Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Mr Bean actor blamed for slow electric car sales
12 views
Skip to first unread message
Wilson
Feb 7, 2024, 12:54:31 PM2/7/24
to
The Mr Bean actor was name-checked in the House of Lords on Tuesday
during its environment and climate change committee meeting.
Thinktank Green Alliance gave its views on the main obstacles the
government faces in its bid to phase out petrol and diesel cars before
2035, and said a comment piece by the Johnny English star published in
June 2023 was damaging to the cause.
The pressure group told peers in a letter that was shared: "One of the
most damaging articles was a comment piece written by Rowan Atkinson in
The Guardian which has been roundly debunked.
"Unfortunately, fact checks never reach the same breadth of audience as
the original false claim, emphasising the need to ensure high editorial
standards around the net zero transition."
The 69-year-old actor's piece was headlined: "I love electric vehicles -
and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped."
Atkinson wrote that EVs were "a bit soulless" and criticised the use of
their lithium-ion batteries.
He suggested solutions like drivers keeping the same car for longer
periods of time and increased use of synthetic fuel would negate the
need for EVs, saying: "Increasingly, I'm feeling that our honeymoon with
electric cars is coming to an end, and that's no bad thing."
The actor, who described himself as a "car person" having got a degree
in electrical and electronic engineering, said he advised friends to
"hold fire for now" on EVs unless they have an old diesel vehicle.
The Guardian published a response the following week from Simon Evans,
deputy editor and senior policy editor of climate news site Carbon
Brief, which looked to debunk Atkinson's claims.
Mr Evans wrote: "Atkinson's biggest mistake is his failure to recognise
that electric vehicles already offer significant global environmental
benefits, compared with combustion-engine cars."
Atkinson's views were used to make a wider point about "misleading"
reports stunting EV sales.
Other challenges highlighted during the committee meeting included
insufficient numbers of charging points, higher prices on EVs and "a
lack of clear and consistent messaging from the government".
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/mr-bean-actor-blamed-for-slow-electric-car-sales/ar-BB1hUOJK
Yes, it's all Mr. Bean's fault. Thank the gods for the fact checkers,
otherwise we might be mislead by the obviously bogus ideas that EVs cost
too much to buy and to replace their batteries when they inevitably go
bad, and their lack of range when temperatures drop below freezing.
during its environment and climate change committee meeting.
Thinktank Green Alliance gave its views on the main obstacles the
government faces in its bid to phase out petrol and diesel cars before
2035, and said a comment piece by the Johnny English star published in
June 2023 was damaging to the cause.
The pressure group told peers in a letter that was shared: "One of the
most damaging articles was a comment piece written by Rowan Atkinson in
The Guardian which has been roundly debunked.
"Unfortunately, fact checks never reach the same breadth of audience as
the original false claim, emphasising the need to ensure high editorial
standards around the net zero transition."
The 69-year-old actor's piece was headlined: "I love electric vehicles -
and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped."
Atkinson wrote that EVs were "a bit soulless" and criticised the use of
their lithium-ion batteries.
He suggested solutions like drivers keeping the same car for longer
periods of time and increased use of synthetic fuel would negate the
need for EVs, saying: "Increasingly, I'm feeling that our honeymoon with
electric cars is coming to an end, and that's no bad thing."
The actor, who described himself as a "car person" having got a degree
in electrical and electronic engineering, said he advised friends to
"hold fire for now" on EVs unless they have an old diesel vehicle.
The Guardian published a response the following week from Simon Evans,
deputy editor and senior policy editor of climate news site Carbon
Brief, which looked to debunk Atkinson's claims.
Mr Evans wrote: "Atkinson's biggest mistake is his failure to recognise
that electric vehicles already offer significant global environmental
benefits, compared with combustion-engine cars."
Atkinson's views were used to make a wider point about "misleading"
reports stunting EV sales.
Other challenges highlighted during the committee meeting included
insufficient numbers of charging points, higher prices on EVs and "a
lack of clear and consistent messaging from the government".
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/mr-bean-actor-blamed-for-slow-electric-car-sales/ar-BB1hUOJK
Yes, it's all Mr. Bean's fault. Thank the gods for the fact checkers,
otherwise we might be mislead by the obviously bogus ideas that EVs cost
too much to buy and to replace their batteries when they inevitably go
bad, and their lack of range when temperatures drop below freezing.
Wilson
Feb 7, 2024, 12:57:10 PM2/7/24
to
Japanese Newsgroup User
Feb 7, 2024, 1:14:12 PM2/7/24
to
I have deleted your very long post to save some electrons but to get new
messages in E-S you need to login because E-S requires only logged in
users to receive and post messages.
Hope this helps.
On 07/02/2024 17:54, Wilson wrote:
> The Mr Bean <big snipping going on here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>
messages in E-S you need to login because E-S requires only logged in
users to receive and post messages.
Hope this helps.
On 07/02/2024 17:54, Wilson wrote:
> The Mr Bean <big snipping going on here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>
J. P. Gilliver
Feb 10, 2024, 2:28:43 AM2/10/24
to
Copied and followup-to set to eternal-september.talk, so Ray doesn't
have to plough through this in 'support.
In message <65c6c72d$1...@news.ausics.net> at Sat, 10 Feb 2024 10:45:33,
noel <delet...@invalid.lan> writes
>theres a nice video interview on youtube I saw last year whewn he said
>this, and I agree with him, hydrogen is way to go forward, its much
>cleaner all round, cleaner to produce (EV fanbois seem to forget EV
Hydrogen production also takes energy, and pure IC vehicles - whether
petrol/diesel or hydrogen - dump energy as heat only when braking,
whereas anything with at least some electric reclaims some of the
braking energy. Hydrogen may have its place, though, where journeys are
longer and steady, such as parts of the USA, and - currently at least -
for heavy freight vehicles.
>chargring comes from someowhere, usually coal and gas fired systems that
That varies by nation - UK currently is only between 0 and 2% coal, and
will be 0 before long.
>in a changing climate also have to power the hungry air conditioners that
>are contantly being installed in large numbers.
Or, in UK and similar climates, heat pumps.
Although overall capacity is definitely a problem, I _think_ UK will
keep up with demand - the bigger problem is grid capacity: we're
generating the power, but not in the places where the people are, so
that has to be remedied.
>
>Those li-ion batteries only have a max life number of recharges, we've
>already seen the horror media reports that failed batteries mean
>relacing the entire shelf, thats 7-10K a module by media reports from
>those who have been quoted that.
Everything has a limited life - IC engines too.
>
>Then theres e-waste - Li-ION's are typially NMC or NCA technologies,
>both very bad for environment and expensive. LFE aka LiFePo4 is much
>better, cheaper, and safer (thermal runaway is near impossible due to its
>incredibly slow heat rise properties) and although LFP's dont quite yet
>hold the same power densities, I'd still only buy them, for anything...
>I'd prefer a slow burning campfire then a nuclear bomb sitting in my
>garage (BTW same goes for solar power walls), but as I said above, I'd
>rather see hydrogen looked at more, they do exist, you do the research.
There have been suggestions that time-served EV batteries can go to
static storage - they don't become complete junk, just reduced capacity;
I genuinely don't know how viable this is. As for campfire versus bomb,
how about your hydrogen tank (-:??
>
>I get tesla has a huge marketing BS dept hard to work ,I mean, how dare
>anyone compete.
>
I think for small high-population areas, EVs have their place, for the
regenerative braking reason alone. This would apply to a _lot_ of the UK
once there are more charging points (at present, I'd be happier with a
hybrid, but in the longer term those are added complexity mechanically,
and also you're carrying around two engines, or at least one and a half,
compared to pure EV or pure IC).
>
Yes, the EV industry does over-sell itself, by varying degrees; however,
the anti-EV brigade also over-"sell" their side, jumping on _any_ bad EV
report, and being quiet about the disadvantages of pure IC.
(More below ...)
>
>On Wed, 07 Feb 2024 12:54:28 -0500, Wilson wrote:
[]
subjects too.
drive - more torque (especially from a standstill), and much quieter.
it for over a century.
pure IC ones - ought to be taken into account more; changing every three
years is excessive for many. However, the vehicle manufacturing industry
[IC, EV, hybrid, hydrogen, nuclear (-: ...] will always - quietly -
lobby to keep us on that cycle.
efficient in terms of miles-per-gallon, and some decades ago there was
quite a push towards them, but this is now countered by them being seen
as outputting more particulate pollution. _Modern_ diesels aren't bad in
that respect, but _older_ ones are now penalised more in UK, both in
road tax and in congestion charges. And EVs need more charging points -
which are coming, but he may be right about holding fire for now,
especially for those who cannot low-speed charge overnight at home -
flat [apartment] dwellers, for example.)
the _average_ UK driver - a pure electric vehicle _is_ better for the
planet in the long run, _and_ cheaper to run - but the payback period is
about seven years on cost *in the UK*, and eleven for the planet; an
investigative radio programme yielded those figures a few years ago, so
increases in fuel costs and improvements in EVs since may have shortened
the periods, but they're still quite long. And "range anxiety" is still
a worry for some. It based on the average UK mileage - which I _think_
was 7000 miles a year; the payback period was shorter for those who do
more, longer for those who do less. (Pure running costs - fuel against
electricity - worked out - again, UK specific - as about 10p a mile less
for electric. This didn't take into account differing tax breaks, which
can change on any government whim, or maintenance cost differences,
which will improve gradually for electric as more garages get
capability.)
Maintenance is an interesting one; the main uncertainly _is_ the
batteries for long-term. Short-term, electric vehicles have less to go
wrong on the whole (they're basically simpler), but - at present at
least - are more expensive to fix when they do.
after this year) have vacillated. Not just on vehicles - other aspects
of "net zero" too.
[]
that the effect, if it exists, becomes significant - is of course going
to be less of a problem going forward as climate changes.)
The UK uses, very roughly, the same amount of energy for three things:
traditional electricity use, heating, and transport. Heating is still
mostly by gas, and _realistically_ this is not going to change rapidly.
This will be very different for other countries (and in specific _parts_
of the UK): for example, parts of the USA will use a lot more for
transport (in energy terms, not cost terms, as fuel is cheaper), and in
some a lot less for heating but a lot more for air conditioning (which
_most_ UK homes do not even _have_).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
_____
___ |[]|_n_n_I_c
|___||__|###|____)
O-O--O-O+++--O-O
have to plough through this in 'support.
In message <65c6c72d$1...@news.ausics.net> at Sat, 10 Feb 2024 10:45:33,
noel <delet...@invalid.lan> writes
>theres a nice video interview on youtube I saw last year whewn he said
>this, and I agree with him, hydrogen is way to go forward, its much
>cleaner all round, cleaner to produce (EV fanbois seem to forget EV
Hydrogen production also takes energy, and pure IC vehicles - whether
petrol/diesel or hydrogen - dump energy as heat only when braking,
whereas anything with at least some electric reclaims some of the
braking energy. Hydrogen may have its place, though, where journeys are
longer and steady, such as parts of the USA, and - currently at least -
for heavy freight vehicles.
>chargring comes from someowhere, usually coal and gas fired systems that
That varies by nation - UK currently is only between 0 and 2% coal, and
will be 0 before long.
>in a changing climate also have to power the hungry air conditioners that
>are contantly being installed in large numbers.
