Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: SAMSON123 on November 19, 2009, 08:47:11 AM
-
California outlaws large, power-hungry TVs
Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:55PM EST
In a move that could spell the end of the plasma TV industry as we know it, the state of California agreed today to enact strict regulations on the amount of power televisions can consume, effectively outlawing most large plasma TVs as of January 1, 2011, with many more televisions set to be banned beginning January 1, 2013.
The state had been concerned that 10 percent of a home's energy use is typically devoted to the TV and its related equipment, and that percentage has been increasing as consumers gain access to larger and larger (and cheaper and cheaper) televisions, which command an ever-increasing hunger for power.
The new rules go into effect a little more than a year from now: On January 1, 2011, televisions will be required to reduce energy consumption by an average of 33 percent. In 2013, a second tier of restrictions will go into effect, with average energy consumption required to be reduced by 49 percent vs. today's levels.
Rest assured, this doesn't mean the end of the television as we know it. As the California Energy Commission notes, as of now, over 1,000 televisions already meet the 2011 standards, so many manufacturers won't have to panic in order to comply with the regulations, at least for now.
Those who will be heavily affected are manufacturers who make televisions that draw more than their fair share of juice. A formula related to the size of the TV's screen in square inches will be used to determine the maximum power draw allowed by a TV. For example, Panasonic's 54-inch VIERA plasma TV would be allowed to draw 281 watts of power in "on mode." Today that set is rated to draw 293 watts of power. Smaller plasmas are generally OK under the 2011 specs, but virtually all of them fall short when put up against the 2013 rules. That same 54-inch plasma will be required to draw only 175 watts once 2013 arrives, a power reduction that just might not be possible.
Bottom line: Most LCD televisions will be safe under the 2011 law, and many plasmas will as well, but come 2013, everyone's going to have to do some serious belt-tightening.
All told, the new rules are expected to save 6,515 Gigawatt-hours annually in the state, save the state $8.7 billion in costs for additional power plants, and save consumers $8.1 billion a year in lower energy bills.
One additional point of note: The new rules currently don't apply to very large TVs, those of 1,400 square inches or larger (roughly a 58" set), although rules are likely to be enacted against these ultra-large sets in the second phase of this legislation.
-
Another liberal hell hole run into the ground by left wing lunatics.
-
Another liberal hell hole run into the ground by left wing lunatics.
I'm sorry but is there a right to a big screen tv in america? Is that in the constitution?
-
I'm sorry but is there a right to a big screen tv in america? Is that in the constitution?
Thank you clearly explaining what people have with future of marxists and liberals - MISERABLE FUCKING LIFE.
Where is it in the constitution you get the right to tax me for your health care?
-
I'm sorry but is there a right to a big screen tv in america? Is that in the constitution?
Show somewhere in the consititution that a RIGHT is REQUIRED for such things. People have a RIGHT to anything they desire so long as it does not infringe upon the rights of others.
-
Thank you clearly explaining what people have with future of marxists and liberals - MISERABLE FUCKING LIFE.
Where is it in the constitution you get the right to tax me for your health care?
Says you, not the majority of people who voted.
It doesn't but a majority of people want it so that's what they get. The constitution does allow for a democratically elected government to enact policies that they were voted in to enact right? Like health care reform and cap and trade. See 333 you would have to go outside the constitution to say they can not do what they were elected to do, just because YOU don't like it or YOUR FRIENDS don't like it, does not mean it is not the will of the people. And what is a democratically elected government if it is not the will of the people?
Both cap and trade and healthcare reform were included in the platforms of both parties i will add including the one of your beloved Palin. But lets forget that blame it on McCain and pretend she is just a dunce with a love of guns.
-
Says you, not the majority of people who voted.
When did the American people vote for THIS particular health care reform?
I doubt Obamacare is what most Americans had in mind.
Check out the last Rasmussen poll on this very issue.
-
Says you, not the majority of people who voted.
It doesn't but a majority of people want it so that's what they get. The constitution does allow for a democratically elected government to enact policies that they were voted in to enact right? Like health care reform and cap and trade. See 333 you would have to go outside the constitution to say they can not do what they were elected to do, just because YOU don't like it or YOUR FRIENDS don't like it, does not mean it is not the will of the people. And what is a democratically elected government if it is not the will of the people?
Both cap and trade and healthcare reform were included in the platforms of both parties i will add including the one of your beloved Palin. But lets forget that blame it on McCain and pretend she is just a dunce with a love of guns.
Thank God that 2010 will put an end to these marxists. KC - you are a disgrace. You are a communist, a statist, a lemming, an obamabot, and will support anything coming from the govt.
Whats next? Banning radios? How about banning telephones?
-
When did the American people vote for THIS particular health care reform?
I doubt Obamacare is what most Americans had in mind.
Check out the last Rasmussen poll on this very issue.
Says who? You? Some news station poll?
Fact is people voted for reform. This is reform and it's what the people want.
When did the american people vote to invade iraq? They didn't the president who was elected made the call and that is that.
-
Thank God that 2010 will put an end to these marxists. KC - you are a disgrace. You are a communist, a statist, a lemming, an obamabot, and will support anything coming from the govt.
Whats next? Banning radios? How about banning telephones?
Sure sure 333. Keep following Palin on twitter and salivating over her pictures meanwhile furiously smashing your keyboard with any adjective you can possibly muster to describe Obama and the majority of Americans who voted for him. Enjoy your stay in the minority Napoleon Dynamite.
-
Says who? You? Some news station poll?
Fact is people voted for reform. This is reform and it's what the people want.
When did the american people vote to invade iraq? They didn't the president who was elected made the call and that is that.
Really?People wanted to have a ban on plasma television sets.Can you show me where Obama or anyone ran on that or had it included in their platform.Because,for the life of me I dont recall that.
Another enviro kook crap shit that will put thousands out of work all for the sake of that fat dumbfuck Al Gore and his lying theories.
-
Where was the referendum on that..or any green laws that suicide states like California enact. Look at the polls on healthcare...there is no solid majority on any of it except tort reform, which is like 60%. Nobody wants this cap and trade.....except teh gorebots. U tell anybody that their light bill is going up and they will basically eat their congressman. If I want a 90 inch LCD so I can see Tom Brady in all his manly glory, then I'll pay the bill.
-
Let's try to predict where this thread will go...
240: I can't believe their republican governor allowed this.
333386: Arnold is a RINO - republican in name only
Lurker: Funny, 33, you were cool with it when Arnold endorsed Mccain.
333386: Mccain is also a RINO lib america hater.
240: So he makes terrible decisions.
333386: yes, absolutely.
240: Even when it comes to VP selections?
...
...
...
333386: I noticed nobody responded to my Harvard Dean criticism of the Obama healthcare plan. Here is a graphic which drives home what a failure the stilumus has been.
;D
-
Where was the referendum on that..or any green laws that suicide states like California enact. Look at the polls on healthcare...there is no solid majority on any of it except tort reform, which is like 60%. Nobody wants this cap and trade.....except teh gorebots. U tell anybody that their light bill is going up and they will basically eat their congressman. If I want a 90 inch LCD so I can see Tom Brady in all his manly glory, then I'll pay the bill.
