Category Archives: Technology

The Truth about EV

Posted on by 0 comment

Got this from my buddy Mark Reed… an interesting take on Electric Cars.
“As an engineer I love the electric vehicle technology However, I have been troubled for a longtime by the fact that the electrical energy to keep the batteries charged has to come from the grid, and that means more power generation and a huge increase in the distribution infrastructure. Whether generated from coal, gas, oil, wind or sun, installed generation capacity is limited.
A friend sent me the following that says it very well. You should all take a look at this short article.
IF ELECTRIC CARS DO NOT USE GASOLINE, THEY WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN PAYING A GASOLINE TAX ON EVERY GALLON THAT IS SOLD FOR AUTOMOBILES, WHICH WAS ENACTED SOME YEARS AGO TO HELP TO MAINTAIN OUR ROADS AND BRIDGES. THEY WILL USE THE ROADS, BUT WILL NOT PAY FOR THEIR MAINTENANCE!
In case you were thinking of buying hybrid or an electric car…
Ever since the advent of electric cars, the REAL cost per mile of those things has never been discussed. All you ever heard was the mpg in terms of gasoline, with nary a mention of the cost of electricity to run it. This is the first article I’ve ever seen and it tells the story pretty much as I expected it to.
Electricity has to be one of the least efficient ways to power things, yet they’re being shoved down our throats. Glad somebody finally put engineering and math to paper.
At a neighborhood BBQ I was talking to a neighbor, a BC Hydro Executive. I asked him how that renewable thing was doing. He laughed, then got serious.
If you really intend to adopt electric vehicles, he pointed out, you had to face certain realities. For example, a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service. The average house is equipped with 100 amp service. On our small street (approximately 25 homes), the electrical infrastructure would be unable to carry more than three houses with a single Tesla each. For even half the homes to have electric vehicles, the system would be wildly over-loaded.
This is the elephant in the room with electric vehicles. Our residential infrastructure cannot bear the load. So, as our genius elected officials promote this nonsense, not only are we being urged to buy these things and replace our reliable, cheap generating systems with expensive new windmills and solar cells, but we will also have to renovate our entire delivery system! This later “investment” will not be revealed until we’re so far down this dead end road that it will be presented with an ‘OOPS…!’ and a shrug.
If you want to argue with a green person over cars that are eco-friendly, just read the following. Note: If you ARE a green person, read it anyway. It’s enlightening.
Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors and he writes, “For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.” Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.
It will take you 4.5 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.
According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery. The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned, so I looked up what I pay for electricity.
I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery. $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery. Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 Mpg = $0.10 per mile.
The gasoline powered car costs about $25,000 while the Volt costs $46,000 plus. So the Canadian Government wants loyal Canadians not to do the math, but simply pay twice as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country.
WAKE UP NORTH AMERICA!!!!!!!

