On 26/07/2026 1:59 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 01:29:39 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 25/07/2026 1:17 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 00:39:56 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>> wrote:
On 25/07/2026 12:02 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:56:50 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> >>>>>> wrote:
Am 24.07.26 um 06:59 schrieb Bill Sloman:
On 24/07/2026 12:37 am, john larkin wrote:Actually, unburnt methane is much more effective as a greenhouse gas >>>>>>> than CO2 by a factor of 80 over the first 20 years. It decays faster, >>>>>>> but with that head start it still will molest our grandchildren. >>>>>>>
The best thing about fracking is making gobs of natural gas. >>>>>>>>>
You should love ng. It's mostly hydrogen and it burns a lot cleaner >>>>>>>>> than wood or coal.
Actually, it is mostly methane, CH4 - the carbon still contributes a lot
to the energy released when you burn it, so while does burn a lot >>>>>>>> cleaner than coal and appreciably clear than coal, it does contributed >>>>>>>> enough to anthropogenic global warming that we can't burn all that much
more of it.
Gerhard
ps. is it unburnt or unburned? Thunderbird flags both.
But as the world industrializes and electrifies, birth rates drop. So >>>>>> there will be fewer grandchildren to suffer the horrible fate of being >>>>>> alive.
It's not the industrialisation and electrification that is dropping
birth rates, but better health care.
Health care works better when there's electricity around. About a
billion people still have no electricity.
But China is churning out solar cell at a great rate, and if you combine >them with a Telsa power wall (or the cheaper, better Chinese equivalent)
you can have electricity anywhere you want it. Nation=wide grids are so >last-century.
People are only having as many kids
as we need to hold the population steady - actually fewer than that
right now, but we've just been through a bout of considerable population >>>>> growth and there seems to be a bit overshoot in the control loop.
And lefties have fewer kids than sane people; even better.
John Larkin has a curious notion of sanity. he thinks that Donald Trump >>>>> has common sense.
AI OverviewThe problem with AI is that it doesn't know what it is talking about. >>>>>
Natural sources account for roughly 40% to 45% of global methane
emissions. The largest contributors are wetlands, where microbes
decompose organic matter in oxygen-poor environments. Other
significant natural sources include termites, thawing permafrost,
oceans, wildfires, and geological seeps.
Between 95% and 96% 0f CO2 emissions come from natural sources, but that >>>>> doesn't stop the 4% to 5% we emit from being a accumulating problem. >>>>>
Methane is oxidised to CO2 and water in the atmosphere over about 20 >>>>> years by perfectly natural processes, and doesn't present a long term >>>>> problem in the way that CO2 does. CO2 does get precipitated out a
carbonates in the long term. but the time constant for that process is >>>>> about 800 years which is inconveniently long.
Earth did just fine when CO2 was 5000 PPM.
And the sun was a bit smaller.
The last time there was massive global warming - about 56 million years
ago - there were mass extinction events.Veggies and flowers are grown in greenhouses at 1000 PPM and more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene%E2%80%93Eocene_thermal_maximum
I keep on posting this link, and it never seems to register with you.
We need more. 700 or so would be great.
You wouldn't like it if it happened. None of the crops that feed you -
that have been selectively bred to do well at atmospheric CO2 levels
around 270ppm - would like it either. There are bound to be weeds that
would like it better, so you would probably starve pretty rapidly but
natural variation would ensure that some species would do reasonably
well (and adapt like fury to optimise themselves for the new conditions). >>
Greenhouses supply all the water and fertiliser the plants need, kill
off weeds and insects, and supply an expensive product.
It's not the whole agricultural industry, just the boutique end of it.
Crop yields have increased dramatically in the last hundred years.
Selective breeding is fast and getting faster. Some of our favorite
things didn't exist 30 years ago.
Selective breeding for a new environment is tricky. You've got a find a >place for your test plots in the new environment that doesn't actually
exist yet.
Slow breeding species like human being wouldn't do well.
