[OT] Bush blames others for high oil prices

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 20 May 2004 10:14:02 -0700, Jim Thompson
<thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 May 2004 10:05:49 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On 20 May 2004 09:33:12 -0700, Winfield Hill
Winfield_member@newsguy.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote...

I'm trying to figure out how to put a 200 ps, 200 volt
gaussian pulse into 2 ohms. Got any advice?

A 2ps 200V pulse into 2 ohms? That's easy, use ohms law.
Make a 100A 2ps gaussian pulse and you'll be all set.



That was 200 ps Win. Even I'm not crazy enough to try for 2!

We might go for 400 volts into 8 ohms, and use a tapered line, but
that's kinda bulky for the gadget we have in mind. A shock line would
be fun, but most diodes are fully depleted at pretty low voltages.

But today, I'm still working on this 30 KHz amplifier...

John

Isn't it funny? A number of my most difficult designs have been at
low or moderately low frequencies.

...Jim Thompson

Yeah. This is an NMR gradient amp. It has to make up to 10 amp pulses
into an inductive load, with noise and pulse flatness below 5 PPM,
zero offset below 0.2 PPM. All sorts of bizarre things start to matter
down there.

Even the picosecond stuff cares about minute power supply ripples,
thermals, ground loops, stuff like that if you want to keep the jitter
comparable to the other specs.

In Jim Williams' first Analog Design book, there's a cool horror story
(chapter 26) about noise problems in a failed frequency synthesizer
project. Everybody who does electronics should be required to read his
two books.

John

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <c8jpa0doidjo5fppoonagg32sjurv55re2@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> writes:

On Thu, 20 May 2004 14:45:18 GMT, James Beck
jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote:

In article <20040519194048.19889.00001691@mb-m10.aol.com>,
rolavine@aol.com says...
Got to love the way this man takes responsibilty for things. His only response
to the high gas prices is asking congress to pass an energy bill based on some
ideas he submitted in 2001, during the height of the screwing that ENRON was
'republican enabled' to give this country.


Just remember that all of the DOT Bombs and cooked books were a result
of the false economy of the stock market created by an artificially
depressed interest rate perpetrated during the Clinton-Gore years.

Market bubbles are a recurring fact of history. What Clinton and
Greenspan failed to do was to warn everybody that it *was* a bubble.
Bill preferred to just take credit for it; if fact, he still does.

Greenspan did warn people, but used the term 'Irrational Exhuberance'

in his usual carefully crafted terminology. Of course, the 'economy'
isn't exactly the same as the 'economy', but alot of the booming
tech economy was boosted by general environment that also created
the stock bubble.

Greenspan was between a rock and a hard place, where the economy
got so far out of control that he knew that he could burst the
bubble very quickly. Indeed the economy was poorly managed, but
some people made lots of money.

Interest rates would have had to be 300% to keep people away from
PETS.COM and Webvan and Enron. Too many people are thrilled by the
gamble, too.

When just betting $10K during the week, I'd usually profit about

$5K after expenses (this is while I was making 3X that on stock
options.) The people who were screwed up were those who 'invested'
instead of 'day traded' during the boom times. Of course, in
about Apr-May2000, the situation changed where the trajectory
was downwards. Eventually, the investment mentality was needed
again.

I pulled out in Mar2000, where I only left a small vestige in the
stock market, and frankly, I should have pulled ALL of it out.

John

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <20040520124544.27424.00001001@mb-m24.aol.com>,
rolavine@aol.com (Rolavine) writes:

Bush blames others for high oil prices
From: James Beck jim@reallykillersystems.com
Date: 5/20/2004 7:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: <MPG.1b168e8fa34cd2af98998b@news.east.earthlink.net

In article <20040519194048.19889.00001691@mb-m10.aol.com>,
rolavine@aol.com says...
Got to love the way this man takes responsibilty for things. His only
response
to the high gas prices is asking congress to pass an energy bill based on
some
ideas he submitted in 2001, during the height of the screwing that ENRON
was
'republican enabled' to give this country.


Just remember that all of the DOT Bombs and cooked books were a result
of the false economy of the stock market created by an artificially
depressed interest rate perpetrated during the Clinton-Gore years.
Greenspan should be shot as a traitor. It isn't genius to cut interest
rates everytime the stock market took a dip. All it has accomplished is
making it unviable to put money anywhere other than the stock market if
you expect a return.


