was cited as a reason not to take action. There is an overwhelming abundance of data supporting climate change, so that excuse certainly won't work. Another excuse often used is that climate change prevention is too costly, but as the Stern Report and others have shown, the cost is minor, and the cost of not taking action is significantly higher. The only excuses left are self-interest and shortsightedness, which are not good excuses at all - unfortunately they tend to be powerful ones.
Here are some of the findings of the report
- "The benefits of strong, early action on climate change outweigh the costs"
"Our actions over the coming few decades could create risks of major disruption to economic and social activity, later in this century and in the next, on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the economic depression of the first half of the 20th century. And it will be difficult or impossible to reverse these changes. Tackling climate change is the pro-growth strategy for the longer term, and it can be done in a way that does not cap the aspirations for growth of rich or poor countries. The earlier effective action is taken, the less costly it will be."
- "Scientific evidence points to increasing risks of serious, irreversible impacts from climate change associated with business-as-usual paths for emissions."
"The current level or stock of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is equivalent to around 430 parts per million (ppm) CO2, compared with only 280 ppm before the Industrial Revolution."
- "The impacts of climate change are not evenly distributed - the poorest countries and people will suffer earliest and most. And if and when the damages appear it will be too late to reverse the process. Thus we are forced to look a long way ahead."
- "Emissions have been, and continue to be, driven by economic growth; yet stabilisation of greenhouse-gas concentrations in the atmosphere is feasible and consistent with continued growth."
- "Policy to reduce emissions should be based on three essential elements: carbon pricing, technology policy, and removal of barriers to behavioural change."
- "An effective response to climate change will depend on creating the conditions for international collective action."
- "There is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change if strong collective action starts now."
Below is a link to a BBC article on the Stern Report's release and a link to a 27 page summary of the report.
BBC Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6096084.stm
Report Summary: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/30_10_06_exec_sum.pdf
Entire Report: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Oil Facts
It's hard for me to believe the debate over drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is still going on. I suppose some people would say it'll continue until they finally decide to drill it. But anyway, it has been going on for years. My wife wrote a thesis on the rhetoric of the photography used during the debate, basically how pictures are used to convey different meanings and feelings. And just like pictures, the facts are construed to convey different meanings. At the heart of the debate is the amount of oil in the wildlife refuge and whether it is worth drilling.
According to the Dept. of Interior, there are 10.4 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil in the ANWR [1]. According to the Dept. of Energy, there is a 95% likelihood of there being 5.7 billion barrels, a 5% likelihood of there being 16 billion barrels, with an average estimate of 10.3 billion barrels [2].
Now, ten billion barrels of oil sound like a heck of a lot, huh? Well, the US consumed 20.7 million barrels a day in 2004 [3]. So doing the math, the ANWR only has enough oil for 502 days or 16.5 months. That's not much.
10.4 billion barrels / 20.7 million barrels per day = 502 days
I personally don't think it's worthwhile to disturb the ANWR for a little more than a years worth of oil. The oil is located in vital Caribou habitat [4]. But before we make any hasty judgments, lets look at what the proponents of oil exploration say. According to anwr.org, "ANWR oil could provide an additional 30 to 50 years of reliable supply" [5]. Now somebody has to be lying. We just showed it won't even last 2 years. Well, not exactly. We aren't going to pull 10 billion barrels of oil out of the ANWR all at once, so there probably will be 30 to 50 years of production, which could also be seen as 30 to 50 years of direct environmental impact. But let's assume that we do drill in the ANWR and take oil for 30 years, how much is that a day?
10.4 billion barrels / (30 yrs * 365.25 days per year) = 0.95 million barrels per day
The daily production from the ANWR would be less than 5% (0.95/20.7) of 2004 US oil consumption. Assuming oil consumption grows in the future, the ANWR oil would be an even more insignificant portion of the total oil. But we need oil and every little bit helps, right? Well, how about we reduce consumption instead. We could put 5% more ethanol in our gasoline, we could drive 5% less, or we could have more efficient vehicles. For example, the average passenger car gets 27.5 mpg [6]. If that average was increased to 29 mpg, passenger cars would consume 5.5% less gasoline - BAM no need for ANWR oil.
So, bottom line, there isn't much oil in the ANWR, so we might as well leave it there and start putting our resources to reducing oil consumption.
[1] US Department of Interior: http://www.doi.gov/news/030312.htm
[2] US Department of Energy: http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/
arctic_national_wildlife_refuge/html/anwr101.html
[3] US Department of Energy: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/topworldtables3_4.html
[4] US Fish and Wildlife Service: http://arctic.fws.gov/carcon.htm
[5] http://www.anwr.org/case.htm
[6] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/cafe/overview.htm
According to the Dept. of Interior, there are 10.4 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil in the ANWR [1]. According to the Dept. of Energy, there is a 95% likelihood of there being 5.7 billion barrels, a 5% likelihood of there being 16 billion barrels, with an average estimate of 10.3 billion barrels [2].
