PRC as a amplifier in GPS question.

[James Arthur]

On May 19, 11:37 am, "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgro...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

"James Arthur" <dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:c186736e-a60f-46f0-86e4-baed00f9cc35@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

The document is an incomprehensible tangle of special exceptions,
rules, ambiguous and incomplete, with footnotes. IOW, exactly what
you'd expect from a publicly regulated, legislated anything. Stay
tuned for public healthcare.

Healthcare is already in that state, no change needed.

Yes, and that's come from the government providing just 40% of
healthcare dollars.

"If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it
costs when it's free!" -P.J. O'Rourke

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Joerg wrote:

Well, I know what's in there anyhow since I am a PG&E customer :-(

Professionally Gouged & Extracted?


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

mpm wrote:

And now that Microsoft Sync is in Ford vehicles - god help us!
"Steering wheel missing, turn left to continue..."

'Fatal error in brakes.exe' Bend over and kiss your ass goodbye.
Report this error to Microsoft?


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Joerg]

Rene Tschaggelar wrote:

Joerg wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:


The owner indicates that the calculated break even point is 18 years
out of a 30 year lifetime. The higher prices of electricity will make
the break even point somewhat sooner. I don't have all the numbers
necessary to verify that. I certainly won't buy into anything that
takes 18 years to break even as I don't expect to live that long. I
agree that it's not very practical (unless you include government
subsidies and rebates), but it's a start.


The reason why PV is popular in Europe is that goverments there
provide HUGE subsidies. They often get well north of 50c/kWh and the
other ratepayers foot the bill. There is no free lunch.


As solar power producer, we get about a dollar a kWh
for solar energy. As electricity customer we can
choose the amount of solar energy you wish to
purchase. This is an adjustable surcharge that allows
to pay such high prices for solar energy. And guess what,
The demand for solar energy by far surpasses the supply.

So, I'm planning to have a solar roof in addition to
the heatpump running on a well.

It doesn't exactly work like that. Even ratepayers who do not wish to
buy expensive solar power and those who are renters and thus cannot even
install solar panels get socked with what basically amounts to an extra
tax. They cannot simply print those Dollars they pay you.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Eeyore]

Martin Brown wrote:

Joerg wrote:
terryc wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:13:45 -0700, Joerg wrote:

Pure electric-only EVs aren't the answer. It'll be HEVs that most
likely win
the day.

Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?

Exactly. My 2c is on a proper hybrid where the ICE(petrol or diesel)
simply runs a generator that tops up the battery bank.
I would really like to see if that works out more efficent that all the
inefficencies of current direct drive ICEs.

That's how the Toyota Prius works. Gets between 40mpg and 60mpg
according to what owners told me.

Which isn't all that impressive by European or Japanese standards of
fuel efficiency. A BMW 3 series deisel saloon will manage that. eg

http://saveyourcash.co.uk/fuel/cardatadetail.aspx?mfr=BMW&model=3-Series-E90/E91/E92/E93&id=632

Urban 39.8 Motorway 64.2 mpg to save you following the link.

Multiply by 0.8 to get US mpg.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Rene Tschaggelar wrote:

Joerg wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:

The owner indicates that the calculated break even point is 18 years
out of a 30 year lifetime. The higher prices of electricity will make
the break even point somewhat sooner. I don't have all the numbers
necessary to verify that. I certainly won't buy into anything that
takes 18 years to break even as I don't expect to live that long. I
agree that it's not very practical (unless you include government
subsidies and rebates), but it's a start.

The reason why PV is popular in Europe is that goverments there provide
HUGE subsidies. They often get well north of 50c/kWh and the other
ratepayers foot the bill. There is no free lunch.

As solar power producer, we get about a dollar a kWh
for solar energy.

How can that even remotely be justified ?

