Monday, July 21, 2008

2,400-Mile Car Race is Powered by the Sun

University teams showcase possibilities for solar power

The solar-powered car built by the University of Michigan team takes off during a leg of the North American Solar Challenge on Friday in Sioux Falls, S.D.
Dirk Lammers / AP



updated 8:57 a.m. PT, Sat., July. 19, 2008

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. - Even as U.S. oil refiners scramble to increase the flow of Canadian crude from Alberta to Texas, a caravan of futuristic solar cars is racing that 2,400-mile route in reverse to show what transportation could look without a drop of oil or gas.

The sleek solar-powered sports cars competing in the North American Solar Challenge always turn heads, but with price tags that can climb well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, don't expect to see them parked in your local car dealer lot anytime soon.

"I don't think so," said Daniel Uhlord, a member of the SolarWorld 1 team from Hochschule Bochum University in Germany. "They're not quite up for the challenge of everyday life."

But solar could still play a significant role in a future transportation society less dependent on oil.

Uhlord and others envision an electric "solar assisted" car with cell-phone-like batteries that charge in the morning sun while you sip your coffee, then recharge in a parking lot while you toil away at work.

The cars racing to Canada this week are essentially electric cars — albeit super-efficient versions that tap into the power of the sun, said race director Dan Eberle.

Testing applications
The state-of-the-art technology found in their motors, batteries, control systems and electronics could one-day find their way into a hybrid or fully electric commuter vehicle.

"Instead of having solar panels on the car, you have a solar panel at home or a solar panel at work," Eberle said. "You drive in, plug in, charge it and then drive without carrying the solar panel along."

The North American Solar Challenge, last run in 2005, aims to promote solar and renewable technologies. The 15 race teams took off from Texas this past Sunday and are expected to arrive in Calgary on Tuesday.

SolarWorld 1, weighing in at 450 pounds at a cost of about $750,000, can cruise at speeds of up to 80 miles per hour, but racers are required to obey local traffic laws along the mostly rural route.

Each driver is escorted by a pair of pit-crew vans filled with engineers monitoring a cadre of statistics. Teams constantly work to improve the efficiency of the solar arrays, batteries, power converters and motors, but Uhlord said a solar car's most important aspect is its aerodynamics.

An iPod added
In preparation for last year's World Solar Challenge race across Australia, the German team had to decide on a small valve to inflate the front tire and whether to use a straight pin or one with an angle. That tiny detail made a difference of more than an hour in the team's final time, he said.

IMAGE: SOLAR CAR
Dirk Lammers / AP
Prince Soriano, a mechanical engineering student from Red River College in Winnipeg, Canada, wipes down his team's car Friday in Sioux Falls, S.D.

Cars use two-way radios to chat with their pit crews, and the German team added a small technological touch to keep drivers humming along.

"You can also hook up an iPod to it," Uhlord said. "It will dim out or fade out the music when you talk or somebody else talks and everything's integrated into the helmet."

Follow the race online at www.americansolarchallenge.org

Tuesday, July 15, 2008

Expectations

Normally here I'd make some apology about how I normally try to make things not so personal, even though a fair amount of posts of mine really are, but I've accepted that that's silly. I won't be doing that. There's something in this irritation that I think relates to more lives than just mine, actually I KNOW it does, but that is irrelevant. I just need to write it, & this is a fitting setting.

Okay, so last week I went "home" for a visit. Regardless of the circumstances, I ended up staying at my dad's house for the first night & the hours I was carless waiting to head to the airport. We haven't related well for a long time, & while the hostilities may no longer be wild & free (thank you to time & distance), we still don't really talk much or really get along that well. Evidence for this is the fact that I ended up suggesting we go out for dinner at 9:30 at night because I had gotten so tired of the "conversation" where he would ask me something, I'd respond, & then we'd sit in silence for a few minutes.

Through this mess, there was something that stuck with me & has still been grating on me a little in the back of my head since then. He asked me several times about my long-term goals, & offered that maybe I'd grow up in 5-10 years. (In the guise of how my education is helping me now, how long I plan to stay with my job, whether there was a man in my life, and directly by asking what I plan for my future.)

Back the fuck up.