Mammals were invented in the PaleoceneuEocene thermal maximum.
Don't be silly. They were around and quite diverse before the dinosaurs
got killed off 66 million years ago.
They'd expanded into most of the dinosaur niches during the previous
eleven million years, and diversified again after the PETM had made a
total mess of the ecology.
Of course the primates showed just up after the PETM, so they replaced
whatever had been occupying our ecological niche before the PETM.
Plants love CO2.
But our plants are well adapted to 270 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere.
They are hungry for CO2 and would like more. Something around 180 is
plant starvation.
What a load of nonsense.
Cold kills.
So does heat, as Europe is demonstrating at the moment.
The cold/heat death ratio is estimated around 10.
For what environment?
The euros should get more a/c, if their power grid could handle it.
It's hard to get people to invest in air-conditioning that can handle an >unpredecented heat wave.
You do have a enthusiasm for recycling the superficial crap you get fed
by climate change denial propaganda, and can't seem to realise quite how >>> gullible this makes you look.
No, I'm an engineer and I think.
You are more a tinkerer than an engineer, and you clearly recycle >superficial crap without thinking about what it actually means.
We were just sitting on the deck finishing our Peets and admiring the
view. It was borderline too cold.
Enjoy it while it lasts.
On 26/07/2026 6:29 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 19:59:47 -0000 (UTC), C<il0n Nioclbs0n Glostoir
<thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@Arcor.De> wrote:
|---------------------------------------------------------|
|"ps. is it unburnt or unburned? Thunderbird flags both."|
|---------------------------------------------------------|
It is 'unburnt' but in countries - e.g. the U.S.A. - where they speak
partially regularized approximations of English, they think it is
'unburned'.
American English is not regular in each respect though. E.g. 'air' and
'airplane' and 'airspace' and 'aerospace' are in American
English. Cf. 'air' and 'aeroplane' and 'airspace' and 'aerospace' are
in English English. These 2 words are different to each other:
'airspace' and 'aerospace'. English sucks.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
I get the impression that the UK has more mutually-incomprehensable
accents than the US has. And the US is bigger.
Language evolves over time. The English have had longer to evolve their >accents than the US has. Australia is about as big a the US but hasn't
had a English-speaking population for nearly as long.
John Larkin claims to be able to think, but isn't all that good at it.
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 15:04:16 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 26/07/2026 1:59 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 01:29:39 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 25/07/2026 1:17 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 00:39:56 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>> wrote:
On 25/07/2026 12:02 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:56:50 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> >>>>>>> wrote:
Am 24.07.26 um 06:59 schrieb Bill Sloman:
On 24/07/2026 12:37 am, john larkin wrote:Actually, unburnt methane is much more effective as a greenhouse gas >>>>>>>> than CO2 by a factor of 80 over the first 20 years. It decays faster, >>>>>>>> but with that head start it still will molest our grandchildren. >>>>>>>>
The best thing about fracking is making gobs of natural gas. >>>>>>>>>>
You should love ng. It's mostly hydrogen and it burns a lot cleaner >>>>>>>>>> than wood or coal.
Actually, it is mostly methane, CH4 - the carbon still contributes a lot
to the energy released when you burn it, so while does burn a lot >>>>>>>>> cleaner than coal and appreciably clear than coal, it does contributed
enough to anthropogenic global warming that we can't burn all that much
more of it.
Gerhard
ps. is it unburnt or unburned? Thunderbird flags both.
But as the world industrializes and electrifies, birth rates drop. So >>>>>>> there will be fewer grandchildren to suffer the horrible fate of being >>>>>>> alive.
It's not the industrialisation and electrification that is dropping >>>>>> birth rates, but better health care.
Health care works better when there's electricity around. About a
billion people still have no electricity.
But China is churning out solar cell at a great rate, and if you combine
them with a Telsa power wall (or the cheaper, better Chinese equivalent)
you can have electricity anywhere you want it. Nation=wide grids are so
last-century.
