My maiden anti-idiot (4wd) rant

[LotteBum]

There are places -- as Theo notes -- where tanks make sense. Suburbia is not amongst them. Better would be the government actually putting infrastructure in place to use the treated sewage out of Werribee and
other sewage plants; it's clean enough for a large number of purposes
currently filled with drinking quality water, after all ...

Paulie-AU did his thesis on this very issue. The problem with such a proposal is public perception. The majority of the general public don't want to drink treated effluent. This is quite ignorant of those who live in Qld (The Smart State - HA!) because Esk dump their treated effluent into the Brisbane River. It ends up in Wivenhoe Dam. We drink that. I imagine it's much the same in other states.

Lotte

 

[cfsmtb]

Paulie-AU did his thesis on this very issue. The problem with such a proposal is public perception. The majority of the general public don't want to drink treated effluent. This is quite ignorant of those who live in Qld (The Smart State - HA!) because Esk dump their treated effluent into the Brisbane River. It ends up in Wivenhoe Dam. We drink that. I imagine it's much the same in other states.

All the water that's ever been on the face of the planet is the same quantity as it is now. That means your lovely pure H2O has been at least filtered through the Earths water systems literally thousands of times. Including the bottom of the deep blue sea, part of a dinosaurs diet or in someones/somethings digestive tract. Funny how humans *think* they're the only part of the environment that's worth consideration....

 

[Terry Collins]

Theo Bekkers wrote:

> OTOH, I'm not connected to the mains. I have a 127,000 litre rain-water
> tank. That would cost around $8000 installed to your taps. Unfortunately it
> won't quite fit on most domestic blocks.
>
> Theo
> Don't you just hate me?

Yes, because you have a block of land that can take a rainwater tank so
big {.

I also agree with your bit on the economics. Thousands spent for what
amount to $7 worth of water to fill my tanks at the old price. Now
$8.40c at the new 20% higher price.

If Sydney was serious about reducing water demand, then composting
toilets would be allowed {. that would save 40% of the domestic usage.

What happens now is that Sydney Water wants people to install a large
rainwater tank, (>$1,000), buy a pump ($400-$1,000+) and connect it to
your toilet ($1,000 for plumber, must be done by plumber). They also
expect that you will top up the rainwater tank from the mains.[1]

Sheer stupidity, although, if you think about it, a brilliant solution
for beating the water restrictions. Just put a "tank water" sign out the
front and you can water your garden anytime {


[1] Do not answer their tank usage survey for the gift. It is a stupid
plastic noddy sprinkler that is extremely contankerous.

 

[Theo Bekkers]

Travis wrote:

> I really can't see why people like lawn so much. Its so ubiquitous
> even a nice green one isn't much of a status symbol any more, and most
> yards aren't big enough for running around in much anyway.

In WA, it keeps the sand from being walked into the house. In Vic, the mud.
Or you can just pave most of the yard.

Theo

 

[Graeme Dods]

On Thu, 6 Apr 2006 15:39:27 +0800, Theo Bekkers wrote:

> Hehe, Cars with open windows use more fuel. I believe the break-even point
> is about 50 km/h. If you go 60 then you use less fuel with the air-con on
> than with the windows open.

Like you say, it depends on the speed, but it also depends on the design of
the car and even if you've got those funny little wind deflectors round the
window. Then there's the efficiency of the air-con unit, when it was last
regassed, what setting you have it on etc. etc. So the break even speed
probably varies over a fairly large range for different vehicles driven by
different people.

Graeme

 

[Theo Bekkers]

TimC wrote:

> Do these people ever wonder why they are the only ones in their truck?
> Doesn't it get lonely and dangerous to fight fires all by yourself?

Hehe. No-one goes out alone.

Theo

 

[Theo Bekkers]

Stuart Lamble wrote:

> There are places -- as Theo notes -- where tanks make sense. Suburbia
> is not amongst them. Better would be the government actually putting
> infrastructure in place to use the treated sewage out of Werribee and
> other sewage plants; it's clean enough for a large number of purposes
> currently filled with drinking quality water, after all ...

Based on 700mm of rain per annum. 14 million litres of water falls on my
block. I don't use anything like that much water. Even a 500 metre block
gets 350,000 litres. We wouldn't need to collect that much. Unfortunately in
Perth we get about 20 of that 700 mm between Oct and April so need a largish
store. My son in Cranbourne relies on rainwater only and has only a smallish
tank, probably 20-30Kl. I don't understand why a streetful of houses 1km
from Cranbourne BD isn't on scheme water.

Theo

 

[Tamyka Bell]

Theo Bekkers wrote:
>
> Tamyka Bell wrote:
>
> > And when Mum's car started leaking air conditioner fluid many years
> > ago, she never bothered to get it fixed and refill it - she just kept
> > the windows down. And now that I've bought it, I do the same, even in
> > high summer in Brisbane.
>
> Hehe, Cars with open windows use more fuel. I believe the break-even point
> is about 50 km/h. If you go 60 then you use less fuel with the air-con on
> than with the windows open.
>
> Theo

I drive through the city. And that's an interesting statistic you quote,
a source would be nice, because experience shows otherwise. Or perhaps
air conditioning just encourages people to drive, when there are other,
more appropriate forms of thransport available.

Tam

 

[dtmeister]

Tamyka Bell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I drive through the city. And that's an interesting statistic you quote,
> a source would be nice, because experience shows otherwise. Or perhaps
> air conditioning just encourages people to drive, when there are other,
> more appropriate forms of thransport available.