Now, ten billion barrels of oil sound like a heck of a lot, huh? Well, the US consumed 20.7 million barrels a day in 2004 [3]. So doing the math, the ANWR only has enough oil for 502 days or 16.5 months. That's not much.
10.4 billion barrels / 20.7 million barrels per day = 502 days
I personally don't think it's worthwhile to disturb the ANWR for a little more than a years worth of oil. The oil is located in vital Caribou habitat [4]. But before we make any hasty judgments, lets look at what the proponents of oil exploration say. According to anwr.org, "ANWR oil could provide an additional 30 to 50 years of reliable supply" [5]. Now somebody has to be lying. We just showed it won't even last 2 years. Well, not exactly. We aren't going to pull 10 billion barrels of oil out of the ANWR all at once, so there probably will be 30 to 50 years of production, which could also be seen as 30 to 50 years of direct environmental impact. But let's assume that we do drill in the ANWR and take oil for 30 years, how much is that a day?
10.4 billion barrels / (30 yrs * 365.25 days per year) = 0.95 million barrels per day
The daily production from the ANWR would be less than 5% (0.95/20.7) of 2004 US oil consumption. Assuming oil consumption grows in the future, the ANWR oil would be an even more insignificant portion of the total oil. But we need oil and every little bit helps, right? Well, how about we reduce consumption instead. We could put 5% more ethanol in our gasoline, we could drive 5% less, or we could have more efficient vehicles. For example, the average passenger car gets 27.5 mpg [6]. If that average was increased to 29 mpg, passenger cars would consume 5.5% less gasoline - BAM no need for ANWR oil.
So, bottom line, there isn't much oil in the ANWR, so we might as well leave it there and start putting our resources to reducing oil consumption.
[1] US Department of Interior: http://www.doi.gov/news/030312.htm
[2] US Department of Energy: http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/
arctic_national_wildlife_refuge/html/anwr101.html
[3] US Department of Energy: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/topworldtables3_4.html
[4] US Fish and Wildlife Service: http://arctic.fws.gov/carcon.htm
[5] http://www.anwr.org/case.htm
[6] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/cafe/overview.htm
Sunday, October 01, 2006
Septic Work
We had our septic system replaced this past week. We had the money in escrow from when we bought the house, so it didn't really cost us anything. We had a guy up the street do the work. I was surprised how big and deep of a hole he dug. I knew the leach field was pretty good size, but I guess I didn't think that he would dig so deep to put sand below the crushed stone. Anyway, he did a really nice job cleaning up afterwards, so the yard still looks nice. That's one less thing to worry about.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Energy Resources - Stock and Flow
There are two main components to an energy resource, stock and flow. Stock is the amount of the resource that is built up, and in the case of oil this would be the total amount of oil we have on the planet right now. The flow is the incoming amount of the energy resource that replenishes the stock. In the case of oil, there is basically no flow, because oil is created on the order of millions of years. In the case of solar energy, the stock is the sun itself, while the flow is the energy emitted by the sun.
If an energy resource has no flow, no matter how low the consumption rate, the resource will eventually be exhausted. Therefore, the sustainability of an energy resource is solely dependent on the flow. As long as the consumption rate is less than or equal to the flow, the energy is being used in a sustainable manner.
Since oil essentially has no flow, there is no way to use oil in a sustainable manner. No matter how much we increase the efficiency of gasoline engines, we will eventually run out. The only variable is when. The oil picture is bleak because consumption rates continue to rise even though we have reached the peak of our oil production (in 2005 in fact - see Hubbert Peak Theory and Deffeyes). As demand continues to increase and supply drops, price will rise, so clearly oil will become an energy source of the past.
The real question we face is not whether to move away from oil, but when and to what. We need to find an energy source, or mix of sources, that have a flow large enough to match our consumption (or we need to change consumption to match the available flow).
Adding more complexity to the situation is the third factor in energy use, the endogenous limit, or the limit created by the earth itself. There may be a limit to the amount of carbon dioxide the earth's atmosphere can contain and still be suitable for human life. Therefore we may want to move away from oil before it naturally runs out.
If an energy resource has no flow, no matter how low the consumption rate, the resource will eventually be exhausted. Therefore, the sustainability of an energy resource is solely dependent on the flow. As long as the consumption rate is less than or equal to the flow, the energy is being used in a sustainable manner.
Since oil essentially has no flow, there is no way to use oil in a sustainable manner. No matter how much we increase the efficiency of gasoline engines, we will eventually run out. The only variable is when. The oil picture is bleak because consumption rates continue to rise even though we have reached the peak of our oil production (in 2005 in fact - see Hubbert Peak Theory and Deffeyes). As demand continues to increase and supply drops, price will rise, so clearly oil will become an energy source of the past.
The real question we face is not whether to move away from oil, but when and to what. We need to find an energy source, or mix of sources, that have a flow large enough to match our consumption (or we need to change consumption to match the available flow).