Do you have solar cells and a Powerwall and an electric car in your residence? Are you off the grid? Post some pix.
My next-door neighbor bought the house with solar panels. He hates
them.
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 15:10:48 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 26/07/2026 6:29 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 19:59:47 -0000 (UTC), C||il|!n Niocl|is|!n Glost|-ir >>> <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@Arcor.De> wrote:
|---------------------------------------------------------|
|"ps. is it unburnt or unburned? Thunderbird flags both."|
|---------------------------------------------------------|
It is 'unburnt' but in countries - e.g. the U.S.A. - where they speak
partially regularized approximations of English, they think it is
'unburned'.
American English is not regular in each respect though. E.g. 'air' and >>>> 'airplane' and 'airspace' and 'aerospace' are in American
English. Cf. 'air' and 'aeroplane' and 'airspace' and 'aerospace' are
in English English. These 2 words are different to each other:
'airspace' and 'aerospace'. English sucks.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
I get the impression that the UK has more mutually-incomprehensable
accents than the US has. And the US is bigger.
Language evolves over time. The English have had longer to evolve their
accents than the US has. Australia is about as big a the US but hasn't
had a English-speaking population for nearly as long.
John Larkin claims to be able to think, but isn't all that good at it.
You substitute insults for thinking, and aren't very good that.
Discuss some electronics. That's the topic here.
John Larkin
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics
On 27/07/2026 12:41 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 15:10:48 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 26/07/2026 6:29 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 19:59:47 -0000 (UTC), C<il0n Nioclbs0n Glostoir
<thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@Arcor.De> wrote:
|---------------------------------------------------------|
|"ps. is it unburnt or unburned? Thunderbird flags both."|
|---------------------------------------------------------|
It is 'unburnt' but in countries - e.g. the U.S.A. - where they speak >>>>> partially regularized approximations of English, they think it is
'unburned'.
American English is not regular in each respect though. E.g. 'air' and >>>>> 'airplane' and 'airspace' and 'aerospace' are in American
English. Cf. 'air' and 'aeroplane' and 'airspace' and 'aerospace' are >>>>> in English English. These 2 words are different to each other:
'airspace' and 'aerospace'. English sucks.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
I get the impression that the UK has more mutually-incomprehensable
accents than the US has. And the US is bigger.
Language evolves over time. The English have had longer to evolve their
accents than the US has. Australia is about as big a the US but hasn't
had a English-speaking population for nearly as long.
John Larkin claims to be able to think, but isn't all that good at it.
You substitute insults for thinking, and aren't very good that.
You experience uncongenial intellectual insights as insults. They aren't >designed to be insulting, no matter how much you dislike them. so you
are judging them against an inappropriate criterion.
Discuss some electronics. That's the topic here.
I do that quite often. Much of what I do post does seem to go over your >head. Your contributions to the very long low distortion sine wave >oscillator thread weren't impressive.
On 27/07/2026 12:38 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 15:04:16 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 26/07/2026 1:59 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 01:29:39 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>> wrote:
On 25/07/2026 1:17 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 00:39:56 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>> wrote:
On 25/07/2026 12:02 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:56:50 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> >>>>>>>> wrote:
Am 24.07.26 um 06:59 schrieb Bill Sloman:
On 24/07/2026 12:37 am, john larkin wrote:Actually, unburnt methane is much more effective as a greenhouse gas >>>>>>>>> than CO2 by a factor of 80 over the first 20 years. It decays faster, >>>>>>>>> but with that head start it still will molest our grandchildren. >>>>>>>>>
The best thing about fracking is making gobs of natural gas. >>>>>>>>>>>
You should love ng. It's mostly hydrogen and it burns a lot cleaner >>>>>>>>>>> than wood or coal.
Actually, it is mostly methane, CH4 - the carbon still contributes a lot
to the energy released when you burn it, so while does burn a lot >>>>>>>>>> cleaner than coal and appreciably clear than coal, it does contributed
enough to anthropogenic global warming that we can't burn all that much
more of it.