Okay, so I work about three jobs, putting in about 35 hours/week combined, and don't have any insurance. HOWEVER, I really enjoy my jobs. And they do allow me to be able to afford to live in San Francisco, provide for myself entirely (he doesn't pay any of my bills), & actually pay down my credit card bills. This doesn't seem like it's too bad of an accomplishment for a 25-year-old who's in the midst of self-discovery.

I'm happy with where my life is right now. I like where I live, I like the things I get to do, I'm proud of the "green" tips that I've thoroughly incorporated into my life. I wish I was working fewer jobs, but I can't really complain about any of them though. They leave me pretty satisfied. And I know I won't be doing them forever, but everything changes so much that it seems silly to me to really do hardcore future planning. All I know is that I'd like to keep living in San Francisco for at least a few more years, & that I think I might want to teach someday (I'm just not ready for it yet on several fronts).

So, I had pointed out to him that I was responsible, I just thought it was silly to plan for the future with how uncertain the world is at this moment. He said he didn't think I wasn't responsible, but that didn't seem to close it up in a satisfactory way that made me feel accepted.


(I'm not sure how much of this relates...but on my last day [I think] he pointed out how mature one of my male friends has become [with me pointing out that it would be a surprise if he DIDN'T turn out that way], & how he wishes I was more "out-going" & "happy" like I used to be.

Oh, & a tiny note that it piques my sense of intrigue that there are pictures up of his wife's children & grandchildren, his two sons...but nothing from my mother's side...granted, that would be me, my brother who hasn't spoken to him in years, & my sister who's made a lot of bad choices. Just a pondering moment.)


Is this a common guilt trip that parents lay on their kids? (Possibly particular to parents of at least middle-class standing?) That they're not doing enough with their lives? (And possibly disappointed at the amount that their education impacts their employments?)

If so, that's absolutely disgusting.

If your child is managing to be happy, to be at least mostly clean, & is taking care of themselves (however that is defined) should be fucking good enough. Why can't THAT be the thing that you wish for your children instead of whatever fucking bullshit has been fed by the culture towards what your children should end up being like?!

Now it's my turn to shake my head in disappointment. For shame, parents. Your heart doesn't lie in the right place. Please take a step back & recognize your children as what they are & build bridges if possible. It'll make them feel less rejected & benefit everyone the world over.

Monday, July 07, 2008

Is It Really Stealing?

I know that there are several articles I have read or heard about over the course of the last few months living in San Francisco demonizing the people who scavenge from the recycling bins that people put out with their trash. (They traditionally take out cardboard or CRV marked cans/botttles for recycling to make some cash.) The argument is that it is ripping off the people who have paid for Sunset Scavengers to pick it all up.

Then last night I was checking out the green compost bins (to see if I could talk my landlord into getting one). I learned that if you pay for them to pick up the black trash bin, you can get the other two (the blue recycling & the green compost) for free. If that's true, then it's just people getting mad that people are going through their trash & finding enough stuff over time to earn money off of it.

Is this a hatred akin to the one for dumpster divers in most parts?

It's just strange to me to think about because there are lots of places around the city where people will also just put old things of theirs that they no longer want on the sidewalk for others to come along & pick up if they want it. (I've put out & picked up plenty of street clothes & such.) And there's the Really Free Market in Dolores Park every month where people bring things to freely trade.

So then why do we have problems with those taking from the bins? Is it because they are taking from our bins, rather than the bags we put out with the intention of people looking through them? Or is it because they are taking things we put out & managing to make money off of them (whereas few people would have the space to accumulate enough to earn a reasonable amount of money off of these items)?

I don't know. But it's an answer I'd be very interested in learning.


EDIT: after talking with my friend Jake (a long time dumpster diver), there are a few more tentative ideas I would like to add.
~I presume the trash companies are losing money from the stuff being scavenged because they will not earn the money from selling the recyclables. But I can't say for sure because this point would not be likely to be printed in an article. (Because a "boo hoo! we don't make as much money!" argument would not work so well.)
~I wonder if they are intended to incite more scorn for the homeless because they are most likely to be the ones scavenging (or thought to be scavenging...plenty in the Haight neighborhood clean out the recyclables from Golden Gate Park....where there is no recycle bins). As well as those without homes who recycle cans & bottles to earn money are not part of the City's Care Not Cash Program.
~I wonder if articles like this increase racial tensions because the drivers of the cardboard trucks I see are Latino.
~My neighborhood recycling center is under threat for eviction because they are being accused that many of their patrons are homeless gentlemen who are scavenging from the neighborhood's bins. One of the men in charge there said that they were having problems with Sunset Scavengers (the trash company) because also by having a recycling facility, less CRV containers were being thrown in the bins (although by California law there must be a recycling facility with a cash-back program within a certain number of miles of a major distribution center, ie. Safeway). He said they were going to have trouble if the issue got up to the level of the mayor because the head of the Sunset Scavengers is a former mayor, & had the present mayor as a deputy.

