Pages

Thursday, 12 July 2012

Great Wall of cars


Drove past a franchise for Chinese Great Wall pickup trucks the other day. The one pictured above was priced at £13998. Don't know much about them, but they seem to be seriously cheap. 

The new Steed 2.0 S: true value is a rare find

Just £13,998 CVOTR

The Steed S makes your money go further in lots of different ways. First, you get an exceptionally high level of equipment, including 16" alloy wheels, leather interior, individually heated seats, Alpine Cd/USB/RDS Radio and electric windows throughout. All as standard.
Next, you get advanced protection, with galvanised body panels and comprehensively rust-proofed chassis backed by a 6-year anti-perforation warranty for complete peace of mind. Plus twin airbags, Anti-lock Braking System and Electronic Brake Force Distribution for added safety.
On top of that, running and insurance costs are lower than you might expect, as the Steed leads its class on urban fuel consumption, is one of the most economical off-roaders and has the cheapest insurance group* rating of any UK pick-up.
All for less than the price you might expect to pay for a used pick-up.

Specs & Features

Generously equipped, keenly priced, the Steed S simply gives you more pick-up for your money.
  • Spacious double cab
  • Powerful 2.0 litre turbo diesel engine
  • Air conditioning
  • Thatcham Category 1 alarm and immobiliser with keyless entry
  • 6-speed manual transmission
  • Electric 'shift on the move' selection between 2WD and 4WD
  • Low range 4WD
  • Full electric windows
  • 16" Alloy wheels
  • Steering wheel audio controls
  • ABS and EBD brakes
  • Alpine Radio/CD with USB/RDS and four surround-sound speakers
  • Bluetooth hands-free mobile phone connectivity*
  • Leather upholstery with individually heated front seats
* subject to phone compatibility

A bureaucratic coup

Below are three of the best videos I've ever seen on climate change. Particularly clear and minimally technical, they are all by Dr David Evans.

The first two cover the science and the third covers the politics. If you know the science, skip to this one where he describes climate change as an attempted bureaucratic coup. That's the best description I've come across - it was and is an attempted coup.

First video – how and why we know that CO2 is not a significant cause of climate change. As Dr Evans makes very clear, all predictions based on the theory have failed. So simple.



Second video - Dr Evans points out how CO2 was only implicated in global warming via an artificial amplification parameter invented as a guess in 1980. Yes - it was a guess!



Third video – the politics – the failed bureaucratic coup behind climate change propaganda. I don’t quite agree with him here – the attempted bureaucratic coup will continue as sustainable development. It's a really good description though.


Wednesday, 11 July 2012

Lords demand Clegg reform


What a strange world it is where a Clegg may demand the reform of the Lords but the Lords may not demand the reform of a Clegg.

Obama or Romney?



As we all know, come this November, Americans will elect either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney as their new president. With the EU collapsing into a stagnant, undemocratic bureaucracy, this is an important event - or should be.

So which man will make the better president? Supporters seem to feel they know the answer to this question with quite an extraordinary degree of confidence. Misplaced confidence in my view.

Surely, political convictions aside, knowing which man will be better for America and the world in general is an impossible ask. A vote for either is either a brand preference, a bet on the future or an extremely shaky prediction about what their man is likely to achieve in office.

Because we all know that predicting the future of human affairs is generally a hopeless task. Most folk realise that events will largely dictate what Obama or Romney will do while in office. Unexpected events or expected events with unexpected impacts and ramifications – these will play the tune to which the President  dances.

It seems to me that Obama is a left-leaning Democrat and on the whole and in the long term, those on the left divert too much power into the hands of the state and their cronies, spend too much of the taxpayer’s money and promote too many wasteful projects.

It seems to me that Romney is a machine Republican and on the whole and in the long term, machine politicians divert too much power into the hands of the state and their cronies spend too much of the taxpayer’s money and promote too many wasteful projects.

If I was a US citizen, I’d vote Romney, but mainly on the principle of kicking the butt of whoever happens to be in power. Or maybe I'd toss a coin. I don’t really subscribe to the allure of taking sides or predicting the unpredictable.

I don’t believe either side has political principles either – they don’t count for anything in the modern world. There is no point swallowing the political principles of either left or right - or voting as they seem to dictate.

Moral principles? That’s another world - another planet.

Tuesday, 10 July 2012

Starvation looms


GreenWise business reports that mad people are to be put in charge of our food supplies. Another ramification of care in the community I suppose. 

The first step in a long-term plan to create a sustainable food supply chain for Britain was launched today with a ground-breaking study looking at how production and consumption could change in the future to meet competing demands of producing more food and improving the environment.

The Green Food Project is the first sustainable food initiative of its kind to bring together Government, farmers, manufacturers, retailers, caterers, environmentalists and scientists. Today it launched its first report to address Britain’s looming food crisis without degrading the natural environment.

Or is this just another consequence of the too many people meme? It's so hard to tell these days, but I think I'll stock up on tins. 

Thorium - peaks and troughs


Out of interest and relating to the previous post on thorium power, this graph uses Google's Ngram Viewer to plot the use of the word thorium.  

At one time it was used for gas mantles, which I assume accounts for the ragged peak from about 1900.

Next there is another peak of interest from just after World War II until about 1960. The unsuitability of thorium for nuclear weapons then led to a sharp decline. 

Maybe it will pick up again.

China and the god of thunder

Thorium (named after Thor, the Norse god of thunder) is a mildly radioactive metal which can be used as a fuel for nuclear reactors. It has some very enthusiastic proponents who think the liquid fluoride thorium reactor (acronym LFTR; spoken as lifter) is the energy source of the future. China seems to agree.

Even though the technology has been known for decades, its potential was never developed because other technologies are more suited to producing plutonium for nuclear weapons. Yet LFTR is said to have many attractions.

Thorium is far more abundant than uranium – at least three-fold.
Thorium does not need enrichment.
Thorium is only mildly radioactive and easy to handle.
LFTRs are small.
LFTRs are safe.
LFTR does not generate plutonium.
LFTR cannot be used to obtain material for nuclear weapons.
LFTR waste has a much shorter half-life than uranium-powered reactors.
LFTR can be used to destroy current stocks of plutonium.
LFTR is cheaper than traditional nuclear.
LFTR consumes all its thorium fuel.


Thorium consumes its own hazardous waste. It can even scavenge the plutonium left by uranium reactors, acting as an eco-cleaner. Kirk Sorensen, a former NASA rocket engineer, now chief nuclear technologist at Teledyne Brown Engineering, and closely watched Internet commentator and educator says,

“It’s the Big One, once you start looking more closely, it blows your mind away. You can run civilization on thorium for hundreds of thousands of years [*], and it’s essentially free. You don’t have to deal with uranium cartels.”

He’s right; thorium is so common that miners treat it as a nuisance, a radioactive by-product when they dig up rare earth metals. The U.S. and Australia are full of the stuff. So are the granite rocks of Cornwall in the UK. Some beaches in India are loaded with thorium. Not so much mining is needed: all thorium is potentially usable as fuel, compared to just 0.7% from uranium as much of the uranium has already decayed.

* To me this figure seems enthusiastic to put it mildly.

In October this year, the Twelfth Thorium Energy Conference (ThEC12) will be held in Shanghai. It is billed as the event of the year for everyone with an interest in the future of thorium energy and its many related fields.

Last month, smartplanet reported:-

The U.S. Department of Energy is quietly collaborating with China on an alternative nuclear power design known as a molten salt reactor that could run on thorium fuel rather than on more hazardous uranium, SmartPlanet understands.

In fact, while the EU bumbles around with technologies that don’t work, such as solar and wind power, while it goes all sniffy over shale gas, China seems to have latched onto the potential of LFTR.

If adopted on a large scale, LFTRs will probably be factory built for installation on site. A few large factories may well supply all global requirements. Where will those factories be? There is also R&D work to be done too, which means there are likely to be discoveries and developments to be patented.

So, safe, factory-built reactors using a fuel much more abundant that uranium with opportunities for developing patented technology. Is China serious about thorium? 

From Wenhui News (Google Chinese to English translation)

Thorium-based molten salt reactor, this sounds people Ruzhui the cloud professional term, may, after three or four decades, becoming one of the pillars of China's energy supply.

Yesterday, one of the strategic lead science and technology projects as initiated by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the first batch of "advanced nuclear fission energy - thorium-based molten salt reactor nuclear system" project was officially launched. Its scientific goal is about 20 years, developed a new generation nuclear energy systems and technologies have reached the level of the pilot and owns all intellectual property rights.

As the world's new generation of nuclear reactors is still in the research and development, China has independently developed the thorium-based molten salt reactor, will be possible to obtain all of the independent intellectual property rights. This makes China the lifeblood of the energy to firmly grasp in their own hands.

From China Daily:-

Experts estimate that China has nearly 300,000 tons of thorium reserves, which is enough for the nation to use for 300 years. Identified uranium will only supply the country for 95 years at the current annual consumption rate, according to the Uranium Red Book 2009.

This places Chinese thorium reserves on a par with Turkish reserves. So is that a compelling reason why Turkey may well be admitted to the EU? Always assuming EU bureaucrats finally catch up with the real world. But by then China may well have the thorium business sewn up.

Still – we have our windmills.