Gerhard
ps. is it unburnt or unburned? Thunderbird flags both.
But as the world industrializes and electrifies, birth rates drop. So >>>>>>>> there will be fewer grandchildren to suffer the horrible fate of being >>>>>>>> alive.
It's not the industrialisation and electrification that is dropping >>>>>>> birth rates, but better health care.
Health care works better when there's electricity around. About a
billion people still have no electricity.
But China is churning out solar cell at a great rate, and if you combine >>> them with a Telsa power wall (or the cheaper, better Chinese equivalent) >>> you can have electricity anywhere you want it. Nation=wide grids are so
last-century.
Do you have solar cells and a Powerwall and an electric car in your
residence? Are you off the grid? Post some pix.
I live in flat in Sydney. There's no roof that I could put solar panels on.
Australia hasn't got a nation wide grid - the gap between western
Australia and the rest of the country is too big to be worth bridging -
but the two halves of the country have both had grids for more than
century now. Australians who live in house with roofs mostly do have
solar panels, and anybody who has them and has the capital to buy a home >battery (they aren't cheap) has got one. My oncologist friend and his >statistician wife moved house recently to a place without stairs (they
are as old as I am) and their new house has both solar panels and a
battery. They bought the battery.
My electric car is going to have to wait until the little Mercedes my
wife bought in 2011 wears out. It is still doing fine and I don't use it >often enough to worry about the carbon dioxide it emits.
My next-door neighbor bought the house with solar panels. He hates
them.
Get him to add a power wall or something similar, and his electricity
bill will go down at lot. That makes the solar panels a lot more attractive.
You probably don't talk to your neighbours about that sort of stuff. You >don't know enough to do it well.
<snip>
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government
financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
Same in the UK.
Wait until enough people are committed to electric cars and the fuel
revenue to the government drops - then they will have to start taxing
electic cars and we'll see a fair comparison in running costs with
petrol and diesel cars.
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 01:35:20 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/07/2026 12:38 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 15:04:16 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 26/07/2026 1:59 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 01:29:39 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>> wrote:
On 25/07/2026 1:17 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 00:39:56 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 25/07/2026 12:02 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:56:50 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
Am 24.07.26 um 06:59 schrieb Bill Sloman:
On 24/07/2026 12:37 am, john larkin wrote:Actually, unburnt methane is much more effective as a greenhouse gas >>>>>>>>>> than CO2 by a factor of 80 over the first 20 years. It decays faster,
The best thing about fracking is making gobs of natural gas. >>>>>>>>>>>>
You should love ng. It's mostly hydrogen and it burns a lot cleaner
than wood or coal.
Actually, it is mostly methane, CH4 - the carbon still contributes a lot
to the energy released when you burn it, so while does burn a lot >>>>>>>>>>> cleaner than coal and appreciably clear than coal, it does contributed
enough to anthropogenic global warming that we can't burn all that much
more of it.
but with that head start it still will molest our grandchildren. >>>>>>>>>>
Gerhard
ps. is it unburnt or unburned? Thunderbird flags both.
But as the world industrializes and electrifies, birth rates drop. So >>>>>>>>> there will be fewer grandchildren to suffer the horrible fate of being
alive.
It's not the industrialisation and electrification that is dropping >>>>>>>> birth rates, but better health care.
Health care works better when there's electricity around. About a >>>>>>> billion people still have no electricity.
But China is churning out solar cell at a great rate, and if you combine >>>> them with a Telsa power wall (or the cheaper, better Chinese equivalent) >>>> you can have electricity anywhere you want it. Nation=wide grids are so >>>> last-century.
Do you have solar cells and a Powerwall and an electric car in your
residence? Are you off the grid? Post some pix.
