Today's Articles

• CF globes, lightning damage?

  Question:

  Considering replaceing household incandescents with CFL. However, the possibility of lightning damage worries me. Are the solid state ballasts in these lamps susceptible or resistant to surge damage?

  Response:

  > Considering replaceing household incandescents with CFL. > However, the possibility of lightning damage worries me. > Are the solid state ballasts in these lamps susceptible or resistant to > surge damage?

  You mean that with all of the alternative energy sources you have in your garage, that you don’t have a whole house surge protector?

  Response:

  > Considering replaceing household incandescents with CFL. > However, the possibility of lightning damage worries me. > Are the solid state ballasts in these lamps susceptible or resistant to > surge damage?

  I dunno,but we’ve had a few outages,brownouts,and whatnot lately,and all of the CFL’s around here seem to have survived,but so did everything else,so I guess it wasn’t all that bad afterall. A whole house surge arrestor is a good investment,and the few i’ve seen aren’t even that expensive.(~$50) I’m sure there are better/more expensive ones around. Also,the CFL’s didn’t seem to care about the MSW inverter either..But,then again,they do use a switching supply/ballast inside.Heck they’ll probably even run off of DC,aslong as the voltage is in-range.(~170-ish Volts?)

  Response:

  No comments alternative energy
  
  

• Practical vibration dampener?

  Question:

  Try wrapping black straps around it and hooking the ends ,,, black rubber – like truck drivers use … M.M. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I learned something interesting today. My generator makes low pitched > knocking noises from the cylinders, but also some high pitched noise. > To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from > the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my > hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably > quieter. The difference was amazing. > My first question is, how come it makes so much noise. It did not > feel as though some moving part was touching it from inside. > My second question is, can I find some material and applicator > (adhesive or magnetic) to attach an equivalent of a human palm, for > vibration control purposes. I am thinking about the silicone "boob" > material, like from better mousepads, or pads for keyboards, on some > advesive backing. > I could buy such silicone boob from say a computer store and attach it > with electrical tape. i would prefer something more professional, if > it would not cost too much. Just how much can such things set me back > and where to find them? I believe I could go quite a long way by > applying vibration dampeners to a few steel plates. Won’t do much for > the low noise, but it is not as annoying as high pitched noise. >In the submarine world, vibration dampening was *the* thing.  Being quieter >than the soviets was paramount.  Sounds like what you have there is a cover >that is resonating from some excitation vibration in the engine or >generator.  Easiest way to dampen something like that is to add weight.  Get >yourself something like a hose clamp that can go completely around the bell >housing with some room to spare.  Then evenly space some small bolts under >the clamp.  About eight or ten should be enough.  Tighten the clamp down >good so the bolts and bell housing vibrate as one.  This should change the >resonant frequency of the bell enough that it stops vibrating.  If I had a >nickel for each of the ‘anti-vibration staves’ I’ve strapped onto ’singing’ >pipes, I’d be on easy street. >Putting your hands on it works because you’re actually adding two things. >Another mass, and a viscous damper between the primary mass (the bell >housing) and the secondary mass (your hand). >daestrom

  Response:

  > My second question is, can I find some material and applicator > (adhesive or magnetic) to attach an equivalent of a human palm, for > vibration control purposes. I am thinking about the silicone "boob" > material, like from better mousepads, or pads for keyboards, on some > advesive backing.

  Why go synthetic? Harley Davidson vibration is dampened by LIVE models, sporting what may or not be silicone ‘boob’ material. They usually place their hands on the tank just ..so.. Replace gas tank with bell housing and you’ve got yourself a pin up shot for all sorts of Diesel Fanatic calendars. A thin coat of bio-diesel on the models give a lustrous sheen that is so desirable in alternative energy circles. Adhesive backing would certainly make sure the ‘dampers’ don’t leave work too early. mike

  Response:

  I have read some great suggestions here. Some of them, or all of them, might work. An easier solution might be already out there for you. If you go to an automotive repair store, you will find that they sell a harmonic dampening silicone to be applied to the back of disc-brake pads. (disc breaks can produce a great laud screech when they are applied.) When they replace pads, they either come with a harmonic suppressor pad, or they use the silicone to coat the pad before installation. I’d suggest you smear this stuff all over it. It might help suppress the harmonic sound you are getting, and it should hold up to any temperatures it might get (it is designed to be on the back of disc pads…. they can get REAL hot in normal operation) Good luck, Hope you can find some peace and quiet

  Response:

  I noticed the problem you had in an earlier post. I replied with the following and this came close ! In case you had not read it here it is again.. I have read some great suggestions here. Some of them, or all of them, might work. An easier solution might be already out there for you. If you go to an automotive repair store, you will find that they sell a harmonic dampening silicone to be applied to the back of disc-brake pads. (disc breaks can produce a great laud screech when they are applied.) When they replace pads, they either come with a harmonic suppressor pad, or they use the silicone to coat the pad before installation. I’d suggest you smear this stuff all over it. It might help suppress the harmonic sound you are getting, and it should hold up to any temperatures it might get (it is designed to be on the back of disc pads…. they can get REAL hot in normal operation) Good luck, Hope you can find some peace and quiet Dave… remove the urine in email address to get me…

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Semi jokingly, I found this "JAC OFF" silicone pad that should be > working. It is just like my hand, after all. > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5545417145 > Will look for something more rectangular though. > i > I learned something interesting today. My generator makes low pitched > knocking noises from the cylinders, but also some high pitched noise. > To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from > the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my > hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably > quieter. The difference was amazing. > My first question is, how come it makes so much noise. It did not > feel as though some moving part was touching it from inside. > My second question is, can I find some material and applicator > (adhesive or magnetic) to attach an equivalent of a human palm, for > vibration control purposes. I am thinking about the silicone "boob" > material, like from better mousepads, or pads for keyboards, on some > advesive backing. > I could buy such silicone boob from say a computer store and attach it > with electrical tape. i would prefer something more professional, if > it would not cost too much. Just how much can such things set me back > and where to find them? I believe I could go quite a long way by > applying vibration dampeners to a few steel plates. Won’t do much for > the low noise, but it is not as annoying as high pitched noise. > i > —

  Response:

  Yeah, something is resonating.  Could be that you have found the natural frequency of the bell cover, which is being excited by the engine firing. (The firing event is "broad band" in frequency during each occurance even though the "firing frequency" itself is low). As Ron said, The easiest solution is probably to add mass.  Look under just about any new Dodge Truck or Jeep at the rear axle and you will see a mass hanging off of it which is sometimes referred to as "donkey balls".  Acutally these have a rubber mount as well which gives them some degree of behavior as a tuned absorber.  Tuning absorbers is hell if you don’t have the right equipment. When adding the mass try not to mount it at just one point.  It may happen that you create a prime location for fatigue failure if all of the reaction of the mass vibration travells through just one point. Rory Johnson – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from >the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my >hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably >quieter. The difference was amazing. > The cover’s resonant frequency happens to match something else > that’s vibrating. Three solutions, from easiest to hardest: > 1: Add some mass. Sometimes just sticking some heavy magnets to > it will help. > 2: Make it stiffer. Often easier said than done, but might be > worth a try. > 3: Add a "dynamic absorber" (tuned mass/spring system) that > vibrates out of phase at the same frequency, cancelling the > vibration. This involves some trial and error but can work well > in some cases. The classic paper on dynamic absorbers is here: > http://domino.automation.rockwell.com/applications/gs/region/EntekWeb… > (PDF file, watch line wrap) > If the paper is not there, look for a paper by Randy Fox on this page: > http://domino.automation.rockwell.com/applications/gs/region/EntekWeb… > I don’t think the consistency of the material makes any > difference, except to the extent that it’s also making it heavier > and/or stiffer. Lead weights should work just as well. > Of course it would be nice to find the driving force behind the > vibration and correct it (ie, make the machine run smoother in > the first place), but if the resonant frequency of the cover matches > the speed the generator has to run at, it may vibrate anyway. > So you’re back to changing its mass and/or stiffness.

  Response:

  - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I learned something interesting today. My generator makes low pitched > knocking noises from the cylinders, but also some high pitched noise. > To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from > the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my > hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably > quieter. The difference was amazing. > My first question is, how come it makes so much noise. It did not > feel as though some moving part was touching it from inside. > My second question is, can I find some material and applicator > (adhesive or magnetic) to attach an equivalent of a human palm, for > vibration control purposes. I am thinking about the silicone "boob" > material, like from better mousepads, or pads for keyboards, on some > advesive backing. > I could buy such silicone boob from say a computer store and attach it > with electrical tape. i would prefer something more professional, if > it would not cost too much. Just how much can such things set me back > and where to find them? I believe I could go quite a long way by > applying vibration dampeners to a few steel plates. Won’t do much for > the low noise, but it is not as annoying as high pitched noise. > In the submarine world, vibration dampening was *the* thing.  Being quieter > than the soviets was paramount.  Sounds like what you have there is a cover > that is resonating from some excitation vibration in the engine or > generator.  Easiest way to dampen something like that is to add weight.  Get > yourself something like a hose clamp that can go completely around the bell > housing with some room to spare.  Then evenly space some small bolts under > the clamp.  About eight or ten should be enough.  Tighten the clamp down > good so the bolts and bell housing vibrate as one.  This should change the > resonant frequency of the bell enough that it stops vibrating.  If I had a > nickel for each of the ‘anti-vibration staves’ I’ve strapped onto ’singing’ > pipes, I’d be on easy street.

  This makes complete sense. I will try to combine adding weight, with damoening action. Ibought some silicone gel thingy on ebay and will strap it to the housing with electrical tape. I hope to receive the decibel meter by then and will report the result. > Putting your hands on it works because you’re actually adding two things. > Another mass, and a viscous damper between the primary mass (the bell > housing) and the secondary mass (your hand).

  I tend to agree with this. I may also go to walmart and buy some silicone bra inserts and tape them to various stamped sheet pieces of the genset. i

  Response:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I learned something interesting today. My generator makes low pitched > knocking noises from the cylinders, but also some high pitched noise. > To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from > the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my > hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably > quieter. The difference was amazing. > My first question is, how come it makes so much noise. It did not > feel as though some moving part was touching it from inside. > My second question is, can I find some material and applicator > (adhesive or magnetic) to attach an equivalent of a human palm, for > vibration control purposes. I am thinking about the silicone "boob" > material, like from better mousepads, or pads for keyboards, on some > advesive backing. > I could buy such silicone boob from say a computer store and attach it > with electrical tape. i would prefer something more professional, if > it would not cost too much. Just how much can such things set me back > and where to find them? I believe I could go quite a long way by > applying vibration dampeners to a few steel plates. Won’t do much for > the low noise, but it is not as annoying as high pitched noise.