copied and pasted
~author unknown

The Stink About Human Poop As Fertilizer

Posted on by 0 comment

Nana Mayfield
March 10 at 4:32 PM ·
Heads up, Okies. Did you know the fruits & veggies grown in Oklahoma could be some of the produce grown in people poop? Yeah, human biowaste is a big thing now.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but.. wasn’t sanitation and running water what significantly reduced disease?
Now, they’re growing your food in it. “Makes total sense to me,” (said no sane person, ever)
““
The Stink About Human Poop As Fertilizer
Are we endangering our health by putting human poop on our farms?
Some waste treatment plants burn it or ship it to landfills, which aren’t the most economically or environmentally friendly solutions. But not all poop ends its life by fire or burial. Some human waste ends up in forests and farm fields as the treated, human-feces-based fertilizer known as biosolids.
Find the idea of growing tomatoes with human excrement repulsive? It’s a common response, one that Washington State University soil scientist Craig Cooger finds strange. “We’re not as grossed out by animal manure as we are by human poop,” he explains. “Although biosolids are a long way removed from the poop, nonetheless there’s that perception issue there.”�
“Humans have been repurposing their feces for thousands of years – some more safely than others.”
But skepticism about biosolids comes from more than just our hesitance to talk about our poop – some organizations, like the Sierra Club, worry that using human excrement as fertilizer is significantly riskier than using animal manure. Almost 50 percent of biosolids created in the United States are applied to land, with the majority being used in agriculture. Are we endangering our health by putting human poop on our farms?
Humans have been repurposing their feces for thousands of years – some more safely than others. Often known by its euphemistic name “night soil,” the most famous example of raw human waste application might be China, where human excrement was used for centuries in an attempt to close the nutrient cycle in their fields, something that agricultural scientist F.H. King cited in the early 20th century as the reason behind China’s seemingly perennial fertility. While night soil might have helped China’s land retain crucial nutrients, it didn’t win any awards for public health. Because the night soil was often untreated, pathogens could easily be transferred to both humans and food (so eating raw vegetation was seriously frowned upon).
Biosolids used in the United States aren’t night soil. Regulated by the EPA and federal codes, treatment plants are required to treat the waste at least once before it can be applied to any land. After you flush your waste is carried along with urine, rainwater and household water to a local sewage treatment plant. From there, bacteria digest the sludge (the solid waste before treatment, a process that accomplishes two things: it makes the sludge less biologically active (meaning it stinks less) and it reduces the amount of pathogens in the biosolid. Biosolids treated once are called Class B biosolids, and can be used with various restrictions, because while the pathogen levels are reduced by a single treatment, they’re not completely gone. That requires a second treatment – often using high temperatures – and turns the biosolids into Class A biosolids, which have no detectable pathogens and can be used anywhere.
And yet, even with EPA regulations and treatment processes in place, people still worry about biosolids. Groups like the Sierra Club, the Center for Food Safety and the Organic Consumers Association worry that outdated regulations and guidelines based on antiquated science make biosolids a threat to public health. “Urban sludges are a highly complex, unpredictable biologically active mixture of organic material and human pathogens, some of which are resistant to antibiotics or cannot be destroyed through composting sludge can contain thousands of industrial chemicals, including dozens of carcinogens, hormone disrupting chemicals, toxic metals, dioxins, radionuclides and other persistent bioaccumulative poisons,” warns the Sierra Club. In 2009, an EPA survey of biosolids produced by 74 randomly selected treatment plants found traces of pharmaceuticals, steroids, flame retardants and chemicals in their samples, though the agency states that “it is not appropriate to speculate on the significance of the results until a proper evaluation has been completed and reviewed.”�
“They find it fascinating that we can take human waste and find a new use for it.”�
But biosolid proponents, and soil experts like Cooger, stress that with materials like pharmaceuticals or heavy metals, the dose makes the poison. “You’re going to find higher levels of metals in biosolids than you will in manure, but the levels are still so low, and the chemistry of interactions between biosolids and soil is such that availability to plants is very low,” he explains. “Given the metal levels in biosolids, we don’t see problems in the food chain or in the environment.” And with pharmaceuticals or steroids, Cooger is quick to note that many animals receive heavy doses of both – which would certainly find their way into animal manure, often in larger concentrations than biosolids. In a 2002 National Academy of Sciences study looking at the regulation of biosolids and land application (known as Federal Part 503), the Academy concluded, “There is no documented scientific evidence that the Part 503 rule has failed to protect human health.”�
Public opinion, Cooger notes, is mixed when it comes to biosolids – but those that have experience with it tend to be more accepting than those that don’t. Jennifer Rusch, a media relations officer for Kansas City, MO, agrees. The city has sponsored a farm for years that takes biosolids from treatment plants around the city and uses it for fertilizer. “Within the city, we’ve actually had a lot of support from the mayor and city council and our customers,” she says. “They find it fascinating that we can take human waste and find a new use for it.”

copied and pasted
~ author unknown

https://modernfarmer.com/…/07/stink-human-poop-fertilizer/

Technology: not for everyone

Posted on by 0 comment

author unkown


“I spent an hour in the bank with my dad, as he had to transfer some money. I couldn’t resist myself and asked…

”Dad, why don’t we activate your internet banking?”
”Why would I do that?” He asked…
”Well, then you wont have to spend an hour here for things like transfer.
You can even do your shopping online. Everything will be so easy!”
I was so excited about initiating him into the world of Net banking.
He asked ”If I do that, I wont have to step out of the house?
”Yes, yes”! I said. I told him how even grocery can be delivered at door now and how amazon delivers everything!
His answer left me tongue-tied.
He said ”Since I entered this bank today, I have met four of my friends, I have chatted a while with the staff who know me very well by now.
You know I am alone…this is the company that I need. I like to get ready and come to the bank. I have enough time, it is the physical touch that I crave.
Two years back I got sick, The store owner from whom I buy fruits, came to see me and sat by my bedside and cried.
When your Mom fell down few days back while on her morning walk. Our local grocer saw her and immediately got his car to rush her home as he knows where I live.
Would I have that ‘human’ touch if everything became online?
Why would I want everything delivered to me and force me to interact with just my computer?
I like to know the person that I’m dealing with and not just the ‘seller’. It creates bonds of Relationships.
Does Amazon deliver all this as well?”’
Technology isn’t life..
Spend time with people .. Not with devices.”
Category: Blog, economics, Technology

A Deep Dive on End-to-End Encryption: How Do Public Key Encryption Systems Work? | Surveillance Self-Defense

Posted on by

In Review: Using Public Key Cryptography

Let’s review. Public key cryptography lets you encrypt and send messages safely to anyone whose public key you know.

If others know your public key:

  • They can send you secret messages that only you can decode using your matching private key and,
  • You can sign your messages with your private key so that the recipients know the messages could only have come from you.

And if you know someone else’s public key:

  • You can decode a message signed by them and know that it only came from them.

It should be clear by now that public key cryptography becomes more useful when more people know your public key. The public key is shareable, in that it’s a file that you can treat like an address in a phone book: it’s public, people know to find you there, you can share it widely, and people know to encrypt messages to you there. You can share your public key with anyone who wants to communicate with you; it doesn’t matter who sees it.

The public key comes paired with a file called a private key. You can think of the private key like an actual key that you have to protect and keep safe. Your private key is used to encrypt and decrypt messages.

Source: A Deep Dive on End-to-End Encryption: How Do Public Key Encryption Systems Work? | Surveillance Self-Defense

Category: People, Technology | Tags: ,