Graham

 

[mpm]

On May 19, 2:49�pm, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net>
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 19 May 2008 07:38:48 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

I have Excel. "An unknown error occurred", the usual meaningful MS error
message :-(

If you can get any of the MS Office Suite applications up and running,
go unto:
ďż˝ Tools -> Detect and Repair
You'll need the original Office or Excel CD. �That usually does the
trick. �Otherwiser, run the original setup, and tell it to repair
Office. �If that doesn't work, tell it to reinstall the existing
applications. �If that doesn't work, give up and install Open Office.

Well, it reads all other files just fine.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

I have run into "unknown" Excel errors before that were almost always
related to VB gibberish or other macros in the "Personal.xls"
workbook. Usually, deleting this workbook solves the problem - (Excel
will re-instantiate it.) Unless of course, you've used Personal.xls
for all your macro storage - in which case you are screwed.

You can also get "unknown" errors if your workbooks contains HTML
links, and the worksheet (possibly workbook?) is shared. You do have
to laugh as some of Microsoft's error descriptions sometimes....
"Keyboard missing, Press F1 to continue", for example.

And now that Microsoft Sync is in Ford vehicles - god help us!
"Steering wheel missing, turn left to continue..."

Good luck.
-mpm (Excel Expert!) Ha!!

 

[Martin Brown]

Joerg wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:
Joerg wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 19 May 2008 07:38:48 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

I have Excel. "An unknown error occurred", the usual meaningful MS
error message :-(

There are plenty of those. I think they learnt the style from IBM.

Even worse when it just dies or stops responding spontaneously. At
least these days it doesn't usually take the OS with it although I
suspect XL2007 took down Vista on my portable last week.

First time I have seen Vista completely dead in the water. Stopped
responding to the keyboard and then shortly after I tried to close
XL2007 the mouse pointer stopped with the pointer still on the close X.

Being a portable I had to wait for the battery to die. No reset button


On many laptops holding down the power button for several seconds resets
the box. I tend to stay with older software where I can.

In this particular instance it was dead with a capital D. Absolutely
nothing worked (not the off switch, numlock or suspend on close) and the
display was frozen in time. I wondered if there had been a hardware
failure, but it recovered after the battery went flat.

Saves a little
in cost but the main reason is that older generally means more reliable
when it comes to software or OS. And Vista will not enter these here
premises ;-)

Unfortunately, I have some customers already on Vista. It isn't all that
bad, but it isn't a noticeable improvement over XP. And it is slower.

XL2007 is a complete crock of shit and best avoided though. There is a
bun fight between the Vista & XL development teams over searching
directories with wildcards (it doesn't work properly in XL2007 VBA and a
commonly used method has been withdrawn unilaterally breaking lots of
code). The suggested work around is a joke and only works on Vista.

Well, it reads all other files just fine.

Chances are something is wrong with the file. You could try the XL
viewer (free download from MS) it is somewhat more error tolerant than
the main application (or a clone that will open XL workbooks). If it
opens copy and paste the stuff it can decode into a new worksheet.


Well, I know what's in there anyhow since I am a PG&E customer :-(

PG&E ? Sorry don't recognise the acronym. Pacific something or other?

Regards,
Martin Brown
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

 

[Richard Henry]

On May 20, 12:49 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...@nezumi.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

Joerg wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
Joerg wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 19 May 2008 07:38:48 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

I have Excel. "An unknown error occurred", the usual meaningful MS
error message :-(

There are plenty of those. I think they learnt the style from IBM.

Even worse when it just dies or stops responding spontaneously. At
least these days it doesn't usually take the OS with it although I
suspect XL2007 took down Vista on my portable last week.

First time I have seen Vista completely dead in the water. Stopped
responding to the keyboard and then shortly after I tried to close
XL2007 the mouse pointer stopped with the pointer still on the close X.

Being a portable I had to wait for the battery to die. No reset button

On many laptops holding down the power button for several seconds resets
the box. I tend to stay with older software where I can.

In this particular instance it was dead with a capital D. Absolutely
nothing worked (not the off switch, numlock or suspend on close) and the
display was frozen in time. I wondered if there had been a hardware
failure, but it recovered after the battery went flat.

Saves a little
in cost but the main reason is that older generally means more reliable
when it comes to software or OS. And Vista will not enter these here
premises ;-)

Unfortunately, I have some customers already on Vista. It isn't all that
bad, but it isn't a noticeable improvement over XP. And it is slower.

XL2007 is a complete crock of shit and best avoided though. There is a
bun fight between the Vista & XL development teams over searching
directories with wildcards (it doesn't work properly in XL2007 VBA and a
commonly used method has been withdrawn unilaterally breaking lots of
code). The suggested work around is a joke and only works on Vista.



Well, it reads all other files just fine.

Chances are something is wrong with the file. You could try the XL
viewer (free download from MS) it is somewhat more error tolerant than
the main application (or a clone that will open XL workbooks). If it
opens copy and paste the stuff it can decode into a new worksheet.

Well, I know what's in there anyhow since I am a PG&E customer :-(

PG&E ? Sorry don't recognise the acronym. Pacific something or other?

Greedy and Expensive.

 

[Joerg]

Martin Brown wrote:

Joerg wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
Joerg wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 19 May 2008 07:38:48 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

I have Excel. "An unknown error occurred", the usual meaningful MS
error message :-(

There are plenty of those. I think they learnt the style from IBM.

Even worse when it just dies or stops responding spontaneously. At
least these days it doesn't usually take the OS with it although I
suspect XL2007 took down Vista on my portable last week.

First time I have seen Vista completely dead in the water. Stopped
responding to the keyboard and then shortly after I tried to close
XL2007 the mouse pointer stopped with the pointer still on the close X.

Being a portable I had to wait for the battery to die. No reset
button


On many laptops holding down the power button for several seconds
resets the box. I tend to stay with older software where I can.

In this particular instance it was dead with a capital D. Absolutely
nothing worked (not the off switch, numlock or suspend on close) and the
display was frozen in time. I wondered if there had been a hardware
failure, but it recovered after the battery went flat.

Saves a little in cost but the main reason is that older generally
means more reliable when it comes to software or OS. And Vista will
not enter these here premises ;-)

Unfortunately, I have some customers already on Vista. It isn't all that
bad, but it isn't a noticeable improvement over XP. And it is slower.

XL2007 is a complete crock of shit and best avoided though. There is a
bun fight between the Vista & XL development teams over searching
directories with wildcards (it doesn't work properly in XL2007 VBA and a
commonly used method has been withdrawn unilaterally breaking lots of
code). The suggested work around is a joke and only works on Vista.

Personally, I wouldn't touch Vista or Office 2007 with a 10ft pole.
There is an unspoken rule in industry to store files '97 compatible. Not
everybody knows that rule but then it's not a problem to ask and if
necessary walk them through the simple steps via phone.

Well, it reads all other files just fine.

Chances are something is wrong with the file. You could try the XL
viewer (free download from MS) it is somewhat more error tolerant
than the main application (or a clone that will open XL workbooks).
If it opens copy and paste the stuff it can decode into a new worksheet.


Well, I know what's in there anyhow since I am a PG&E customer :-(

PG&E ? Sorry don't recognise the acronym. Pacific something or other?

Pacific Gas & Electric. The usual. Large utility, given a monopoly,
meaning you pay through the nose.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

Eeyore wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:

Joerg wrote:
terryc wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:13:45 -0700, Joerg wrote:

Pure electric-only EVs aren't the answer. It'll be HEVs that most
likely win
the day.
Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?
Exactly. My 2c is on a proper hybrid where the ICE(petrol or diesel)
simply runs a generator that tops up the battery bank.
I would really like to see if that works out more efficent that all the
inefficencies of current direct drive ICEs.
That's how the Toyota Prius works. Gets between 40mpg and 60mpg
according to what owners told me.
Which isn't all that impressive by European or Japanese standards of
fuel efficiency. A BMW 3 series deisel saloon will manage that. eg

http://saveyourcash.co.uk/fuel/cardatadetail.aspx?mfr=BMW&model=3-Series-E90/E91/E92/E93&id=632

Urban 39.8 Motorway 64.2 mpg to save you following the link.