  In the submarine world, vibration dampening was *the* thing.  Being quieter than the soviets was paramount.  Sounds like what you have there is a cover that is resonating from some excitation vibration in the engine or generator.  Easiest way to dampen something like that is to add weight.  Get yourself something like a hose clamp that can go completely around the bell housing with some room to spare.  Then evenly space some small bolts under the clamp.  About eight or ten should be enough.  Tighten the clamp down good so the bolts and bell housing vibrate as one.  This should change the resonant frequency of the bell enough that it stops vibrating.  If I had a nickel for each of the ‘anti-vibration staves’ I’ve strapped onto ’singing’ pipes, I’d be on easy street. Putting your hands on it works because you’re actually adding two things. Another mass, and a viscous damper between the primary mass (the bell housing) and the secondary mass (your hand). daestrom

  Response:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I learned something interesting today. My generator makes low pitched > knocking noises from the cylinders, but also some high pitched noise. > To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from > the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my > hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably > quieter. The difference was amazing. > My first question is, how come it makes so much noise. It did not > feel as though some moving part was touching it from inside. > My second question is, can I find some material and applicator > (adhesive or magnetic) to attach an equivalent of a human palm, for > vibration control purposes. I am thinking about the silicone "boob" > material, like from better mousepads, or pads for keyboards, on some > advesive backing.

  There is a material known as "composite steel", which consists of sheets of steel that have been pounded together, ala the Damascene sword. This steel is inherently vibration absorbing, and is used for acoustic control. You might consider tack welding pieces of it to the bell cover. This would be more durable under exposure to vibration, temperature, and fuel leakage, than plastics.

  Response:

  >To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from >the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my >hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably >quieter. The difference was amazing.

  The cover’s resonant frequency happens to match something else that’s vibrating. Three solutions, from easiest to hardest: 1: Add some mass. Sometimes just sticking some heavy magnets to it will help. 2: Make it stiffer. Often easier said than done, but might be worth a try. 3: Add a "dynamic absorber" (tuned mass/spring system) that vibrates out of phase at the same frequency, cancelling the vibration. This involves some trial and error but can work well in some cases. The classic paper on dynamic absorbers is here: http://domino.automation.rockwell.com/applications/gs/region/EntekWeb… (PDF file, watch line wrap) If the paper is not there, look for a paper by Randy Fox on this page: http://domino.automation.rockwell.com/applications/gs/region/EntekWeb… I don’t think the consistency of the material makes any difference, except to the extent that it’s also making it heavier and/or stiffer. Lead weights should work just as well. Of course it would be nice to find the driving force behind the vibration and correct it (ie, make the machine run smoother in the first place), but if the resonant frequency of the cover matches the speed the generator has to run at, it may vibrate anyway. So you’re back to changing its mass and/or stiffness.

  Response:

  - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from >>the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my >>hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably >>quieter. The difference was amazing. >The cover’s resonant frequency happens to match something else >that’s vibrating. Three solutions, from easiest to hardest: >1: Add some mass. Sometimes just sticking some heavy magnets to >it will help. >2: Make it stiffer. Often easier said than done, but might be >worth a try. >3: Add a "dynamic absorber" (tuned mass/spring system) that >vibrates out of phase at the same frequency, cancelling the >vibration. This involves some trial and error but can work well >in some cases. The classic paper on dynamic absorbers is here: >http://domino.automation.rockwell.com/applications/gs/region/EntekWeb… >(PDF file, watch line wrap) >If the paper is not there, look for a paper by Randy Fox on this page: >http://domino.automation.rockwell.com/applications/gs/region/EntekWeb… >I don’t think the consistency of the material makes any >difference, except to the extent that it’s also making it heavier >and/or stiffer. Lead weights should work just as well. >Of course it would be nice to find the driving force behind the >vibration and correct it (ie, make the machine run smoother in >the first place), but if the resonant frequency of the cover matches >the speed the generator has to run at, it may vibrate anyway. >So you’re back to changing its mass and/or stiffness. > or adding an equivaent of my hand, something soft and dampening. > Thanks for the pointers. I thought I had a silicone computer pad lying > around, but I am not so sure now. > i

  How does the cover mount? Can you put a soft gasket under it? How about a shim someplace. Sometimes a "hammer adjustment" will help, a small crease in the cover may stop the vibration. Dave

  Response:

  I think the word you are looking for is "resonance". Steve Spence Dir., Green Trust http://www.green-trust.org – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I learned something interesting today. My generator makes low pitched > knocking noises from the cylinders, but also some high pitched noise. > To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from > the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my > hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably > quieter. The difference was amazing. > My first question is, how come it makes so much noise. It did not > feel as though some moving part was touching it from inside. > My second question is, can I find some material and applicator > (adhesive or magnetic) to attach an equivalent of a human palm, for > vibration control purposes. I am thinking about the silicone "boob" > material, like from better mousepads, or pads for keyboards, on some > advesive backing. > I could buy such silicone boob from say a computer store and attach it > with electrical tape. i would prefer something more professional, if > it would not cost too much. Just how much can such things set me back > and where to find them? I believe I could go quite a long way by > applying vibration dampeners to a few steel plates. Won’t do much for > the low noise, but it is not as annoying as high pitched noise. > i

  Response:

  Semi jokingly, I found this "JAC OFF" silicone pad that should be working. It is just like my hand, after all. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5545417145 Will look for something more rectangular though. i – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I learned something interesting today. My generator makes low pitched > knocking noises from the cylinders, but also some high pitched noise. > To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from > the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my > hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably > quieter. The difference was amazing. > My first question is, how come it makes so much noise. It did not > feel as though some moving part was touching it from inside. > My second question is, can I find some material and applicator > (adhesive or magnetic) to attach an equivalent of a human palm, for > vibration control purposes. I am thinking about the silicone "boob" > material, like from better mousepads, or pads for keyboards, on some > advesive backing. > I could buy such silicone boob from say a computer store and attach it > with electrical tape. i would prefer something more professional, if > it would not cost too much. Just how much can such things set me back > and where to find them? I believe I could go quite a long way by > applying vibration dampeners to a few steel plates. Won’t do much for > the low noise, but it is not as annoying as high pitched noise. > i

  –

  Response:

  I learned something interesting today. My generator makes low pitched knocking noises from the cylinders, but also some high pitched noise. To my great surprise, that high pitched noise was mostly coming from the "bell" cover of the generator head. As soon as I placed both of my hands on it firmly, the generator instantly became considerably quieter. The difference was amazing. My first question is, how come it makes so much noise. It did not feel as though some moving part was touching it from inside. My second question is, can I find some material and applicator (adhesive or magnetic) to attach an equivalent of a human palm, for vibration control purposes. I am thinking about the silicone "boob" material, like from better mousepads, or pads for keyboards, on some advesive backing. I could buy such silicone boob from say a computer store and attach it with electrical tape. i would prefer something more professional, if it would not cost too much. Just how much can such things set me back and where to find them? I believe I could go quite a long way by applying vibration dampeners to a few steel plates. Won’t do much for the low noise, but it is not as annoying as high pitched noise. i

  Response:

  No comments alternative energy
  
  

• George W. Bush Resume:

  Question:

  Sorry fellaz! This arrived in my inbox today and I had to share with y’all! Mind you, if I were an american, I wouldn’t vote for Kerry either. D.R. George W. Bush Resume: Past work experience: * Ran for congress and lost. * Produced a Hollywood slasher B movie. * Bought an oil company, but couldn’t find any oil in Texas, company went bankrupt shortly after he sold all his stock. * Bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using tax-payer money. Biggest move: Traded Sammy Sosa to Chicago. * With fathers help (and his name) was elected Governor of Texas. Accomplishments: * Changed pollution laws for power and oil companies and made Texas the most polluted state in America. * Replaced Los Angeles with Houston as the most smog-ridden city in the U.S. * Cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas government to the tune of billions in borrowed money. * Set record for most executions by any Governor in American history. Accomplishments as president: * First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record. * In his first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their jobs. * Members of Bush cabinet are the richest administration in history. (the ‘poorest’ multi-millionaire, Condoleeza Rice has a Chevron oil tanker named after her). * Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury. * Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history. * Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period. * Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market. * First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history. * After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, presided over the worst security failure in US history. * Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history. * Set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12 month period. * Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history. * Signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any president in US history. * Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans. * Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history. * Presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud of any market in any country in the history of the world. * Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history.

  No comments alternative energy
  
  

• Energy from rivers

  Question:

  Rams have a very long history. Pulser pumps are just over 15 years old. If your reasoning is correct, there should be rams everywhere. At every river mill town in Europe in place of the old water wheels. Well, guess what? There are almost none. Why not give the pulser pump the benifit of the doubt until some scientist or engineers or economists or sociaoligists round the world get round to actually testing it in real life village situations? If the scientific dogma of "my efficiency is bigger than yours" was correct, butterflys wouldnt fly, peacocks wouldnt have those beautiful tails, deer wouldnt shed antlers (or grow them in the first place) and pre humans would not have climbed down from the trees. "That lion down there has mighty efficient teeth, I’m not too sure of this newfangled walking thing anyways" The world has space for a broad range of technologys and it is way past time that people realize it. Brian White   – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > A few dozen meters of large diameter metal pipe does not come cheap. > Not cheaper than a constructed dam with all it’s buried pipes? The more I > think about this, the more cost-effective the water hammer appears to be. > Another thought is that the length of a water hammer/ram does not have to > handle the full pressure of the surge.  And of course a well built ram > doesn’t have much of a surge beyond the discharge head.  That’s what the air > chamber is for, dampen out the surges and even out the discharge head. > But you still need a bit of head to make them work, IIRC.  So you still > might need a dam??  And like the pulser pump, you send more water > ‘downriver’ through the ram than you pump up to storage. > daestrom

  Response:

  > A few dozen meters of large diameter metal pipe does not come cheap. > Not cheaper than a constructed dam with all it’s buried pipes? The more I > think about this, the more cost-effective the water hammer appears to be.

  Another thought is that the length of a water hammer/ram does not have to handle the full pressure of the surge.  And of course a well built ram doesn’t have much of a surge beyond the discharge head.  That’s what the air chamber is for, dampen out the surges and even out the discharge head. But you still need a bit of head to make them work, IIRC.  So you still might need a dam??  And like the pulser pump, you send more water ‘downriver’ through the ram than you pump up to storage. daestrom

  Response:

  > A few dozen meters of large diameter metal pipe does not come cheap.

