Jim

...or half the team and start over. Again.

In short yes. You're obviously not familiar with what is going on in this country, even this state, regarding windpower. In CA and NV there are large scale (2,000 MW) projects going in, Scotland has leased tidal and wave projects with up to 200 MW per project, off shore wind is huge in the EU - and yes it's on a commercial scale, viable, and on the grid. Naysay on this and you're just uninformed dude. I'm aware of the existence of the projects - just not of any that were funded, continue to operate, etc without direct subsidies. I'm not raising these points because I dislike the idea of alternative energy. I think its great. I hope that the technology matures to the point where they generate enough free cash flow to be commercially viable on their own, and enough energy to keep the lights on everywhere tomorrow. They aren't. They won't be anytime soon. By all means keep funding R & D but I'm not down with the turning over the infrastructure necessary to keep civilization going to fantasy spawned by the energy equivalent of Trofim Lysenko. Can you provide some specifics? For instance, the Solar Millennium project in the CA mojave (which I'm working on) is going in right now. 200 MW - the only incentive they are getting is some good deal on BLM land leases (as all energy projects get including coal and oil) and the benefit of an accelerated depreciation. There is no money from the state or feds in it. You can point to the renewable energy goals of Or, WA, and CA among other states as altering the market I suppose - but the coal, oil, and gas industries get way more tax incentives and outright handouts than the peanuts provided to renewables. While the EU is nearing 10% of their capacity, right now, with stringent goals to get to 20% by 2020 - you're drowning in your theories again and ignoring reality.

In short yes. You're obviously not familiar with what is going on in this country, even this state, regarding windpower. In CA and NV there are large scale (2,000 MW) projects going in, Scotland has leased tidal and wave projects with up to 200 MW per project, off shore wind is huge in the EU - and yes it's on a commercial scale, viable, and on the grid. Naysay on this and you're just uninformed dude.

Well, it's kind of important to figure that out, don't you think? No doubt. But with the politics, and frankly ignorance, surrounding the topic of energy reform it's hard to get the conversation going in any reasonable manner. Why any political affiliation would want to extend our serfdom to Saudia Arabia is beyond me. The strong emphasis should be on mass transit, conservation and energy efficiency, and a push on renewable energy. It's not going to happen with just the private sector, it will take government vision and push.

I don't think it's possible to know exactly how it's going to end up - but I can say with some confidence that it will be pretty ugly if we don't get our ass in gear soon while the rest of the world is making a good run at it.

I'm not sure the Japanese are the role model but you are correct that the question has to be asked on a large scale, and we haven't even begun that discussion yet. There will be changes associated with a large energy plan and transition. But - and this is a key point - it's going to happen anyway and it's better to get going ASAP rather than be jolted by the coming changes.

the "planet" cares about how much oil you use that you could avoid using. We have at least twice as far to go in this domain as any other nation among developed nations, thanks in part to your oil corporation shilling ways. Nah - I'm pretty sure that it's just total global consumption that matters, which is a direct function of wealth. The more output people generate, the more money people have to fund consumption, and the more they consume. The reason that Greeks don't use much energy isn't because of their superior virtue, it's because they don't generate enough output to buy as much. When you look at energy consumption per unit GDP, which is a much better proxy for efficiency than simple per-capita consumption metrics, the picture looks a bit different. Below is a plot of energy consumption per-unit-GDP.... Time for you to start hectoring the Norweigans and the Dutch.... I don't know about this one. We get a big boost from what? - Finance was 24% of GDP last year and we know where that led to - so we get extra points for the paper shuffling wall street types. Also - EU is way ahead of us in renewable energy production - 9% from wind, solar, and marine energy (wind,tidal, wave) with agressive mandates to reach 20% by 2020. They are way ahead of us in conservation and renewable energy production. And here's another way to look at it:

Hmmm. May be an option. Thanks.