Multiply by 0.8 to get US mpg.

Graham

US fluid ounces are a bit bigger than Imperial, so the ratio isn't
1.25:1 as you might expect, but almost exactly 1.20:1.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs

 

[Joerg]

John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 18 May 2008 08:38:33 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@pergamos.net> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2008 23:10:12 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@pergamos.net> wrote:

David L. Jones wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:482FA872.804C42A9@hotmail.com...
"David L. Jones" wrote:

I just saw the movie Who Killed the Electric Car?:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489037/

Fantastic!
It completely misses the point.
Sounds like it's you who missed the point of the movie.

Everyone should watch this one.
The IMDB user comment is spot on - " This film WILL frustrate you
greatly"
In fact, it's enough to make you want to cry.

Can't believe I had never heard of the movie before the other day.
http://gm-volt.com/2008/05/11/the-ev-1-wasnt-killed-it-was-dead-on-arrival/

Required to do so, GM went on to make the EV-1. It used lead acid
batteries
which held 0.4% as much energy as the same weight of gasoline.
Irrelevant.

Thus the EV-1
weighed 2970 lbs, 1175 lbs of which were the batteries.
Also irrelevant.

The resulting range
was 90/70 miles hwy/city.
Plenty enough for the majority of people. Especially when you can
conveniently recharge at home, at work, or at a shopping centre etc.

To achieve this, the tiny two-seater also had to
have the record lowest CD, the most advanced powertrain of the day, and a
cost
of $80,000 (they were only leased to consumers).
So what? price would come down in time.
Thousands of people buy $80,00 cars every day.

No excuse for GM to go to ridiculous lengths to get back every one of the
cars and then crush them literally out of existence. Especially when there
were thousands who would have taken them off their hands and waived all
rights to support.
GM did an evil thing, just evil.

The article concludes:

"In the end, though, the price wasn't an issue. The reality is the EV1 was
hostage to a technology the engineers knew from the get-go just wasn't
able to
do the job Roger Smith and the California Air Resources Board believed it
could. That's what killed the electric car."
Everyone had better rush and get one of those Humvees with the $100,000 Bush
government tax rebate before the new government gets in. Or has that
fire-sale finished already?

Dave.


A lot of assets get crushed on account of the corporate tax code and
accounting rules. I vividly remember 1992, when IBM got into the glue
really badly--we crushed a whole lot of brand new equipment, all paid
for and everything, because our budgets were being slashed and it was
either keep the people or keep the equipment--which had to have the
depreciation paid. The waste was astronomical, but the management was
in a bind and did their best with the choices available.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs
A small business can expense about $120K a year in equipment
purchases. The big boys have to show equipment and real estate and
improvements as assets, ie as taxable profit, which the public doesn't
generally understand. No wonder we export jobs.

But in the 1992 situation, they could have had a garage sale for
employees, got rid of the stuff at a suitable loss, and made some
employees very happy. I think.

John


That's probably true, but what would I do with a $2m copper dep tool?


Sell it and buy a ski lodge?

And then the taxman cometh. Audits the company, wonders where all that
stuff went, pokes around a bit in the books, raises his eyebrows, hops
into the car and shows up at the lodge with a humongous tax bill in hand.

I remember when all the trucks moved up 50 towards Nevada in the usual
year-end inventory shuffle. We live 2mi away and it almost caused local
smog. A while ago I took a look at Nevada, see what the biz-friendliness
there would be. Turns out you really have to watch it. If I am not
mistaken Clark County socks people with more than 3% in property taxes.
Yikes!

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Eeyore]

Phil Hobbs wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
Joerg wrote:
terryc wrote:
Joerg wrote:

Pure electric-only EVs aren't the answer. It'll be HEVs that most
likely win
the day.
Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?
Exactly. My 2c is on a proper hybrid where the ICE(petrol or diesel)
simply runs a generator that tops up the battery bank.
I would really like to see if that works out more efficent that all the
inefficencies of current direct drive ICEs.
That's how the Toyota Prius works. Gets between 40mpg and 60mpg
according to what owners told me.
Which isn't all that impressive by European or Japanese standards of
fuel efficiency. A BMW 3 series deisel saloon will manage that. eg

http://saveyourcash.co.uk/fuel/cardatadetail.aspx?mfr=BMW&model=3-Series-E90/E91/E92/E93&id=632

Urban 39.8 Motorway 64.2 mpg to save you following the link.