  Not cheaper than a constructed dam with all it’s buried pipes? The more I think about this, the more cost-effective the water hammer appears to be. >Payback > time is the important constraint here. If your water hammer device lumbers > you with debt and repayments costing more than the energy savings from > making of said water hammer, why on earth would you make one?? >  Modifications to the design might reduce the water hammer. Or not. > You can make your pulser pump from off the shelf plastic parts from your > local hardware store. No high pressures are involved. No metal fatigue. > No reinforcing your structure with tons of concrete. > Brian

  No metal fatigue whatsoever if shock-chambers are used.  Metal or concrete tubes would work, with just enough length to create sufficient momentum to provide the desired water delivery. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >  It seems to me, a water hammer in a river would only require a few dozen > metres of large diameter metal pipe, submerged and oriented in the > direction of the current. A few modifications to the design, cushioned > valves, should alleviate much of the noise. >> Water hammers are fine in their place. Water hammer is just that, a >> hammering noise under water. it cannot be good for fish. Water hammers >> are more useful for higher heads and smallish sources of water energy. A > pulser >> pump could easily use a source with a tonne of water per second falling a >> half meter or a meter. These type of sources of water power are currently >> unused across the world. It would be very simple technically to use many > of >> them to power activated sludge works, park features beside rivers >> (fountains, etc) pumping for agriculture and more. You would need a > massive >> water ram to use a tonne per second of river and massively reinforced >> pipework leading up to it. But with pulser pumps, you need only a few >> plastic pipes. >>  Brian White > It seems to me, a water hammer in a river would only require a few dozen > metres of large diameter metal pipe, submerged and oriented in the > direction of the current. A few modifications to the design, cushioned > valves, should alleviate much of the noise. >> >> http://nxtwave.tripod.com/gaiatech/pulser/

  Response:

  A few dozen meters of large diameter metal pipe does not come cheap. Payback time is the important constraint here. If your water hammer device lumbers you with debt and repayments costing more than the energy savings from making of said water hammer, why on earth would you make one??  Modifications to the design might reduce the water hammer. Or not. You can make your pulser pump from off the shelf plastic parts from your local hardware store. No high pressures are involved. No metal fatigue. No reinforcing your structure with tons of concrete. Brian

   It seems to me, a water hammer in a river would only require a few dozen – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> metres of large diameter metal pipe, submerged and oriented in the > direction of the current. A few modifications to the design, cushioned > valves, should alleviate much of the noise. > Water hammers are fine in their place. Water hammer is just that, a > hammering noise under water. it cannot be good for fish. Water hammers > are more useful for higher heads and smallish sources of water energy. A > pulser > pump could easily use a source with a tonne of water per second falling a > half meter or a meter. These type of sources of water power are currently > unused across the world. It would be very simple technically to use many > of > them to power activated sludge works, park features beside rivers > (fountains, etc) pumping for agriculture and more. You would need a > massive > water ram to use a tonne per second of river and massively reinforced > pipework leading up to it. But with pulser pumps, you need only a few > plastic pipes. >  Brian White > It seems to me, a water hammer in a river would only require a few dozen > metres of large diameter metal pipe, submerged and oriented in the > direction of the current. A few modifications to the design, cushioned > valves, should alleviate much of the noise. > >> http://nxtwave.tripod.com/gaiatech/pulser/

  Response:

  Water hammers are fine in their place. Water hammer is just that, a hammering noise under water. it cannot be good for fish. Water hammers are more useful for higher heads and smallish sources of water energy. A pulser pump could easily use a source with a tonne of water per second falling a half meter or a meter. These type of sources of water power are currently unused across the world. It would be very simple technically to use many of them to power activated sludge works, park features beside rivers (fountains, etc) pumping for agriculture and more. You would need a massive water ram to use a tonne per second of river and massively reinforced pipework leading up to it. But with pulser pumps, you need only a few plastic pipes.  Brian White – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> http://nxtwave.tripod.com/gaiatech/pulser/ > What about using water hammers? Wouldn’t they require less extensive > construction, produce higher pressures and not have the problems of > separating air from the water?

  Response:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Water hammers are fine in their place. Water hammer is just that, a > hammering noise under water. it cannot be good for fish. Water hammers are > more useful for higher heads and smallish sources of water energy. A pulser > pump could easily use a source with a tonne of water per second falling a > half meter or a meter. These type of sources of water power are currently > unused across the world. It would be very simple technically to use many of > them to power activated sludge works, park features beside rivers > (fountains, etc) pumping for agriculture and more. You would need a massive > water ram to use a tonne per second of river and massively reinforced > pipework leading up to it. But with pulser pumps, you need only a few > plastic pipes. >  Brian White

  It seems to me, a water hammer in a river would only require a few dozen metres of large diameter metal pipe, submerged and oriented in the direction of the current. A few modifications to the design, cushioned valves, should alleviate much of the noise. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> http://nxtwave.tripod.com/gaiatech/pulser/ > What about using water hammers? Wouldn’t they require less extensive > construction, produce higher pressures and not have the problems of > separating air from the water?

  Response:

  Getting electricity from small low dams is very expensive and the power may not pay for the interest on capital spent. The pulser pump is an option that lowers the capital expenditure. The pulser pump has no moving parts and can produce low pressure air (for the nearby sewage treatment plant or for the nearby fishfarm) and pump water. For agriculture, horticulture. And there are various other uses. The pump also oxygenates the stream or river as it works. Pulser pumps are very new so links are appreciated, feedback to the site is needed if you make one and also, please inform your nearest science/alternative energy/eco centre display about them. (A model for display to the public is easy to make). Brian White http://nxtwave.tripod.com/gaiatech/pulser/

  Response:

  > Getting electricity from small low dams is very expensive and the power may > not pay for the interest on capital spent. The pulser pump is an option > that lowers the capital expenditure. The pulser pump has no moving parts > and can produce low pressure air (for the nearby sewage treatment plant or > for the nearby fishfarm) and pump water. For agriculture, horticulture. > And there are various other uses. The pump also oxygenates the stream or > river as it works. > Pulser pumps are very new so links are appreciated, feedback to the site is > needed if you make one and also, please inform your nearest > science/alternative energy/eco centre display about them. (A model for > display to the public is easy to make). > Brian White > http://nxtwave.tripod.com/gaiatech/pulser/

  What about using water hammers? Wouldn’t they require less extensive constrction, produce higher pressures and not have the problems of separating air from the water?

  Response:

  No comments alternative energy
  
  

• OT: France & Germany Shut Out

  Question:

  U.S. Shuts Out France, Germany for Iraq Work Tue Dec 9, 6:15 PM ET  Reuters By Sue Pleming WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Citing national security reasons, U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has ruled that prime contracts to rebuild Iraq (news – web sites) will exclude firms from nations such as France and Germany that opposed the U.S. war. In a policy document released on Tuesday, Wolfowitz said he was limiting competition for 26 reconstruction contracts worth up to $18.6 billion that will be advertised in coming days. "It is necessary for the protection of the essential security interests of the United States to limit competition for the prime contracts of these procurements to companies from the United States, Iraq, coalition partners and force contributing nations," Wolfowitz said in a notice published on the web site www.rebuilding-iraq.net. The move is likely to anger France and Germany and other traditional allies in NATO (news – web sites) and the U.N. Security Council who are being blocked out of prime contracts after their opposition to the war. They may bid for sub-contracts. But the decision will placate countries such as Britain, Italy and Spain, which provided troops to Iraq but whose companies were excluded from the first round of deals that went to U.S. firms. The contracts cover electricity, communications, public buildings, transportation, public works and security and justice. Additional contracts are also being awarded to oversee those projects. TIT FOR TAT RESPONSES U.S. trade lawyer Clark McFadden questioned the administration’s criterion for the contracts. "Is this going to set a precedent where national security can be used to justify limiting competition?" he asked. Procurement specialist Prof. Steven Schooner from George Washington University said it was "disingenuous" to use national security as an excuse and predicted an angry reaction from those nations excluded. "This kind of decision just begs for retaliation and a tit-for-tat response from countries (such as Germany, France and Russia)," said Schooner. But a defense official said NATO partners had known for weeks they would not get prime Iraq business. "This is not a slight. We still have many agreements with those countries and good working relationships with them." Wolfowitz is hoping that excluded companies will put pressure on their governments to join the post-war effort. "Limiting competition for prime contracts will encourage the expansion of international cooperation in Iraq and in future efforts," wrote Wolfowitz. The document, dated Dec. 5, listed more than 60 countries eligible for contracts funded by the $18.6 billion appropriated by Congress to rebuild Iraq. The list included Britain, Australia, Poland, Japan, Italy, Norway, Spain, Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, South Korea (news – web sites), the Philippines, Romania and Saudi Arabia. Some officials had argued privately the United States should not limit international competition to rebuild Iraq, where the infrastructure has been shattered by years of neglect, war and post-conflict looting and attacks. The roll-out of tenders to rebuild Iraq has been delayed in recent days while "high-level" policy decisions were being taken on Iraqi reconstruction and as lawyers checked that the final wording complied with U.S. procurement laws. A defense official said he expected the new contracts to be advertised on government Web sites later on Tuesday or on Wednesday. U.S. trade lawyer Roger Schagrin told Reuters non-coalition firms could still get business from selling material and equipment to the lead contractors. "Much of the money is expended on materials. A British or U.S. company could get a prime contract and then buy 100 percent French materials," said Schagrin.

  Response:

  Good.

  Response:

  Frogs and Krauts. Good ridance.

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> U.S. Shuts Out France, Germany for Iraq Work > Tue Dec 9, 6:15 PM ET  Reuters > By Sue Pleming > WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Citing national security reasons, U.S. Deputy > Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has ruled that prime contracts to > rebuild Iraq (news – web sites) will exclude firms from nations such > as France and Germany that opposed the U.S. war. > In a policy document released on Tuesday, Wolfowitz said he was > limiting competition for 26 reconstruction contracts worth up to $18.6 > billion that will be advertised in coming days. > "It is necessary for the protection of the essential security > interests of the United States to limit competition for the prime > contracts of these procurements to companies from the United States, > Iraq, coalition partners and force contributing nations," Wolfowitz > said in a notice published on the web site www.rebuilding-iraq.net. > The move is likely to anger France and Germany and other traditional > allies in NATO (news – web sites) and the U.N. Security Council who > are being blocked out of prime contracts after their opposition to the > war. They may bid for sub-contracts. > But the decision will placate countries such as Britain, Italy and > Spain, which provided troops to Iraq but whose companies were excluded > from the first round of deals that went to U.S. firms. > The contracts cover electricity, communications, public buildings, > transportation, public works and security and justice. Additional > contracts are also being awarded to oversee those projects. > TIT FOR TAT RESPONSES > U.S. trade lawyer Clark McFadden questioned the administration’s > criterion for the contracts. "Is this going to set a precedent where > national security can be used to justify limiting competition?" he > asked. > Procurement specialist Prof. Steven Schooner from George Washington > University said it was "disingenuous" to use national security as an > excuse and predicted an angry reaction from those nations excluded. > "This kind of decision just begs for retaliation and a tit-for-tat > response from countries (such as Germany, France and Russia)," said > Schooner. > But a defense official said NATO partners had known for weeks they > would not get prime Iraq business. "This is not a slight. We still > have many agreements with those countries and good working > relationships with them." > Wolfowitz is hoping that excluded companies will put pressure on their > governments to join the post-war effort. > "Limiting competition for prime contracts will encourage the expansion > of international cooperation in Iraq and in future efforts," wrote > Wolfowitz. > The document, dated Dec. 5, listed more than 60 countries eligible for > contracts funded by the $18.6 billion appropriated by Congress to > rebuild Iraq. > The list included Britain, Australia, Poland, Japan, Italy, Norway, > Spain, Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, South Korea (news – web sites), the > Philippines, Romania and Saudi Arabia. > Some officials had argued privately the United States should not limit > international competition to rebuild Iraq, where the infrastructure > has been shattered by years of neglect, war and post-conflict looting > and attacks. > The roll-out of tenders to rebuild Iraq has been delayed in recent > days while "high-level" policy decisions were being taken on Iraqi > reconstruction and as lawyers checked that the final wording complied > with U.S. procurement laws. > A defense official said he expected the new contracts to be advertised > on government Web sites later on Tuesday or on Wednesday. > U.S. trade lawyer Roger Schagrin told Reuters non-coalition firms > could still get business from selling material and equipment to the > lead contractors. > "Much of the money is expended on materials. A British or U.S. company > could get a prime contract and then buy 100 percent French materials," > said Schagrin.