Or, in UK and similar climates, heat pumps.
Although overall capacity is definitely a problem, I _think_ UK will
keep up with demand - the bigger problem is grid capacity: we're
generating the power, but not in the places where the people are, so
that has to be remedied.
>
>Those li-ion batteries only have a max life number of recharges, we've
>already seen the horror media reports that failed batteries mean
>relacing the entire shelf, thats 7-10K a module by media reports from
>those who have been quoted that.
Everything has a limited life - IC engines too.
>
>Then theres e-waste - Li-ION's are typially NMC or NCA technologies,
>both very bad for environment and expensive. LFE aka LiFePo4 is much
>better, cheaper, and safer (thermal runaway is near impossible due to its
>incredibly slow heat rise properties) and although LFP's dont quite yet
>hold the same power densities, I'd still only buy them, for anything...
>I'd prefer a slow burning campfire then a nuclear bomb sitting in my
>garage (BTW same goes for solar power walls), but as I said above, I'd
>rather see hydrogen looked at more, they do exist, you do the research.
There have been suggestions that time-served EV batteries can go to
static storage - they don't become complete junk, just reduced capacity;
I genuinely don't know how viable this is. As for campfire versus bomb,
how about your hydrogen tank (-:??
>
>I get tesla has a huge marketing BS dept hard to work ,I mean, how dare
>anyone compete.
>
I think for small high-population areas, EVs have their place, for the
regenerative braking reason alone. This would apply to a _lot_ of the UK
once there are more charging points (at present, I'd be happier with a
hybrid, but in the longer term those are added complexity mechanically,
and also you're carrying around two engines, or at least one and a half,
compared to pure EV or pure IC).
>
Yes, the EV industry does over-sell itself, by varying degrees; however,
the anti-EV brigade also over-"sell" their side, jumping on _any_ bad EV
report, and being quiet about the disadvantages of pure IC.
(More below ...)
>
>On Wed, 07 Feb 2024 12:54:28 -0500, Wilson wrote:
[]
>> "Unfortunately, fact checks never reach the same breadth of audience as
>> the original false claim, emphasising the need to ensure high editorial
>> standards around the net zero transition."
That's always true - on both sides in this debate, and on many other
>> the original false claim, emphasising the need to ensure high editorial
>> standards around the net zero transition."
subjects too.
>>
>> The 69-year-old actor's piece was headlined: "I love electric vehicles -
>> and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped."
All those I've heard from who've driven them say electric are fun to
>> The 69-year-old actor's piece was headlined: "I love electric vehicles -
>> and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped."
drive - more torque (especially from a standstill), and much quieter.
>>
>> Atkinson wrote that EVs were "a bit soulless" and criticised the use of
>> their lithium-ion batteries.
The lack of a roar sound may seem "soulless", since we've been used to
>> Atkinson wrote that EVs were "a bit soulless" and criticised the use of
>> their lithium-ion batteries.
it for over a century.
>>
>> He suggested solutions like drivers keeping the same car for longer
>> periods of time and increased use of synthetic fuel would negate the
>> need for EVs, saying: "Increasingly, I'm feeling that our honeymoon with
>> electric cars is coming to an end, and that's no bad thing."
Certainly, the manufacturing energy cost of vehicles - including of even
>> He suggested solutions like drivers keeping the same car for longer
>> periods of time and increased use of synthetic fuel would negate the
>> need for EVs, saying: "Increasingly, I'm feeling that our honeymoon with
>> electric cars is coming to an end, and that's no bad thing."
pure IC ones - ought to be taken into account more; changing every three
years is excessive for many. However, the vehicle manufacturing industry
[IC, EV, hybrid, hydrogen, nuclear (-: ...] will always - quietly -
lobby to keep us on that cycle.
>>
>> The actor, who described himself as a "car person" having got a degree
>> in electrical and electronic engineering, said he advised friends to
>> "hold fire for now" on EVs unless they have an old diesel vehicle.
(That's very UK-specific. Diesel vehicles _are_ on the whole more
>> The actor, who described himself as a "car person" having got a degree
>> in electrical and electronic engineering, said he advised friends to
>> "hold fire for now" on EVs unless they have an old diesel vehicle.
efficient in terms of miles-per-gallon, and some decades ago there was
quite a push towards them, but this is now countered by them being seen
as outputting more particulate pollution. _Modern_ diesels aren't bad in
that respect, but _older_ ones are now penalised more in UK, both in
road tax and in congestion charges. And EVs need more charging points -
which are coming, but he may be right about holding fire for now,
especially for those who cannot low-speed charge overnight at home -
flat [apartment] dwellers, for example.)
>>
>> The Guardian published a response the following week from Simon Evans,
>> deputy editor and senior policy editor of climate news site Carbon
>> Brief, which looked to debunk Atkinson's claims.
>>
>> Mr Evans wrote: "Atkinson's biggest mistake is his failure to recognise
>> that electric vehicles already offer significant global environmental
>> benefits, compared with combustion-engine cars."
That of course is overstating _their_ case. It is fairly true that - for
>> The Guardian published a response the following week from Simon Evans,
>> deputy editor and senior policy editor of climate news site Carbon
>> Brief, which looked to debunk Atkinson's claims.
>>
>> Mr Evans wrote: "Atkinson's biggest mistake is his failure to recognise
>> that electric vehicles already offer significant global environmental
>> benefits, compared with combustion-engine cars."
the _average_ UK driver - a pure electric vehicle _is_ better for the
planet in the long run, _and_ cheaper to run - but the payback period is
about seven years on cost *in the UK*, and eleven for the planet; an
investigative radio programme yielded those figures a few years ago, so
increases in fuel costs and improvements in EVs since may have shortened
the periods, but they're still quite long. And "range anxiety" is still
a worry for some. It based on the average UK mileage - which I _think_
was 7000 miles a year; the payback period was shorter for those who do
more, longer for those who do less. (Pure running costs - fuel against
electricity - worked out - again, UK specific - as about 10p a mile less
for electric. This didn't take into account differing tax breaks, which
can change on any government whim, or maintenance cost differences,
which will improve gradually for electric as more garages get
capability.)