Political manipulation of facts (even when unintentional) is bullshit.

Thank you.

(All comments will be greatly appreciated.)

Saturday, July 05, 2008

How Dare They Rip the Fourth Amendment?

Thursday 03 July 2008

by: Joseph L. Galloway, McClatchy Newspapers


Early next week the US Senate will vote on an extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, with a few small amendments intended to immunize telecommunications corporations that assisted our government in the warrantless and illegal wiretapping it has grown to love.

That such a gutting of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution even made it out of committee is yet another stain on the gutless and seemingly powerless Democratic majority in both houses of Congress.

That a majority on both sides of the aisle - not least of them the presumptive nominees for president of both political parties - intend to vote for such a violation of Americans' right to privacy and of the sanctity of their personal communications is a stunning surrender to those who want us to live in fear forever.

We are living in a time when the right of habeas corpus - which simply put is your right to be brought before a proper court of law where the government is made to prove that there is good and legal reason to detain you - recently survived by a margin of only one vote at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Now these bad actors are prepared to set aside your right to privacy - written into the Constitution as a key part of our Bill of Rights - with hardly a nod in the direction of the true patriots who rebelled against an English king and his army to guarantee those rights.

That they will do this while the last empty phrases of the political windbags at the Fourth of July celebrations are still echoing across a thousand city parks and the bright red, white and blue bunting and blizzard of American flags still flap in the breeze is little short of breath-taking.

How dare they?

Those denizens of the White House and Capitol Hill and all those gray granite buildings that line avenues with names like Constitution and Independence in the nation's capitol would have us believe that we must trade our rights, all of our rights, for some measure of security from the terrorists.

They would have us believe that a nation of 300 million people must surrender what a million other Americans gave their lives in war to protect in order to protect us from a couple of hundred fanatics hiding in caves in Waziristan.

Benjamin Franklin himself wrote of such a debate:

"Those who can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The fact that British troops, operating on flimsy general warrants handed out by local magistrates, were kicking in the doors of ordinary Americans and rifling through their pantries and papers in search of smuggled, untaxed goods was a prime reason why our ancestors rebelled against their king and went to war.

This is WHY we celebrate the Fourth of July. This is why the vote on renewing the expanded version of FISA and whitewashing the egregious violations of the Fourth Amendment for seven long years by our government is important.

If neither John McCain, the Republican, or Barrack Obama, the Democrat, can find the courage to oppose such a violation of so basic a right then what are we to do for a president, a successor to George W. Bush, The Decider, who has since 9/11 decided what rights you are entitled to keep, what laws he will or will not obey, and whether you will be protected by these words of the Constitution:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

That's it. That's the Fourth Amendment. That is what these folks in Washington, D.C., have violated continuously and in secret for seven long years.

Somewhere across an ocean and a desert, hiding in his cave, a man of hate named Osama bin Laden is laughing up the sleeve of his dirty robe at the thought that he and a small handful of fellow fanatics could tie a great nation in knots - knots of fear stoked by our own leaders.

We have done incalculably more and greater damage to ourselves since September 11, 2001, than a thousand bin Ladens and ten thousand al Qaida recruits could ever have done to us.

Franklin D. Roosevelt famously declared that "we have nothing to fear but fear itself." Now it would seem that we have no one to fear but ourselves and our leaders.

The questions I pose are these:

How can even one senator on either side of the aisle in good conscience vote in favor of this law that does nothing to enhance our security and everything to diminish our rights as a free people?

How can both men who seek to become our next president cast such a vote when both should be standing shoulder-to-shoulder declaring that they would govern by our consent and with our approval, not by wielding the coercive and corrosive and corrupt powers that King George III and his latter-day namesake from Texas thought are theirs by divine right?

Happy Overthrow Your Government Day! (A Day Late)

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton