Planet Xdroop

March 19, 2010

Twitter Feed

xdroop: isn't sure he can face another day of HP/UX

xdroop: isn't sure he can face another day of HP/UX

March 19, 2010 12:27 PM

Shared Items from Google Reader

Home Energy – Greenyness (or cheapness)

A year and a half ago I went on a wall wart power measuring exercise. I concluded that going around unplugging wall warts (8 lbs CO2/yr) wasn’t going to save the planet. If you want to save the planet, you’ll have to do hard things, like hang your clothes out on the line (.3 tons CO2/yr), drive your car half as much (3 tons CO2/yr), or turn off your geeky home server (.3 ton CO2/yr).

For me, saving energy is nothing new. We grew up getting yelled at for leaving the fridge door open, we set our thermostat back before set-back thermostats were fashionable, and in winter we left the water in the bath tub until it had cooled so the heat from the tub water would warm the house instead of the drain (I ain’t paying to heat the $#*&$^ drain!). My dad super-insulated our house before the 1973 oil crisis. We weren’t saving energy to be green though, we were just cheap.

So how about backing up my perception of myself as a cheap  energy efficient citizen with some actual data? Hmmm… I just happen to have nearly thirty years of electric and gas bills. All I need to do is add them up and make some pretty charts.

Here goes.

Chart 1: Electricity consumption by my household, 1986-2009, in kilowatt-hours per year.
 image
I added a trend line to the Excel chart. I’m not sure what it means, but it looks cool, so I left it. Also - I didn’t have energy bills for half of 1996, so I’ve left that year out.

Electric energy use ranged from a high of 12,000kwh (1989) to a low of 3500kwh(2009). I’ll blame the ‘88-‘89 peak on air conditioning, electric hot water, and a household member who took really long hot showers with the air conditioning on. The dip in 1997 probably is a combination of a new house and no satellite receiver/computers/electronics running full time. I can’t think of what else might have caused low electric use around that time.

From 1998 to 2003 the increased load might be because I’ve had a server running 24/7 and I had a satellite receiver running most of the time (that thing was hot when it ran). In 2008 I turned off the receiver and in 2009 I switched the home server out for a lower power model. The 2008 decline might also be related to CFL’s, or it might be that we got used to being left in the dark. The difference between the years around 2003 and 2008-2009 is a couple thousand kilowatt-hours, or about a 200 watt continuous draw. That decline could easily be technology or light bulb related.

Electricity is only half of the home energy equation. We’ll need to consider heat too.

Chart 2: Therms per year, natural gas – 1986-2009 in therms per year. 
image
  A therm is 100,000 btu, or about 100 cubic feet of natural gas (methane). There’s a hole at 1996 (new house, no energy bills for half the year). Prior to 1996 I lived in an un-insulated house. It lost heat pretty easily, so I compensated with a 97% efficient gas furnace. It still used a lot of energy. In 1997/1998 I re-insulated parts of the new house. Since then it’s been nearly constant.

Natural gas use is mostly related to the weather, so therms per year alone doesn’t tell me much. I don’t know if I used more or less energy because of the weather or because of something I did or didn’t do. Fortunately there is a handy-dandy measurement called a ‘Heating Degree Day’ that is proportional to the daily average temperature. More HDD’s means colder weather. If I care about efficiency, then I need to compare coldness to energy use. Which brings us to…

Chart 3: Therms per Heating Degree Day, 1986-2009.
image 
Once again, there is a hole at 1996, and I’ve faked in a trend line using Excel’s trend function. The discontinuity at 1996 shows how much less efficient the old house was compared to the new house. I’m not sure what the minor variations are from 1999 on, other than we may have adjusted the thermostat or left the windows open.

All this matters, of course, because I’m cheap green, so the next obvious thing to do is to translate this to CO2 equivalents.

Chart 4: Carbon Dioxide emissions per year due to home energy use, 1986-2009.
image
I didn’t put a trend line on this chart, ‘cause Excel grays out that menu item on stacked bar charts & I didn’t feel like figuring out how to calculate one manually. The CO2 values assume 1.2lbs CO2 per kwh and 12lbs CO2 per therm. Of course if your region has lots of nuclear power or is willing to dam the Colorado River and suck out all its potential energy, you’ll have different carbon/kwh ratios. (No big deal really. If you’ve already sucked all the water out of the Colorado, you might as well have the energy too, it’s not like Mexico has any use for it).

So I know how much carbon I’m releasing to energize my house. Now what?

Carbon offsets can be purchased at anywhere from $2.75 to $99 per ton. The Nature Conservancy sells offsets for $20/ton, but their offsets (tree planting) take up to 70 years to realize. I pollute today, I pay today, the pollution accumulates and warms the planet, and 70 years from now when the trees grow up my offsets get realized? Sounds like to little, to late. I can’t image falling for that scam plan.

Reducing usage sounds like a better idea.

Speaking of Heating Degree Days, the University of Minnesota happens to  have records that go back a hundred-odd years, from 1891-present.

