These still aren't great prices, compared to five years ago, but they aren't quite as silly as I was seeing a few months ago.
Jumat, 12 Juli 2013
Is The Ammunition Insanity Finally Coming To An End?
Cheaper Than Dirt has 124 grain 9mm FMJ (50 rounds per box) in stock for $19.19.
Last Night's Treadmill Experience
It seems that the more exercise I get on the treadmill, the less serious the breathlessness symptoms become. I spent 65 minutes on the treadmill last night, and the breathlessness problem was of a shorter interval at each speed than the previous night. I ended up at 3.1 mph, with no real problem.
I am really beginning to wonder if whatever this problem is can be attributed to the prolonged high blood pressure spike caused by the kidney stone, surgery, and recovery. Perhaps I can exercise my way back to health.
I am really beginning to wonder if whatever this problem is can be attributed to the prolonged high blood pressure spike caused by the kidney stone, surgery, and recovery. Perhaps I can exercise my way back to health.
Solar Power Calculator
A reader pointed me to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory PVWATTS 2 calculator, which uses your local weather information to calculate likely power output, including adjusting from nominal DC output to AC (because of inverter losses). I ran the data for a nominal 1 KW system (four of those Westinghouse panels), using the default inverter efficiency, and our current 7.8 cents/KW-h. I also assumed a fixed tilt array. (Changing the angle four times a year helps, but not dramatically.) I am not assuming that I will get my proprietary improvements working.
"Station Identification"
"City:","Boise"
"State:","Idaho"
"Lat (deg N):", 43.57
"Long (deg W):", 116.22
"Elev (m): ", 874
"PV System Specifications"
"DC Rating:"," 4.0 kW"
"DC to AC Derate Factor:"," 0.770"
"AC Rating:"," 3.1 kW"
"Array Type: Fixed Tilt"
"Array Tilt:"," 43.6"
"Array Azimuth:","180.0"
"Energy Specifications"
"Cost of Electricity:"," 7.8 cents/kWh"
"Results"
"Month", "Solar Radiation (kWh/m^2/day)", "AC Energy (kWh)", "Energy Value ($)"
1, 2.88, 276, 21.53
2, 4.16, 359, 28.00
3, 4.93, 463, 36.11
4, 5.77, 507, 39.55
5, 6.12, 542, 42.28
6, 6.47, 541, 42.20
7, 7.05, 582, 45.40
8, 6.93, 587, 45.79
9, 6.40, 536, 41.81
10, 5.30, 481, 37.52
11, 3.48, 313, 24.41
12, 2.80, 272, 21.22
"Year", 5.20, 5459, 425.80
I should point out that the 7.8 cents is for the 0-800 KW-h consumption rate -- Idaho Power actually charges us more than that above 800 KW-h per month. Sixteen of those panels would cost $9600 plus shipping; I am going to have to pay something to my electrician to put in a 20 amp breaker to connect this to the main bus. I will also have to spend some money and time build a support system to position these on the hillside that allows me to change angle four times a year. Still, it is hard to imagine that this plus shipping will exceed $600. A $10,000 investment thus takes 23 years to pay for itself, ignoring rising electricity prices and leaving out the 30% tax credit from the federal income tax return and the relatively trivial tax deductions on the state income tax return. It also does not include the inevitable drop in output over the life of the panels.
This is beginning to make less and less sense.
UPDATE: Of course, if the cardiologist calls me back next week and says that I need an angioplasty, all of this will need to be delayed.
UPDATE 2: This isn't California. Idaho Power's net metering program is somewhat limited:
UPDATE 3: Details on Idaho's alternative energy tax incentives are here. You are allowed to deduct 40% of the purchase price of the system in the first year from your income taxes, and 20% in the following three years. Idahoans who can afford to consider alternative energy are going to be in the 8% marginal state income tax bracket, so a $3000 investment means a $1200 reduction in your taxable income, or about a $96 tax reduction the first year, and $48 tax reduction for the next three years. The website previously linked isn't very clear on how the $5000 maximum incentive per year, $20,000 maximum incentive total, works; Idaho Code 63-3022C gives the details. It appears that you are not allowed to take more than $5000 of deduction in any year. The Idaho Code says nothing about a $20,000 maximum incentive.
If you are a greenie, Idaho law is a sign of what a backward, primitive, stingy state we are. If you are anyone else, they are a sign that Idaho legislators like the idea of alternative energy, but didn't drink the green Kool-Aid. The incentives are so tiny that they are essentially a sop thrown to greenies to make them think that Idaho cares about Mother Earth.