I live in flat in Sydney. There's no roof that I could put solar panels on. >>
Australia hasn't got a nation wide grid - the gap between western
Australia and the rest of the country is too big to be worth bridging -
but the two halves of the country have both had grids for more than
century now. Australians who live in house with roofs mostly do have
solar panels, and anybody who has them and has the capital to buy a home
battery (they aren't cheap) has got one. My oncologist friend and his
statistician wife moved house recently to a place without stairs (they
are as old as I am) and their new house has both solar panels and a
battery. They bought the battery.
My electric car is going to have to wait until the little Mercedes my
wife bought in 2011 wears out. It is still doing fine and I don't use it
often enough to worry about the carbon dioxide it emits.
My next-door neighbor bought the house with solar panels. He hates
them.
Get him to add a power wall or something similar, and his electricity
bill will go down at lot. That makes the solar panels a lot more attractive. >>
You probably don't talk to your neighbours about that sort of stuff. You
don't know enough to do it well.
<snip>
Sure I talk to him. We take care of one anothers houses when someone
is on vacation. We have door keys. We swap baked goods. He stays in
our cabin in Truckee, as do some other neighbors.
He has a fancy digital front-door lock that stopped working a few
weeks ago. Dead battery? Code crash? I let him into my back yard, he
jumped the fence, climbed up to a deck, and got in the back way.
His solar panels don't make much power in our climate at our latitude.
And they need maintanance.
He parked the entire array on our roof when he had his roof repaired.
That was crazy expensive.
We don't have many hurricanes or tornados here, but panels get ripped
off roofs where people do.
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 19:22:35 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government
financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
Same in the UK.
Wait until enough people are committed to electric cars and the fuel
revenue to the government drops - then they will have to start taxing
electic cars and we'll see a fair comparison in running costs with
petrol and diesel cars.
Car makers are getting tired of losing gigabucks on electric cars.
Ford, GM, Honda, Porsche.
Not to mention the Jaguar suicide. Apparently a 95% drop in sales is a
clever marketing strategy.
Maybe electric cars are a novelty buy. Like Miatas and PT Cruisers.
Once the fans have all bought one, the sales die, and nobody wants a
used PT Cruiser.
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 02:11:12 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/07/2026 12:41 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 15:10:48 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 26/07/2026 6:29 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 19:59:47 -0000 (UTC), C||il|!n Niocl|is|!n Glost|-ir >>>>> <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@Arcor.De> wrote:
|---------------------------------------------------------|
|"ps. is it unburnt or unburned? Thunderbird flags both."|
|---------------------------------------------------------|
It is 'unburnt' but in countries - e.g. the U.S.A. - where they speak >>>>>> partially regularized approximations of English, they think it is
'unburned'.
American English is not regular in each respect though. E.g. 'air' and >>>>>> 'airplane' and 'airspace' and 'aerospace' are in American
English. Cf. 'air' and 'aeroplane' and 'airspace' and 'aerospace' are >>>>>> in English English. These 2 words are different to each other:
'airspace' and 'aerospace'. English sucks.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
I get the impression that the UK has more mutually-incomprehensable
accents than the US has. And the US is bigger.
Language evolves over time. The English have had longer to evolve their >>>> accents than the US has. Australia is about as big a the US but hasn't >>>> had a English-speaking population for nearly as long.
John Larkin claims to be able to think, but isn't all that good at it.
You substitute insults for thinking, and aren't very good that.
You experience uncongenial intellectual insights as insults. They aren't
designed to be insulting, no matter how much you dislike them. so you
are judging them against an inappropriate criterion.
Discuss some electronics. That's the topic here.
I do that quite often. Much of what I do post does seem to go over your
head. Your contributions to the very long low distortion sine wave
oscillator thread weren't impressive.
It's not difficult nowadays to make a variable-frequency 1-
PPM-distortion sine wave. The problem is measuring it.
It would be an interesting hobby.
Did you ever build your low-distortion oscillator? I wouldn't trust a
Spice sim at that level.
On 27/07/2026 7:33 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 19:22:35 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government >>>> financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
Same in the UK.
