ClimbingPanther

Maybe this had nothing to do with it, but come on, why would you even take a chance?

It's widely thought that Dyneema and Spectra are the same thing, and in a way, they are, but in another way, they aren't. What I mean is they're the same substance, but Dyneema fibers are spun thinner and they fray easier. Just a thought to keep in mind, especially when talking about wear from usage.

Is that "Senate's #1 spender" label accurate?

You're right about the fact that you don't need to replace the whole car, probably just the batteries, although I don't know what other hybrid-specific stuff will wear out sooner also. Regarding hummers, they must assume that the lifetime of newer vehicles will be longer that what is common today, I guess. I agree 300K seems a bit generous. Electrical energy, especially from nuclear reactors, is very clean, in a sense, and I believe much cheaper than gas for the work you can do. What would a system based on electric cars and nuclear power look like?

I was there July 4 2005, and there were reports of bear activity in the valley just to the west of the one with snowgrass flats and goat lake. However, (for example) in all the years of Mt. Rainier Natl. Park, there's been gazillions of sightings and not a single attack, so you're not likely to have a problem as long as you don't slather yourself in bacon grease and huckleberries. Hang up your food and enjoy a beautiful area of washington! Edit: with regard to the perceived lack of trees, there does tend to be some correlation to the thickness of the forest and the aspect of a slope near the treeline in that area, but I don't think you'll have any real trouble finding trees below the treeline.

Not exactly. First, they were not talking purely about input costs, it was about all input/maintenance/gas energy over the life of the vehicle stated as a dollar figure per mile of vehicle life. Second, hybrids do not turn a profit yet, so their price is artificially low compared to the massive-profit-maker hummers. Perhaps the prices aren't that far apart. On top of that, the gains in energy efficiency of manufacturing a smaller vehicle and of running the vehicle are lost in the fact that you have to produce three hybrids (est. 100K mile lifetime) to last as long as one hummer (est. 300K lifetime).

Yes. http://www.reason.org/commentaries/dalmia_20060719.shtml I think research covered in this article is interesting and keeps things in perspective, but the conclusion of the commentary's author is flawed. Whatever extra energy is consumed in researching and manufacturing hybrids today must be considered a sunk cost in terms of energy, which will be offset by future improvements and increased prevalence of hybrids. After all, they're comparing a 100-year-old established industry to a brand new tiny sub-section. Interesting food for thought though. The real [unanswered?] question though is can hybrid production and usage ever come to the point where in an all-things-considered point of view, they are more energy efficient than the normal cars of today?

Vaseline, in case the group behind me makes me mad.

Awwwww, I thought this was about concessions, like, you know, at a basketball game or something. I was really hoping they had built ANOTHER hut at Muir to sell and and and add to the list of typical climbing supplies that are no longer needed to do Rainier.

vw4ever, this is EXACTLY the kind of thing I wanted to learn more about. There's pros and cons for every option, and that is really what I want to bring out in the discussion so I can make an informed determination of what's best for me to do, not just to find the absolute best mpg ever in the world or the most environmentally perfect option in the world or whatever. Thanks!

CBS, this is clearly not a simple, mundane thread resurrection. Put yourself in Dru's place... what would YOU do if you ran across a thread you hadn't posted in?

Good suggestions, Peter. hehe, confusing info corrected. 7 mi. was one-way, 1 hour was roundtrip I did just buy a little rack two days ago for the back of my bike so I don't have to use a backpack anymore. That's one of the worst places for sweating.

14 miles roundtrip, my only option for an everyday purely me-powered method is biking. I do that once a week, but it takes me an hour roundtrip and I'm sweaty and gross when I get to work. There must be a better way. Anyway, I'm not looking for justification for it, I just want an easier way which doesn't impact the environment as much. Besides, even if I could, some people just can't go to work any of those ways, and I want this thread to be a resource for them, not a finger-wagging session.

So, how much did you pay for it, and what mileage does it get? Also, is insurance more? Liability, collision, comp., etc.? Thanks!

I want to start an informative thread about ways we can get around without using a gas-only full-size vehicle. Specifically for me, I would like to find a better way to make my 7-mile 13-minute (car) commute to work every day using either less (than a regular car) or no gasoline. Since I and most people will never go to work EVERY day under our own power (walk, run, bicycle, etc. = smell like the gym when you get to work), I want to start a discussion on alternative means of getting there that are better than the status quo. Let's talk over the pros and cons of each method [electric-assist bicycle, moped, hybrid, anything else whatsoever], especially the cost/benefit aspect. I would find it especially useful to know what some of you are I'm sure already doing. Keep this an information-heavy thread, and you will not only help me to make a difference, but others can use this thread as a resource for information on how they can make a difference too. Thanks!

Yeah, and I lost my post I had so beautifully written

A chance to get a MASSAGE by one of the more prolific climbers (or at least profane) in the PNW? Sign me up!

to name a few but stay away from

A few years, eh? Good, so if you replace all your lights with fluorescents now, you won't ever have to buy another bulb! Then when the LED's come out you can switch to them. How are they shaping up for cost/longevity/[light] temperature/etc.? As if I couldn't google it. But you seem to know, so do tell!

Hey everybody, There is becoming less and less reason to own a single regular old light bulb and more and more reason to switch over to fluorescent bulbs in every fixture in your house. Wal-Mart is selling them very cheaply now, and anybody who gives a hoot about the energy and environmental crises we're creating should go buy these bulbs. And anybody who doesn't give a hoot as well, because they save you a -load of money over their lifetime because they use 1/4 the energy to run, and they last 10 times longer. 6-pack of [60 watt equivalent] bulbs are only $10, making them $1.67 per bulb. Since they last 10 times longer, I challenge you to find 10 60-watt bulbs for that price.

enelson, I agree NCLB isn't a perfect solution, but it's at least acknowledging that there's a problem that schools aren't teaching kids what they need to know in order to succeed. Cutting funding is probably the dumbest idea possible for fixing whatever problems may be there (reminds me of the Bible story about Pharaoh telling the Israelites to make bricks without straw), but making the school leaders responsible for turning their school around is definitely a positive mark for the law. No legislation is perfect (even the constitution has been amended how many times?) but NCLB at least acknowledged a problem and tries to fix it. Hopefully it will be a dynamic law and will be adapted to fit with what is being shown to work and what is bogus.

Spot on, man. For you still waiting for that list, I did previously note a couple things, No Child Left Behind is a very good concept to make schools accoutable to teach kids stuff they need to know The tax cut was theoretically a good first step, though the REPUBLICAN congress' (surprising?) love of pork along with the war has prevented the budget from remaining balanced (props to Clinton for doing that during his time)

Props to Mass. election officials who made a fail-safe system that people couldn't screw up with their own stupidity. Did anybody not see that coming? I mean, sure, we all heard about the idiots in Florida who couldn't figure out their ballots, but we're smarter than that, right? No, there was still a surprisingly large number of ballots rejected, and I dare say most were not informed voters simply using a purposely mis-marked ballot as a protest against the system. Whatever. If you're too stupid to read the directions, then you may not register an IQ worthy of deserving a vote. Granted, some may not have the written English skillz to decipher the directions, but those people are still responsible to have it interpreted or look stuff up in a foreign-english dictionary.

You're right, you did already explain your points. Sorry for asking. selkirk, why didn't you just come out and say you were trying to uncover peoples thoughts on bolting?

what is yours?