"Station Identification"
"City:","Boise"
"State:","Idaho"
"Lat (deg N):", 43.57
"Long (deg W):", 116.22
"Elev (m): ", 874
"PV System Specifications"
"DC Rating:"," 4.0 kW"
"DC to AC Derate Factor:"," 0.770"
"AC Rating:"," 3.1 kW"
"Array Type: Fixed Tilt"
"Array Tilt:"," 43.6"
"Array Azimuth:","180.0"
"Energy Specifications"
"Cost of Electricity:"," 7.8 cents/kWh"
"Results"
"Month", "Solar Radiation (kWh/m^2/day)", "AC Energy (kWh)", "Energy Value ($)"
1, 2.88, 276, 21.53
2, 4.16, 359, 28.00
3, 4.93, 463, 36.11
4, 5.77, 507, 39.55
5, 6.12, 542, 42.28
6, 6.47, 541, 42.20
7, 7.05, 582, 45.40
8, 6.93, 587, 45.79
9, 6.40, 536, 41.81
10, 5.30, 481, 37.52
11, 3.48, 313, 24.41
12, 2.80, 272, 21.22
"Year", 5.20, 5459, 425.80
I should point out that the 7.8 cents is for the 0-800 KW-h consumption rate -- Idaho Power actually charges us more than that above 800 KW-h per month. Sixteen of those panels would cost $9600 plus shipping; I am going to have to pay something to my electrician to put in a 20 amp breaker to connect this to the main bus. I will also have to spend some money and time build a support system to position these on the hillside that allows me to change angle four times a year. Still, it is hard to imagine that this plus shipping will exceed $600. A $10,000 investment thus takes 23 years to pay for itself, ignoring rising electricity prices and leaving out the 30% tax credit from the federal income tax return and the relatively trivial tax deductions on the state income tax return. It also does not include the inevitable drop in output over the life of the panels.
This is beginning to make less and less sense.
UPDATE: Of course, if the cardiologist calls me back next week and says that I need an angioplasty, all of this will need to be delayed.
UPDATE 2: This isn't California. Idaho Power's net metering program is somewhat limited:
Is there a limit to the size of generation from the customer?I am guessing that they mean 25 KW-h per month. Not a problem; I can't imagine investing that much capital in solar panels.
Yes. For residential and small commercial customers, generation is limited to 25 kilowatts of nameplate generation or less.
Is there a limit to how many Idaho Power customers can participate in Net Metering?I have no idea if they are at limit yet; I've put in a call to their office to find out. Worst comes to worst, we skip net metering and just settle for wasting the extra energy. Perhaps this would encourage not putting in more panels than I would likely use at any given moment. Or it might make sense to look at using excess power to charge batteries for use after dark.
Yes. At this time Idaho Power limits the total amount of customer-owned generation to 2.9 MW. The actual number of systems will vary depending on the size of the individual installations.
UPDATE 3: Details on Idaho's alternative energy tax incentives are here. You are allowed to deduct 40% of the purchase price of the system in the first year from your income taxes, and 20% in the following three years. Idahoans who can afford to consider alternative energy are going to be in the 8% marginal state income tax bracket, so a $3000 investment means a $1200 reduction in your taxable income, or about a $96 tax reduction the first year, and $48 tax reduction for the next three years. The website previously linked isn't very clear on how the $5000 maximum incentive per year, $20,000 maximum incentive total, works; Idaho Code 63-3022C gives the details. It appears that you are not allowed to take more than $5000 of deduction in any year. The Idaho Code says nothing about a $20,000 maximum incentive.
If you are a greenie, Idaho law is a sign of what a backward, primitive, stingy state we are. If you are anyone else, they are a sign that Idaho legislators like the idea of alternative energy, but didn't drink the green Kool-Aid. The incentives are so tiny that they are essentially a sop thrown to greenies to make them think that Idaho cares about Mother Earth.
Kamis, 11 Juli 2013
More Smart Diplomacy From the Obama Administration
It's behind a paywall, but this article in the July 11, 2013 Foreign Policy explains that Obama appointed an ambassador that is generating considerable ill-will towards the U.S.:
If confirmed, Brewster will be the first openly gay ambassador to the country, a prospect that is not going over well with some segments of this conservative Christian country of 9 million people. Local reports indicate that church leaders are pressuring the government to reject
Brewster's nomination and calling on the faithful to dress in black on Monday in solidarity against him.
Praise Christian Church Pastor Sauford Medrano is quoted in Diario Libre as saying that Brewster could cause "the U.S. promotion of gender beliefs in the country." That supposedly violates a general education law in the country that "all the Dominican education system is based on Christian principles."There are plenty of countries where a gay ambassador would be welcomed with open arms -- pretty much all of post-Christian Europe. Why go out of your way to upset and offend before the ambassador even hits the ground? This isn't smart; it's stupid. And yes, it is quite equivalent to sending a black ambassador to apartheid era South Africa. It may make the U.S. feel good, but it isn't a way to persuade another country to do what we want.
Echocardiogram Today
It was really fascinating. I've seen ultrasounds done, but on body parts that don't move (like gall bladders). This is the first time that I have seen one being done on a part in motion. The resolution isn't spectacularly high, limited, I would assume, by the frequency that they are using, but there is still enough detail to see valves opening and closing, and Doppler shifting enables the device to color blood flowing one direction blue and the other direction red. The technician was also measuring chamber volume minima and maxima.