  Response:

  > U.S. Shuts Out France, Germany for Iraq Work > Tue Dec 9, 6:15 PM ET  Reuters

  As it should be. Fuck’em.

  Response:

  >"Limiting competition for prime contracts will encourage the expansion >of international cooperation in Iraq and in future efforts," wrote >Wolfowitz.

  So, what happens when the USA and  England run out of smaller defenseless countries to plunder, and have to try someone bigger? Let me guess, the favaorable trade arrangements made to China by the USA are in reciprocity for China agreeing not to sell nukes on the open market, and China can beat the USA with that club as much as it wants, and then later, decide the arrangement isn’t in its best interests (after the USA has made many more enemies). When France could be selling nukes all over the planet, and wipe out two thirds of the USA with their own defensive nukes, if France was attacked by USA nukes, why is it that the USA sems to be able to ride herd over France, humiliate them, bitch-slap them, flush immense French investments in Iraq down a toilet somewhere, and piss the French off in general, and is not worried about any possibility of French retailiation? If France has demanded some concession from the USA to agree to appear to accept this treatment with only minor complaining, one wonders what it might have been. France sells three nukes to Iran, and they recover all their financial investment that had been wiped out on Iraq.  One would think they would be beating the USA over the head with this leverage, and not a word of it. What would the USA do, nuke France?  France isn’t Iraq.  France can retailiate with nukes, and not just by sneaking two nukes into two USA cities, but by firing a respectably large sized arsenal of ICBMs. It just seems odd to be that the USA could humiliate France this way, with no word or action of any kind from France except minor grumbling and complaining.  I would have expected five more above ground nuke tests by France within three months of the USA first claiming a desire to invade Iraq. Strange, also, all those "lost" USSR nukes, never knowing where one might turn up, and yet this Imperial policy by the USA… subtract where I hang at to unmunge feklar’s guitar playing: http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/kahless This will always take you to my ftp server if its up. The Amazing and Mysterious Powers of Mexican Females. Chapter 1: Levitation and Summoning. http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/images/mexwench.jpg

  Response:

  Just when the German economy needs a boost most – thanks US of A – if that’s how you treat "Friends" one wonders how you treat acquaintances or enemies… Oh wait we already know – you conquer them in the name of freedom. Now just wait for the U-turn… cb

  Response:

  >U.S. Shuts Out France, Germany for Iraq Work >Tue Dec 9, 6:15 PM ET  Reuters

  Good. The people who wanted us to fail are not welcome to our money. Ron

  Response:

  >U.S. Shuts Out France, Germany for Iraq Work >Tue Dec 9, 6:15 PM ET  Reuters > Good. The people who wanted us to fail are not welcome to our money.

  Ron, they didn’t want you to fail – they wanted it to succeed as quickly as possible with the least disruption. Sure they didn’t want unsactioned action to take place but that’s another matter completely. It’s funny – the Neo-Cons want Germany and France to pay but not to participate. We’ll see how far that goes. Like I said – wait for the U-turn. National Security indeed? Think we’re in the middle ages? cb

  Response:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >U.S. Shuts Out France, Germany for Iraq Work > >Tue Dec 9, 6:15 PM ET  Reuters > Good. The people who wanted us to fail are not welcome to our money. > Ron, they didn’t want you to fail – they wanted it to succeed as quickly as > possible with the least disruption. > Sure they didn’t want unsactioned action to take place but that’s another > matter completely. > It’s funny – the Neo-Cons want Germany and France to pay but not to > participate. We’ll see how far that goes. > Like I said – wait for the U-turn. National Security indeed? Think we’re in > the middle ages? > cb

  You must mean DARK AGES.

  Response:

  >>U.S. Shuts Out France, Germany for Iraq Work >Tue Dec 9, 6:15 PM ET  Reuters >Good. The people who wanted us to fail are not welcome to our money.

  You’re an idiot if you think France and Germany wanted us to fail. They wanted a co-operative, international (really international) effort and Bush wanted to act like the "all hat, no cattle" cowboy that he is.

  Response:

  > >>U.S. Shuts Out France, Germany for Iraq Work >>Tue Dec 9, 6:15 PM ET  Reuters >Good. The people who wanted us to fail are not welcome to our money. > You’re an idiot if you think France and Germany wanted us to fail. They wanted > a co-operative, international (really international) effort and Bush wanted to > act like the "all hat, no cattle" cowboy that he is.

  BULLSHIT!  France and Germany sold *billions* of dollars worth of shit to Iraq – ON CREDIT – and they knew they weren’t gonna get *paid* if we kicked Hussein’s ass.  And that’s *exactly* what’s going down.  Good for George, and good for us, too.  See ya in ‘04, loser. Lord Valve American

  Response:

  > >U.S. Shuts Out France, Germany for Iraq Work >Tue Dec 9, 6:15 PM ET  Reuters > Good. The people who wanted us to fail are not welcome to our money. > Ron

  That sounds like a power/wealth grab.  So much for invading Iraq because it was the "right thing". It’s supposed to be about what’s best for the Iraqi people, not West Texas hardball.  If there are firms in the excluded countries better qualified, then that’s hurting the Iraqis. We don’t own Iraq.  It’s not our money.  I applaud you for being honest, though.  I wish some of our elected representatives would speak as candidly so voters could really know where they stand.

  Response:

  >BULLSHIT!

  It’s what you’re full of.

  Response:

  >So much for invading Iraq >because it was the "right thing".

  It was all about oil.

  Response:

  >>So much for invading Iraq >because it was the "right thing". > It was all about oil.

  …but Gulf War I, and going against the coalition *then* would not have been? You are a hypocrite.

  Response:

  >>So much for invading Iraq >>because it was the "right thing". > It was all about oil. > …but Gulf War I, and going against the > coalition *then* would not have been?

  Operation Desert Scam was all about oil too. Securing it for Kuwait since the Bush family has business ties to Kuwait oil just like they do with Saudi oil. You are not funny anymore, fishbrain. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> You are a hypocrite.

  Response:

  > It was all about oil.

  …but Gulf War I>> Stop trying to change the subject. You’re a lying fuck and you know it. Typical right-wing bullshit.

  Response:

  >Operation Desert Scam was all about oil too. >Securing it for Kuwait since the Bush family has business ties >to Kuwait oil just like they do with Saudi oil. >You are not funny anymore, fishbrain.

  Well, if Gulf I was about oil ties in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, why the hell did they save the oil in Iraq?  after all, wouldn’t they be making more money if the Iraq was out of oil or couldn’t produce for a while?  Hell, why stop there … since the Bush family has ties to a lot of US oil companies, why would they want to have had the oil fires in Kuwait put out as soon as they could?  After all, wouldn’t they want to make money that way?  Get off this oil kick, Ed and get back on the sauce … At least you thought a little more clearly when you were drinking …. Hate you later!  Haters, Inc.  MSHateBC.  Microhate hateware.  Hate of 1000 Corpses.  Night of the living hate.  Hate gone wild.  the hate in miss jones. Deep hate (or is it hate throat?).  Behind the hate door.  Hate-mart.  The Hatrix.  Lord of the Hate.  Hate entertainment television (HET).  The United States Hate Department.  You want the hate?  You can’t handle the hate!   Lostpup198 "When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer ‘Present’ or ‘Not guilty.’ " — Unknown

  Response:

  >Operation Desert Scam was all about oil too. >Securing it for Kuwait since the Bush family has business ties >to Kuwait oil just like they do with Saudi oil. >You are not funny anymore, fishbrain. > Well, if Gulf I was about oil ties in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, why the hell did > they save the oil in Iraq?  after all, wouldn’t they be making more money if > the Iraq was out of oil or couldn’t produce for a while?

  Don’t you remember the oil embargoes on Iraq? Hell, why stop there > … since the Bush family has ties to a lot of US oil companies, why would they > want to have had the oil fires in Kuwait put out as soon as they could?

  Sure they would – they have a lot of exploitation contracts, can win a lot of those contracts and a very high oil price reduces long term oil consumption and promotes the use of alternative energy. Since the 70’s oil has run the US – not the other way round. Here in Germany there’s 72% tax paid on oil products while oil consumption per capita is twice that of Germany in the US. Now imagine the US as an oil exporter – which can easily happen should energy conservation policies be implemented in the US. http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/ene_oil_con_cap&int=-1 Conveniently, the US consumes twice the amount of electricity as well: http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/ene_ele_con_cap&int=300 Twice the per capita CO2 emissions too: http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/env_co2_emi_cap&int=300 In fact here the US is the biggest producer of CO2 per capita! 5 times the coal is also consumed: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_coa_con I guess this is why we europeans think of the US as the worst global pollutant and approaching being a self-destructing WMB for all humanity. Get real USA we all breathe the same air. cb

  Response:

  >…if Gulf I was about oil ties in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, why the hell >did they save the oil in Iraq?  after all, wouldn’t they be making more money >if the Iraq was out of oil or couldn’t produce for a while?

  It’s easy to see that you don’t understand the economics. If Bush and Company’s friend could get the oil dirctly from Iraq, as they supposed, they’d be able to make more money than acting as a middleman for Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

  Response:

  > >So much for invading Iraq >because it was the "right thing". > It was all about oil.

  It was all about getting rid of a regime known to harbor terrorists, pay money to terrorist organizations, and have active WMD development programs in place.

  Response:

  > >So much for invading Iraq > >because it was the "right thing". > It was all about oil. > It was all about getting rid of a regime known to harbor terrorists, pay > money to terrorist organizations, and have active WMD development > programs in place.

  The Pixie is partly right. for France and Russia it WAS all about oil.

  Response:

  >> It was all about oil. >It was all about getting rid of a regime known to harbor terrorists, pay >money to terrorist organizations, and have active WMD development >programs in place.

  It was about oil.

  Response:

  > >> It was all about oil. >It was all about getting rid of a regime known to harbor terrorists, pay >money to terrorist organizations, and have active WMD development >programs in place. > It was about oil.

  Keep repeating that while clicking your ruby slippers together. Maybe the man in the balloon will take you home to Kansas.

  Response:

  >>It was all about oil.

   >…but Gulf War I, and going against the  >coalition *then* would not have been?  >You are a hypocrite. > Stop <snip> You’re a lying fuck and you know it.

  Well, you are apparently a big box of tampons. > Typical right-wing bullshit.

  Your statement (above) is typical bigot bullshit. I’m a civil libertarian, and a fiscal conservative. Open your primitive segmented eyes. Happy holidays, too, by the way.

  Response:

  No comments alternative energy
  
  

• The Best Generator….