The Fed did that because there was not a lot of inflation, that is their
mantra! It was not a conspiracy, the Clinton-Gore Years had genuine economic
growth.

Much of the growth from the boom was false, and the bubble burst well

before Clinton left office. The trailing indicators (jobs) took a
while to start being affected, but the money
flow was starting to get screwed up in the late 1999 timeframe, and by
the time of Mar 2000, the boyancy of the stock market stopped.
(People tend to be laid off after serious attempts to keep them,
but people tend not to be hired until a company can make a proper
investment in them.)

The big, fat, bubble burst was well managed as a thin, short (2-3mos),
and mild recession. It took a while to recover from the bubble burst
and to regain trust. (The time for the recession, after properly
adjusted figures, actually started several months before
the Mar/Apr2001 timeframe, but it isn't worth arguing about the
past.)

John

 

[Rich Grise]

"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote in message
news:YL7rc.3$PU5.0@fed1read06...

"Rich Grise" <null@example.net> wrote in message
news:AC6rc.8326$r6.8185@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...

What would it take to splice a gene into something like blue-green
algae,
to make it produce something like heptane/octane?

Do you know of a gene on any existing organism that can produce
heptane/octane?


Well, how about seven methane genes from an e.coli spliced in

series?

Or fractionate some vegetable oil gene ....

Cheers!
Rich

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 20 May 2004 15:30:46 GMT, Scott Stephens <scottxs@comcast.net>
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On Thu, 20 May 2004 04:28:26 GMT, Scott Stephens <scottxs@comcast.net
wrote:

There are a billion Chinese who want

cars, another billion in India, and a few more bil around the world
who want to be middle-class, and that means having heat and
electricity and transportation.

Is their desire, even their need, an obligation on me, my talent, time,
or treasure?

It certainly should be. As a practical matter, it sure is. The Saudis
and the Russians sell oil to the high bidder.

I don't follow. Your first argument seem to imply you thought the
Chinese, and developing world in general, was entitled to some kind of
poverty-subsidy, like they Kyoto Accords would give them, under the
deluded guise of preventing the fictitious Global Warming.

Kyoto is silly, which is why we didn't ratify it. And they are
entitled to however much that can produce and earn, and I certainly
hope all the world manages to earn enough for a decent life. If that
makes the price of gas go up, or keeps the US from being "number one",
good.

I'm not complaining about higher energy costs due to Chinese
competition, although I don't see how they are much less worthy of
economic sanctions against their evil political regime than Iraq.

Only free economies can produce wealth on the scale of the US and
Europe and Japan. Even the Chinese know this. The next 50 years should
be interesting.

I'm complaining about such American foolishness as "boutique fuel", and
other environmental nonsense that is an artificial tariff on American
fuel, by the Boleshevic-Globalist-Socialist-Enviro-Nazis.

Oh. I'm not complaining about anything. Except maybe diesel fumes... I
hate diesel fumes.

John

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

In news:s99oa0phqb48u9l2p5ri4p4nd9hv35gcgf@4ax.com,
John Larkin typed:

But I *hate* SUVs, espacially the hideous Cadillac and Dodge
atrocities, designed to be "menacing." Menacing to the drivers, it
says in the fine print.

Isn't the existence of SUVs mandated by the government limits on fuel
usage by "cars"? If not for those regulations we would still have
"station wagons" (When have I last seen one?) and other big cars. They
burned as much gas as SUVs, but they weren't ugly.


--
-Reply in group, but if emailing add 2 more zeros-
-and remove the obvious-

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 21 May 2004 03:00:27 GMT, "Tom Del Rosso"
<tdnews01@att.net.invalid> wrote:

In news:s99oa0phqb48u9l2p5ri4p4nd9hv35gcgf@4ax.com,
John Larkin typed:

But I *hate* SUVs, espacially the hideous Cadillac and Dodge
atrocities, designed to be "menacing." Menacing to the drivers, it
says in the fine print.

Isn't the existence of SUVs mandated by the government limits on fuel
usage by "cars"? If not for those regulations we would still have
"station wagons" (When have I last seen one?) and other big cars. They
burned as much gas as SUVs, but they weren't ugly.

Right. SUVs are classed as trucks, and they don't have the mileage
requirements of "cars". Gotta keep those autoworkers happy.