Maintenance is an interesting one; the main uncertainly _is_ the
batteries for long-term. Short-term, electric vehicles have less to go
wrong on the whole (they're basically simpler), but - at present at
least - are more expensive to fix when they do.
>>
>> Atkinson's views were used to make a wider point about "misleading"
>> reports stunting EV sales.
>>
>> Other challenges highlighted during the committee meeting included
>> insufficient numbers of charging points, higher prices on EVs and "a
>> lack of clear and consistent messaging from the government".
Yes, the government (and opposition, who will probably be the government
>> Atkinson's views were used to make a wider point about "misleading"
>> reports stunting EV sales.
>>
>> Other challenges highlighted during the committee meeting included
>> insufficient numbers of charging points, higher prices on EVs and "a
>> lack of clear and consistent messaging from the government".
after this year) have vacillated. Not just on vehicles - other aspects
of "net zero" too.
[]
>> Yes, it's all Mr. Bean's fault. Thank the gods for the fact checkers,
>> otherwise we might be mislead by the obviously bogus ideas that EVs cost
>> too much to buy and to replace their batteries when they inevitably go
>> bad, and their lack of range when temperatures drop below freezing.
>
(That last - which is itself overstated, it's when _far_ below freezing
>> otherwise we might be mislead by the obviously bogus ideas that EVs cost
>> too much to buy and to replace their batteries when they inevitably go
>> bad, and their lack of range when temperatures drop below freezing.
>
that the effect, if it exists, becomes significant - is of course going
to be less of a problem going forward as climate changes.)
The UK uses, very roughly, the same amount of energy for three things:
traditional electricity use, heating, and transport. Heating is still
mostly by gas, and _realistically_ this is not going to change rapidly.
This will be very different for other countries (and in specific _parts_
of the UK): for example, parts of the USA will use a lot more for
transport (in energy terms, not cost terms, as fuel is cheaper), and in
some a lot less for heating but a lot more for air conditioning (which
_most_ UK homes do not even _have_).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
_____
___ |[]|_n_n_I_c
|___||__|###|____)
O-O--O-O+++--O-O
William Unruh
Feb 10, 2024, 2:53:45 PM2/10/24
to
On 2024-02-10, noel <delet...@invalid.lan> wrote:
> theres a nice video interview on youtube I saw last year whewn he said
> this, and I agree with him, hydrogen is way to go forward, its much
> cleaner all round, cleaner to produce (EV fanbois seem to forget EV
> theres a nice video interview on youtube I saw last year whewn he said
> this, and I agree with him, hydrogen is way to go forward, its much
> cleaner all round, cleaner to produce (EV fanbois seem to forget EV
> chargring comes from someowhere, usually coal and gas fired systems that
> in a changing climate also have to power the hungry air conditioners that
> are contantly being installed in large numbers.
Hydrogen is not free. It also "comes from someowhere, usually coal and gas fired systems that
> are contantly being installed in large numbers.
in a changing climate also have to power the hungry air conditioners that
are contantly being installed in large numbers."
Or by splitting Natural Gas and throwing away the carbon produced, but
are contantly being installed in large numbers."
it also needs to have an external power source to split the H from the
C.
>
> Those li-ion batteries only have a max life number of recharges, we've
> already seen the horror media reports that failed batteries mean
> relacing the entire shelf, thats 7-10K a module by media reports from
> those who have been quoted that.
And H is really hard to store-- it liquifies at absurdly low
tempertures, and even compressed to absurdly high pressures, its volume
is still large (and talk about a bomb in your garage).
H has been looked at, a lot.
>
J. P. Gilliver
Feb 10, 2024, 3:39:15 PM2/10/24
to
In message <uq8k87$3d01t$1...@dont-email.me> at Sat, 10 Feb 2024 19:53:43,
William Unruh <un...@invalid.ca> writes
it needs energy.)
diggers and the like [is that what the US calls "backhoes"?]) is making
H-powered devices, for example (I don't think by any means exclusively,
though).
Another approach which might be of interest is definitely being tried in
Germany, mainly for heavy goods vehicles: overhead wires on some
motorways, like trains use. The heavy goods vehicles have a raisable
pantograph, and run off the wire for the main part of their journey,
using something else (I can't remember whether IC, battery, or hybrid)
for the final leg of their journey. Plenty about it on YouTube - I think
there's a Tom Scott one, for example. (If battery or hybrid, they could
also charge it when on the wire; I can't remember whether they do that.)
It seems definitely to be viable: of course, the people saying that are
the enthusiasts, but still.
(first series, fit the second)
William Unruh <un...@invalid.ca> writes
>On 2024-02-10, noel <delet...@invalid.lan> wrote:
>> theres a nice video interview on youtube I saw last year whewn he said
>> this, and I agree with him, hydrogen is way to go forward, its much
[]
>> theres a nice video interview on youtube I saw last year whewn he said
>> this, and I agree with him, hydrogen is way to go forward, its much
>Hydrogen is not free. It also "comes from someowhere, usually coal and
>gas fired systems that
> in a changing climate also have to power the hungry air conditioners that
> are contantly being installed in large numbers."
Indeed!
>gas fired systems that
> in a changing climate also have to power the hungry air conditioners that
> are contantly being installed in large numbers."
>
>Or by splitting Natural Gas and throwing away the carbon produced, but
>it also needs to have an external power source to split the H from the
>C.