60% want cap and trade. Sorry HH6 You're in the minority on this one. Just like with everything else you're in the minority.
-
really? 60% of americans want cap/trade? interesting. I had no clue most people are that informed about it. Maybe its' how the Q is phrased as well.
Pollster (NBC): Do you support destorying the environment?
Pollster (FOX): Do you support destroying the economy?
-
really? 60% of americans want cap/trade? interesting. I had no clue most people are that informed about it. Maybe its' how the Q is phrased as well.
Pollster (NBC): Do you support destorying the environment?
Pollster (FOX): Do you support destroying the economy?
Do you support having your electric rates go up by 25%, gasoline $1 a gallon, a retrofit penalty when selling your home, a national building code, etc?
-
really? 60% of americans want cap/trade? interesting. I had no clue most people are that informed about it. Maybe its' how the Q is phrased as well.
Pollster (NBC): Do you support destorying the environment?
Pollster (FOX): Do you support destroying the economy?
according to a cnn poll there are 60% of people in support of it.
It's a necessary thing. It's not crippling in any way shape or form, will there be growing pains? Yes. But it will lead to a brighter future. Right now America does not rely on self sufficient energy. It's beholden to middle eastern oil interests. If you want to complain about high oil blame the policies of the last 8 years, blame the destabilization of the middle east under US direction. Those are more crippling monetary wise than ANY cap and trade system.
-
Demographics on the poll there KC? Also Barry himself said bills would go waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay up..barry himself. I'm not paying another cent to u douchbag libs. Ohg and it won't help anything anyway. See below...thats research..not the CNN bullshit without the breakdown or how much its gonna cost people.
Other polls that ask Americans how they feel about a proposed "cap and trade" system to control pollution have tended to produce positive responses. But those surveys never seem to mention what such a system might cost. The latest IBD/TIPP Poll laid it all out in a somewhat lengthy question and drew a very different response: By nearly 3-to-1, Americans oppose a cap-and-trade system that, if opponents are correct, could add $800 to $1,200 per household to energy prices.
This is from Investors Business Daily:
Overall: 23% support, 63% oppose, 14% not sure.
Democrats: 36% support, 47% oppose, 17% not sure.
Republicans: 9% support, 80% oppose, 11% not sure.
Independents: 21% support, 79% oppose, 12% not sure
-
according to a cnn poll there are 60% of people in support of it.
It's a necessary thing. It's not crippling in any way shape or form, will there be growing pains? Yes. But it will lead to a brighter future. Right now America does not rely on self sufficient energy. It's beholden to middle eastern oil interests. If you want to complain about high oil blame the policies of the last 8 years, blame the destabilization of the middle east under US direction. Those are more crippling monetary wise than ANY cap and trade system.
And where will get the shiny new super energy that will make us not "beholden" to foreign nations? I don't hear a peep about natural gas, oil or nuclear. I hear phasing out coal and fantasy projects like mass wind farms and solar energy. Both are nice ideas and pretty and make people smile, but are totally inadeuqute for replacing other sources of energy on a mass scale. So where will the energy come from? Even IF cap and trade worked and there was an actual decrease in energy usage...we are still a growing nation with a growing population...we will not gain enough in effiencey to stop us from needing new sources of power generation.
Where will it come from?
Also, I can actually agree on a national building code for energy efficiency. And the retro-fitting migh actually work only if homes are given enough lead time and a HUGE fucking tax credit and such to offset the costs.
-
And where will get the shiny new super energy that will make us not "beholden" to foreign nations? I don't hear a peep about natural gas, oil or nuclear. I hear phasing out coal and fantasy projects like mass wind farms and solar energy. Both are nice ideas and pretty and make people smile, but are totally inadeuqute for replacing other sources of energy on a mass scale. So where will the energy come from? Even IF cap and trade worked and there was an actual decrease in energy usage...we are still a growing nation with a growing population...we will not gain enough in effiencey to stop us from needing new sources of power generation.
Where will it come from?
Also, I can actually agree on a national building code for energy efficiency. And the retro-fitting migh actually work only if homes are given enough lead time and a HUGE fucking tax credit and such to offset the costs.
Nuclear and natural gas have never been taken off the table. It's about reduction of greenhouse emissions so cleaner burning coal technology, nuclear technology and creating renewable projects are key. But not one without the other. No one has said no more nuclear or no more clean coal. Wind, water, solar etc may never be the only solution. But enacting cleaner burning fuels and less reliance on foreign oil is not a bad thing.
Well that's the thing we don't have a sh*t load of time but i agree. A tax credit may be something thats needed to help offset the cost right away. I hope things like this are brought up for debate when the bill is being hammered out.
As for rising energy costs i've said it once and i'll say it again. US involvement in middle eastern policy and war has led to higher energy destabilization than anything cap and trade will do.
-
Oh no... Sebelius shitcanned both in her state before Barry was elected. Nobody on the left is calling for Nuke plants or Clean Coal...they want magic and hope to run our cars.
-
It would take only 400 Nuclear power plants to run the entire country for decades, yet no one on any side is talking about that (at least that I'm aware of).
Cap and Trade is just a backdoor tax on the American people to cover the bullshit idea that we're in an energy crisis, which we are not. Having every part of my life taxed is not something I'm very keen on nor know anyone who is either.
As far as the "ban on plasmas" goes, just buy your 60" plasma this year and be done with it, they last for at least 10-12 years now.
-
no 33, I dont like cap/trade. IF obama and friends could PROVE there was some crisis coming, as well as demonstreate PROOF this plan will prevent it, I would like the idea.
So far, both sides are just yelling about how bad the other is, so I say preserve the status quo until 1 side can prove their argument.
Do I think the mid-east will eventually tell us to fvck off, and then we have a crisis? Sure. If the dollar tanks, you bet your ass we're in for an energy crisis. Maybe O knows more about the future than I do.
But from what I've seen, I'm not liknig it.
-
no 33, I dont like cap/trade. IF obama and friends could PROVE there was some crisis coming, as well as demonstreate PROOF this plan will prevent it, I would like the idea.
So far, both sides are just yelling about how bad the other is, so I say preserve the status quo until 1 side can prove their argument.
Do I think the mid-east will eventually tell us to fvck off, and then we have a crisis? Sure. If the dollar tanks, you bet your ass we're in for an energy crisis. Maybe O knows more about the future than I do.
But from what I've seen, I'm not liknig it.
Than tell the idiot in the WH, to drill baby drill, go for nuclear power, more coal, etc. 240 - you seem like a nice guy, but sometimes are so fucking dense! Raising energy prices on all of us is the freaking point 240! Obama wants an energy crisis. Dont you get it yet?
What dont you get 240 - Obama wants our energy prices to skyrocket. How many times do I have to post this damn clip? He wants high prices! Are you fucking blind 240? Serious, with everything I have shown you, are you still this dense as to the agenda of this WH?