Chart 5: Heating Degree Days, Minneapolis MN, 1891-2008
image
Because HDD’s are a measure of coldness, less HDD’s indicates warmer weather. To make it more dramatic I skewed the visual effect by shaving off the bottom of the chart. I suspect that climatologists would use something fancier than a linear trend line to indicate long term temperature change, but excel doesn’t have a hockey stick trend line, so linear will have to do.

And, because charts are cheap:

Chart 6: Cooling Degree Days, Minneapolis MN, 1891-2009
image
I’ll throw in Cooling Degree Days too. In a warm climate, electricity use per cooling degree day would be an interesting indicator of the efficiency of an air conditioner and home insulation. I’m not in a warm climate, so it’s not an interesting number for me.

I’m pretty sure that households could make a significant impact on energy use by paying attention to home servers, gaming consoles, and other home technologies.

---

by Michael Janke at March 19, 2010 02:45 AM

Senators Blog

Thursday Wasted

No, really, why did I give my Thursday night to watch that?

It didn't start out bad, really. The predictably terrible officiating -- the first penalty to Ottawa for tripping really should have been accompanied by one to Atlanta for diving -- and the predictable error leading to the opening Atlanta goal, those I can live with. That's part of being a Senators fan. But Ottawa spent a good deal of time in the offensive zone applying good pressure and getting good chances. "Keep trying boys," I told the TV, "they'll come."

But then the officials really got going. Three of the first seven penalties assigned to Ottawa were either iffy or flat out not penalties. At one point, we were five-to-one behind in terms of power plays. That's not clean play, that's poor officiating. And Sutton's two minutes for "elbowing" on a perfectly clean and legal check -- not to the head, not from behind, not away from the play -- THAT was PURE GARBAGE. Even someone like ME, who isn't keen on all the hitting and such that goes on, can see THAT.

Let's be fair. Neil's goal in the second should have been called back due to Kelly's presence in the crease. But with this kind of officiating, who the hell knows what you are going to get.

Through the end of two the Senators played well, getting most of the shots and the vast majority of the quality chances. And then the third started. The Senators just crumbled and gave up stupid goals due to poor coverage or running around in their own end. Again. Leaving Elliot hanging out there on his own, going the wrong way on the play because nobody's covering the guy sliding through the slot. Again.

Spezza getting that break. And. Not. Burying. It. Again. Dammit.

I don't blame Elliot for this. You can't, really. But for a(n allegedly) playoff-bound team, we shouldn't be talking about these kinds of miscues and collapses and all around bad hockey with the frequency that we are.

Saturday is an afternoon game, but fortunately for me I have something else scheduled so will be unable to watch it.

This isn't fun any more. I want my evening back.

by David (noreply@blogger.com) at March 19, 2010 12:24 AM

March 18, 2010

Twitter Feed

xdroop: @PsychoI3oy your VAX doesn't suck enough: http://tinyurl.com/y9qylgy

xdroop: @PsychoI3oy your VAX doesn't suck enough: http://tinyurl.com/y9qylgy

March 18, 2010 05:33 PM

xdroop: Password Security #Fail -- every two weeks I get locked out of this website and can't think of a new password. Every two weeks.

xdroop: Password Security #Fail -- every two weeks I get locked out of this website and can't think of a new password. Every two weeks.

March 18, 2010 05:27 PM

xdroop: @Flakeloaf That stuff's so old it predated the rocks we bang together for AIX.

xdroop: @Flakeloaf That stuff's so old it predated the rocks we bang together for AIX.

March 18, 2010 02:49 PM

xdroop: Wow -- first HP/UX, now I'm dealing with AIX for the first time in a decade. Who's going to call wanting Compaq Digital Unix installed?

xdroop: Wow -- first HP/UX, now I'm dealing with AIX for the first time in a decade. Who's going to call wanting Compaq Digital Unix installed?

March 18, 2010 02:40 PM

Del.Icio.Us Feed

March 17, 2010

Twitter Feed

xdroop: Survived Monday. Wait, today is Wednesday.

xdroop: Survived Monday. Wait, today is Wednesday.

March 17, 2010 10:24 PM

Senators Blog

Back To Reality

Well, that was awful, wasn't it? Hopefully this kick in the nuts will clear the dreams of Stanley Cup glory from anyone's eyes. It's over, ok? Just... over.

What is there to say? One of the worst teams in hockey comes to town against allegedly one of the better ones and we can't beat them. Bluntly the Leafs were just plain better, and the bounces didn't go Ottawa's way. Again. Several good chances; several failures to seal the deal.

At least Carkner kept his brains enough to avoid getting pounded again. I don't understand why he does it -- Ottawa loses every time.

And it is pathetic that the rink sounded more like Maple Leaf Gardens than the home of the Ottawa Senators. Not that the Senators did much worth cheering for tonight, but the crowd was definitely behind Toronto.

by David (noreply@blogger.com) at March 17, 2010 12:00 AM

March 16, 2010

Shared Items from Google Reader

FACEBOOK

demotivational posters

FACEBOOK
I just don’t understand it.
Submitted by: dunno source via deMotivational Builder

MORE FACEBOOK FAILS @ FAILBOOKING.


by Cheezburger Network at March 16, 2010 10:00 PM

Ferrari Blog

An Aerodynamicist's solution: Reduce Mechanical Grip

James Allen has an article where aerodynamicist Frank Dernie makes the case for reducing mechanical grip, not aerodynamic grip.