  Question:

  >I did a little research when I bought my Generac 7000 XL at Home Depot >over the weekend.  The entire line of Gnerac generators sold at Lowes >and the Depot are made by Briggs & Stratton. The Generac models that

  Briggs & Stratton bought the portion of Generac that makes the small portable generators. Generac owed Briggs a bunch of money for engines and finally sold them the portable generator division to satisfy the debt. Brian Elfert

  Response:

  Brian, I am a director at Generac Power Systems, and I’m glad to see that you did research before you purchased the generator.  However, I would like to correct a few of your comments concerning Briggs and Stratton and Generac. In 1998, Generac Corporation sold its portable generator and pressure washer assembly operation in Jefferson, Wisconsin to a New York based private investment fund called Beacon International.  The division was sold simply because it was an excellent time to do so (the strong economy in 1998 created quite a sellers market).  At the time, the Jefferson operation was highly profitable, and was NOT deeply in debt.  The new company Beacon formed was called Generac Portable Products, Inc.  They kept the Generac name due to the value of the brand.  The remaining part of Generac Corporation was changed to Generac Power Systems, to better reflect its new focus on stationary power systems. Beacon International borrowed heavily to finance the purchase, which meant that the new company was very highly leveraged.  Their plan was to take the company public in an IPO in 1999/2000.  However, with the dot.com bust, economic recession, and overall bear market, the opportunity for an IPO disappeared.  Therefore, they decided to sell the new company instead to recoup their investment. This is the company that Briggs and Stratton bought in 2001.  Briggs and Stratton has since folded the operation into their company as the Power Products Division. This gets us to today.  Today, Generac label pressure washers and portable generators (under 12.5kW) ARE being made by Briggs and Stratton.  They still carry the Generac name because of the value of the brand in the eye of the consumer, and due to the fact that the retailers prefer it. This gets us to your 7000XL generator.  In addition to using the Generac name, Briggs and Stratton also uses OHVI (OverHead Valve Industrial) engines, which are manufactured by Generac Power Systems in Whitewater, Wisconsin.  The OHVI engine technology in Generac XL series generators was not sold with the Jefferson operation.   You read that correctly, Briggs and Stratton BUYS the engine in your generator from Generac Power Systems.  The reason is that the major retailers specify them, as they are the accepted standard for premium power in portable generators.  The Generac OHVI engines, with their extremely long-life, low-vibration, and low fuel consumption, are what make the XL series of generators the best value on the market. I hope this message helps you understand exactly how Generac portable generators came to be made by a division of Briggs and Stratton.  I would ask that you refrain from telling people that Generac sold because some financial hardship.  It is simply incorrect. Sincerely, Kevin Anderson Director of Corporate Planning Generac Power Systems, Inc. Waukesha, Wisconsin. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I did a little research when I bought my Generac 7000 XL at Home Depot >over the weekend.  The entire line of Gnerac generators sold at Lowes >and the Depot are made by Briggs & Stratton. The Generac models that > Briggs & Stratton bought the portion of Generac that makes the small > portable generators. > Generac owed Briggs a bunch of money for engines and finally sold them the > portable generator division to satisfy the debt. > Brian Elfert

  Response:

  I did a little research when I bought my Generac 7000 XL at Home Depot over the weekend.  The entire line of Gnerac generators sold at Lowes and the Depot are made by Briggs & Stratton. The Generac models that Lowes sells do not have voltage regulation in them.  The models that Home Depot sells do have voltage regulation.  The models that have Generac engines will be quieter and cost more than the same model equipped with a Briggs & Stratton engine. I started my 7000 XL last night and was surprised how how well it ran. Very quiet compared to other generators of its size. I turned idle control on and cycled my 1.5 HP Dust collector, and 13" surface planer on and off.  The generator doesn’t skip a beat as it ramps up to the required load, then back down as I shut the loads off. I was shocked to learn that Lowes does not request voltage regulation in the models they buy, but Home Depot does. I would think that a device whose primary goal is to supply power, would have a key component like a voltage regulator without question. Go figure.. Lowes here (FL) has discontinued the Power Boss 8000 and has them on clearence price now. I could have gotten it for the same cost as the 7000 XL, but then I would have to have a noisy Briggs & Statton engine and no voltage regulation.                    Joe – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Define ‘best’ and ‘home use’. How many hours do you expect to run it and how > much do you want to spend? > The primary issue is the motor. The longest lasting motors by far run at > 1800 rpm. The vast majority of the generators you see on the shelves run at > 3600 rpm. A diesel will last longer than a gas motor but should be used for > longer-period situations. > Onan is considered among the best(gas), there are now a variety of small > diesels available from the Japanese such as Kubota. For the ‘best’ expect to > pay $3-5k. > Its been a few years since I was into it, but Generac is a widely sold cheap > brand. They seem to use a variety of motors. A 7kw will use a different > class of motor than a 5kw and you will pay for it. I understand Briggs & > Stratton has redesigned their motors which were notoriously bad but cheap, > compared to a Honda. Honda I am told has slightly slipped in recent years

  Response:

  Honda. — Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus     www.lds.org     www.mormons.org . .

  Who manufactures the best 5000 to 7000 watt home use generator?

  Response:

  Who manufactures the best 5000 to 7000 watt home use generator?

  Response:

  >Who manufactures the best 5000 to 7000 watt home use generator?

  That’s rather like asking who makes the best midsize car, isn’t it? I have a Coleman 5000W generator, and I’m quite happy with it. It starts easily, does its job without problems, runs for hours on a couple gallons of gas, and is light enough that my teenage son and I can carry it anywhere we need to. If there are better ones out there, I don’t really care — mine does everything I ask of it, so "better" isn’t much of a concern for me. — Regards,         Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com) Save the baby humans – stop partial-birth abortion NOW

  Response:

  Generac for the money and honda for quietness Honda is alot more expensive. Look at generac EXL line they come with electric start, Pressurised oil system and oil filter , Electronic voltage stabilation, which you need for home power use, idle contol, and excesories. Also generac has a higher surge rating.and sells a good transfer panel  

  Response:

  Define ‘best’ and ‘home use’. How many hours do you expect to run it and how much do you want to spend? The primary issue is the motor. The longest lasting motors by far run at 1800 rpm. The vast majority of the generators you see on the shelves run at 3600 rpm. A diesel will last longer than a gas motor but should be used for longer-period situations. Onan is considered among the best(gas), there are now a variety of small diesels available from the Japanese such as Kubota. For the ‘best’ expect to pay $3-5k. Its been a few years since I was into it, but Generac is a widely sold cheap brand. They seem to use a variety of motors. A 7kw will use a different class of motor than a 5kw and you will pay for it. I understand Briggs & Stratton has redesigned their motors which were notoriously bad but cheap, compared to a Honda. Honda I am told has slightly slipped in recent years using more plastic components. They and the other Japanese manufacturers have developed a line that uses an inverter to convert 12v to 110v. This is highly efficient and if they make one that size, I’d buy it in a heartbeat. It loses the generator and lots of weight but is more expensive than your standard generic(Generac or Coleman). I have heard very good things about the Yamaha inverter model. I *think* 5-7000 watts requires an 8 or 10 hp motor. You should google for motor feedback, ease of maintenance, reliability, noise, etc. The alternative energy crowd should be up-to-date. I have a 10kw Honda that has done well. Far bigger than I need, a 2 cyl, 600+cc motor, but the price was right. I live off the grid and for solar backup, I have suffered through the generic brands with the old, noisy, fussy and inefficient but cheap B&S motors and will never, ever do it again. MH

  Who manufactures the best 5000 to 7000 watt home use generator?

  Response:

  No comments alternative energy
  
  

• Pillar (pole) able to sustain a cistern of 1000 litres (250 gallons)

  Question:

  I think there a number of alternative energy solutions at reasonable prices ShurFlo makes inexpensive($80) 12v pumps with built in pressure switches. Not a lot of flow, about 2 gallons/minute. Google is your friend. M Hamlin

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Supposing I should use a pump (another or the same), what solution > should I use to have water all the time I need? An electrical device > (could be also incorporated in the pump) should start and pumps the > water from the cistern. But this kind of pump is expensive also.

  Response:

  >And how does the water get into the cistern, may I ask?  Are you pumping it? >If so, the net expenditure of power is exactly the same, except for some >small losses.  It’s called conservation of energy.

  I don’t hava a well on my yard, I take the water from a spring at 2 km from the my little farm, with a 12v submersible pump (car battery). I fill the water in 2 small tanks (on my mini van), care it with my car to the farm and then with the same pump I fill the cistern. Indeed, the process is very strange… but the water is necessary and to make a well I should pay 1/4 of the price of the little farm! The farm is used just during the summer/fall time, so during the winter the cistern is empty. I use the water for water the small garden. Now the cistern is at 1 (one) meter from the ground, enougth for this purpose, but I would like to gain a little pressure of the water. Usually I fill the whole cistern one per week and the water is sufficient for all the week… The cistern is closed to some pines and I could fix the "monument"  to be protected from going down. Supposing I should use a pump (another or the same), what solution should I use to have water all the time I need? An electrical device (could be also incorporated in the pump) should start and pumps the water from the cistern. But this kind of pump is expensive also. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Apart from that, balancing a ton 9 feet in the air is tricky business, as >others have pointed out, and it isn’t going to look very nice either.  Of >course they do this sort of thing all the time in Mexico.  But four 4×4 >posts set 2.5 feet deep on some nice flat rocks and then concrete around >them with some good X bracing will certainly carry the load, barring an >earthquake.  You should brace zigzag fashion, i.e., two X’s on each of the >four sides.  And even so, if someone drives into this monument with a >pickup, he or she could be killed. > >> Hi, > >> I have a plastic water cistern/reservoir (cubic shape, 1000 liters or > >> 250 gallons) and I would like to install it on 4 vertical wood > >> pillars, 4×4 size, at 7-9 ft height. > >> I need some suggestion about the structure in wood to construct in > >> order to be secure. Is this size (4×4) able to sustain the full > >> reservoir?  What kind of simple wood structure should I build in order > >> to be secure. How many pillars, how to fix the pillars one to the > >> other, supplementary reinforce, etc. > >> The cistern is not very heavy when is empty (less 50 kilos). > >> Thank you, > >> Cristian > >Well it will be heavy when filled. Water weighs roughly 8.5# per gallon. > >Cross bracing in is order and it should reinforce the 4×4s to keep them > >straight. That’s a small foot print for the height. Why not on the > >ground and a small pump? > I would like to use the fall of the water (no cost) instead of using a > pump with extra cost (each time I need water the pump should start, > etc). > The water is usually used for water the garden. > Cristian

  Response:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> Hi, >> I have a plastic water cistern/reservoir (cubic shape, 1000 liters or >> 250 gallons) and I would like to install it on 4 vertical wood >> pillars, 4×4 size, at 7-9 ft height. >> I need some suggestion about the structure in wood to construct in >> order to be secure. Is this size (4×4) able to sustain the full >> reservoir?  What kind of simple wood structure should I build in order >> to be secure. How many pillars, how to fix the pillars one to the >> other, supplementary reinforce, etc. >> The cistern is not very heavy when is empty (less 50 kilos). >> Thank you, >> Cristian >Well it will be heavy when filled. Water weighs roughly 8.5# per gallon. >Cross bracing in is order and it should reinforce the 4×4s to keep them >straight. That’s a small foot print for the height. Why not on the >ground and a small pump? > I would like to use the fall of the water (no cost) instead of using a > pump with extra cost (each time I need water the pump should start, > etc). > The water is usually used for water the garden. > Cristian

  Unless you use drip irrigation, you won’t get the water moving under much pressure with gravity alone. And let’s see…. 8.5* 250=2125# plus the weight of the tank, 50# you say although it might be more, especially if it has metal bands around it…. and that’s 7-8′ high on a foot print of 4′x4′ making it extremely top heavy while on a straight up set of legs. They better be in the ground more than a bit and not able to move or twist. A small utility pump that is gravity fed from the tank that you’d be able to carry around easily might be a good choice, especially for the little bit it would cost to run it. It would also look better but, I’m not usually one for looks over practical, it’s more practical, better pressure and neat when you take up the hose you move the pump inside. Or build a little housing for both the hose and pump next to the tank or as a support for the tank. You can buy a lot of electricity with the money you save by not buying the posts etc..