-
I know prices will go up.
The critical thinker in me believes O knows more than I do about the future coming mess - maybe the saudis and chinese cut us both off at the knees on the same day :(
who knows. I'm against it, it's that simple. I'm not fvcking blind.
-
240 - Obama hates us and hates this country. Every policy of his is about punishing people.
He wants electric rates to skyrocket. I post that clip yet people still dont get it. Its amazing. He is telling you that he is going to royally fuck you, and yet we still have brain dead idiots like mons, kc, blacken, still supporting this admn.
-
I'm sorry but is there a right to a big screen tv in america? Is that in the constitution?
ummm... kinda. life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
I think Body88 would just die if he couldn't watch the superbowl on a 54 inch plasma. Thank Goodness he's in MA
Let's hope the manufacturers figure out a way to make it less of an energy glutton,
...otherwise we'll see a run on those. I wonder if they'll bring out the television police?
-
240 - Obama hates us and hates this country. Every policy of his is about punishing people.
He wants electric rates to skyrocket. I post that clip yet people still dont get it. Its amazing. He is telling you that he is going to royally fuck you, and yet we still have brain dead idiots like mons, kc, blacken, still supporting this admn.
pssst: Last I checked California is a state run by the Republicans, ...but please, ...don't let facts get in your way.
-
pssst: Last I checked California is a state run by the Republicans, ...but please, ...don't let facts get in your way.
Not quite. The legislature who makes the laws is run by far left freaks.
-
Another liberal hell hole run into the ground by left wing lunatics.
California is bleeding financially.
What's wrong with saving money on becoming more energy efficient?
According to this article, a whopping $8.1 billion could be saved from not having to build additional power plants.
As for "green taxes", I believe Sweden introduced a carbon tax as far back as 1991, and it didn't really had any negative impact on our lifestyles.
I am not to say whether cap and trade is a good idea.
But I definitely would say that regulations that favor environmentally friendly alternatives does not necessarily mean they're worse.
On the contrary.
The ban on conventional lamps over here have means that the development of the LED lamps have finally taken off.
Higher oil prices (and hopefully higher gas taxes globally) will lead to better and more efficient hybrid cars and system with fueling poles on every highway in a few years.
-
Hedge - respectfully, you are 100% wrong on this.
CA is bleeding financially because it has the worst business climate in the nation due to these insane regulations and anti-business lunatics in the legislature.
The other thing is that the govt is simply too big. The taxes are outrageous and people fleeing this mess because it is not sustainable.
We need cheap, reliable, usable fuel for trucks, cars, heat, etc. The evironmentalists are destroying the economy with their fantasies.
We need more factories and power plants, not solar panels. We need more nukes and drilling, not oppresive anti-growth regs.
What more evidence do you need? CA is bleeding people and jobs and businesses are leaving.
-
should they have fuel regulations on cars? Y or N?
-
should they have fuel regulations on cars? Y or N?
No. Emissions are one thing, but MPG is another. I dont have as mucha problem with the emissions as I do with the mpg stuff.
-
so you're okay with a car getting 1 MPG?
-
so you're okay with a car getting 1 MPG?
I am...if that person wants to pay for that, then let them. It is not the government's responsibility to tax us into certain habits. If I want to drive a V-8 F-150, then I will. The plasma TV issue is just an excuse for a legislature that can't get its act together.
If people would just wake up(as said in countless other threads) and do the right thing, for example, buy their gas from companies that pump and manufacture gasoline and petroleum products in the U.S.A. Sunoco(the official fuel of NASCAR), and Hess gas are two companies that are American pumped and processed. I'm more concerned with us giving our money to 'ol Hadji in sandland then the energy costs of a damn plasma TV.
Everybody knows that LCDs are better anyway. ;D
-
ummm... kinda. life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
I think Body88 would just die if he couldn't watch the superbowl on a 54 inch plasma. Thank Goodness he's in MA
Let's hope the manufacturers figure out a way to make it less of an energy glutton,
...otherwise we'll see a run on those. I wonder if they'll bring out the television police?
And therefore that means plasma tv's? Life, liberty and happiness are now intermingled with televisions in your mind?
-
KC - this is why I hate marxists.
You want the govt to run everyones life and deprive everyone of choice.
-
KC - this is why I hate marxists.
You want the govt to run everyones life and deprive everyone of choice.
Not at all. I believe in free choice, but i can see in california desperate times call for desperate measures.
Overall though i believe in choice, freedom to choose what you want. What i do not believe in is that everything should cost the same regardless of choice as it relates to energy. For example if you choose a highly inefficient product you should pay more for it. If you choose to use more power you should pay more. It's simple. If you don't want to pay more under cap and trade change your ways. It's your choice.
-
Not at all. I believe in free choice, but i can see in california desperate times call for desperate measures.
Overall though i believe in choice, freedom to choose what you want. What i do not believe in is that everything should cost the same regardless of choice as it relates to energy. For example if you choose a highly inefficient product you should pay more for it. If you choose to use more power you should pay more. It's simple. If you don't want to pay more under cap and trade change your ways. It's your choice.
People do pay more...that's why their power bills go up when they use a lot of power.
-
People do pay more...that's why their power bills go up when they use a lot of power.
Exactly. The only choice most liberals are concerned about the govt making is their right to kill a baby and marry another guy.
Other than that, they are perfectly willing to let the govt dictate every other aspect of their lives.
This is why liberalism is a severe mental disorder.
-
Exactly. The only choice most liberals are concerned about the govt making is their right to kill a baby and marry another guy.
Other than that, they are perfectly willing to let the govt dictate every other aspect of their lives.
This is why liberalism is a severe mental disorder.
You forgot smoking weed.
I just read that unemployment in CA is at 12.5%. And these folks are banning certain types of TVs?
-
Not at all. I believe in free choice, but i can see in california desperate times call for desperate measures.
Overall though i believe in choice, freedom to choose what you want. What i do not believe in is that everything should cost the same regardless of choice as it relates to energy. For example if you choose a highly inefficient product you should pay more for it. If you choose to use more power you should pay more. It's simple. If you don't want to pay more under cap and trade change your ways. It's your choice.
I hope all of you don't have a memory so short that you have forgotten the scam (Ken Lay) pulled over CALIFORNIANS with ENRON which was caught red handed making claims about electricity shortages, allowing rolling blackouts, making ridiculous excuses to increase the utility rate throughout the state. When busted ENRON admitted to falsifying ALL of the excuses they gave for increasing the utility rates and even was caught on tape admitting to causing blackouts, embezzling money, usurping the consumers of California...SHAMEFUL..m ore capitalism nonsense. Now you are advocating charging a person MORE for electricity because they have an older fridge, microwave, toaster, hair dryer etc etc?????
So far as this TV business and supposed electric consumption.. most of those large TVs pull about 300 watts yet a hair dryer pulls between 1500 and 2000 watts!! and Electric Iron pulls between 1500 and 2200 watts, lets not even get into the heated Jacuzzis, microwave ovens (2000 watts) etc etc. Will this TV issue then turn to these household appliances and a BAN is placed on them as well?
-
I hope all of you don't have a memory so short that you have forgotten the scam (Ken Lay) pulled over CALIFORNIANS with ENRON which was caught red handed making claims about electricity shortages, allowing rolling blackouts, making ridiculous excuses to increase the utility rate throughout the state. When busted ENRON admitted to falsifying ALL of the excuses they gave for increasing the utility rates and even was caught on tape admitting to causing blackouts, embezzling money, usurping the consumers of California...SHAMEFUL..m ore capitalism nonsense. Now you are advocating charging a person MORE for electricity because they have an older fridge, microwave, toaster, hair dryer etc etc?????
So far as this TV business and supposed electric consumption.. most of those large TVs pull about 300 watts yet a hair dryer pulls between 1500 and 2000 watts!! and Electric Iron pulls between 1500 and 2200 watts, lets not even get into the heated Jacuzzis, microwave ovens (2000 watts) etc etc. Will this TV issue then turn to these household appliances and a BAN is placed on them as well?
Good post Samson. Samson - did you know Ken Lay and Al Gore came up with the carbon trading scheme that is the centerpiece of the cap & trade scheme Obama is pushing?
-
Good post Samson. Samson - did you know Ken Lay and Al Gore came up with the carbon trading scheme that is the centerpiece of the cap & trade scheme Obama is pushing?
I didn't know that Ken Lay was involved..but I can't say that I am shocked over it. At some point everyone's excessive greed causes their nature to change for the WORST. I always wonder at what point does a person say..."I HAVE ENOUGH MONEY". Most of these men that are padding their pockets and accounts with UNGODLY sums of money are well into their 70s and even 80s...Exactly what are they going to do with this money? Their days on earth are so short that literally tomorrow could be the end of the line for them. Now what will all of the greed, and gathering of money will have been for? Sadly their children, whom have never known a real day of work or want (an example being Paris Hilton), will burn through that money in no time at all, having no real value of it.
I don't know america..many complain of whatever the administration that exist at any one time, but the real CHANGE has to start with the people in order to bring about change... instead of waiting on the next CLOWNASS to say he is all about CHANGE you have to change the mind of the masses so that whatever president you have and whatever corporations, businesses etc are in existence are run by people with a conscious who are concerned about the masses before they are concerned about their POCKETS/ACCOUNTS.
-
Like Celente says - they are money junkies.
-
pssst: Last I checked California is a state run by the Republicans, ...but please, ...don't let facts get in your way.
Ya. Do what Jag does....just make stuff up.
-
Jesus,
This legislation is awful and dumb on so many levels. That being said, this is a non-starter because the TV industry is not going to be producing PLASMA TV's in a few years or less. Plasma TV's lost the war in the marketplace and they will be obsolete in short order.
And Hedge...come on, it is cute and happy and rainbows to throw out the 8 billion dollar number in relation to not having to build no plants. But guess what, banning the sale of a type of TV which isn't bought by really anyone anymore and has been replaced by LCD/LED TV's which are incredibly more efficient, isn't going to help prove your point.
Either way, California's pop. is growing and the need for new sources of energy, banning the sale of Plasma's and other things isn't going to accomplish stopping the need for energy. I surly get your point and agree with being more efficient, but this is dumb.
-
No. Emissions are one thing, but MPG is another. I dont have as mucha problem with the emissions as I do with the mpg stuff.
333386,
They are one and the same... inextricably intertwined. When you reduce the emissions, the result is more mpg.
Emissions are nothing more than unburned hydrocarbons. By increasing the efficiency of the engine, and altering the in-cylinder rate and shape of the burn, eg: causing more of the fuel to be burned inside the combustion chamber, during the first 30 degrees of the downward stroke of the pistons, you not only prevent the formation of NOx emissions, but provide more power to the engine, by completely burning every drop of fuel, and you're burning it in the most effective place... inside the upper part of the combustion chamber rather than out the exhaust.
This results in both reduced emissions, reduced fuel consumption, and more miles per gallon (mpg). A $1400 weekly fuel cost savings on a dedicated run is all the proof some people need to know that they are getting more mpg... that or a fllabberghasted California Air Board inspector unable to figure out why a 1991 FLD 120 freightliner with a 3406 mechanical B400 caterpillar motor with 2.6 million miles was blowing cleaner than brand new 2008 emission standards truck with less than 60K miles, and was infact meeting year 2012 emission target standards in 2007.
When a truck with 23 yrs experience behind the wheel finds himself with the ability to idle his truck for a weekend after being pulled over by the DOT in Kansas for a broken truck arm on his trailer, and not being able to leave until it's fixed... while he has a load of Alaska King Crab that has to be kept at a constant -10 degrees, and he only has enough fuel in his reefer unit to last til 8am, ...and he finds himself being held up and only released at 4pm, ...and despite the fact that he SHOULD HAVE run out of fuel 8 hours ago, yet he found he still had a quarter tank of fuel left... you know consumption has been reduced. That fuel savings could turn into an even greater savings when you factor the $5,000.oo insurance deductible he otherwise would have had to pay for a lost freight claim had he run out of fuel in the reefer and his load of Alaskan King Crabs spoiled.
When you only have enough fuel to last til you get to Dalton Georgia... but you manage to make it to Greenville SC, you know you're reducing consumption.
When you used to haul beef from Amarillo TX to Calif, then return to Amarillo with frozen vegetables... and you used to have to refill either just before, or just after leaving Cali in order to make the return trip to Amarillo, ...and suddenly find yourself able to go from Amarillo TX to Cali and back again ON THE SAME TANK OF FUEL... you know you are reducing your fuel consumption.
The bottom line is:
Reduced fuel consumption = more mpg reduced emissions = more mpg More mpg = Reduced fuel costs.
Which reminds me...not sure if it was George Whorewell or not, but one of you was gonna keep your eyes peeled for a Caterpillar 2010 class 8 motor. I've been looking, but I haven't seemed to be able to find one. Have you? ;) :P
-
And therefore that means plasma tv's? Life, liberty and happiness are now intermingled with televisions in your mind?
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/em/angel2.gif)
Just trying to bring a little levity.
-
Jag: I'm fully aware of the breadth and width of the issues that brought us here, I was just harping on one of the aspects of it, not laying the entire weight of the situation on one segment.
We're all in for some very interesting times ahead, both rich or poor, the future is full of more uncertainty than many have seen in their lifetimes.
-
There is a limited amount of energy on the planet in the current forms that we use. Lots of people seem keen on Nuclear power but no-one seems to want one in their backyard.
And now, a bunch of fat-ass Americans get bent out of shape because they can't suck up energy that our Grandkids might need, just sitting on their asses and watching a 60 inch TV ?
Marxism ? Because you can't suck the life out of the planet with an energy guzzling TV ? Guess what - TV Technology needs to improve. Or perhaps you forgot about the blackouts already ?
Honestly - the way some people think they have the God-given right to consume everything in sight truly sickens me. A lack of willpower is certainly involved.
-
THE ISSUE IS NOT TV'S.
The issue is that you have the govt again dictating asnd regulating your choices based upon its own failures. I simply cant fathom the mind of a person who screams up and down about being for the choice of gay marriage and killing as baby, but having no problem with the govt dictating every other choice in their life.
Additionsally, what if the govt sasys, "we were wrong, we have to ban tvs over 32" since our estimates were off" ? ?
It seems to me that the the govt is going after everything people enjoy and trying to regulate it away. Televisions have gone up in queality and gone down in price as years have gone on. The govt hates success and hates the fact that private companies can deliver a product people want and are willing to pay for without its own hand in the till.
The issue of energy is one solely at the foot of the green movement. They block all new power plants, all new factories, etc.
We need more energy. Conserving energy is not going to do shit when you have a growing population. Additionally, if you want to grow the economy, you need more energy to fuel factories, trucks, workers, etc.
Do you thiink its a coincidence that the dumbest ideas like this come from a state that is ranked 49th for its business climate? These punitive ideas are job killers and leading CA to collapse.
We need more tv's not less, more factories and power plants not less. It would be even better if we could make those 60" tvs right here in this country and get people back to work.
We need to produce what we consume if we are to have any type of improvement in this country. Selectively banning certain consumer goods the govt feels waste energy is a joke considering how muchg money and energy it itself wastes.
-
I didn't know that Ken Lay was involved..but I can't say that I am shocked over it. At some point everyone's excessive greed causes their nature to change for the WORST. I always wonder at what point does a person say..."I HAVE ENOUGH MONEY". Most of these men that are padding their pockets and accounts with UNGODLY sums of money are well into their 70s and even 80s...Exactly what are they going to do with this money? Their days on earth are so short that literally tomorrow could be the end of the line for them. Now what will all of the greed, and gathering of money will have been for? Sadly their children, whom have never known a real day of work or want (an example being Paris Hilton), will burn through that money in no time at all, having no real value of it.
I don't know america..many complain of whatever the administration that exist at any one time, but the real CHANGE has to start with the people in order to bring about change... instead of waiting on the next CLOWNASS to say he is all about CHANGE you have to change the mind of the masses so that whatever president you have and whatever corporations, businesses etc are in existence are run by people with a conscious who are concerned about the masses before they are concerned about their POCKETS/ACCOUNTS.
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/trophy.jpg)
BRAVO!!![
ps: I know she's considered the poster child for vapid heiresses, but the truth is... she's not inheriting a thing.
She learned long ago, she's out of the will. She has created her own little empire, and she's not as dumb as she appears. She took her lemons and made lemonade.
-
Jag: I'm fully aware of the breadth and width of the issues that brought us here, I was just harping on one of the aspects of it, not laying the entire weight of the situation on one segment.
We're all in for some very interesting times ahead, both rich or poor, the future is full of more uncertainty than many have seen in their lifetimes.
I think many of the rich are finally beginning to develop real appreciation for the non-rich.
We've always had an old saying in my industry:
If you want to dine with the classes, ...you had better be catering to the masses.
I think alot of the rich are finally figuring out that if it's bad for main street, inevitably, it's bad for wall street too.
-
THE ISSUE IS NOT TV'S.
The issue is that you have the govt again dictating asnd regulating your choices based upon its own failures. I simply cant fathom the mind of a person who screams up and down about being for the choice of gay marriage and killing as baby, but having no problem with the govt dictating every other choice in their life.
Additionsally, what if the govt sasys, "we were wrong, we have to ban tvs over 32" since our estimates were off" ? ?
It seems to me that the the govt is going after everything people enjoy and trying to regulate it away. Televisions have gone up in queality and gone down in price as years have gone on. The govt hates success and hates the fact that private companies can deliver a product people want and are willing to pay for without its own hand in the till.
The issue of energy is one solely at the foot of the green movement. They block all new power plants, all new factories, etc.
We need more energy. Conserving energy is not going to do shit when you have a growing population. Additionally, if you want to grow the economy, you need more energy to fuel factories, trucks, workers, etc.
Do you thiink its a coincidence that the dumbest ideas like this come from a state that is ranked 49th for its business climate? These punitive ideas are job killers and leading CA to collapse.
We need more tv's not less, more factories and power plants not less. It would be even better if we could make those 60" tvs right here in this country and get people back to work.
We need to produce what we consume if we are to have any type of improvement in this country. Selectively banning certain consumer goods the govt feels waste energy is a joke considering how muchg money and energy it itself wastes.
Which 'private companies' is it in the US that are making those TVs ? I think you'll find flat panels mostly come from Korea. Are you saying that the US government is suffering from some sort of Kimchi envy ?
Whatever you think, you do not have the right to consume away future generations energy supply when there isn't yet a clear alternative. Forget the green issues - just consider that future generations shouldn't have to live by candlelight.
All that needs to happen here is for the manufacturers to get smarter about lowering energy costs. Guess what - if some smart US company comes up with a way to reduce energy costs more than their Asian counterparts, then this will put them way ahead of the market. Of course, that won't happen because they are sitting on their fat asses eating twinkies and watching the shite that passes for Television in the states. A direct result, of course, of the pitiful education system that now exists in the US.
-
The reality is that nuclear power is cheap, clean, reliable and doable right now. We power our aircraft carriers and subs with nuc power, Europe uses it effectively and the only ones prohibiting it here are the fanatical tree huggers who want to stop all progress on all fronts.
The other reality is that there simply is no alternative form of energy now, or in the near future, that can replace nukes, fossils, or other traditional fuel. We have plenty of natural gas, coal, already to meet our needs.
The fantasies of solar and wind pannels powering skyscrapers, trains, etc is just ridiculous. Its far more expensive, not as reliable, and nowhere near as cost effecrtive. Of course we should look for alternatives, but they simply dont exist.
We need to reindustrialize and get our head out of our asses soon. Otherwise, we are really heading to a horrible place on the jobs front.
-
Which 'private companies' is it in the US that are making those TVs ? I think you'll find flat panels mostly come from Korea. Are you saying that the US government is suffering from some sort of Kimchi envy ?
Whatever you think, you do not have the right to consume away future generations energy supply when there isn't yet a clear alternative. Forget the green issues - just consider that future generations shouldn't have to live by candlelight.
All that needs to happen here is for the manufacturers to get smarter about lowering energy costs. Guess what - if some smart US company comes up with a way to reduce energy costs more than their Asian counterparts, then this will put them way ahead of the market. Of course, that won't happen because they are sitting on their fat asses eating twinkies and watching the shite that passes for Television in the states. A direct result, of course, of the pitiful education system that now exists in the US.
Speaking of twinkies... if a company came up with a twinkie-like sponge cake with a creamy protein filling, that had zero sugar, and zero carbs, ...and taste better than a hostess twinkie as voted by 70% of taste testers, ...would that be something of interest to you? I sure hope so... cause in addition to a healthy great tasting snack... you'll feed a starving child for a week simply by purchasing one. Watch for them soon in GNC, WalMart, WalGreens, and at a vending machine near you. :)
-
The reality is that nuclear power is cheap, clean, reliable and doable right now. We power our aircraft carriers and subs with nuc power, Europe uses it effectively and the only ones prohibiting it here are the fanatical tree huggers who want to stop all progress on all fronts.