>
(I didn't know about splitting methane rather than water, but as you say
>Or by splitting Natural Gas and throwing away the carbon produced, but
>it also needs to have an external power source to split the H from the
>C.
>
it needs energy.)
>>
>> Those li-ion batteries only have a max life number of recharges, we've
>> already seen the horror media reports that failed batteries mean
>> relacing the entire shelf, thats 7-10K a module by media reports from
>> those who have been quoted that.
>
>Except the lifetime turned out to be far longer than initially feared.
>
>And H is really hard to store-- it liquifies at absurdly low
>tempertures, and even compressed to absurdly high pressures, its volume
>is still large (and talk about a bomb in your garage).
>H has been looked at, a lot.
>
>>
It probably _does_ have its place; I know JCB (a UK manufacturer of
>> Those li-ion batteries only have a max life number of recharges, we've
>> already seen the horror media reports that failed batteries mean
>> relacing the entire shelf, thats 7-10K a module by media reports from
>> those who have been quoted that.
>
>Except the lifetime turned out to be far longer than initially feared.
>
>And H is really hard to store-- it liquifies at absurdly low
>tempertures, and even compressed to absurdly high pressures, its volume
>is still large (and talk about a bomb in your garage).
>H has been looked at, a lot.
>
>>
diggers and the like [is that what the US calls "backhoes"?]) is making
H-powered devices, for example (I don't think by any means exclusively,
though).
Another approach which might be of interest is definitely being tried in
Germany, mainly for heavy goods vehicles: overhead wires on some
motorways, like trains use. The heavy goods vehicles have a raisable
pantograph, and run off the wire for the main part of their journey,
using something else (I can't remember whether IC, battery, or hybrid)
for the final leg of their journey. Plenty about it on YouTube - I think
there's a Tom Scott one, for example. (If battery or hybrid, they could
also charge it when on the wire; I can't remember whether they do that.)
It seems definitely to be viable: of course, the people saying that are
the enthusiasts, but still.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
once described by Eccentrica Golumbits as the best bang since the big one ...
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
(first series, fit the second)
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 10, 2024, 3:54:40 PM2/10/24
to
J. P. Gilliver <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>. . .
>It probably _does_ have its place; I know JCB (a UK manufacturer of
>diggers and the like [is that what the US calls "backhoes"?]) is making
>H-powered devices, for example (I don't think by any means exclusively,
>though).
A backhoe is defined as a large mechanically operated shovel whose
operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
I believe a backhoe is unique to the United States but I have no idea.
I have no idea what the identical shovel is called when it's operated by
a man who truly takes pride in limiting where he digs to locations in
which he won't do any expensive damage.
>>. . .
>It probably _does_ have its place; I know JCB (a UK manufacturer of
>diggers and the like [is that what the US calls "backhoes"?]) is making
>H-powered devices, for example (I don't think by any means exclusively,
>though).
operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
I believe a backhoe is unique to the United States but I have no idea.
I have no idea what the identical shovel is called when it's operated by
a man who truly takes pride in limiting where he digs to locations in
which he won't do any expensive damage.
Bobbie Sellers
Feb 10, 2024, 5:51:18 PM2/10/24
to
All current transport power systems are transitional. For vehicles the
flow battery is coming where the the exhausted electrolyte
io replaced. Electrical power to charge batteries or split water to
get hydrogen can come from wind solar and maybe tidal power
Likely we will be using a lot of power to desalinate sea
water in the miserable future now in progress.
bliss - very pessimistic these days.
Paul
Feb 10, 2024, 6:43:07 PM2/10/24
to
You won't be driving a 10,000 pound car with a big tank
of Vanadium electrolyte sloshing around.
Vanadium uses a relatively small cell, while the tanks of liquid "fuel"
next to it, can be huge. That's why this is a great concept (up to a point)
as a stationary storage mechanism.
The Hydrogen proposal is pure evil, and is the work of the tobacco industry.
*******
With electrolysis of water to make hydrogen and oxygen, there is stoichiometry.
There is a balance of hydrogen and oxygen. When what you make is
consumed, everything is in balance. Whether you put the hydrogen in one
tank, and the oxygen in the other tank, or you release the oxygen to be
"banked" in the atmosphere, when the hydrogen is consumed later, you
get water back and the "cycle is complete". You have not created
a crisis for yourself.
If you take an unbalanced supply of hydrogen, and mix with atmospheric oxygen,
it makes water. We're good so far. How do we get the oxygen back ? Why... um...
we need electrolysis to work. Otherwise "we'll be gasping for air".
You need electrolysis to work in any case. Otherwise, just stop with
your silly, unbalanced, hydrogen based society. There are two fossil fuel
industry plans, for an unbalanced future. One, is making hydrogen from
fossil fuel (to consume atmospheric oxygen). The second is to "drill for hydrogen"
because there is apparently hydrogen underground (to consume atmospheric oxygen).
Only an idiot would come up with an evil scheme to reduce the ppO2 of the
atmosphere, with no plan to "put it back".
Hydrogen should not be deployed at scale (if at all!), unless it is
a stoichiometric process and everything is kept in balance. The
same way you put your weekly pay check in the bank and withdraw funds
for your weekly needs. Endless borrowing of money, without paying
it back, doesn't work at the bank, and it does not work for our
energy needs either.
The "hydrogen gold rush" is the handiwork of the fossil fuel industry,
who are no better than tobacco companies when it comes to provenance.
Electrolysis works in the lab. You can do it in your kitchen
(although it may seem a bit dirty process for you). The problem is
doing it at an industrial level, and without using a lot of
precious metals to do it.
https://www.securities.io/green-hydrogen-set-to-replace-grey-as-new-electrocatalysts-make-production-cost-effective/
"Korean researchers [have] found a new type of catalyst, ruthenium, to avoid using platinum or iridium.