  Response:

  > >Well it will be heavy when filled. Water weighs roughly 8.5# per gallon. >Cross bracing in is order and it should reinforce the 4×4s to keep them >straight. That’s a small foot print for the height. Why not on the >ground and a small pump? > I would like to use the fall of the water (no cost) instead of using a > pump with extra cost (each time I need water the pump should start, > etc). > The water is usually used for water the garden.

  The pump will be cheaper than an adequate tower.

  Response:

  And how does the water get into the cistern, may I ask?  Are you pumping it? If so, the net expenditure of power is exactly the same, except for some small losses.  It’s called conservation of energy. Apart from that, balancing a ton 9 feet in the air is tricky business, as others have pointed out, and it isn’t going to look very nice either.  Of course they do this sort of thing all the time in Mexico.  But four 4×4 posts set 2.5 feet deep on some nice flat rocks and then concrete around them with some good X bracing will certainly carry the load, barring an earthquake.  You should brace zigzag fashion, i.e., two X’s on each of the four sides.  And even so, if someone drives into this monument with a pickup, he or she could be killed.

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> Hi, >> I have a plastic water cistern/reservoir (cubic shape, 1000 liters or >> 250 gallons) and I would like to install it on 4 vertical wood >> pillars, 4×4 size, at 7-9 ft height. >> I need some suggestion about the structure in wood to construct in >> order to be secure. Is this size (4×4) able to sustain the full >> reservoir?  What kind of simple wood structure should I build in order >> to be secure. How many pillars, how to fix the pillars one to the >> other, supplementary reinforce, etc. >> The cistern is not very heavy when is empty (less 50 kilos). >> Thank you, >> Cristian >Well it will be heavy when filled. Water weighs roughly 8.5# per gallon. >Cross bracing in is order and it should reinforce the 4×4s to keep them >straight. That’s a small foot print for the height. Why not on the >ground and a small pump? > I would like to use the fall of the water (no cost) instead of using a > pump with extra cost (each time I need water the pump should start, > etc). > The water is usually used for water the garden. > Cristian

  Response:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi, > I have a plastic water cistern/reservoir (cubic shape, 1000 liters or > 250 gallons) and I would like to install it on 4 vertical wood > pillars, 4×4 size, at 7-9 ft height. > I need some suggestion about the structure in wood to construct in > order to be secure. Is this size (4×4) able to sustain the full > reservoir?  What kind of simple wood structure should I build in order > to be secure. How many pillars, how to fix the pillars one to the > other, supplementary reinforce, etc. > The cistern is not very heavy when is empty (less 50 kilos). > Thank you, > Cristian >Well it will be heavy when filled. Water weighs roughly 8.5# per gallon. >Cross bracing in is order and it should reinforce the 4×4s to keep them >straight. That’s a small foot print for the height. Why not on the >ground and a small pump?

  I would like to use the fall of the water (no cost) instead of using a pump with extra cost (each time I need water the pump should start, etc). The water is usually used for water the garden. Cristian

  Response:

  Hi, I have a plastic water cistern/reservoir (cubic shape, 1000 liters or 250 gallons) and I would like to install it on 4 vertical wood pillars, 4×4 size, at 7-9 ft height. I need some suggestion about the structure in wood to construct in order to be secure. Is this size (4×4) able to sustain the full reservoir?  What kind of simple wood structure should I build in order to be secure. How many pillars, how to fix the pillars one to the other, supplementary reinforce, etc. The cistern is not very heavy when is empty (less 50 kilos). Thank you, Cristian

  Response:

  > Hi, > I have a plastic water cistern/reservoir (cubic shape, 1000 liters or > 250 gallons) and I would like to install it on 4 vertical wood > pillars, 4×4 size, at 7-9 ft height. > I need some suggestion about the structure in wood to construct in > order to be secure. Is this size (4×4) able to sustain the full > reservoir?  What kind of simple wood structure should I build in order > to be secure. How many pillars, how to fix the pillars one to the > other, supplementary reinforce, etc. > The cistern is not very heavy when is empty (less 50 kilos). > Thank you, > Cristian

  Well it will be heavy when filled. Water weighs roughly 8.5# per gallon. Cross bracing in is order and it should reinforce the 4×4s to keep them straight. That’s a small foot print for the height. Why not on the ground and a small pump?

  Response:

  > Hi, > I have a plastic water cistern/reservoir (cubic shape, 1000 liters or > 250 gallons) and I would like to install it on 4 vertical wood > pillars, 4×4 size, at 7-9 ft height. > I need some suggestion about the structure in wood to construct in > order to be secure. Is this size (4×4) able to sustain the full > reservoir?  What kind of simple wood structure should I build in order > to be secure. How many pillars, how to fix the pillars one to the > other, supplementary reinforce, etc. > The cistern is not very heavy when is empty (less 50 kilos).

  Your problem is lateral stability.  An earthquake, or even a wind storm, could collapse the whole structure.  It is much taller than it is wide, with all the weight at the top.  You will need a substantial concrete footing or pilings, will have to secure the posts against both uplift and lateral displacement, and will have to install heavy lateral bracing to prevent collapse.  Bolt the posts into heavy welded iron post bases that are cast into a reinforced concrete footing and tied in with the reinforcing steel.  If your posts are about 8 feet apart, diagonal 2×6 braces bolted to either side of the posts on 45 degree angles should be sufficient.  Block the 2×6 braces together where they cross.  Then install strapping for the platform.  Securing the cistern is your problem, since I don’t know what it looks like. — http://home.teleport.com/~larryc

  Response:

  No comments alternative energy
  
  

• Self-Sufficiency

  Question:

  I recently saw a message on (I think!) this Group asking whether anyone knew of web sites devoted to all aspects of self-sufficiency. The site to check out is The Get-A-Life Index.   It’s at http://www.getalifeindex.com It’s so new I don’t know if the search engines have picked it up yet. There are hundreds of references– Not only to web sites, but also to books and articles and other information The site is organized into categories and sub-categories including Alternative Energy (solar, wind, etc.); House-building; Homesteading; Food (gardening, recipes, storage, etc.); Alternative Medicine; Work (starting your own business or changing jobs/careers), etc. &#8211;Alex

  Response:

  Nice bit of spam there, Alex ….. I didn’t see anything there worth $8 / month — Steve Spence www.green-trust.org

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I recently saw a message on (I think!) this Group asking whether > anyone knew of web sites devoted to all aspects of self-sufficiency. > The site to check out is The Get-A-Life Index.   It’s at > http://www.getalifeindex.com > It’s so new I don’t know if the search engines have picked it up yet. > There are hundreds of references– Not only to web sites, but also to > books and articles and other information > The site is organized into categories and sub-categories including > Alternative Energy (solar, wind, etc.); House-building; Homesteading; > Food (gardening, recipes, storage, etc.); Alternative Medicine; Work > (starting your own business or changing jobs/careers), etc. > &#8211;Alex

  Response:

  >Nice bit of spam there, Alex ….. >I didn’t see anything there worth $8 / month

  Ah, the old "self-sufficiency for the vendor" routine. Thanks for saving me the trip… -=s

  Response:

  yeh, my stuff will only cost you $3.95 Just kidding. I provide over 300 pages of free info, but I do have self sufficiency booklets for sale at $3.95  / topic to help defray my costs. — Steve Spence www.green-trust.org

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Nice bit of spam there, Alex ….. >I didn’t see anything there worth $8 / month > Ah, the old "self-sufficiency for the vendor" routine. > Thanks for saving me the trip… > -=s

  Response:

  No comments alternative energy
  
  

• Its gotta be checked

  Question:

  There are a lot of folks who can’t understand how we came to have an oil shortage here in America. Well, there’s a very simple answer…… Nobody bothered to check the oil.  We just didn’t know we were getting low. The reason for that is purely geographical. All our oil is in Alaska, Texas, California, and Oklahoma. All our dipsticks are in Washington, DC. John

  Response:

  All our dipsticks were busy inventing things, hugging trees, and fucking interns with cigars, at a time when today’s problems would have been much easier to deal with. Hoady

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> There are a lot of folks who can’t understand how we came to have an oil > shortage here in America. > Well, there’s a very simple answer…… > Nobody bothered to check the oil.  We just didn’t know we were getting > low. > The reason for that is purely geographical. All our oil is in Alaska, > Texas, California, and Oklahoma. > All our dipsticks are in Washington, DC. > John

  Response:

  If the #1 dipstick RWRaygun had not cut the funds to alternative energy research as BushW has also done, who knows we might have fusion power already in place and other alternatives that would make that oil in the middle east worthless for fuel.

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> All our dipsticks were busy inventing things, hugging trees, and fucking > interns with cigars, at a time when today’s problems would have been much > easier to deal with. > Hoady > There are a lot of folks who can’t understand how we came to have an oil > shortage here in America. > Well, there’s a very simple answer…… > Nobody bothered to check the oil.  We just didn’t know we were getting > low. > The reason for that is purely geographical. All our oil is in Alaska, > Texas, California, and Oklahoma. > All our dipsticks are in Washington, DC. > John

  Response:

  No comments alternative energy
  
  

• SCREW FRANCE!