Wait until enough people are committed to electric cars and the fuel
revenue to the government drops - then they will have to start taxing
electic cars and we'll see a fair comparison in running costs with
petrol and diesel cars.
Car makers are getting tired of losing gigabucks on electric cars.
Ford, GM, Honda, Porsche.
BYD seems to be making a bundle. They went to the trouble of developing
the blade battery technology for their cars, which does seem to give
them an advantage over people who buy in old technology batteries.
Not to mention the Jaguar suicide. Apparently a 95% drop in sales is a
clever marketing strategy.
Maybe electric cars are a novelty buy. Like Miatas and PT Cruisers.
Once the fans have all bought one, the sales die, and nobody wants a
used PT Cruiser.
John Larkin is a sucker for fossil carbon extraction industry propaganda.
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 16:25:02 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/07/2026 7:33 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 19:22:35 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government >>>>> financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
Same in the UK.
Wait until enough people are committed to electric cars and the fuel
revenue to the government drops - then they will have to start taxing
electic cars and we'll see a fair comparison in running costs with
petrol and diesel cars.
Car makers are getting tired of losing gigabucks on electric cars.
Ford, GM, Honda, Porsche.
BYD seems to be making a bundle. They went to the trouble of developing
the blade battery technology for their cars, which does seem to give
them an advantage over people who buy in old technology batteries.
Not to mention the Jaguar suicide. Apparently a 95% drop in sales is a
clever marketing strategy.
Maybe electric cars are a novelty buy. Like Miatas and PT Cruisers.
Once the fans have all bought one, the sales die, and nobody wants a
used PT Cruiser.
John Larkin is a sucker for fossil carbon extraction industry propaganda.
My Audi A3 rocks. Custom-ordered from the factory. 240 HP v-6 with the Borg-Warner dial-clutch 6-speed tranny. AWD. It screams up
mountainsides at altitude.
Great ski car, except for the tiny ground clearance. I can drive right through chain controls.
Small enough to be a good city car too.
On 28/07/2026 3:37 am, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 16:25:02 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/07/2026 7:33 am, john larkin wrote:My Audi A3 rocks. Custom-ordered from the factory. 240 HP v-6 with the
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 19:22:35 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid
(Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government >>>>>> financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
Same in the UK.
Wait until enough people are committed to electric cars and the fuel >>>>> revenue to the government drops - then they will have to start taxing >>>>> electic cars and we'll see a fair comparison in running costs with
petrol and diesel cars.
Car makers are getting tired of losing gigabucks on electric cars.
Ford, GM, Honda, Porsche.
BYD seems to be making a bundle. They went to the trouble of developing
the blade battery technology for their cars, which does seem to give
them an advantage over people who buy in old technology batteries.
Not to mention the Jaguar suicide. Apparently a 95% drop in sales is a >>>> clever marketing strategy.
Maybe electric cars are a novelty buy. Like Miatas and PT Cruisers.
Once the fans have all bought one, the sales die, and nobody wants a
used PT Cruiser.
John Larkin is a sucker for fossil carbon extraction industry propaganda. >>
Borg-Warner dial-clutch 6-speed tranny. AWD. It screams up
mountainsides at altitude.
Of course it does. The electric-powered equivalent will probably be just
as nice to drive, but Audi hasn't yet invested the money in batteries >designed explicitly for electric cars.
Great ski car, except for the tiny ground clearance. I can drive right
through chain controls.
Small enough to be a good city car too.
But obsolescent all the same.
On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 15:54:09 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 28/07/2026 3:37 am, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 16:25:02 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 27/07/2026 7:33 am, john larkin wrote:My Audi A3 rocks. Custom-ordered from the factory. 240 HP v-6 with the
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 19:22:35 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government >>>>>>> financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
Same in the UK.
Wait until enough people are committed to electric cars and the fuel >>>>>> revenue to the government drops - then they will have to start taxing >>>>>> electic cars and we'll see a fair comparison in running costs with >>>>>> petrol and diesel cars.