Adding more complexity to the situation is the third factor in energy use, the endogenous limit, or the limit created by the earth itself. There may be a limit to the amount of carbon dioxide the earth's atmosphere can contain and still be suitable for human life. Therefore we may want to move away from oil before it naturally runs out.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Scientific American Special Issue on Energy
The September volume of Scientific American has many articles on the energy and environment debate. Several of the articles are a high level overview of the problem. There are some articles that talk about specific technologies, such as Nuclear and Hydrogen, but still at a high level. The articles are easy reads and interesting.
Here's some of the articles from the table of contents
A Climate Repair Manual
A Plan to Keep Carbon in Check
Fueling Our Transportation Future
An Efficient Solution
What to Do about Coal
The Nuclear Option
The Rise of Renewable Energy
High Hopes for Hydrogen
Plan B for Energy
The bottom line in all the articles that I've read is that we need to do something to change our energy usage, and we need to do it now.
You can read some of the articles online at www.sciam.com
Here's some of the articles from the table of contents
A Climate Repair Manual
A Plan to Keep Carbon in Check
Fueling Our Transportation Future
An Efficient Solution
What to Do about Coal
The Nuclear Option
The Rise of Renewable Energy
High Hopes for Hydrogen
Plan B for Energy
The bottom line in all the articles that I've read is that we need to do something to change our energy usage, and we need to do it now.
You can read some of the articles online at www.sciam.com
Monday, September 11, 2006
Lincoln and Luna Join the Family
I can’t believe I haven’t posted this sooner, but I guess I’ve been busy going to camp, my week-long conference for work, and with class starting up again. Anyway, Jodie and I have adopted two weimaraners, Lincoln and Luna from a family in Sturbridge, MA. The family recently had a baby and decided they didn’t have the time to exercise the dogs as much as they should. Luckily, we saw their post on an AMC forum and applied for the dogs.
Lincoln and Luna are both 3.5 years old. Lincoln is a big boy and Luna is a cute girl. They are lots of fun and love to run and play. Jodie and I have decided to add a section to this blog devoted to pictures and stories about Lincoln and Luna. We’re calling it The Weimaraner Chronicles. Check it out!
Lincoln and Luna are both 3.5 years old. Lincoln is a big boy and Luna is a cute girl. They are lots of fun and love to run and play. Jodie and I have decided to add a section to this blog devoted to pictures and stories about Lincoln and Luna. We’re calling it The Weimaraner Chronicles. Check it out!
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Ethan's Baptism Photos
I've posted the pictures I took at Ethan's baptism on my Picasa Web Album. Check them out
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Wedding Pictures Posted
Our photographer has posted some of our wedding pictures online. You can scroll through the pictures either by clicking on the larger one, or with the arrow keys (left/right) once you get the process started. Enjoy!
http://www.thamerphotography.com/mclaughlin/
http://www.thamerphotography.com/mclaughlin/
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Alaskan Honeymoon Photos
Jodie and I are back from our honeymoon. We had a fantastic time! I wish we were still there. There was so much more to see - Alaska is so big.
Our photos are posted online, so check them out when you get a chance.
http://picasaweb.google.com/PatMcLaugh
Our photos are posted online, so check them out when you get a chance.
http://picasaweb.google.com/PatMcLaugh
Saturday, June 10, 2006
May 2006 Wrapup
It's been a long time since I've posted, but I've been busy with the upcoming wedding and work, etc. Jodie and I have been enjoying living in our new house. It's great coming home to our own place. We've had a few interesting things happen so far.
New Hampshire received a lot of rain in May, particularly the weekend of the 13th and the 14th. I was up in Maine with my Parents enoying some beautiful sunny spring weather, but when I returned home on Sunday night, our street was flooded just beyond our house. Southern NH had severe flooding causing many schools to close for the majority of the week. The town of Hooksett was closed on Monday. They weren't letting traffic in our out of town due to the flooding.
For the last month or two, Jodie and I have enjoyed the company of a pair of barn swallows. The pair has been sleeping in the overhang just outside out front door. They didn't seem to mind us going in and out of the house as long as we were relatively quiet. Each night around 7:00pm they would fly in, spend the night and fly out around 6:00am. They are no longer staying with us - they seemed to stop coming about the same time we got the dog.
Yes, we have a dog. We are taking care of Sampson, an eleven year old yellow lab. He is owned by one of Jodie's friend's parents. They moved to California for about six months and were looking for someone to take care of Sampson while they were gone. It's been pretty fun watching Sampson. For the most part he's a really good dog, but we have had some trouble with him going to the bathroom in the house while we're at work.
New Hampshire received a lot of rain in May, particularly the weekend of the 13th and the 14th. I was up in Maine with my Parents enoying some beautiful sunny spring weather, but when I returned home on Sunday night, our street was flooded just beyond our house. Southern NH had severe flooding causing many schools to close for the majority of the week. The town of Hooksett was closed on Monday. They weren't letting traffic in our out of town due to the flooding.