His view of the problem:
[...] that the “overtaking problem in F1″ is not the aero, but the mechanical grip from the tyres and the lack of mistakes made by drivers on gearshifts due to semi automatic gearboxes.
His ideas as a solution:
  • Manual gearboxes. If you miss a change, the car behind gets a chance.
  • Rock-hard, spec, no-change tires. If the tire is required to do a full race distance, it will have to be rock hard. It won't degrade as much, but since it has to last it won't be as grippy either. This has a knock-on effect that since the tires are not degrading, fewer marbles are getting created and there's less rubber bedded in to the racing line. Both effects reduce the penalty for driving off-line.
  • Less effective brakes. Longer braking zones give drivers more chances to get in front and more chances to make mistakes.
  • Single lap qualifying (my hero!). Drivers get one chance to set a qualifying time. Naturally, some will make mistakes, meaning you'll have "faster" cars mixed in with "slower" cars, a situation which can lead to passing opportunities.
Interesting ideas.

by David (noreply@blogger.com) at March 16, 2010 07:58 PM

Twitter Feed

xdroop: 'Useless laws weaken necessary laws.' -- Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu

xdroop: 'Useless laws weaken necessary laws.' -- Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu

March 16, 2010 03:01 PM

xdroop: and both sons have strep throat. Boo.

xdroop: and both sons have strep throat. Boo.

March 16, 2010 02:28 AM

March 15, 2010

Twitter Feed

xdroop: survived another weekend of being sick. Tomorrow I get to decide if I go to work or fall down dead... assuming I can find a difference.

xdroop: survived another weekend of being sick. Tomorrow I get to decide if I go to work or fall down dead... assuming I can find a difference.

March 15, 2010 01:27 AM

March 14, 2010

Ferrari Blog

Desert Racing Extra Dry

Back in August of last year I said I was worried about the racing in 2010. The fact of the matter is that the cars just are not built to follow each other closely enough to effect passes -- witness Hamilton's efforts to pass Rosberg, despite having a car capable of going a half- to a full second faster per lap than the Mercedes, he couldn't get on terms to make the pass and had to do the business in the pits. The combination of the double-diffuser development with the intricate changes made to the front wings on the cars mean the following car just isn't as efficient as the car in front is.

I also noticed that there seemed to be a lot more flip-ups and aerodynamic "things" hanging on the cars than there were last year.

Even the "extra" action brought on by the new teams retiring at an increased rate did little to improve the show, although Senna's HRT car made it almost half way through the event, which is a decent enough amount for what was effectively its third day of running.

And while Ferrari had an almost perfect weekend -- missing out only on the pole position as an accomplishment -- one is left to wonder if their slow reeling in of Vettel was due to Ferrari pace or Red Bull exhaust issues slowly manifesting themselves.

I also have to comment on the graphics shown through the event -- a lot of the time it was difficult for me to understand what they were trying to tell me. I guess putting everything in stylishly slanted boxes is the coming thing.

One race is not enough to condemn an entire season, even if there are rumors about hastily amending the rules to make a second pit stop mandatory. Artificially trying to manufacturer more "show" is always going to result in silliness.

One just hopes that the FIA resists the urge to continue the silliness that was a hallmark of the Mosley years.

by David (noreply@blogger.com) at March 14, 2010 09:55 PM

March 12, 2010

Twitter Feed

xdroop: is steaming slightly. Oh wait, thats the fever. Never mind then. Look: rabbits!

xdroop: is steaming slightly. Oh wait, thats the fever. Never mind then. Look: rabbits!

March 12, 2010 10:28 PM

xdroop: Just got a login prompt. But I am out of time for today.

xdroop: Just got a login prompt. But I am out of time for today.

March 12, 2010 07:22 PM

xdroop: 2 hours in: first boot! Now the software configuration stage. Starting to regret not bringing a lunch.

xdroop: 2 hours in: first boot! Now the software configuration stage. Starting to regret not bringing a lunch.

March 12, 2010 06:45 PM

Shared Items from Google Reader

rands: The phrase “I don’t have time for” should never be said: http://j.mp/cSEOGM

rands: The phrase “I don’t have time for” should never be said: http://j.mp/cSEOGM

by (author unknown) at March 12, 2010 06:13 PM

Twitter Feed

xdroop: 90 minutes later, it is time to install disk 2!

xdroop: 90 minutes later, it is time to install disk 2!

March 12, 2010 06:09 PM

xdroop: is watching a HP/UX 11iv23 install. This is so slow it brings back bad memories. Welcome to 1996! Faster please!

xdroop: is watching a HP/UX 11iv23 install. This is so slow it brings back bad memories. Welcome to 1996! Faster please!

March 12, 2010 05:31 PM