It relies on much cheaper and less environmentally damaging alloy of ruthenium, silicon, and tungsten (RuSiW).
*******
Grey/brown hydrogen: produced from fossil fuels.
Blue hydrogen: produced from fossil fuels, but with carbon capture.
Pink hydrogen (sometimes also called yellow hydrogen): produced from nuclear energy.
Turquoise hydrogen: produced from the pyrolysis of methane.
This breaks down methane into hydrogen and solid carbon.
The solid carbon can be stored in my shoe.
Green Hydrogen: produced from renewable energy.
Green hydrogen is the ideal situation and a goal for most climate-conscious people.
"
No, you're designing an energy cycle for the future.
Do it right.
Or, don't do it at all.
The same goes for people doing fusion. But we aren't even
at the point, of making fun of them.
Paul
Sn!pe
Feb 10, 2024, 8:10:57 PM2/10/24
to
Paul <nos...@needed.invalid> wrote:
[...]
> If you take an unbalanced supply of hydrogen, and mix with atmospheric
> oxygen, it makes water. We're good so far. How do we get the oxygen back ?
> Why... um... we need electrolysis to work. Otherwise "we'll be gasping for
> air".
>
> You need electrolysis to work in any case. Otherwise, just stop with your
> silly, unbalanced, hydrogen based society. There are two fossil fuel
> industry plans, for an unbalanced future. One, is making hydrogen from
> fossil fuel (to consume atmospheric oxygen). The second is to "drill for
> hydrogen" because there is apparently hydrogen underground (to consume
> atmospheric oxygen).
>
> Only an idiot would come up with an evil scheme to reduce the ppO2 of the
> atmosphere, with no plan to "put it back".
[...]
Extraction of energy from fossil fuel consumes O2 in just the same way.
To conserve O2 we have two options: either "renewables"* or nuclear
(inc. fusion RSN).
* I have put "renewables" in scare quotes because of the energy and
resources needed to build the equipment.
This is off topic in e-s.support. [crosspost and followup-to e-s.talk]
--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator
My pet rock Gordon says:
The first duty of government is defence of the realm.
[...]
> If you take an unbalanced supply of hydrogen, and mix with atmospheric
> oxygen, it makes water. We're good so far. How do we get the oxygen back ?
> Why... um... we need electrolysis to work. Otherwise "we'll be gasping for
> air".
>
> You need electrolysis to work in any case. Otherwise, just stop with your
> silly, unbalanced, hydrogen based society. There are two fossil fuel
> industry plans, for an unbalanced future. One, is making hydrogen from
> fossil fuel (to consume atmospheric oxygen). The second is to "drill for
> hydrogen" because there is apparently hydrogen underground (to consume
> atmospheric oxygen).
>
> Only an idiot would come up with an evil scheme to reduce the ppO2 of the
> atmosphere, with no plan to "put it back".
Extraction of energy from fossil fuel consumes O2 in just the same way.
To conserve O2 we have two options: either "renewables"* or nuclear
(inc. fusion RSN).
* I have put "renewables" in scare quotes because of the energy and
resources needed to build the equipment.
This is off topic in e-s.support. [crosspost and followup-to e-s.talk]
--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator
My pet rock Gordon says:
The first duty of government is defence of the realm.
Daniel65
Feb 11, 2024, 3:57:47 AM2/11/24
to
Bobbie Sellers wrote on 11/2/24 9:51 am:
<Snip>
> All current transport power systems are transitional. For vehicles
> the flow battery is coming where the the exhausted electrolyte io
> replaced. Electrical power to charge batteries or split water to get
> hydrogen can come from wind solar and maybe tidal power
"tidal power"!! Now there's something I have heard much about in a long
time.
I do remember reading something (.... was it back in the 90's??) where,
apparently, France had installed a series of 'tidal power' turbines
somewhere ..... and people were worried that the turbines would effect
tides to such an effect that they might affect The Earth's rotation!!
--
Daniel
<Snip>
> All current transport power systems are transitional. For vehicles
> the flow battery is coming where the the exhausted electrolyte io
> replaced. Electrical power to charge batteries or split water to get
> hydrogen can come from wind solar and maybe tidal power
time.
I do remember reading something (.... was it back in the 90's??) where,
apparently, France had installed a series of 'tidal power' turbines
somewhere ..... and people were worried that the turbines would effect
tides to such an effect that they might affect The Earth's rotation!!
--
Daniel
J. P. Gilliver
Feb 11, 2024, 4:29:48 AM2/11/24
to
In message <uqa268$tg0u$1...@dont-email.me> at Sun, 11 Feb 2024 19:57:47,
Daniel65 <dani...@nomail.afraid.org> writes
[]
schemes: the French one (which has been in place for ages - 1950s/'60s
maybe?), and one in Indonesia. They work well.
The main objection in the UK is that their creation disrupts wildlife
environments. While there is undoubtedly some truth in that, they would
also create some new ones - and anyway, mankind's activities have been
disrupting nature for a long time, currently not least with climate
change.
The main _political_ problem with getting large tidal schemes set up is
that they are costly and take a long time - more than the time of most
governments. The cost will repay many times over, but not start doing so
for some years.
The main _practical_ problem - well, there are two: 1., the availability
of power does not match demand, as with wind. However, unlike wind, it's
extremely predictable! (And for island countries of suitable shape and
currents, adding one on each side would mitigate that - slightly. The
UK, for example.) 2. They're of no interest to inland countries and
states.