Multiply by 0.8 to get US mpg.


US fluid ounces are a bit bigger than Imperial, so the ratio isn't
1.25:1 as you might expect, but almost exactly 1.20:1.

So a US fl oz doesn't weigh an ounce ?

Graham

 

[Phil Hobbs]

Eeyore wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
Joerg wrote:
terryc wrote:
Joerg wrote:

Pure electric-only EVs aren't the answer. It'll be HEVs that most
likely win
the day.
Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?
Exactly. My 2c is on a proper hybrid where the ICE(petrol or diesel)
simply runs a generator that tops up the battery bank.
I would really like to see if that works out more efficent that all the
inefficencies of current direct drive ICEs.
That's how the Toyota Prius works. Gets between 40mpg and 60mpg
according to what owners told me.
Which isn't all that impressive by European or Japanese standards of
fuel efficiency. A BMW 3 series deisel saloon will manage that. eg

http://saveyourcash.co.uk/fuel/cardatadetail.aspx?mfr=BMW&model=3-Series-E90/E91/E92/E93&id=632

Urban 39.8 Motorway 64.2 mpg to save you following the link.
Multiply by 0.8 to get US mpg.

US fluid ounces are a bit bigger than Imperial, so the ratio isn't
1.25:1 as you might expect, but almost exactly 1.20:1.

So a US fl oz doesn't weigh an ounce ?

Graham

No, a US gallon of water is 3.785 litres, which at 2.2046 pounds per kg,

comes out to 8.345 pounds. An Imperial gallon of water is exactly 10
pounds, so the ratio is 10:8.345 or 1.198:1, just about 6:5.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 22 May 2008 19:19:23 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
Joerg wrote:
terryc wrote:
Joerg wrote:

Pure electric-only EVs aren't the answer. It'll be HEVs that most
likely win
the day.
Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?
Exactly. My 2c is on a proper hybrid where the ICE(petrol or diesel)
simply runs a generator that tops up the battery bank.
I would really like to see if that works out more efficent that all the
inefficencies of current direct drive ICEs.
That's how the Toyota Prius works. Gets between 40mpg and 60mpg
according to what owners told me.
Which isn't all that impressive by European or Japanese standards of
fuel efficiency. A BMW 3 series deisel saloon will manage that. eg

http://saveyourcash.co.uk/fuel/cardatadetail.aspx?mfr=BMW&model=3-Series-E90/E91/E92/E93&id=632

Urban 39.8 Motorway 64.2 mpg to save you following the link.

Multiply by 0.8 to get US mpg.


US fluid ounces are a bit bigger than Imperial, so the ratio isn't
1.25:1 as you might expect, but almost exactly 1.20:1.

So a US fl oz doesn't weigh an ounce ?

---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_ounce

JF

 

[Eeyore]

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Phil Hobbs wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
Joerg wrote:
terryc wrote:
Joerg wrote:

Pure electric-only EVs aren't the answer. It'll be HEVs that most
likely win
the day.
Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?
Exactly. My 2c is on a proper hybrid where the ICE(petrol or diesel)
simply runs a generator that tops up the battery bank.
I would really like to see if that works out more efficent that all the
inefficencies of current direct drive ICEs.
That's how the Toyota Prius works. Gets between 40mpg and 60mpg
according to what owners told me.
Which isn't all that impressive by European or Japanese standards of
fuel efficiency. A BMW 3 series deisel saloon will manage that. eg

http://saveyourcash.co.uk/fuel/cardatadetail.aspx?mfr=BMW&model=3-Series-E90/E91/E92/E93&id=632

Urban 39.8 Motorway 64.2 mpg to save you following the link.