After a week of acclimation and home school it will be a week of warmups in Condorri. Then a week somewhere - trying to figure that out, then packing in for 5 days of rock at Quisma Cruz. Then treking with me esposa, some cultrual stuff, and then a week in the Amazon before heading back to La Paz for a few days to visit with a friend. Total 8 weeks. So the first week I'm working on some possible partners but may settle for picking one up down there - week in Quisma Cruz is figured out. Middle week open to suggestions

Wow! thanks.

This opinion is a bit over the top. I was at a national DOI confernce on the environment last week in Portland and from talking with Interior agency folks they overwhelmingly feel they have a different mandate then under the Bush years when most of them were regarded as pests. The larger issues are more complex, rooted in institutions, politics, and as always, money. We're slow on the uptake here in the US, as usual. We're not dealing with the implications of climate change or making the needed modifications to the bascis of our economy. Baby steps so far, but some good ones, but we really need some bold actions to change, for lack of a better word, the current paradigm.

Bump

Looks like a Lienert (Swiss) ice piton (1940- 50s?). Hand forged - where did you find that gem?

Also looking for a partner in July, but likely routes more moderate than this on my first visit.

Still working on the schedule but likely will be in Bolivia from end of June through mid-August, with most of July available for climbing. Having not been there before and never been above 5,000 m, I'm intersted in moderate routes and an intro to the area. Planning a week of aclimatization just hiking before climbing. Been climbing for 34 yrs, some Alps and Patagonian experience, mostly in Cascades last 20 yrs.

The ruling does not afffect patents on processes, drugs, or new newly developed genes. It merely says that a firm cannot lay claim to a patent on an existing gene. In this case the firm isolated the defective gene sequence for congenital breast cancer. Rather than lay claim to the test procedure they said they owned the right to the gene itself. WTF? They didn't create anything. They can patent a test for it, a potential medical cure, etc. but not the gene itself. Not any more.

Uh...yeah? So, should EVERYTHING for sale have to be cleared by the gummint first? Or, just drywall? I think the free market should reign. Then we could get back to using the best material for the job such as radium for watch dials, asbestos for insulation, and DDT for those dang bugs.

Short answer is yes, you can change out the big chain ring, but you'll need to look at compatability of it with your drive train. I don't know about this specific bike but many "commuter" ones have a large ring in the low 40's. Something up close to 50 would help. Also, do you have 26" or 700c wheels. The narrower 700s are speedier, but not as versatile.

We took the late shift and went up to Pinapple Pass early afternoon. Saw a few minor releases off cliff faces, but the pack in the basin remained cool and powdery. Low in the trees was another story. Dang - I have to get a better hop tele going. Working a bit to hard in the heavier snow there. All in all a nice half day ski.

Actually, no, that's not how it works. The younger generation is paying for those that receive the benefits. No one is socking away money for their own SS benefits.

Oh. I was confused for a minute. I thought the Federal Government administered the Social Security System.

Gotta go - but you realize that a giant chunk of the insurers are non-profit, and that profits at for profit health insurance companies has been something like ~2.2% on average for the past few years? I'd like to see that statistic from a reliable source. And of course profit does not include CEO compensation. For a taste of that go here: http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/special-reports/total-package-health-plan-ceo-compensations-2008 So CGNA might post a 5% profit but pays over $12M to its CEO and another $50M+ for a handful of other executives. My heart aches for them.

IMO - I'm not arguing that you don't have a valid point about the other end of efficiency and patitent care - it's just that you're ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the current insurance mess and lack of coverage for all. THAT is not going to be addressed with the current system. My recommendation: Either singer payer or limited insurance companies with cap of 4% profit. Standard prices for all procedures.

What? The use of multitude private insurance companies, each inefficient in their own profit grubbing way, and collectively a nightmare, don't contribute to health care costs? Just look around the world - Germany, Japan, Tawian, France, for any number of different models that are working much better, and cheaper, than ours while delivering more and better service.

...speaking of which ....