The other reality is that there simply is no alternative form of energy now, or in the near future, that can replace nukes, fossils, or other traditional fuel. We have plenty of natural gas, coal, already to meet our needs.
The fantasies of solar and wind pannels powering skyscrapers, trains, etc is just ridiculous. Its far more expensive, not as reliable, and nowhere near as cost effecrtive. Of course we should look for alternatives, but they simply dont exist.
We need to reindustrialize and get our head out of our asses soon. Otherwise, we are really heading to a horrible place on the jobs front.
That seems a little off to me. :-\ If they don't exist, ...why should we look for them?
there are plenty of alternatives, ...but big money interests have been manipulating leaders, politicians and the public to maintain the status quo. They've been doing it for years too. Look at DuPont's influence to have hemp outlawed even though it was a more suitable and sustainable crop than the cotton they grew. Look at when GM convinced them to scrap the Red rocket public transit system in S. Cali in order to force consumers to buy more GM cars years ago. Look at GM's stupid decision to destroy all those electric cars. To my understanding, alternatives do exist. It's simply the will to utilize them that's lacking. I don't deny that drastic shifts in the way we generate energy will cause massive shifts. PC's made typewriters pretty much obsolete, ...but large amounts of displaced workers can be trasnferred to new emerging technologies.... creating all new markets and all sorts of new employment opportunities for those who want a JOB. 20 yrs ago who ever heard of an IT professional. Did philips rally against the implementation of PC's. infact the head of IBM said a personal computer was unecessary... that perhaps only the President of GM might have any need for a personal computer, ...but look at all the spin off industries that new technology spurred on. things like virus protection, not to mention all the peripherals didn't even exist just a few short years ago. This part of the world needs to move forward before we find ourselves taking a back seat to power houses emerging in Asia & Europe. Your scenario would relegate the American workforce to manual labourers while the Euros, Chinese & Indians develop all the technology we'll be using in the future. If you think North American fuel efficient compacts are too small now... wait til the Chinese start making them. they'll design them to fit average Chinese proportions. The average American wouldn't be able to fit their right thigh through the door. :D
-
That seems a little off to me. :-\ If they don't exist, ...why should we look for them?
there are plenty of alternatives, ...but big money interests having manipulating leaders, politicians and the public to maintain the status quo. Look at GM's stupid decision to destroy all those electric cars. To my understanding, alternatives do exist. it is the will to utilize them that is lacking. I don't deny that drastic shifts in the way we generate energy will cause massive shifts. PC's made typewriters pretty much obsolete, ...but large amounts of displaced workers can be trasnferred to new emerging technologies.... creating all new markets and all sorts of new employment opportunities for those who want a JOB. 20 yrs ago who ever heard of an IT professional. Did philips rally against the implementation of PC's. infact the head of IBM said a personal computer was unecessary... that perhaps only the President of GM might have any need for a personal computer, ...but look at all the spin off industries that new technology spurred on. things like virus protection, not to mention all the peripherals didn't even exist just a few short years ago. This part of the world needs to move forward before we find ourselves taking a back seat to power houses emerging in Asia & Europe. Your scenario would relegate the American workforce to manual labourers while the Euros, Chinese & Indians develop all the technology we'll be using in the future. If you think North American fuel efficient compacts are too small now... wait til the Chinese start making them. they'll design them to fit average Chinese proportions. The average American wouldn't be able to fit their right thigh through the door. :D
More CT nonsense.
If the tech existed we would have it. Im so sick of all these nosense CT's being used to try to explain anything and everything on these issues.
Hoping for a tech to come about is not the same as doing what we need now to produce jobs, fuel our economy, and keep things going.
If the tech existed, dont you think some Bill Gates type person would jet out and do it like he did?
As far as moving workers like you said that is nonsense, our education system,. which has been transformed into a politically correct indo program, does not produce people capable of those tasks you say.
The only reason Asia is moving ahead is because they see the importance of focusing on production and mfg. We are focused on govt, wall street bailouts, nonsense "green" bs, and other fantasies that never materialize.
-
More CT nonsense.
If the tech existed we would have it. Im so sick of all these nosense CT's being used to try to explain anything and everything on these issues.
Hoping for a tech to come about is not the same as doing what we need now to produce jobs, fuel our economy, and keep things going.
If the tech existed, dont you think some Bill Gates type person would jet out and do it like he did?
As far as moving workers like you said that is nonsense, our education system,. which has been transformed into a politically correct indo program, does not produce people capable of those tasks you say.
The only reason Asia is moving ahead is because they see the importance of focusing on production and mfg. We are focused on govt, wall street bailouts, nonsense "green" bs, and other fantasies that never materialize.
So in your estimation GM didn't produce an electric car... then kill them?
Just think, a company spends all that money developing and producing something, then decides they don't want to put it on the market, so they decide to put a wrecking ball to them rather than simply give them away to the needy. What's that all about?
-
The electric car is a joke and uses more net energy than the combustible engine.
-
The reality is that nuclear power is cheap, clean, reliable and doable right now. We power our aircraft carriers and subs with nuc power, Europe uses it effectively and the only ones prohibiting it here are the fanatical tree huggers who want to stop all progress on all fronts.
The other reality is that there simply is no alternative form of energy now, or in the near future, that can replace nukes, fossils, or other traditional fuel. We have plenty of natural gas, coal, already to meet our needs.
The fantasies of solar and wind pannels powering skyscrapers, trains, etc is just ridiculous. Its far more expensive, not as reliable, and nowhere near as cost effecrtive. Of course we should look for alternatives, but they simply dont exist.
We need to reindustrialize and get our head out of our asses soon. Otherwise, we are really heading to a horrible place on the jobs front.
Yeah we dropped the ball on nuclear energy and as a result are 20 years behind europe.
-
The reality is that nuclear power is cheap, clean, reliable and doable right now. We power our aircraft carriers and subs with nuc power, Europe uses it effectively and the only ones prohibiting it here are the fanatical tree huggers who want to stop all progress on all fronts.
Would you be totally happy if a nuclear power plant were to be built within a mile of your house ?
I think this is one of the issues with nuclear power. Most (like me) don't know enough about the 'complete safety' of them and so err on the side of caution. This makes actually building them anywhere near where people live a bit of an issue.
-
Would you be totally happy if a nuclear power plant were to be built within a mile of your house ?
I think this is one of the issues with nuclear power. Most (like me) don't know enough about the 'complete safety' of them and so err on the side of caution. This makes actually building them anywhere near where people live a bit of an issue.
Pedro - go on google earth and scan the landsscape. There are plenty of places we can put far out of the way of any large population centers.
-
Pedro - go on google earth and scan the landsscape. There are plenty of places we can put far out of the way of any large population centers.