John

 

[Paul Burke]

Frank Bemelman wrote:

Gas price isn't everything. We should also compare road tax, insurance and
the
purchase of the car itself. Not to mention parking costs and fines

OK, about 240 Euros tax, about the same for insurance, the car (2nd hand
Saab) was about 8000. Parking 1 Euro for 2 hrs locally when I use a pay
car park. Fines? Don't know. Speed cameras are a tax on stupidity, which
I'm all for, as it's an unlimited resource.

Paul Burke

 

[Rich Grise]

"Bill Bailley" <JustMe@Home> wrote in message
news:40aca08c$0$3035$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

I hope gas hits $8 a gallon soon. That would get a lot of ugly metal
off the road.

John


My very words.
Those beautiful shiny SUV carcases will fetch big money as scrap from
China.

The future ?
Plywood cars and ceramic engines. Methanol fuel and vegetable oils for
lube.

Bring it on.

What would it take to splice a gene into something like blue-green algae,
to make it produce something like heptane/octane? What's the status on
"biodeisel?"

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Zak]

John Larkin wrote:

Right. SUVs are classed as trucks, and they don't have the mileage
requirements of "cars". Gotta keep those autoworkers happy.

Don't trucks have a lower allowed highway speed? Here it is 80 km/h for
trucks versus 120 km/h for cars.



Thomas

 

[Daniel Haude]

On Thu, 20 May 2004 09:07:15 +0200,
Frank Bemelman <f.bemelmanx@planet.invalid.nl> wrote
in Msg. <40ac58a5$0$348$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> schreef in
bericht news:9a7oa01pivc3dl8hoevpen0ib2m26g3vng@4ax.com...

[snip]

I hope gas hits $8 a gallon soon. That would get a lot of ugly metal
off the road.


Price of gas in the Netherlands is 1.33 euro per liter. About US$1.56, at
the current exchange rate of 1.20. In Germany it is 15 cents cheaper (?) not
sure. A gallon is 3.79 liter, so the price for a gallon is roughly US$6.04

But the average US citizen uses 1380 liters of gas each years as opposed
to the 330 liters of the average German (who is by no means less car-
crazy), so the American ends up spending just about as much per year.
Four times the gas usage of course means that the American spends four
times as many hours in his car, which may account for the fact that the
German gets to spend three times the vacation time of his American
colleague.

--Daniel

--
"With me is nothing wrong! And with you?" (from r.a.m.p)

 

[Paul Burke]

Zak wrote:

Don't trucks have a lower allowed highway speed? Here it is 80 km/h for
trucks versus 120 km/h for cars.

This is one of my pet annoyances. Get on a dual carriageway, 2 lane
stretch, cars can do 70mph, trucks limited to 60. Truck A, with limiter
set to 60.01mph, starts to overtake truck B, limiter at 59.99mph. Result
is total blockage until a hill, when either B is less powerful and A can
pass, or A finally drops back behind B.

I think trucks should not be speed limited, but should have to operate
on the imaginary axis. (that's where the alternative to Real Madrid,
Imaginary Madrid, play).

Paul Burke

 

[Paul Burke]

Daniel Haude wrote:

But the average US citizen uses 1380 liters of gas each years as opposed
to the 330 liters of the average German

Is this true? 330/52 = 6.3l/ week. Say 50 miles/ week. That's possible I
suppose where distances are short and most people can use bicycles or
public transport. I travel 3 miles each way every day, but public
transport takes 90 minutes (buses don't connect), and there's half a
mile of 1 in 7 up, followed by the same down, so only fitness loonies
would bike, I'd be risking a coronary (also death by HGV).

Paul Burke

 

[Jim Yanik]

"Tom Del Rosso" <tdnews01@att.net.invalid> wrote in
news:fherc.10187$fF3.252450@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

In news:s99oa0phqb48u9l2p5ri4p4nd9hv35gcgf@4ax.com,
John Larkin typed:

But I *hate* SUVs, espacially the hideous Cadillac and Dodge
atrocities, designed to be "menacing." Menacing to the drivers, it
says in the fine print.

Isn't the existence of SUVs mandated by the government limits on fuel
usage by "cars"? If not for those regulations we would still have
"station wagons" (When have I last seen one?) and other big cars. They
burned as much gas as SUVs, but they weren't ugly.