For the last month or two, Jodie and I have enjoyed the company of a pair of barn swallows. The pair has been sleeping in the overhang just outside out front door. They didn't seem to mind us going in and out of the house as long as we were relatively quiet. Each night around 7:00pm they would fly in, spend the night and fly out around 6:00am. They are no longer staying with us - they seemed to stop coming about the same time we got the dog.
Yes, we have a dog. We are taking care of Sampson, an eleven year old yellow lab. He is owned by one of Jodie's friend's parents. They moved to California for about six months and were looking for someone to take care of Sampson while they were gone. It's been pretty fun watching Sampson. For the most part he's a really good dog, but we have had some trouble with him going to the bathroom in the house while we're at work.
I've only had the chance to go up to the lake in Maine a couple times so far. We've had nice weather both times - I even caught a bunch of fish over Memorial Day Weekend. We won't be able to go up all that much this summer because of the wedding and honeymoon.
It's hard to believe the wedding is only a couple weeks away.
Friday, February 24, 2006
Which Car should You Be Driving?
Answer: A diesel-electric hybrid using 100% biodiesel. Unfortunately, I don't know of any diesel-electric hybrid cars on the market, and biodiesel isn't readily available. BAE SYSTEMS does make diesel electric buses for New York City.
Biodiesel Retailer Map
Hybrid Buses
I recently found out UNH has a biodiesel group, and they have a comparison between several different cars. They compare cost per mile (strictly fuel cost), and fossil energy input per mile (again strictly looking at the fuel) for six different cars; a Jetta TDI on biodiesel, a Jetta TDI on petrodiesel, a Jetta 2.0L on regular gasoline, a Toyota Prius Hybrid, a Honda Fuel Cell vehicle (hydrogen), and a Dodge ESX3 diesel hybrid. The diesel hybrid was the cheapest to operate per mile at 3 cents per mile followed by the Prius at 3.5 cents/mile, the Jetta TDI on petrodiesel at 4 cents per mile, the biodiesel Jetta at 4.7 cents/mile, the gas Jetta at 6.2 cents/mile, and last the fuel cell at 19 cents/mile. The price of fuel used for the comparison is outdated, but I don't think the order would change much with updated fuel costs.
As far as fossil fuel use, the diesel hybrid (using 100% biodiesel of course) was the clear winner again, using only 0.55 BTUs of fossil energy per mile. The runner up was the Jetta TDI on biodiesel at .89, then the fuel cell car at 2.4, the Prius at 3.4, the petrol diesel Jetta at 3.7, and the gas Jetta at 6.0. The energy balance data for biodiesel used in the calculation seems a little optimistic, but biodiesel would be the clear winner regardless - unless the hydrogen for the fuel cell car is obtained from renewable sources. The hydrogen was assumed to come from natural gas.
The UNH Biodiesel group also has a great introductory presentation on biodiesel.
Car Comparison
Biodiesel Presentation
UNH Biodiesel Main Site
Biodiesel Retailer Map
Hybrid Buses
I recently found out UNH has a biodiesel group, and they have a comparison between several different cars. They compare cost per mile (strictly fuel cost), and fossil energy input per mile (again strictly looking at the fuel) for six different cars; a Jetta TDI on biodiesel, a Jetta TDI on petrodiesel, a Jetta 2.0L on regular gasoline, a Toyota Prius Hybrid, a Honda Fuel Cell vehicle (hydrogen), and a Dodge ESX3 diesel hybrid. The diesel hybrid was the cheapest to operate per mile at 3 cents per mile followed by the Prius at 3.5 cents/mile, the Jetta TDI on petrodiesel at 4 cents per mile, the biodiesel Jetta at 4.7 cents/mile, the gas Jetta at 6.2 cents/mile, and last the fuel cell at 19 cents/mile. The price of fuel used for the comparison is outdated, but I don't think the order would change much with updated fuel costs.
As far as fossil fuel use, the diesel hybrid (using 100% biodiesel of course) was the clear winner again, using only 0.55 BTUs of fossil energy per mile. The runner up was the Jetta TDI on biodiesel at .89, then the fuel cell car at 2.4, the Prius at 3.4, the petrol diesel Jetta at 3.7, and the gas Jetta at 6.0. The energy balance data for biodiesel used in the calculation seems a little optimistic, but biodiesel would be the clear winner regardless - unless the hydrogen for the fuel cell car is obtained from renewable sources. The hydrogen was assumed to come from natural gas.
The UNH Biodiesel group also has a great introductory presentation on biodiesel.
Car Comparison
Biodiesel Presentation
UNH Biodiesel Main Site
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Wachusett Skiing / Snowboarding
Jodie and I went to Wachusett Mtn in Princeton, MA yesterday for some skiing and snowboarding. I snowboarded and Jodie skied. It was awesome!
We got a coupon book from Mr. Tux when we signed up for them to provide our tuxedos for our wedding. The coupon book is great! We used a coupon for a free "Learn To Turn" package for both of us. The package included free rentals, a free lesson, and a free lift ticket for the lower mountain. We didn't pay a dime for the whole day!