_Small-scale_ installations can also be useful for individual coastal
homes. Along with _wave_ power - not so much Salter ducks, as
"rectifier" cavities.
it's noticeable! The earth-moon system is _big_ compared to the actions
of mankind.
having punched the man who threw an egg at him (Top Gear, 2011-2-28)
Daniel65 <dani...@nomail.afraid.org> writes
[]
>"tidal power"!! Now there's something I have heard much about in a long
>time.
There is much potential there! There are I think two main _large_ such
>time.
schemes: the French one (which has been in place for ages - 1950s/'60s
maybe?), and one in Indonesia. They work well.
The main objection in the UK is that their creation disrupts wildlife
environments. While there is undoubtedly some truth in that, they would
also create some new ones - and anyway, mankind's activities have been
disrupting nature for a long time, currently not least with climate
change.
The main _political_ problem with getting large tidal schemes set up is
that they are costly and take a long time - more than the time of most
governments. The cost will repay many times over, but not start doing so
for some years.
The main _practical_ problem - well, there are two: 1., the availability
of power does not match demand, as with wind. However, unlike wind, it's
extremely predictable! (And for island countries of suitable shape and
currents, adding one on each side would mitigate that - slightly. The
UK, for example.) 2. They're of no interest to inland countries and
states.
_Small-scale_ installations can also be useful for individual coastal
homes. Along with _wave_ power - not so much Salter ducks, as
"rectifier" cavities.
>
>I do remember reading something (.... was it back in the 90's??) where,
>apparently, France had installed a series of 'tidal power' turbines
>somewhere ..... and people were worried that the turbines would effect
>tides to such an effect that they might affect The Earth's rotation!!
I guess they will, eventually - but I think it will be millennia before
>I do remember reading something (.... was it back in the 90's??) where,
>apparently, France had installed a series of 'tidal power' turbines
>somewhere ..... and people were worried that the turbines would effect
>tides to such an effect that they might affect The Earth's rotation!!
it's noticeable! The earth-moon system is _big_ compared to the actions
of mankind.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
"...told me to connect with the electorate, and I did!" John Prescott on
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
having punched the man who threw an egg at him (Top Gear, 2011-2-28)
Nuno Silva
Feb 18, 2024, 4:00:08 AM2/18/24
to
On 2024-02-10, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> J. P. Gilliver <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>>>. . .
>
>>It probably _does_ have its place; I know JCB (a UK manufacturer of
>>diggers and the like [is that what the US calls "backhoes"?]) is making
>>H-powered devices, for example (I don't think by any means exclusively,
>>though).
>
> A backhoe is defined as a large mechanically operated shovel whose
> operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
> didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
> and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
> important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
Or to add skylights to underground rail tunnels:
> J. P. Gilliver <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>>>. . .
>
>>It probably _does_ have its place; I know JCB (a UK manufacturer of
>>diggers and the like [is that what the US calls "backhoes"?]) is making
>>H-powered devices, for example (I don't think by any means exclusively,
>>though).
>
> A backhoe is defined as a large mechanically operated shovel whose
> operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
> didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
> and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
> important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
https://lisboaparapessoas.pt/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/errometropracaespanha_02.jpg
(Pictured: Lisbon Metro Blue line, near Praça de Espanha, just after the
new skylight was added in 2020.)
> I believe a backhoe is unique to the United States but I have no idea.
>
> I have no idea what the identical shovel is called when it's operated by
> a man who truly takes pride in limiting where he digs to locations in
> which he won't do any expensive damage.
Nuno Silva
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 18, 2024, 4:55:27 AM2/18/24
to
Nuno Silva <nunoj...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>On 2024-02-10, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>J. P. Gilliver <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>>. . .
>>>It probably _does_ have its place; I know JCB (a UK manufacturer of
>>>diggers and the like [is that what the US calls "backhoes"?]) is making
>>>H-powered devices, for example (I don't think by any means exclusively,
>>>though).
>>A backhoe is defined as a large mechanically operated shovel whose
>>operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
>>didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
>>and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
>>important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
>Or to add skylights to underground rail tunnels:
>https://lisboaparapessoas.pt/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/errometropracaespanha_02.jpg
>(Pictured: Lisbon Metro Blue line, near Praça de Espanha, just after the
>new skylight was added in 2020.)
Good heavens
>On 2024-02-10, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>J. P. Gilliver <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>>. . .
>>>It probably _does_ have its place; I know JCB (a UK manufacturer of
>>>diggers and the like [is that what the US calls "backhoes"?]) is making
>>>H-powered devices, for example (I don't think by any means exclusively,
>>>though).
>>A backhoe is defined as a large mechanically operated shovel whose
>>operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
>>didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
>>and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
>>important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
>Or to add skylights to underground rail tunnels:
>https://lisboaparapessoas.pt/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/errometropracaespanha_02.jpg
>(Pictured: Lisbon Metro Blue line, near Praça de Espanha, just after the
>new skylight was added in 2020.)
Paul
Feb 18, 2024, 5:08:39 AM2/18/24
to
It would cost more than a Bobcat (they're about $80,000).
This used backhoe (Case 500) is $77000.
https://cdn.ironpla.net/i/13668/807/94d1c938-e795-414a-bf3f-3c1bbd1c7481.jpg
There are two driving directions. When facing forward, you can drive
along the street to your next job. You can also slide the front bucket
along the roadway, and transfer scoops of material to a dump truck. That's
what the front end is for. Or, a dump truck could dump a load of gravel,
and the front bucket can be used to chew into the pile of gravel,
and then pour the gravel into a hole that is being refilled.
The rear bucket is for trenching, you can dig down.
The rear bucket, you can use the teeth on a downstroke. Or,
you can use the teeth on an upstroke. This doubles the destruction possible.
The gentleman on my back property line, he used to be a backhoe operator.
One Saturday morning, I get a knock at my front door, and it's my "good"
neighbour, telling me the backhoe operator is destroying the back hedge.