I would not use the term 'mandated'. More of an unintended consequence that
SUV s rose to such levels of use.SUVs were around before CAFE,but were
limited-use,specialty vehicles that were also in commercial uses.Thus the
exception in CAFE,to protect the commercial and limited-use of 'light
trucks'.
And IMO,the US auto companies simply did not want to develop more fuel-
efficient large cars.They took a long time just to accept electronic fuel
injection,while foreign cars(Japan) adopted it readily,and made great
strides with it.

Besides,a SUV is just a jacked up station wagon,on a truck chassis,with big
wheels.More of "Detroit's" method of auto design;picking parts from their
bins and tacking them together and then fine-tuning it to make it
work(somewhat).

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Fri, 21 May 2004 15:10:43 +0100, Paul Burke <paul@scazon.com>
wrote:

Daniel Haude wrote:

But the average US citizen uses 1380 liters of gas each years as opposed
to the 330 liters of the average German

Is this true? 330/52 = 6.3l/ week. Say 50 miles/ week. That's possible I
suppose where distances are short and most people can use bicycles or
public transport. I travel 3 miles each way every day, but public
transport takes 90 minutes (buses don't connect), and there's half a
mile of 1 in 7 up, followed by the same down, so only fitness loonies
would bike, I'd be risking a coronary (also death by HGV).

Paul Burke

From insurance statistics it appears that the average VEHICLE travels
15,000 miles per year. At 20MPG that's 750 gallons or 2839 liters per
year.

I don't know where Haude got his numbers, but he is noted for being
full of it ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Rolavine wrote:

Got to love the way this man takes responsibilty for things. His only response
to the high gas prices is asking congress to pass an energy bill based on some
ideas he submitted in 2001, during the height of the screwing that ENRON was
'republican enabled' to give this country.

Sigh. "Liberal Mantras" again.

Have you not noticed that these corporations are
_Multi-Nationals_? There simply aren't any "Evil American
Corporations".

As of this moment all major oil companies are announcing record profits.
Nothing has happened to the supply of oil, and the industry is using the excuse
of a lack of refining capacity, a situation that this industry created for
itself.

Right, they happily agreed with the Green-driven
legislation that made increased refining capacity
unfeasible. (Warning: that's the wrong answer to the wrong
question you keep asking.)

We need a federal government strong enough to go head to head with
corporations. The one we got now is in the pocket of big oil, and Bush's
unspoken advice to the general public is, "Bend over and squeel like pigs".

Don't be ridiculous. On one hand, we have "Evil Jewish
Bankers", on the other hand "Evil Arab Oil Sheiks and their
Evil Oil Corporation Partners". You can't solve that problem
because you're looking at the wrong problem; it's fabricated
to look like the right one though.

Youknow for a cost of 10K$ per head the citizens should expect a bit more from
their government.

No, Americans should expect $10K worth of getting
screwed, and everyone else pays what they're charged locally.

I keep saying "Act Locally" but you don't get it. Hint: I
don't own a car. I have ordered my life so that I don't need
one, hence I don't need "Big Oil"'s products. I just don't
care what the price of gasoline is. Why do you?

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[John Larkin]

On 19 May 2004 23:40:48 GMT, rolavine@aol.com (Rolavine) wrote:

Got to love the way this man takes responsibilty for things. His only response
to the high gas prices is asking congress to pass an energy bill based on some
ideas he submitted in 2001, during the height of the screwing that ENRON was
'republican enabled' to give this country.

As of this moment all major oil companies are announcing record profits.
Nothing has happened to the supply of oil, and the industry is using the excuse
of a lack of refining capacity, a situation that this industry created for
itself.

We need a federal government strong enough to go head to head with
corporations. The one we got now is in the pocket of big oil, and Bush's
unspoken advice to the general public is, "Bend over and squeel like pigs".
Youknow for a cost of 10K$ per head the citizens should expect a bit more from
their government.

Rocky

Adjusted for inflation, gas cost $2.80 in 1980. Adjusted further for
per-capita income, it cost over twice what it costs today. Relative to
1900, the ratio is 5:1.

So quitcher bitchin.

John

 

[Rolavine]

Bush blames others for high oil prices
From: John Larkin jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com
Date: 5/21/2004 7:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: <2reta0pvhvmqp0l0h70j9ogtvrj358badb@4ax.com

On 19 May 2004 23:40:48 GMT, rolavine@aol.com (Rolavine) wrote:

Got to love the way this man takes responsibilty for things. His only
response
to the high gas prices is asking congress to pass an energy bill based on
some
ideas he submitted in 2001, during the height of the screwing that ENRON
was
'republican enabled' to give this country.