Mythbusters!

http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2004/11/mythbusters_boom_lift_catapult.html

Actually, it seems to be very complicated and I don't think there's one
right answer. Obviously too many variables and what might happen with
one car won't happen with another. There's also a snopes article.

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_393.html


--
..dt

 

[Theo Bekkers]

dtmeister wrote:
> Tamyka Bell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I drive through the city. And that's an interesting statistic you
>> quote, a source would be nice, because experience shows otherwise.
>> Or perhaps air conditioning just encourages people to drive, when
>> there are other, more appropriate forms of thransport available.
>
> Mythbusters!
>
> http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2004/11/mythbusters_boom_lift_catapult.html
>
> Actually, it seems to be very complicated and I don't think there's
> one right answer. Obviously too many variables and what might happen
> with one car won't happen with another. There's also a snopes article.
>
> http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_393.html

I read it somewhere many years ago. In my own experience my ute fuel
consumption doesn't vary by a measurable amount from summer to winter. But I
suppose I have the lights and wipers on more often in winter. I suspect the
smaller the engine, the bigger the effect of extra load.

Theo

 

[Stuart Lamble]

On 2006-04-07, dtmeister <[email protected]> wrote:
> Actually, it seems to be very complicated and I don't think there's one
> right answer. Obviously too many variables and what might happen with
> one car won't happen with another. There's also a snopes article.
>
> http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_393.html

Straightdope isn't snopes.

--
My Usenet From: address now expires after two weeks. If you email me, and
the mail bounces, try changing the bit before the "@" to "usenet".

 

[mitosis]

Travis wrote:

> I really can't see why people like lawn so much. Its so ubiquitous
> even a nice green one isn't much of a status symbol any more, and most
> yards aren't big enough for running around in much anyway.

In WA, it keeps the sand from being walked into the house. In Vic, the mud.
Or you can just pave most of the yard.

Theo

Take your shoes off.

 

[mitosis]

TimC wrote:

> Do these people ever wonder why they are the only ones in their truck?
> Doesn't it get lonely and dangerous to fight fires all by yourself?

Hehe. No-one goes out alone.

Theo

Minimum 4 in NSW I think.

 

[Theo Bekkers]

mitosis wrote:
> Theo Bekkers Wrote:
>> TimC wrote:

>>> Do these people ever wonder why they are the only ones in their
>>> truck? Doesn't it get lonely and dangerous to fight fires all by
>>> yourself?

>> Hehe. No-one goes out alone.

> Minimum 4 in NSW I think.

We use Toyota's as light tankers. Max crew 2.

Theo

 

[Graeme Dods]

On 6 Apr 2006 01:58:42 -0700, Travis wrote:

> I really can't see why people like lawn so much.

You might as well concrete the front garden and paint it green as it's
functionally and aesthetically very similar. The only reason I can think of
for us having one (wherever/whenever we find a place to buy) is so our son
has somewhere to play. Mind you, in Perth's summer many lawns are as hard
as concrete anyway and he's got my big head which has survived many an
impact with the ground (and has been known to break "solid" objects).

Graeme

 

[dtmeister]

Stuart Lamble <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2006-04-07, dtmeister <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Actually, it seems to be very complicated and I don't think there's one
>> right answer. Obviously too many variables and what might happen with
>> one car won't happen with another. There's also a snopes article.
>>
>> http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_393.html
>
> Straightdope isn't snopes.

Snopes _link_ then...

--
..dt

 

[Stuart Lamble]

On 2006-04-07, Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
> We use Toyota's as light tankers. Max crew 2.
^ *BLAM!*

Oh. Sorry. Having just spent a while explaining usage of the apostrophe
to a non-native English speaker in a newsgroup where pedanticism rules
the roost, my trigger finger got a little too twitchy.

--
My Usenet From: address now expires after two weeks. If you email me, and
the mail bounces, try changing the bit before the "@" to "usenet".

 

[Theo Bekkers]

Stuart Lamble wrote:
> Theo Bekkers wrote:
>> We use Toyota's as light tankers. Max crew 2.
> ^ *BLAM!*
>
> Oh. Sorry. Having just spent a while explaining usage of the
> apostrophe to a non-native English speaker in a newsgroup where
> pedanticism rules the roost, my trigger finger got a little too
> twitchy.

"Toyota's" ****, I don't believe I did that. I'll have to speak to my
proof-reader and my editor. I'm just going to share a cup of coffee with
them. We all drink from the same cup.

Theo
My fingers got temporarily disconnected from my brain. Please accept my
sincerest apology.

 

[Stuart Lamble]

On 2006-04-07, dtmeister <[email protected]> wrote:
> Stuart Lamble <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2006-04-07, dtmeister <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Actually, it seems to be very complicated and I don't think there's one
>>> right answer. Obviously too many variables and what might happen with
>>> one car won't happen with another. There's also a snopes article.
>>>
>>> http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_393.html
>>
>> Straightdope isn't snopes.
>
> Snopes _link_ then...

The above link ain't a snopes link, and a quick check on snopes in the
"automobiles" section reveals nothing about air conditioning and fuel
economy ...

--
My Usenet From: address now expires after two weeks. If you email me, and
the mail bounces, try changing the bit before the "@" to "usenet".

 

[dtmeister]

Stuart Lamble <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The above link ain't a snopes link, and a quick check on snopes in the
> "automobiles" section reveals nothing about air conditioning and fuel
> economy ...

Okay, you win. Will you proof read all my most important posts from now
on?

You're not a computer geek are you?


--
..dt