  Question:

  Chickenshit frogs are making things as tough as possible for our soldiers.  Boycott French goods! Cowardly France Tries to ‘Maximize U.S. Casualties’ The cowardly French are so jealous in guarding their multibillion-dollar financial ties to Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein that they will endanger the lives of American servicemen. "Essentially the French are trying to maneuver the U.S. into a position that would maximize U.S. casualties – as if enough US soldiers haven’t been killed on France’s behalf," a source tells NewsMax. "French politicians are using the lives of U.S. soldiers as pawns, while the infrastructure of French political freedom lays on the solid foundation of the bones of U.S. servicemen." Here’s the scoop, according to Stratfor.com: Because of desert heat, any war against Iraq must conclude in April. "The preference to begin the war under moonless skies means that an attack is possible around March 1 or at the end of March – which wouldn’t leave enough time for the operation. "The next moonless night, or night when the moon rises after 4 a.m., will be Feb. 27. The moon re-emerges on March 4. The United States does not want to attack in mid-month, with the full moon. The next open window will come at the end of March. If the weather sets a terminus date of about April 15, that will allow for only a two-week operation before problems might begin to arise from the weather. "It is no accident that a French proposal suggests another report from chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix on March 14. The French, in this apparently innocent proposal, know they are undermining the U.S. military option. It is also no accident that the United States is insisting that Feb. 28, when Blix is scheduled to give his next report, is the date that Washington is insisting on as the final decision point. "If France wins, the United States either has to fight the war under less than optimal conditions or postpone the attack. President George W. Bush is not going to start a war at a time when his commanders are saying that it might entail additional risk. If anything went wrong, the president c ouldn’t survive that call." Lord Valve American

  Response:

  I didn’t know they made any goods

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Chickenshit frogs are making things as tough as possible for > our soldiers.  Boycott French goods! > Cowardly France Tries to ‘Maximize U.S. Casualties’ > The cowardly French are so jealous in guarding their > multibillion-dollar financial ties to Iraqi dictator > Saddam Hussein that they will endanger the lives of > American servicemen. > "Essentially the French are trying to maneuver the U.S. > into a position that would maximize U.S. casualties – > as if enough US soldiers haven’t been killed on France’s > behalf," a source tells NewsMax. > "French politicians are using the lives of U.S. soldiers > as pawns, while the infrastructure of French political > freedom lays on the solid foundation of the bones of > U.S. servicemen." > Here’s the scoop, according to Stratfor.com: > Because of desert heat, any war against Iraq must conclude > in April. "The preference to begin the war under moonless > skies means that an attack is possible around March 1 or > at the end of March – which wouldn’t leave enough time > for the operation. > "The next moonless night, or night when the moon rises > after 4 a.m., will be Feb. 27. The moon re-emerges on > March 4. The United States does not want to attack in > mid-month, with the full moon. The next open window will > come at the end of March. If the weather sets a terminus > date of about April 15, that will allow for only a two-week > operation before problems might begin to arise from the weather. > "It is no accident that a French proposal suggests another > report from chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix on March > 14. The French, in this apparently innocent proposal, know > they are undermining the U.S. military option. It is also no > accident that the United States is insisting that Feb. 28, > when Blix is scheduled to give his next report, is the date > that Washington is insisting on as the final decision point. > "If France wins, the United States either has to fight the war > under less than optimal conditions or postpone the attack. > President George W. Bush is not going to start a war at a > time when his commanders are saying that it might entail > additional risk. If anything went wrong, the president c > ouldn’t survive that call." > Lord Valve > American

  Response:

  No more French fries? French toast? French kissing? Mister French? French’s mustard? Is Valve a French word?  <JK>

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Chickenshit frogs are making things as tough as possible for > our soldiers.  Boycott French goods! > Cowardly France Tries to ‘Maximize U.S. Casualties’ > The cowardly French are so jealous in guarding their > multibillion-dollar financial ties to Iraqi dictator > Saddam Hussein that they will endanger the lives of > American servicemen. > "Essentially the French are trying to maneuver the U.S. > into a position that would maximize U.S. casualties – > as if enough US soldiers haven’t been killed on France’s > behalf," a source tells NewsMax. > "French politicians are using the lives of U.S. soldiers > as pawns, while the infrastructure of French political > freedom lays on the solid foundation of the bones of > U.S. servicemen." > Here’s the scoop, according to Stratfor.com: > Because of desert heat, any war against Iraq must conclude > in April. "The preference to begin the war under moonless > skies means that an attack is possible around March 1 or > at the end of March – which wouldn’t leave enough time > for the operation. > "The next moonless night, or night when the moon rises > after 4 a.m., will be Feb. 27. The moon re-emerges on > March 4. The United States does not want to attack in > mid-month, with the full moon. The next open window will > come at the end of March. If the weather sets a terminus > date of about April 15, that will allow for only a two-week > operation before problems might begin to arise from the weather. > "It is no accident that a French proposal suggests another > report from chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix on March > 14. The French, in this apparently innocent proposal, know > they are undermining the U.S. military option. It is also no > accident that the United States is insisting that Feb. 28, > when Blix is scheduled to give his next report, is the date > that Washington is insisting on as the final decision point. > "If France wins, the United States either has to fight the war > under less than optimal conditions or postpone the attack. > President George W. Bush is not going to start a war at a > time when his commanders are saying that it might entail > additional risk. If anything went wrong, the president c > ouldn’t survive that call." > Lord Valve > American

  Response:

  > I didn’t know they made any goods

  Wine? — * David Beardsley * microtonal guitar * http://biink.com/db

  Response:

  More like "Whine"

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I didn’t know they made any goods > Wine? > — > * David Beardsley > * microtonal guitar > * http://biink.com/db

  Response:

  Recently I came across a web page quoting Lord Valve, saying something like "I’m not an asshole, I’m just playing one on the internet". Hmmm…seems like you’re not only a very fine amp tech, but also a *very convincing* actor… Phil European – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Chickenshit frogs are making things as tough as possible for > our soldiers.  Boycott French goods! > Cowardly France Tries to ‘Maximize U.S. Casualties’ > The cowardly French are so jealous in guarding their > multibillion-dollar financial ties to Iraqi dictator > Saddam Hussein that they will endanger the lives of > American servicemen. > "Essentially the French are trying to maneuver the U.S. > into a position that would maximize U.S. casualties – > as if enough US soldiers haven’t been killed on France’s > behalf," a source tells NewsMax. > "French politicians are using the lives of U.S. soldiers > as pawns, while the infrastructure of French political > freedom lays on the solid foundation of the bones of > U.S. servicemen." > Here’s the scoop, according to Stratfor.com: > Because of desert heat, any war against Iraq must conclude > in April. "The preference to begin the war under moonless > skies means that an attack is possible around March 1 or > at the end of March – which wouldn’t leave enough time > for the operation. > "The next moonless night, or night when the moon rises > after 4 a.m., will be Feb. 27. The moon re-emerges on > March 4. The United States does not want to attack in > mid-month, with the full moon. The next open window will > come at the end of March. If the weather sets a terminus > date of about April 15, that will allow for only a two-week > operation before problems might begin to arise from the weather. > "It is no accident that a French proposal suggests another > report from chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix on March > 14. The French, in this apparently innocent proposal, know > they are undermining the U.S. military option. It is also no > accident that the United States is insisting that Feb. 28, > when Blix is scheduled to give his next report, is the date > that Washington is insisting on as the final decision point. > "If France wins, the United States either has to fight the war > under less than optimal conditions or postpone the attack. > President George W. Bush is not going to start a war at a > time when his commanders are saying that it might entail > additional risk. If anything went wrong, the president c > ouldn’t survive that call." > Lord Valve > American

  Response:

  The only thing France ever made was JUNK! How many times have we pulled these asswipes out of the shitter? How much do they still owe us for WWI WWII…

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Chickenshit frogs are making things as tough as possible for > our soldiers.  Boycott French goods! > Cowardly France Tries to ‘Maximize U.S. Casualties’ > The cowardly French are so jealous in guarding their > multibillion-dollar financial ties to Iraqi dictator > Saddam Hussein that they will endanger the lives of > American servicemen. > "Essentially the French are trying to maneuver the U.S. > into a position that would maximize U.S. casualties – > as if enough US soldiers haven’t been killed on France’s > behalf," a source tells NewsMax. > "French politicians are using the lives of U.S. soldiers > as pawns, while the infrastructure of French political > freedom lays on the solid foundation of the bones of > U.S. servicemen." > Here’s the scoop, according to Stratfor.com: > Because of desert heat, any war against Iraq must conclude > in April. "The preference to begin the war under moonless > skies means that an attack is possible around March 1 or > at the end of March – which wouldn’t leave enough time > for the operation. > "The next moonless night, or night when the moon rises > after 4 a.m., will be Feb. 27. The moon re-emerges on > March 4. The United States does not want to attack in > mid-month, with the full moon. The next open window will > come at the end of March. If the weather sets a terminus > date of about April 15, that will allow for only a two-week > operation before problems might begin to arise from the weather. > "It is no accident that a French proposal suggests another > report from chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix on March > 14. The French, in this apparently innocent proposal, know > they are undermining the U.S. military option. It is also no > accident that the United States is insisting that Feb. 28, > when Blix is scheduled to give his next report, is the date > that Washington is insisting on as the final decision point. > "If France wins, the United States either has to fight the war > under less than optimal conditions or postpone the attack. > President George W. Bush is not going to start a war at a > time when his commanders are saying that it might entail > additional risk. If anything went wrong, the president c > ouldn’t survive that call." > Lord Valve > American

  Response:

  "Wally" wrote… > The only thing France ever made was JUNK! How > many times have we pulled these asswipes out of the > shitter? How much do they still owe us for WWI WWII…

  Better be careful about the history angle – somebody might mention that us here in the "colonies" wouldn’t have won our independence without French help back in the Revolutionary War days. Next time you drink a glass of milk you might want to think about Louis Pasteur. As far as making "junk" – ask any pilot who’s flown a Dassault Mirage fighter – Dassault has made great military airplanes for many years. The SUD Caravelle, a twin engine (aft fuselage mounted) medium range commercial jet preceded the DC-9 by a number of years (about 10 years!). They were bought in quantity by United Airlines and were very successful in the US market and overseas. Do you know what the fastest passenger trains in the world are? The French TGV ran 320 MPH on a specially prepared stretch of track, and runs at 185+ MPH in regular passenger service – with no fatalities in 20 years. I’m not crazy about the French way of doing things (or their politics) either. They drive me crazy. But it’s hard to assign much weight to your words. Do your homework first if you want to be taken credibly. They’ve made a lot of stuff that isn’t "junk". Jim McShane

  Response:

  > Recently I came across a web page quoting Lord Valve, > saying something like "I’m not an asshole, I’m just > playing one on the internet". > Hmmm…seems like you’re not only a very fine amp tech, > but also a *very convincing* actor… > Phil > European

  That wouldn’t be the Europe that the United States rebuilt under the Marshall Plan after y’all killed forty million of each other, would it?  Just checkin’… Lord Valve AMERICAN asshole – and that’s good enough for most.

  Response:

  Who drinks wine from france when there is better wine in your (my) own country.

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I didn’t know they made any goods > Wine? > — > * David Beardsley > * microtonal guitar > * http://biink.com/db

  Response:

  Hi, Are you all just firing mouth machine gun sitting in your comfy chair? Or anyone young enough gonna join the forces ready to strike Iraq? After you return tell us all about it. Tony – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Recently I came across a web page quoting Lord Valve, >saying something like "I’m not an asshole, I’m just >playing one on the internet". >Hmmm…seems like you’re not only a very fine amp tech, >but also a *very convincing* actor… >Phil >European > That wouldn’t be the Europe that the United States rebuilt > under the Marshall Plan after y’all killed forty million of > each other, would it?  Just checkin’… > Lord Valve > AMERICAN asshole – and that’s good enough for most.