As of this moment all major oil companies are announcing record profits.
Nothing has happened to the supply of oil, and the industry is using the
excuse
of a lack of refining capacity, a situation that this industry created for
itself.

We need a federal government strong enough to go head to head with
corporations. The one we got now is in the pocket of big oil, and Bush's
unspoken advice to the general public is, "Bend over and squeel like pigs".
Youknow for a cost of 10K$ per head the citizens should expect a bit more
from
their government.

Rocky

Adjusted for inflation, gas cost $2.80 in 1980. Adjusted further for
per-capita income, it cost over twice what it costs today. Relative to
1900, the ratio is 5:1.

So quitcher bitchin.

No, we all need to keep bitching, that is an important element to keeping

freedom. Besides, it looks like this thing is just another rippoff.

As far as your adjusted for inflation figures for gasoline, how about last year
when it was about half what it is now.

So, start your bitching and urge congress to investigate, or it's going to be
$3.50 soon.

Rocky.

 

[Rich Grise]

"Rolavine" <rolavine@aol.com> wrote in message > >Adjusted for inflation,
gas cost $2.80 in 1980. Adjusted further for

per-capita income, it cost over twice what it costs today. Relative to
1900, the ratio is 5:1.

So quitcher bitchin.

No, we all need to keep bitching, that is an important element to keeping
freedom. Besides, it looks like this thing is just another rippoff.

I saw just a snippet today of Sen. Barbara Boxer, CA, talking
about the high oil prices and what they're doing about it.

She said that "The strategic reserves are currently 94% full.
We propose temporarily suspending filling storage tanks with
high-priced oil, and merely divert a very small fraction of
that flow." or something to that effect. She emphasized that
they're paying top dollar, taxpayer dollars, for oil that
they're putting in "reserve." And goes on, not specifically
saying "conspiracy", but basically der Fuehrer is hogging
all the oil and they're all getting fat in the proces. There
was a spokesman for "The Administration," saying that "These
strategic reserves are needed in case of a homeland security
emergency..." Just parroting the party line.

See, the thing with the robber barons and nazis, they're
incapable of anything other than all-or-nothing thinking. Any
amount less than their fantastical "safe" amount is a deficit,
and they're terrified that that means that they'll have
nothing at all.

Another problem is, several times Boxer said that we need to do
things that make sense - she actually said, "that make sense"
- so if a majority of the sheeple heard that, she probably cut
her own reelection throat.

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Terry Given]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote in
message news:8m3qa0dttl6sgmu8e3dj3a23qs27n08g09@4ax.com...

On Thu, 20 May 2004 10:14:02 -0700, Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 May 2004 10:05:49 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On 20 May 2004 09:33:12 -0700, Winfield Hill
Winfield_member@newsguy.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote...

I'm trying to figure out how to put a 200 ps, 200 volt
gaussian pulse into 2 ohms. Got any advice?

A 2ps 200V pulse into 2 ohms? That's easy, use ohms law.
Make a 100A 2ps gaussian pulse and you'll be all set.



That was 200 ps Win. Even I'm not crazy enough to try for 2!

We might go for 400 volts into 8 ohms, and use a tapered line, but
that's kinda bulky for the gadget we have in mind. A shock line would
be fun, but most diodes are fully depleted at pretty low voltages.

But today, I'm still working on this 30 KHz amplifier...

John

Isn't it funny? A number of my most difficult designs have been at
low or moderately low frequencies.

...Jim Thompson


Yeah. This is an NMR gradient amp. It has to make up to 10 amp pulses
into an inductive load, with noise and pulse flatness below 5 PPM,
zero offset below 0.2 PPM. All sorts of bizarre things start to matter
down there.

Even the picosecond stuff cares about minute power supply ripples,
thermals, ground loops, stuff like that if you want to keep the jitter
comparable to the other specs.

In Jim Williams' first Analog Design book, there's a cool horror story
(chapter 26) about noise problems in a failed frequency synthesizer
project. Everybody who does electronics should be required to read his
two books.

John

Hear Hear. and not just once - say once a year.

I posted a list of my books to abse if anybody gives a damn.

Cheers
Terry