Originally I was thinking of bringing my skis and using the coupon for an entire mountain lift ticket while Jodie did her lessons, but then I thought this was the perfect opportunity to try snowboarding. I'm really glad I decided to go the snowboarding route. It made it so Jodie and I were on the same level. It was her first time skiing and my first time snowboarding, so we were quite content to stay on the lower mountain. In fact we didn't progress to the chair lift until around 2:00 pm. We were in lessons in the morning, and then still needed to work on a few things using the "magic carpet" lift before trying the chair. Apparently, the days of rope tows and "J" or "T" bars are gone, and these conveyer belt things are the standard "bunny slope" lift.
I didn't really know what to expect from snowboarding. Part of me thought I'd pick it up pretty easily because I've skied before and I'm generally pretty good at picking up things like this. But, another part of me feared I'd be quite bad because I'd never skateboarded in my life (the few times I tried to even stand on a board went very badly) and a lot of people compare snowboarding to skateboarding. At the beginning of my lesson, I struggled quite a bit. Though I was one of the better people in the class, I was still struggling to go straight for a few feet and make one turn. By the end of the 1.5 hour lesson, I could occasionally link two turns together.
There were a couple things I found very surprising about snowboarding. I was surprised to hear the rider is supposed to weight the front foot heavily, when intuitively I would have thought, and my body seemed to agree, the rider would want to weight the rear foot more. I also was surprised to find out I ride "goofy", meaning with my right foot forward. I had heard the term "goofy" before, but I had always assumed riding with the left foot forward was "goofy". There are a couple questions they ask a first time snowboarder to help them decide which foot should be forward. First, what foot do you kick a soccer ball with, and second, if you ran and then slid on a slippery surface, which foot would you put first. I definitely do both those things with my right foot. It is quite surprising to me that most people don't, especially since most people are right handed and so am I.
After a lunch break, Jodie and I stayed together somewhat and used the "magic carpet" for awhile. When the 1:00 pm snowboarding classes invaded the slope, there really wasn't much room to practice. Even though I was still struggling a lot, and falling regularly, I suggested to Jodie that we take the Monadnock Chair lift up. She agreed with a little convincing. I figured the trail was a green circle, so it would just be a lot more of what we had been doing already. I was right, for me, it was a lot more falling.
By the end of the day, I was feeling quite beat up from the repeated falling, but I was doing pretty well linking my toe-side and heel-side turns together. I was finally able to ride down the slope in a reasonable fashion.
Jodie did amazingly well. She had vowed never to try downhill skiing, especially after getting a small taste of downhill on some cross country ski trails. Thanks to this coupon, I was able to convince her to give it a try, and she did great! And liked it! Jodie has a difficult time when she's not in full control, and sliding downhill definitely fits in that category. Once she learned to turn and stop, she could control herself to her likening. She also is afraid of falling down. Who would have thought, but that made her learn much more quickly because she really didn't want to fall. She actually made it through the whole day without falling, which must be a record for a first timer. Though, it might have been nice for her to fall a couple times just to realize it's not that bad. Trust me, I can attest to that!
Summary:
Number of falls for Jodie: 0
Number of runs without a fall for Pat: 1
We got a coupon book from Mr. Tux when we signed up for them to provide our tuxedos for our wedding. The coupon book is great! We used a coupon for a free "Learn To Turn" package for both of us. The package included free rentals, a free lesson, and a free lift ticket for the lower mountain. We didn't pay a dime for the whole day!
Originally I was thinking of bringing my skis and using the coupon for an entire mountain lift ticket while Jodie did her lessons, but then I thought this was the perfect opportunity to try snowboarding. I'm really glad I decided to go the snowboarding route. It made it so Jodie and I were on the same level. It was her first time skiing and my first time snowboarding, so we were quite content to stay on the lower mountain. In fact we didn't progress to the chair lift until around 2:00 pm. We were in lessons in the morning, and then still needed to work on a few things using the "magic carpet" lift before trying the chair. Apparently, the days of rope tows and "J" or "T" bars are gone, and these conveyer belt things are the standard "bunny slope" lift.
I didn't really know what to expect from snowboarding. Part of me thought I'd pick it up pretty easily because I've skied before and I'm generally pretty good at picking up things like this. But, another part of me feared I'd be quite bad because I'd never skateboarded in my life (the few times I tried to even stand on a board went very badly) and a lot of people compare snowboarding to skateboarding. At the beginning of my lesson, I struggled quite a bit. Though I was one of the better people in the class, I was still struggling to go straight for a few feet and make one turn. By the end of the 1.5 hour lesson, I could occasionally link two turns together.There were a couple things I found very surprising about snowboarding. I was surprised to hear the rider is supposed to weight the front foot heavily, when intuitively I would have thought, and my body seemed to agree, the rider would want to weight the rear foot more. I also was surprised to find out I ride "goofy", meaning with my right foot forward. I had heard the term "goofy" before, but I had always assumed riding with the left foot forward was "goofy". There are a couple questions they ask a first time snowboarder to help them decide which foot should be forward. First, what foot do you kick a soccer ball with, and second, if you ran and then slid on a slippery surface, which foot would you put first. I definitely do both those things with my right foot. It is quite surprising to me that most people don't, especially since most people are right handed and so am I.