Multiply by 0.8 to get US mpg.


US fluid ounces are a bit bigger than Imperial, so the ratio isn't
1.25:1 as you might expect, but almost exactly 1.20:1.

So a US fl oz doesn't weigh an ounce ?

---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_ounce

Lucky then that almost no-one these days uses them isn't it ?

Graham

 

[John Fields]

On Fri, 23 May 2008 00:04:37 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Phil Hobbs wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
Joerg wrote:
terryc wrote:
Joerg wrote:

Pure electric-only EVs aren't the answer. It'll be HEVs that most
likely win
the day.
Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?
Exactly. My 2c is on a proper hybrid where the ICE(petrol or diesel)
simply runs a generator that tops up the battery bank.
I would really like to see if that works out more efficent that all the
inefficencies of current direct drive ICEs.
That's how the Toyota Prius works. Gets between 40mpg and 60mpg
according to what owners told me.
Which isn't all that impressive by European or Japanese standards of
fuel efficiency. A BMW 3 series deisel saloon will manage that. eg

http://saveyourcash.co.uk/fuel/cardatadetail.aspx?mfr=BMW&model=3-Series-E90/E91/E92/E93&id=632

Urban 39.8 Motorway 64.2 mpg to save you following the link.

Multiply by 0.8 to get US mpg.


US fluid ounces are a bit bigger than Imperial, so the ratio isn't
1.25:1 as you might expect, but almost exactly 1.20:1.

So a US fl oz doesn't weigh an ounce ?

---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_ounce

Lucky then that almost no-one these days uses them isn't it ?

---
You never miss an opportunity to be a nasty little bitch, do you?

JF

 

[Eeyore]

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Phil Hobbs wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
Joerg wrote:
terryc wrote:
Joerg wrote:

Pure electric-only EVs aren't the answer. It'll be HEVs that most
likely win
the day.
Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?
Exactly. My 2c is on a proper hybrid where the ICE(petrol or diesel)
simply runs a generator that tops up the battery bank.
I would really like to see if that works out more efficent that all the
inefficencies of current direct drive ICEs.
That's how the Toyota Prius works. Gets between 40mpg and 60mpg
according to what owners told me.
Which isn't all that impressive by European or Japanese standards of
fuel efficiency. A BMW 3 series deisel saloon will manage that. eg

http://saveyourcash.co.uk/fuel/cardatadetail.aspx?mfr=BMW&model=3-Series-E90/E91/E92/E93&id=632

Urban 39.8 Motorway 64.2 mpg to save you following the link.

Multiply by 0.8 to get US mpg.


US fluid ounces are a bit bigger than Imperial, so the ratio isn't
1.25:1 as you might expect, but almost exactly 1.20:1.

So a US fl oz doesn't weigh an ounce ?

---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_ounce

Lucky then that almost no-one these days uses them isn't it ?

---
You never miss an opportunity to be a nasty little bitch, do you?

Are you suggesting that fl oz make any kind of sense ? Especially when there THREE different definitions.

Graham

 

[Jeroen Belleman]

John Fields wrote:

On Fri, 23 May 2008 00:04:37 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_ounce
Lucky then that almost no-one these days uses them isn't it ?

---
You never miss an opportunity to be a nasty little bitch, do you?

Haha! This Wikipedia article is one of the best arguments in
favour of the metric system I've come across. What a mess!

Jeroen Belleman

 

[Eeyore]

Jeroen Belleman wrote:

John Fields wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_ounce
Lucky then that almost no-one these days uses them isn't it ?

---
You never miss an opportunity to be a nasty little bitch, do you?


Haha! This Wikipedia article is one of the best arguments in
favour of the metric system I've come across. What a mess!

At least the British fl oz actually weighs an ounce ! But no-one here
uses them any more. Not for ages in fact.

We have kept the pint though for certain uses (different to a US pint of
course) for traditional reasons. Asking for 568ml of beer doesn't quite
have the same ring to it. ;~)

Gaham