Car makers are getting tired of losing gigabucks on electric cars.
Ford, GM, Honda, Porsche.
BYD seems to be making a bundle. They went to the trouble of developing >>>> the blade battery technology for their cars, which does seem to give
them an advantage over people who buy in old technology batteries.
Not to mention the Jaguar suicide. Apparently a 95% drop in sales is a >>>>> clever marketing strategy.
Maybe electric cars are a novelty buy. Like Miatas and PT Cruisers.
Once the fans have all bought one, the sales die, and nobody wants a >>>>> used PT Cruiser.
John Larkin is a sucker for fossil carbon extraction industry propaganda. >>>
Borg-Warner dial-clutch 6-speed tranny. AWD. It screams up
mountainsides at altitude.
Of course it does. The electric-powered equivalent will probably be just
as nice to drive, but Audi hasn't yet invested the money in batteries
designed explicitly for electric cars.
I wouldn't want to be stuck on the upgrade to Donner Summit, in a slow
line, at 15 deg F, in an electric car. With the heater off.
Teslas are rarely seen in Truckee in the winter.
Great ski car, except for the tiny ground clearance. I can drive right
through chain controls.
Small enough to be a good city car too.
But obsolescent all the same.
Unfortunately so. Most Audis are now the dinky 2 liter turbo, a
torqueless wonder.
I plan to rebuild my A3 forever.
People leave notes on my windshield offering to buy it. No.
My Audi A3 rocks. Custom-ordered from the factory. 240 HP v-6 with the
On 29/07/2026 1:35 am, john larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 15:54:09 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 28/07/2026 3:37 am, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 16:25:02 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>> wrote:
On 27/07/2026 7:33 am, john larkin wrote:My Audi A3 rocks. Custom-ordered from the factory. 240 HP v-6 with the >>>> Borg-Warner dial-clutch 6-speed tranny. AWD. It screams up
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 19:22:35 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government >>>>>>>> financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
Same in the UK.
Wait until enough people are committed to electric cars and the fuel >>>>>>> revenue to the government drops - then they will have to start taxing >>>>>>> electic cars and we'll see a fair comparison in running costs with >>>>>>> petrol and diesel cars.
Car makers are getting tired of losing gigabucks on electric cars. >>>>>>
Ford, GM, Honda, Porsche.
BYD seems to be making a bundle. They went to the trouble of developing >>>>> the blade battery technology for their cars, which does seem to give >>>>> them an advantage over people who buy in old technology batteries.
Not to mention the Jaguar suicide. Apparently a 95% drop in sales is a >>>>>> clever marketing strategy.
Maybe electric cars are a novelty buy. Like Miatas and PT Cruisers. >>>>>> Once the fans have all bought one, the sales die, and nobody wants a >>>>>> used PT Cruiser.
John Larkin is a sucker for fossil carbon extraction industry propaganda. >>>>
mountainsides at altitude.
Of course it does. The electric-powered equivalent will probably be just >>> as nice to drive, but Audi hasn't yet invested the money in batteries
designed explicitly for electric cars.
I wouldn't want to be stuck on the upgrade to Donner Summit, in a slow
line, at 15 deg F, in an electric car. With the heater off.
Why would you turn the heater off?
Teslas are rarely seen in Truckee in the winter.
Their owners are more nearly sane than people who buy Audi's?
Great ski car, except for the tiny ground clearance. I can drive right >>>> through chain controls.
Small enough to be a good city car too.
But obsolescent all the same.
Unfortunately so. Most Audis are now the dinky 2 liter turbo, a
torqueless wonder.
I plan to rebuild my A3 forever.
People leave notes on my windshield offering to buy it. No.
People do get invested in their cars. It's just a lump of machinery.
The
rational approach might be to find out how much the buyers was willing
to pay,
but a note under windscreen wiper can also come from a scammer,
and the risk-benefit analysis probably favours binning the note.