After a lunch break, Jodie and I stayed together somewhat and used the "magic carpet" for awhile. When the 1:00 pm snowboarding classes invaded the slope, there really wasn't much room to practice. Even though I was still struggling a lot, and falling regularly, I suggested to Jodie that we take the Monadnock Chair lift up. She agreed with a little convincing. I figured the trail was a green circle, so it would just be a lot more of what we had been doing already. I was right, for me, it was a lot more falling.
By the end of the day, I was feeling quite beat up from the repeated falling, but I was doing pretty well linking my toe-side and heel-side turns together. I was finally able to ride down the slope in a reasonable fashion.
Jodie did amazingly well. She had vowed never to try downhill skiing, especially after getting a small taste of downhill on some cross country ski trails. Thanks to this coupon, I was able to convince her to give it a try, and she did great! And liked it! Jodie has a difficult time when she's not in full control, and sliding downhill definitely fits in that category. Once she learned to turn and stop, she could control herself to her likening. She also is afraid of falling down. Who would have thought, but that made her learn much more quickly because she really didn't want to fall. She actually made it through the whole day without falling, which must be a record for a first timer. Though, it might have been nice for her to fall a couple times just to realize it's not that bad. Trust me, I can attest to that!Summary:
Number of falls for Jodie: 0
Number of runs without a fall for Pat: 1
Friday, February 10, 2006
The House Saga Continues ...
The seller on our original house came back and offered to give us $6,000 back at closing if we came back to the house. Apparently, he was disappointed that the house didn't sell fast after we left. This was an attractive offer given the radon and septic issues at the new property. Jodie and I felt we could move right into the house and bank the $6,000 to use in the event the septic system has issues or if we sell the house and the new buyer wants some concession.
The sellers on the new house have offered us a total of $11,000 in a combination of cash back at closing and escrow funds. That almost covers the cost of both radon mitigation systems and a new septic.
After some going back and forth on our decision, we've decide to stay with our "second" property. It will involve a little more money on our part, but we like the house and sellers better than the first house.
The sellers on the new house have offered us a total of $11,000 in a combination of cash back at closing and escrow funds. That almost covers the cost of both radon mitigation systems and a new septic.
After some going back and forth on our decision, we've decide to stay with our "second" property. It will involve a little more money on our part, but we like the house and sellers better than the first house.
Another Bad Septic! Plus High Radon!
The inspection on our "new" house turned up a failing septic system and high radon levels in the air and the water. The septic system had a lot of water and sewage in the leach field. The radon level in the basement air was 6.5 pCi/L and the water radon was 15,000 pCi/L. An Air radon level of 4.0 pCi/L is the EPA recommended level above which action should be taken. There is no agreed upon level for radon in the water, but a level of 4,000 pCi/L has been proposed in NH. Maine uses 20,000 and Massachusetts 10,000 pCi/L. Most literature indicates the largest health risk from water radon is when it outgasses from the water, such as when showering.
After quite a bit of investigation, I've decided the radon treatments for air and the water are warranted. Obviously, a new septic system is warranted as well. Here's what I've found for estimates for the various systems. These estimates are just ballpark estimates based on the information I could give over the phone. A site assessment is necessary to get a good estimate.
$6500 - $8000 for a septic system design and installation
$900 - $1200 for air radon mitigation system
~$3500 for water radon mitigation
Resources:
http://www.des.state.nh.us/EOH/Radon/FAQs.asp
http://www.radonh2o.com/
http://www.radongas.org/
After quite a bit of investigation, I've decided the radon treatments for air and the water are warranted. Obviously, a new septic system is warranted as well. Here's what I've found for estimates for the various systems. These estimates are just ballpark estimates based on the information I could give over the phone. A site assessment is necessary to get a good estimate.
$6500 - $8000 for a septic system design and installation
$900 - $1200 for air radon mitigation system
~$3500 for water radon mitigation
Resources:
http://www.des.state.nh.us/EOH/Radon/FAQs.asp
http://www.radonh2o.com/
http://www.radongas.org/
One House Out, New House In
Jodie and I are now under agreement on a different house. The inspection on the first house went fairly well. The boiler is older and needs a new coil, and some of the electrical wiring was out of date, but the big issue was the septic system. The septic system is undersized and not state approved. There is a 500 gallon metal tank and a trench line rather than a leach field. Kent Septic did the inspection and said they don't even like to pump metal tanks because they collapse. The inspection results were somewhat disappointing, but I wasn't too upset because I thought the inspection was enough to force the seller to make a concession.