  Response:

  Hi, I once worked on many different Cii-Bull products. First I was not impressed. After I figured out why they designed things certain way, I was amazed how smart they are. Also I worked on Olivetti stuffs as well. Same with Italians. They’re much less wasteful than us in many ways. Tony – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > "Wally" wrote… >The only thing France ever made was JUNK! How >many times have we pulled these asswipes out of the >shitter? How much do they still owe us for WWI WWII… > Better be careful about the history angle – somebody > might mention that us here in the "colonies" wouldn’t have > won our independence without French help back in the > Revolutionary War days. > Next time you drink a glass of milk you might want to > think about Louis Pasteur. > As far as making "junk" – ask any pilot who’s flown a > Dassault Mirage fighter – Dassault has made great > military airplanes for many years. > The SUD Caravelle, a twin engine (aft fuselage > mounted) medium range commercial jet preceded > the DC-9 by a number of years (about 10 years!). > They were bought in quantity by United Airlines and > were very successful in the US market and overseas. > Do you know what the fastest passenger trains in the world > are? The French TGV ran 320 MPH on a specially prepared > stretch of track, and runs at 185+ MPH in regular passenger > service – with no fatalities in 20 years. > I’m not crazy about the French way of doing things (or > their politics) either. They drive me crazy. > But it’s hard to assign much weight to your words. Do your > homework first if you want to be taken credibly. They’ve > made a lot of stuff that isn’t "junk". > Jim McShane

  Response:

  Been there, done that, got the triple-A holes in the aircraft patched. Then went back up and done that again. So take your alligator mouth and shove it up your hummingbird ass. Freep

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi, > Are you all just firing mouth machine gun sitting in your > comfy chair? Or anyone young enough gonna join the forces > ready to strike Iraq? After you return tell us all about it. > Tony >>Recently I came across a web page quoting Lord Valve, >>saying something like "I’m not an asshole, I’m just >>playing one on the internet". >>Hmmm…seems like you’re not only a very fine amp tech, >>but also a *very convincing* actor… >>Phil >>European > That wouldn’t be the Europe that the United States rebuilt > under the Marshall Plan after y’all killed forty million of > each other, would it?  Just checkin’… > Lord Valve > AMERICAN asshole – and that’s good enough for most.

  Response:

  >Boycott French goods!

  In your case that means french fries.

  Response:

  >> I didn’t know they made any goods >Wine?

  Cheese.

  Response:

  >Who drinks wine from france when there is >better wine in your (my) own country.

  As good as perhaps. Better? Nope. As good as for the price? No way.

  Response:

  >Lord Valve >AMERICAN asshole

  Every once in a while LV tells the truth.

  Response:

  >The only thing France ever made was JUNK!

  Spoken like a man that’s never had a decent bottle of wine in his life.

  Response:

  Hi, What a MOUTH. Tony – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Been there, done that, got the triple-A holes in the aircraft patched. Then > went back up and done that again. > So take your alligator mouth and shove it up your hummingbird ass. > Freep >Hi, >Are you all just firing mouth machine gun sitting in your >comfy chair? Or anyone young enough gonna join the forces >ready to strike Iraq? After you return tell us all about it. >Tony >>>Recently I came across a web page quoting Lord Valve, >>>saying something like "I’m not an asshole, I’m just >>>playing one on the internet". >>>Hmmm…seems like you’re not only a very fine amp tech, >>>but also a *very convincing* actor… >>>Phil >>>European >>That wouldn’t be the Europe that the United States rebuilt >>under the Marshall Plan after y’all killed forty million of >>each other, would it?  Just checkin’… >>Lord Valve >>AMERICAN asshole – and that’s good enough for most.

  Response:

  Thanks for the lesson of history. Opinions are like assholes… everybody has one.

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Wally" wrote… > The only thing France ever made was JUNK! How > many times have we pulled these asswipes out of the > shitter? How much do they still owe us for WWI WWII… > Better be careful about the history angle – somebody > might mention that us here in the "colonies" wouldn’t have > won our independence without French help back in the > Revolutionary War days. > Next time you drink a glass of milk you might want to > think about Louis Pasteur. > As far as making "junk" – ask any pilot who’s flown a > Dassault Mirage fighter – Dassault has made great > military airplanes for many years. > The SUD Caravelle, a twin engine (aft fuselage > mounted) medium range commercial jet preceded > the DC-9 by a number of years (about 10 years!). > They were bought in quantity by United Airlines and > were very successful in the US market and overseas. > Do you know what the fastest passenger trains in the world > are? The French TGV ran 320 MPH on a specially prepared > stretch of track, and runs at 185+ MPH in regular passenger > service – with no fatalities in 20 years. > I’m not crazy about the French way of doing things (or > their politics) either. They drive me crazy. > But it’s hard to assign much weight to your words. Do your > homework first if you want to be taken credibly. They’ve > made a lot of stuff that isn’t "junk". > Jim McShane

  Response:

  > That wouldn’t be the Europe that the United States rebuilt > under the Marshall Plan after y’all killed forty million of > each other, would it?  Just checkin’…

  Since you seem to be proficient with facts and figures, how many Native Americans have been slaughtered to free up space for the white immigrants? Do you happen to remember THAT figure? I know, those immigrants were mostly Europeans, so I probably pissed on my own shoe by making this point here. Or how far do you go back in history when you refer to yourself as an "American"? Back to the original (off-)topic: Of *course* the US media wants you to believe Mr. Bush is the king of the world, of *course* they want you to think you are the chosen people. If you lived in Germany, you’d believe the US are the most fu..ed-up country in the world, because the German media wants you to believe it. I’m proud that *I* am wise enough not to fall into this trap… What are your views based upon, anyway? The Iraq news? German news? French news? Oh, sorry, you probably don’t speak any foreign language, so you have to rely on the news you get from big daddy in Washington. Have you ever watched TV commercials? Of course everyone wants you to believe *their* toothpaste is the best in the world. If you’ve only seen a single toothpaste commercial in your live, I don’t see any reason to treat you like a qualified toothpaste expert… But if I should ever want some biased, patriotic second-hand shit, I’ll refer to Google and search for your "political" posts. Back to the "Marshall Plan" this newsgroup is *really* about… Phillip MUSICIAN

  Response:

  If I was young enough I’d be there already.  I’ll do what I can here, which includes smacking jiveass chickenshit leftists on the Net.  Fair enough? LV – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Hi, > Are you all just firing mouth machine gun sitting in your > comfy chair? Or anyone young enough gonna join the forces > ready to strike Iraq? After you return tell us all about it. > Tony >>Recently I came across a web page quoting Lord Valve, >>saying something like "I’m not an asshole, I’m just >>playing one on the internet". >>Hmmm…seems like you’re not only a very fine amp tech, >>but also a *very convincing* actor… >>Phil >>European > That wouldn’t be the Europe that the United States rebuilt > under the Marshall Plan after y’all killed forty million of > each other, would it?  Just checkin’… > Lord Valve > AMERICAN asshole – and that’s good enough for most.

  Response:

  Aye – no yellow streak in white wine from Oz!. LV – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Who drinks wine from france when there is > better wine in your (my) own country. > > I didn’t know they made any goods > Wine? > — > * David Beardsley > * microtonal guitar > * http://biink.com/db

  Response:

  > > That wouldn’t be the Europe that the United States rebuilt > under the Marshall Plan after y’all killed forty million of > each other, would it?  Just checkin’… > Since you seem to be proficient with facts and figures, > how many Native Americans have been slaughtered to free up > space for the white immigrants? Do you happen to remember > THAT figure?

  Not as many as you’d think.  And they were so busy   fighting each other that they didn’t have the time or   the inclination to band together to repel the invaders,   which they could have done easily in the early years.   The NAs were *also* some nasty SOBs, dude – all   you ever hear about ‘em is that they got their asses   kicked by the Evil White Man.  Wake up.  Things may   not be like you’d wish them to be.  Yes, we kicked their   ass and took their country.  Stuff like that has been   happening since Og bonked Ug with a rock in two   million BC and made off with his old lady and his   shiny rocks.  How far back would you like to go –   Ghengis Kahn?  Cheops?  You want me to apologize?   Sorry – ain’t gonna happen.  Go fuck yourself. > I know, those immigrants were mostly Europeans, > so I probably pissed on my own shoe by making this point here.

  Yeah, how about that, eh?  In fact, a whole *shitload* of ‘em were French and German.  Hey, wasn’t there something called the French-Indian war?  How ’bout dat… > Or how far do you go back in history when you refer to yourself > as an "American"?

  Ellis Island, early 1900s.  Don’t forget, the Indianscame here from somewhere else, too.  Tough shit! > Back to the original (off-)topic: > Of *course* the US media wants you to believe Mr. Bush is the > king of the world, of *course* they want you to think you are > the chosen people. If you lived in Germany, you’d believe > the US are the most fu..ed-up country in the world, because the > German media wants you to believe it. I’m proud that *I* am > wise enough not to fall into this trap…

  Well, boy howdy, son – you look like a duck, you walk like a duck,   you quack like a duck, hell, you even *smell* like a duck.  Guess   you must not be a duck, though, because you say so.  OK, what   else ya got? > What are your views based upon, anyway? The Iraq news? German news? > French news? Oh, sorry, you probably don’t speak any foreign > language, so you have to rely on the news you get from big > daddy in Washington.

  Who told ya that, son – Saddam Hussein?  Must be true, eh?   I mean – Saddam wouldn’t *lie* or anything, right? > Have you ever watched TV commercials?

  Nah, shit no.  Neither have you.  You’re gonna be watching   the American Whoopass Hour in around two weeks, though –   maybe our networks can recycle some Super Bowl commercials   for ya – they’re excellent.  Hey, maybe you can see some live   footage of our GIs fragging Al Jazeera reporters when they   start sending info to the enemy.  "Ooops, sorry – he shouldn’ta   walked in front o’ that Abrahms, y’know?" > Of course everyone wants you to believe *their* toothpaste is > the best in the world. If you’ve only seen a single toothpaste > commercial in your live, I don’t see any reason to treat you > like a qualified toothpaste expert… But if I should ever want > some biased, patriotic second-hand shit, I’ll refer to Google > and search for your "political" posts.

  It’s tough being from a pissant country, eh, son?  Hey – Delta is   ready when you are…we can always use another asshole. > Back to the "Marshall Plan" this newsgroup is *really* about… > Phillip > MUSICIAN

  Sez who? Lord Valve American

  Response:

  Anyone know where I can get a French flag bumper sticker? That’s right. At least the French have the balls to stand up to the spineless bullying and bribing the US is using to get allies in the alleged war against terrorism by attacking Iraq. But Osama is purportedly in Pakistan. Huh? Wasn’t the objective to find the terrorist Osama? If Iraq attacks Israel, I’m sure Israel can take care of itself (Israel has the nukes Iraq doesn’t have). We keep hearing that the US needs to rid the world of "evil" regimes headed by dictators like Saddam. If that’s true, the US should also invade Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and oust those dictators. The US claims to support Israel because it IS a democracy, but I detect the scent of some fishy double standard. Most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis. What country monetarily supported Bin laden? Saudi Arabia. What was that again? But the US is not attacking Saudi Arabia? If the US didn’t go around acting like a bully rent-a-cop of the world and instead shared alternative energy technologies with the rest of the world, no other country would hate us and no one would want to terrorize us. Do not believe the corporate media. War is Terrorism. If you can read this, you are not the president. Fox alleged news has no investigative reporting – it’s only banal propaganda and titilation – flash without substance.  EP

  >Boycott French goods! > In your case that means french fries.

  Slick would miss his oil intake though.

  Response:

  No comments alternative energy
  
  
• « Older Entries