OK - then all we need now is a relative of Osama Bin-Laden to volunteer to fund and run them !
But basically, the answer to the question I asked you is "No, you wouldn't want to live within a mile of one"
Why not, if completely safe ?
-
OK - then all we need now is a relative of Osama Bin-Laden to volunteer to fund and run them !
But basically, the answer to the question I asked you is "No, you wouldn't want to live within a mile of one"
Why not, if completely safe ?
Wait a minute - thousands of people live within a few hundred feet of them on submarines and nuclear based aircraft carriers.
-
Wait a minute - thousands of people live within a few hundred feet of them on submarines and nuclear based aircraft carriers.
Still - you dodge the question - would you personally be happy with living within a mile of a shiny new nuclear power plant ?
-
I would think zoning laws wouldn't allow that.
So it's a moot question.
-
Zoning laws did nothing to safeguard the residents living near 3 mile island. They didn't help those who lived near Chernobyl, ...and zoning laws had virtually no effect on the residents of other countries affected by the fallout from Chernobyl. I lived in Southern Cali at the time and I remember how air radiation levels went straight up. We have the right to do what we want to do as long as we cause no harm to others, ...however, we ALL breathe the same air, and the butterfly effect while it may be long in coming, it does eventually arrive.
-
Speaking of twinkies... if a company came up with a twinkie-like sponge cake with a creamy protein filling, that had zero sugar, and zero carbs, ...and taste better than a hostess twinkie as voted by 70% of taste testers, ...would that be something of interest to you? I sure hope so... cause in addition to a healthy great tasting snack... you'll feed a starving child for a week simply by purchasing one. Watch for them soon in GNC, WalMart, WalGreens, and at a vending machine near you. :)
Not even remotely interested.
I'd rather eat an apple to be honest. What you describe sounds about as far from real food as the stuff I eat.
And as for 'Vending machines' - why the fuck would anyone eat out of one of those ?
-
I would think zoning laws wouldn't allow that.
So it's a moot question.
No - it's just an avoided question.
I still maintain that none of the pro-nuclear crowd want one in their back yard.
Me - I simply know about as much as nuclear power as anyone else - not much - and so would not want to live near one 'just in case'.
-
No - it's just an avoided question.
I still maintain that none of the pro-nuclear crowd want one in their back yard.
Me - I simply know about as much as nuclear power as anyone else - not much - and so would not want to live near one 'just in case'.
I wouldnt have a problem with a nuke plant. I live not too far from Indian Point as it is. To my personal self, the gang bangers, drunks, illegals driving cars, and bad bus drivers are a more immediate and likely danger to me.
-
Zoning laws did nothing to safeguard the residents living near 3 mile island. They didn't help those who lived near Chernobyl, ...and zoning laws had virtually no effect on the residents of other countries affected by the fallout from Chernobyl. I lived in Southern Cali at the time and I remember how air radiation levels went straight up. We have the right to do what we want to do as long as we cause no harm to others, ...however, we ALL breathe the same air, and the butterfly effect while it may be long in coming, it does eventually arrive.
Of course not. And how long ago did that happen? And weren't we not in the beginning stages of learning about nuclear fuel?
Should we have shut down Airline travel the first time a jumbo jet crashed?
Nuclear energy safety have advance greatly since 3-mile island.
-
Solar power is the future. If battery technology would improve then solar could be a viable option.
Hugo had some interesting ideas for power a long time ago. I actually think that nuclear is shortsighted...there is limitless energy out there, we just need people smart enought to harvest and channel it for its use.
-
Not even remotely interested.
I'd rather eat an apple to be honest. What you describe sounds about as far from real food as the stuff I eat.
And as for 'Vending machines' - why the fuck would anyone eat out of one of those ?
Sorry Pedro, ...I forgot you're not American.
You might find the typical average American's diet somewhat surprising.
-
Sorry Pedro, ...I forgot you're not American.
You might find the typical average American's diet somewhat surprising.
only if you're following the TA diet ::) Eating twinkies from vending machines is not part of our regular diet ::) I would say for the average person the vending machine is for that odd moment where you missed eating and couldn't help it. That's why they mostly set that shit up around colleges, hospitals, airports etc. Normal life for Americans doesn't included freaquent trips to vending machines ::)
-
I wouldnt have a problem with a nuke plant. I live not too far from Indian Point as it is. To my personal self, the gang bangers, drunks, illegals driving cars, and bad bus drivers are a more immediate and likely danger to me.
Think Again
Of course not. And how long ago did that happen? And weren't we not in the beginning stages of learning about nuclear fuel?
Should we have shut down Airline travel the first time a jumbo jet crashed?
Nuclear energy safety have advance greatly since 3-mile island.
Why OzmO, ...it happened the very day BEFORE you made that smug remark. Do try to keep up with current affairs.
Radiation leak investigated at Three Mile Island
Mon Nov 23, 8:09 am ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Federal officials are investigating a radiation leak at Three Mile Island, scene of the worst U.S. nuclear power accident, but said on Sunday there was no threat to public health or safety.
Investigators were trying to determine the cause of radiological contamination inside the nuclear facility's containment building on Saturday afternoon.
About 150 people were working in a TMI containment building when the contamination was detected and some were exposed to low levels of radiation, a Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman said.
"Based on the information that was provided to us by the company, the level of the dose they received was a small fraction of the NRC's regulatory limit," spokeswoman Diane Screnci said in a telephone interview.
The NRC sent a radiation specialist and a regional manager to the site on Sunday to review the company's assessment. "There was no impact on public health and safety," Screnci said.
Three Mile Island operator, Exelon, said no contamination was found outside the containment building.
One employee was found to have received 16 millirem of exposure and other workers were exposed to lower levels, Exelon said. The annual occupational dose limit for nuclear workers at Exelon nuclear plants is 2,000 millirem, the company said.
The containment building has been shut down since October 26 for refueling and maintenance, Exelon said in a statement.
The plant near the Pennsylvania state capital of Harrisburg created worldwide headlines in 1979 when one of its units partially melted down. The accident made Three Mile Island synonymous with the dangers of nuclear power and helped slow expansion of the U.S. nuclear industry.
Exelon the biggest nuclear power operator in the United States, did not own Three Mile Island at the time.
(Reporting by JoAnne Allen; editing by Doina Chiacu)
ABC News coverage of 3 Mile Island Radiation Leak this past weekend (http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=16786690)
AP coverage of the cause of Three Mile Island's Radiation Leak (http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=16792974)
You can have all the faith in science you want, ...however nuclear plants don't employ science, they employ workers, and as long as Homer Simpson is on the job... poop can happen.
btw OzmO...
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/owned9wz.jpg)
-
only if you're following the TA diet ::) Eating twinkies from vending machines is not part of our regular diet ::) I would say for the average person the vending machine is for that odd moment where you missed eating and couldn't help it. That's why they mostly set that shit up around colleges, hospitals, airports etc. Normal life for Americans doesn't included freaquent trips to vending machines ::)
There are vending machines ALL over... including cafeterias which I've always found to be the oddest thing.
btw - These aren't twinkies. they look like twinkies, ...but they're not.