The seller was unwilling to make a concession. His standpoint was that the system works, so there was no need to do any work. Jodie and I felt the seller should make concessions because based on the inspection results we felt the system was inadequate for the size of the house and unmaintainable because of the metal tank. It seemed to us that we'd be stuck with a large bill to replace the system, if not right away, then probably before we could sell the house.
Jodie, our real estate agent, and I met with the seller's original septic inspector, who inspected the septic a year ago. These septic people painted a much better picture. Saying the system does work now and is serviceable. They have in fact pumped it many times. They claimed the problem with metal tanks was the cover collapsing and this septic has a concrete cover.
Jodie and I still didn't feel too great about the septic system. Even if it works, it's too small and we'd likely have problems in the future. We weren't happy with the seller, who had bought the place a year earlier, made some updates, and was basically just trying to make as much money as possible. So we decided to spend the rest of the day looking at other houses on the market to see what our other options were.
We ended up finding another house in Hooksett for the same asking price. We made an offer, and ended up getting the house for the same price as the first one, with some money back for closing. The house has more finished space than the first house and has lots of storage space (2 garages) and a lot of land (5.5 acres, though some of it is wetlands). We're very excited.
The seller was unwilling to make a concession. His standpoint was that the system works, so there was no need to do any work. Jodie and I felt the seller should make concessions because based on the inspection results we felt the system was inadequate for the size of the house and unmaintainable because of the metal tank. It seemed to us that we'd be stuck with a large bill to replace the system, if not right away, then probably before we could sell the house.Jodie, our real estate agent, and I met with the seller's original septic inspector, who inspected the septic a year ago. These septic people painted a much better picture. Saying the system does work now and is serviceable. They have in fact pumped it many times. They claimed the problem with metal tanks was the cover collapsing and this septic has a concrete cover.
Jodie and I still didn't feel too great about the septic system. Even if it works, it's too small and we'd likely have problems in the future. We weren't happy with the seller, who had bought the place a year earlier, made some updates, and was basically just trying to make as much money as possible. So we decided to spend the rest of the day looking at other houses on the market to see what our other options were.
We ended up finding another house in Hooksett for the same asking price. We made an offer, and ended up getting the house for the same price as the first one, with some money back for closing. The house has more finished space than the first house and has lots of storage space (2 garages) and a lot of land (5.5 acres, though some of it is wetlands). We're very excited.
Sunday, January 22, 2006
Another Semester at WPI: Spring 2006
Last Monday was my first day of graduate classes for the Spring 2006 semester. My plan for the semester was to take a class in Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS) and to do three credits of directed research work. So, on Monday I left work early to drive down to WPI for my first MEMS class. I get there, I’m a little confused at first because the room number given for the course turns out to be the computer lab, but other students show up so I figure I have the right place and find a seat. About 10 minutes after the class is scheduled to start a professor type person walks to the front of the computer lab, asks if anyone is here for the MEMS course and then proceeds to tell us that the professor is not in today, so we have no class. Well that was a great, worthwhile hour drive down to Worcester! Thanks for the heads up professor!
While I’m at campus, I figure I’ll make good use of my time. I buy the book for the course ($135!), and setup my WPI computer account at the computer center. I assume that since the course meets in the computer lab, I’ll probably have to log in to the computer at some point.
Thursday rolls around and back down to WPI I go for the second, but really the first MEMS class. I’ll also be meeting with my professor to start the directed research afterward. The MEMS professor shows up on time and mentions he was out on Monday, but doesn’t offer any sort of apology. He proceeds to handout approximately a hundred pages of notes that are relevant to the first two class lectures. He then proceeds to go through the first two classes worth of PowerPoint slides (we wouldn’t want to be behind schedule so early in the semester). We never once touch the computers in front of us, nor does he mention them. The professor does interrupt lecture a couple times to chastise the other students in the computer lab for talking quietly. These other students are actually trying to get some work done. I can’t figure out why the professor would hold the lecture in the computer lab other than the fact there is a projector screen for his PowerPoint slides. There are screens in other classrooms, though maybe not quite as big a screen as the one in the computer lab. Anyway, I find the computer lab a very distracting environment for a class. People are coming and going all the time, there are keyboard/mouse noises, and not too mention the much more interesting material a few clicks away on the Internet.
Overall, I’m not impressed with the course or the professor. The class will have homework for every lecture, two exams, a project, multiple laboratories, and mandatory seminars in addition to class time. It looks like a lot of work, and potentially additional trips to campus other than scheduled class times, for a subject that is not that interesting to me. I should have known to drop the class on Monday when he didn’t show up and never told us beforehand.
One of the sheets the professor gave to us in his handouts was a sheet outlining his Homework and Exam Requirements (HER). This sheet lists sixteen items about the required formatting of homework assignments. “Points will be taken off during the evaluations for not satisfying these requirements”. My favorite one is number fifteen. “15. Staple (no folded corners, no paper clips, or other separable fasteners) all sheets for specific homework set (or exam, or report) in the upper left corner – do not staple more than one homework set at a time; make certain that the staple has a positive slope of approximately 45º”.