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 10:37:58 -0700, john larkin <jl@htigct.com> wrote:
My Audi A3 rocks. Custom-ordered from the factory. 240 HP v-6 with the
A decent engine. Some units have a forged crankshaft and are very
popular for modding. With the addition of aftermaket forged
pistons/rods and a turbo it can achieve over 800bhp with a remap.
Most mass market cars with V6's and above have been taken off the UK
market in recent years.
On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 21:51:24 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 29/07/2026 1:35 am, john larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 15:54:09 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 28/07/2026 3:37 am, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 16:25:02 +1000, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>> wrote:
On 27/07/2026 7:33 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 19:22:35 +0100, liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid >>>>>>> (Liz Tuddenham) wrote:
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
Electric car and solar panel purchases are mostly driven by government
financial incentives here. China is the main beneficiary.
Same in the UK.
Wait until enough people are committed to electric cars and the fuel >>>>>>>> revenue to the government drops - then they will have to start taxing >>>>>>>> electic cars and we'll see a fair comparison in running costs with >>>>>>>> petrol and diesel cars.
Car makers are getting tired of losing gigabucks on electric cars. >>>>>>>
Ford, GM, Honda, Porsche.
BYD seems to be making a bundle. They went to the trouble of developing >>>>>> the blade battery technology for their cars, which does seem to give >>>>>> them an advantage over people who buy in old technology batteries. >>>>>>
Not to mention the Jaguar suicide. Apparently a 95% drop in sales is a >>>>>>> clever marketing strategy.
Maybe electric cars are a novelty buy. Like Miatas and PT Cruisers. >>>>>>> Once the fans have all bought one, the sales die, and nobody wants a >>>>>>> used PT Cruiser.
John Larkin is a sucker for fossil carbon extraction industry propaganda.
My Audi A3 rocks. Custom-ordered from the factory. 240 HP v-6 with the >>>>> Borg-Warner dial-clutch 6-speed tranny. AWD. It screams up
mountainsides at altitude.
Of course it does. The electric-powered equivalent will probably be just >>>> as nice to drive, but Audi hasn't yet invested the money in batteries
designed explicitly for electric cars.
I wouldn't want to be stuck on the upgrade to Donner Summit, in a slow
line, at 15 deg F, in an electric car. With the heater off.
Why would you turn the heater off?
To save battery energy in hopes of passing the summit at 7200 feet. It
might take 20 hours to get a tow truck in a blizzard.
Teslas are rarely seen in Truckee in the winter.
Their owners are more nearly sane than people who buy Audi's?
Batteries don't work well at low temperatures, and charging stations
are far apart. If you park at a ski area all day, things cool off.
We have seen some Teslas in clusters, looks like mutual aid convoys.
Sort of electric wagon trains.
Shoppers at the Truckee Safeway park in the charging stalls, since
they are rarely used.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y7a3kcnwaeadbfcngneso/Tesla_1.jpg?rlkey=gzlv250yfz26ezafjwtvc3ejp&raw=1
Great ski car, except for the tiny ground clearance. I can drive right >>>>> through chain controls.
Small enough to be a good city car too.
But obsolescent all the same.
Unfortunately so. Most Audis are now the dinky 2 liter turbo, a
torqueless wonder.
I plan to rebuild my A3 forever.
People leave notes on my windshield offering to buy it. No.
People do get invested in their cars. It's just a lump of machinery.
Some people have an appreciation for dynamic motion, roller coasters
and skiing and cars and motorcycles. Some get nauseated. I enjoy
violent motion. I don't get seasick. The Audi has great dynamics and
is fun.
How about you? Do you enjoy 3D motion and acceleration? I think the
same brain parts that enjoy swoopy motion also visualize circuit
dynamics.
The
rational approach might be to find out how much the buyers was willing
to pay,
It's not for sale.
but a note under windscreen wiper can also come from a scammer,
and the risk-benefit analysis probably favours binning the note.
One note included a $20 bill. I gave it to a beggar lady.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 52:42:52 |
| Calls: | 1,101 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 276,187 |