I could see my mitral valve, and it looks like it was closing and opening properly. I could see my aortal valve, although it didn't look like it was completely closing. (The cardiologist had indicated Tuesday that he wasn't sure if the squeak was mitral valve or aortal valve.)
The technician, of course, could not tell me anything. But I did ask her when I would hear back from the doctor, hours or days? "Early next week."
"If you saw something really serious, would it be early next week before I heard from him?"
"No, it would be hours."
I guess that I am not too worried. The other interesting sign is that while the breathlessness that was bothering after the kidney stone surgery is still present, it seems to be declining. On Sunday, I was spent 80 minutes on the treadmill, starting at 2.0 mph, and working my up to 2.7 mph. At each level, I was breathless for a few minutes... then it went away. Last night, I treadmilled for 80 minutes, starting at 2.0 mph, but getting up to 3.0 mph by the end. Again, I had some breathing problems at each speed, but they did not last very long.
High blood pressure can be a cause of chronic aortic valve regurgitation. While I have struggled with high blood pressure in the past, it was not a recent problem until I ended up in the emergency room with the kidney stone. I find myself wondering if the high blood pressure brought on by the pain and anxiety might have done some damage -- and the exercise since then is helping.
I could see my mitral valve, and it looks like it was closing and opening properly. I could see my aortal valve, although it didn't look like it was completely closing. (The cardiologist had indicated Tuesday that he wasn't sure if the squeak was mitral valve or aortal valve.)
The technician, of course, could not tell me anything. But I did ask her when I would hear back from the doctor, hours or days? "Early next week."
"If you saw something really serious, would it be early next week before I heard from him?"
"No, it would be hours."
I guess that I am not too worried. The other interesting sign is that while the breathlessness that was bothering after the kidney stone surgery is still present, it seems to be declining. On Sunday, I was spent 80 minutes on the treadmill, starting at 2.0 mph, and working my up to 2.7 mph. At each level, I was breathless for a few minutes... then it went away. Last night, I treadmilled for 80 minutes, starting at 2.0 mph, but getting up to 3.0 mph by the end. Again, I had some breathing problems at each speed, but they did not last very long.
High blood pressure can be a cause of chronic aortic valve regurgitation. While I have struggled with high blood pressure in the past, it was not a recent problem until I ended up in the emergency room with the kidney stone. I find myself wondering if the high blood pressure brought on by the pain and anxiety might have done some damage -- and the exercise since then is helping.
Throws Up Hands in Disgust
Omega-3 fatty acids are supposed to reduce your risk of heart disease, right? My cardiologist agrees, so I started taking one of these fish oil supplements. (After a traumatic experience with a fish as a small child, I have a hard time eating fish that I can recognize as fish.) But this article from July 10, 2013 NBC News reports that a recent survey finds that high doses of omega-3 fatty acids increases the risk of prostate cancer.
But a startling study shows men who have the highest levels of these compounds – the kinds found in fish but not in vegetable sources -- have a higher risk of prostate cancer. Men with the very highest levels had a 71 percent higher risk of high-grade prostate cancer – the kind most likely to spread and kill, they report in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
It might be a sign that popping a pill is not only possibly a waste of money – it might be downright dangerous. And eating fish too often might be, also.
“These fish oil supplements in which some men getting mega, mega doses…in our opinion that is probably a little bit dangerous,” said Theodore Brasky of Ohio State University Medical Center, who worked on the study with a team from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.Even worse, the article goes on to report that even the supposed benefits for heart disease may turn out to be overrated:
But the researchers point out that recent studies have shown taking extra omega-3 has little effect on heart disease – including a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine in May.That article is pretty interesting -- it describes a study where people at high risk for heart disease, but who were being aggressively treated:
They had not suffered a heart attack but were at high risk of having one because of diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, smoking, obesity or other conditions. Most already were taking cholesterol-lowering statins, aspirin and other medicines to lower their chances of heart problems.And yet the fish oil supplements were no more effective than placebos in reducing hospitalization for heart disease. And fish oil supplement makers paid for this study. (I bet they wish that they hadn't.) What is fascinating to me is that the article quotes an expert who essentially argues that people who eat high fish diets are probably more focused on good health anyway, and that supplements aren't effective alternatives to healthy eating:
"People who choose to eat more fish are more likely to eat heart healthier diets and engage in more physical activity," and studies testing the benefit of supplements may not be able to completely adjust for differences like these, said Alice Lichtenstein, director of the cardiovascular nutrition lab at Tufts University in Boston.I have a brother-in-law who is skinny, backpacks, bicycles, eats a diet that seems positively hippie compared to me -- and just had surgery for prostate cancer, which appeared quite unexpectedly in his late 50s. I have read that people who are skinny are more prone to cancers, and those who are overweight are more prone to heart disease. Perhaps all we are doing is picking different poisons?
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)