They're.... GOLDEN NUGGETS. :P A healthy vending machine snack. :D
-
There are vending machines ALL over... including cafeterias which I've always found to be the oddest thing.
btw - These aren't twinkies. they look like twinkies, ...but they're not.
They're.... GOLDEN NUGGETS. :P A healthy vending machine snack. :D
trust me, you're wrong. zero way vending machines are a regular part of the average American diet. The average American still has 3 regular meals a day. Those vending machines work because they catch people at the odd moment where they are hungry or missed a meal. You might find them in cafeterias but those again are areas where people are caught away. Cafeterias are in schools, colleges, large businesses, hospitals etc. You won't find them in restaurants. You will find them in hotels... That's because they're banking more on the person away from their regular routine and away from their regular routine happens, but it's by far not something you can say is a part of our regular diet. Now if you are talking fast food establishments, you might have me, those fucking things are a goddamned plague. I'm ready to reenact "Falling Down" on these fuckers if I see another one of these shitholes open up.
-
trust me, you're wrong. zero way vending machines are a regular part of the average American diet. The average American still has 3 regular meals a day. Those vending machines work because they catch people at the odd moment where they are hungry or missed a meal. You might find them in cafeterias but those again are areas where people are caught away. Cafeterias are in schools, colleges, large businesses, hospitals etc. You won't find them in restaurants. You will find them in hotels... That's because they're banking more on the person away from their regular routine and away from their regular routine happens, but it's by far not something you can say is a part of our regular diet. Now if you are talking fast food establishments, you might have me, those fucking things are a goddamned plague. I'm ready to reenact "Falling Down" on these fuckers if I see another one of these shitholes open up.
I loved the scene on the Golf course.
-
I loved the scene on the Golf course.
I was like, WTF... Oh yea, falling down... awesome movie.
-
Sorry Pedro, ...I forgot you're not American.
You might find the typical average American's diet somewhat surprising.
Probably not - I usually spend 2 months in LA a year.
I stay next to a Ralphs supermarket in a serviced appartment, even though there's a bunch of 5 star hotels around.
In Ralphs, I can find fruit, meat, potatoes, rice, cereals in much more plentiful supply AND CHEAPER than I can get in Thailand where I live (but I am a Brit).
The fare in the US is absolutely astounding compared to Thailand, yet in Thailand I eat fresh food every day, In the US I do the same but damn I really eat it up out there because of the choice/price.
There is little excuse for Twinkies IMO
-
only if you're following the TA diet ::) Eating twinkies from vending machines is not part of our regular diet ::) I would say for the average person the vending machine is for that odd moment where you missed eating and couldn't help it. That's why they mostly set that shit up around colleges, hospitals, airports etc. Normal life for Americans doesn't included freaquent trips to vending machines ::)
Agreed - but there's always that bag of fuit & nuts - I just can't understand why they need to drop those white chocolate chips in there. People looking for nuts & fruit are not generally looking for choc chips.
Fuck it though - I'll do some choc chips if I've plumped for nuts over Twinkies.
-
Think Again
Why OzmO, ...it happened the very day BEFORE you made that smug remark. Do try to keep up with current affairs.
Radiation leak investigated at Three Mile Island
Mon Nov 23, 8:09 am ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Federal officials are investigating a radiation leak at Three Mile Island, scene of the worst U.S. nuclear power accident, but said on Sunday there was no threat to public health or safety.
Investigators were trying to determine the cause of radiological contamination inside the nuclear facility's containment building on Saturday afternoon.
About 150 people were working in a TMI containment building when the contamination was detected and some were exposed to low levels of radiation, a Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman said.
"Based on the information that was provided to us by the company, the level of the dose they received was a small fraction of the NRC's regulatory limit," spokeswoman Diane Screnci said in a telephone interview.
The NRC sent a radiation specialist and a regional manager to the site on Sunday to review the company's assessment. "There was no impact on public health and safety," Screnci said.
Three Mile Island operator, Exelon, said no contamination was found outside the containment building.
One employee was found to have received 16 millirem of exposure and other workers were exposed to lower levels, Exelon said. The annual occupational dose limit for nuclear workers at Exelon nuclear plants is 2,000 millirem, the company said.
The containment building has been shut down since October 26 for refueling and maintenance, Exelon said in a statement.
The plant near the Pennsylvania state capital of Harrisburg created worldwide headlines in 1979 when one of its units partially melted down. The accident made Three Mile Island synonymous with the dangers of nuclear power and helped slow expansion of the U.S. nuclear industry.
Exelon the biggest nuclear power operator in the United States, did not own Three Mile Island at the time.
(Reporting by JoAnne Allen; editing by Doina Chiacu)
ABC News coverage of 3 Mile Island Radiation Leak this past weekend (http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=16786690)
AP coverage of the cause of Three Mile Island's Radiation Leak (http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=16792974)
You can have all the faith in science you want, ...however nuclear plants don't employ science, they employ workers, and as long as Homer Simpson is on the job... poop can happen.
btw OzmO...
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/owned9wz.jpg)
Wow.... ::) Another accident or malfunction.... Why don't you apply the same screwy logic to the airlines or auto industry?
Fact is, Nuclear power is a very safe and CLEAN form of energy compared to coal. I don't have time right now to post up supporting material but i will get to it.
-
It's unfortunate that companies have slowed making plasmas. Plasma is still the best technology on the market for t.v.s.
-
trust me, you're wrong. zero way vending machines are a regular part of the average American diet. The average American still has 3 regular meals a day. Those vending machines work because they catch people at the odd moment where they are hungry or missed a meal. You might find them in cafeterias but those again are areas where people are caught away. Cafeterias are in schools, colleges, large businesses, hospitals etc. You won't find them in restaurants. You will find them in hotels... That's because they're banking more on the person away from their regular routine and away from their regular routine happens, but it's by far not something you can say is a part of our regular diet. Now if you are talking fast food establishments, you might have me, those fucking things are a goddamned plague. I'm ready to reenact "Falling Down" on these fuckers if I see another one of these shitholes open up.
Sorry Hugo, I worded my statement inarticulately. I'm not saying the average person gets their meals from vending machines, ...just that vending machine snacks are so much a regular part of so many people's days that it might as well be considered part of their diet. I know the idea is absured to most who post on these boards, ...but those of us who post here are not average. We do our best to take care of ourselves, we're concerned about the nutritional and caloric composition of our foods. We for the most part have no use for empty calories that provide very little if any nutritional value and merely turn to fat. However, the average person just wants to know if it tastes good and satisfies their cravings, and have more often than not, have no problem hitting vending machines regularly or indulging in the kinds of foods we often find in vending machines. Now with GOLDEN NUGGETS, people who hit vending machines can get a great tasteing snack that is not only nutritious and good for them, ...they contain zero sugar, zero carbs, and as a bonus, ...you'll find a protein enriched creamy filling. Great for bodybuilders. :P