Thankfully, my directed research meeting when a lot better. I am going to be studying Biodiesel fuel and assessing its “cradle to grave” environmental effects. I think it will be very interesting and somewhat fun.
I’ve decided to drop the MEMS course and add the Advanced Dynamics and Vibrations course instead. I was originally going to take the Adv Dynamics and Vib class, but I had the professor last semester for graduate level dynamics and wasn’t too impressed. I’ve heard this advanced class will be spending a lot more time on random vibrations, which is a topic we deal with a lot at work.
While I’m at campus, I figure I’ll make good use of my time. I buy the book for the course ($135!), and setup my WPI computer account at the computer center. I assume that since the course meets in the computer lab, I’ll probably have to log in to the computer at some point.
Thursday rolls around and back down to WPI I go for the second, but really the first MEMS class. I’ll also be meeting with my professor to start the directed research afterward. The MEMS professor shows up on time and mentions he was out on Monday, but doesn’t offer any sort of apology. He proceeds to handout approximately a hundred pages of notes that are relevant to the first two class lectures. He then proceeds to go through the first two classes worth of PowerPoint slides (we wouldn’t want to be behind schedule so early in the semester). We never once touch the computers in front of us, nor does he mention them. The professor does interrupt lecture a couple times to chastise the other students in the computer lab for talking quietly. These other students are actually trying to get some work done. I can’t figure out why the professor would hold the lecture in the computer lab other than the fact there is a projector screen for his PowerPoint slides. There are screens in other classrooms, though maybe not quite as big a screen as the one in the computer lab. Anyway, I find the computer lab a very distracting environment for a class. People are coming and going all the time, there are keyboard/mouse noises, and not too mention the much more interesting material a few clicks away on the Internet.
Overall, I’m not impressed with the course or the professor. The class will have homework for every lecture, two exams, a project, multiple laboratories, and mandatory seminars in addition to class time. It looks like a lot of work, and potentially additional trips to campus other than scheduled class times, for a subject that is not that interesting to me. I should have known to drop the class on Monday when he didn’t show up and never told us beforehand.
One of the sheets the professor gave to us in his handouts was a sheet outlining his Homework and Exam Requirements (HER). This sheet lists sixteen items about the required formatting of homework assignments. “Points will be taken off during the evaluations for not satisfying these requirements”. My favorite one is number fifteen. “15. Staple (no folded corners, no paper clips, or other separable fasteners) all sheets for specific homework set (or exam, or report) in the upper left corner – do not staple more than one homework set at a time; make certain that the staple has a positive slope of approximately 45º”.
Thankfully, my directed research meeting when a lot better. I am going to be studying Biodiesel fuel and assessing its “cradle to grave” environmental effects. I think it will be very interesting and somewhat fun.
I’ve decided to drop the MEMS course and add the Advanced Dynamics and Vibrations course instead. I was originally going to take the Adv Dynamics and Vib class, but I had the professor last semester for graduate level dynamics and wasn’t too impressed. I’ve heard this advanced class will be spending a lot more time on random vibrations, which is a topic we deal with a lot at work.
Thursday, January 12, 2006
Found a House!
Jodie and I found house! It's a ranch that has been renovated, and is only a few minutes from our current apartment in Manchester. The house is actually in Hooksett. We're under contract and only need to complete the inspections and other paperwork for closing. Maybe we'll be in the house by the end of February!The house hunting process was fun at first. It was nice to look a bunch of houses, but the process became more stressful as we kept looking and didn't see anything we really liked. Then we found a great house at a great price and made an offer. Unfortunately, the seller went with another offer even though we offered their full asking price. It was very disappointing to lose that house, but there were several houses on the market we hadn't seen yet, so there was still hope the right house was out there for us. When we made an offer on this house that we are now under contract with, I was very stressed. At that point, we had looked at basically every house on the market in our price range and location requirements. It was a very unsettling feeling to think "what do we do if we don't get this house". Thankfully, the stress ended last night when we got word the seller had signed our contract even though they received two other offers last night. It's a very good thing we got our offer in early (the house had only been on the market two days).
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
New Year's 2006
Jodie and I spent New Years in Syracuse with Ben and Jaclyn. It was so much fun! Their New Years Party consisted of good food, fun games like trivial pursuit, and watching some of the Giants football game. There was some wine and champagne, but also some sparkling cider. It was my kind of party, low key, with fun people and only a little alcohol. There were six or seven of us. Ben and Jaclyn’s friends Josh and Jess were up from Arkansas; Adrian, who is in medical school with Jaclyn, and Brian, her fiancé, were there. Phil stopped by briefly.
On New Year’s Day, we sat around in our pajamas all day, played some more games, and read. I finished Shadow Puppets by Orson Scott Card, and started Dan Brown’s Angels and Demons.
Ben & Jaclyn have a great house with very modern colors. I really liked the yellow walls in their living room and the hardwood floors. Jodie and I would be lucky to find such a great place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)