And it only takes him ten minutes to do it, because he is skilled enough
to be using the downstroke and upstroke of the bucket, to destroyed pieces of
hedge in alternate directions. That cost me $400 for a new hedge and $400
for a section of fencing (fencing laid first, hedge laid next). So I put it
all back up -- even though the hedge had been completely on my side of the
line in the first place.
That gentleman has passed on, and is now digging holes in Heaven.
For about as much money as a taxi driver invests, you can purchase
a pickup truck and a backhoe, and go into business for yourself.
And a lot of this sort of equipment can be rented. You can drive the
backhoe to jobs within the city, without owning a flatbed.
Some operators, own a dump truck, it has a trailer hitch on the back,
there is a trailer, and the backhoe goes on the trailer. And the
whole shebang can be driven to a job site, then the operator parks
the dump truck, jumps in the backhoe and drives the backhoe off the
trailer. And the difference there, is the backhoe can do about 50km/hr
top speed, whereas the dump truck and trailer can do 100km/hr on the highway.
https://www.alamy.com/a-dump-truck-delivers-a-front-end-loader-back-hoe-on-a-trailer-to-a-city-street-so-that-road-work-can-begin-image355438257.html
With the lights on the backhoe, you can even be trenching at midnight.
Which does happen (during water main repair).
But to reach down into a road and reach every pipe buried in there,
there is a much bigger excavator for that. Usually, a road will be
nonfunctional for a year or so, when that sort of nuke and pave is going on.
Your fresh water, during that year, is delivered via a fire hose from
a hydrant.
Paul
sticks
Feb 18, 2024, 8:04:46 PM2/18/24
to
On 2/18/2024 4:08 AM, Paul wrote:
> On 2/10/2024 3:54 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> A backhoe is defined as a large mechanically operated shovel whose
>> operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
>> didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
>> and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
>> important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
FWIW, this is my specialty and what I grew up with. I still do like
> On 2/10/2024 3:54 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> A backhoe is defined as a large mechanically operated shovel whose
>> operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
>> didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
>> and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
>> important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
Adam's joke, and take no offense. That said, in reality, operators
almost never look at a map of existing utilities, that's not their job.
There will always be small outfits doing little jobs who don't due their
preliminary work by getting underground utilities marked, but it is
rare. I worked on big projects, and it was my job to organize this work
and carry it out. It's free to get everything located, though it can
take a couple of days before you get the go ahead to dig and everyone
has marked what they have or don't have.
Once you proceed to dig, you are still not guaranteed that everything
has been properly marked. Nor can you know if the utilities are in the
ground as far as required. For example, though buried electric is
supposed to be 18" to 24" for secondary service lines, it is supposed to
be 36" to 42" for Primary cables. I had one project where full three
phase primary was directly under concrete pavement (10") and only didn't
get damaged because it was running in a steel conduit. This is a life
threatening fuck up and was caused by "pushing" the conduit under the
road and just saying screw it by whoever did the job. If you hit these
with a big backhoe, the spark eruptions are huge, and I have had
backhoes burn to the ground. If you are touching the machine and have
your feet on the ground, you're dead. Trust me, those of us who have
done this type of work take it deadly serious.
>> I believe a backhoe is unique to the United States but I have no idea.
everything. I still recall when these machines were cables and pulleys
and hydraulics was in it's early years. Here's a picture of my dad's
machine from 1965 that was a cable backhoe. He's the big guy in the
middle, and I"m the little shit to the right. Today's operators would
have no idea how to run this machine, and attempting to do so would
break lots of things. They simply didn't have the 'pick your teeth'
control of modern machines.
<https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8f8v071lz44xwzk8r55kf/1965.jpg?rlkey=kr9sn6reolrjvz6q9jj1h9yoa&dl=0>
>> I have no idea what the identical shovel is called when it's operated by
>> a man who truly takes pride in limiting where he digs to locations in
>> which he won't do any expensive damage.
area, but my brother was an Operating Engineer who just retired last
year after a lifetime of working in the Chicago area. He told me he
almost never got to work in virgin ground. Everything he did, was where
somebody had already turned the ground. Utilities were everywhere. As
far as utilities on private property, JULIE doesn't mark them, and that
can be another whole nightmare. I redid an airport that the sites
property staff did their best to mark, but some of the cabling was
direct bury 440 volt primary, and the operator never really knew if
things were clear.
> I don't think it is an expensive machine.
>
> It would cost more than a Bobcat (they're about $80,000).
>
> This used backhoe (Case 500) is $77000.
>
> https://cdn.ironpla.net/i/13668/807/94d1c938-e795-414a-bf3f-3c1bbd1c7481.jpg
>
> There are two driving directions. When facing forward, you can drive
> along the street to your next job. You can also slide the front bucket
> along the roadway, and transfer scoops of material to a dump truck. That's
> what the front end is for. Or, a dump truck could dump a load of gravel,
> and the front bucket can be used to chew into the pile of gravel,
> and then pour the gravel into a hole that is being refilled.
>
> The rear bucket is for trenching, you can dig down.
>
> The rear bucket, you can use the teeth on a downstroke. Or,
> you can use the teeth on an upstroke. This doubles the destruction possible.
broken water main, or a collapsed manhole, but you don't see them on too
many big projects for anything other than hauling around parts or odd
jobs. They are too small to get much done. The backhoes we used start
at half a $Mil and go up from there. However nowadays, the bigger
companies like I worked for don't buy them, they get leased. They break
down often. You call for a mechanic and he's there withing a half hour
and gets you back. The cost of the other people waiting to work rule
out having older machines on big jobs. If you can't work, you lose big
money in a hurry. Every two years you get a new machine, and the old
ones get shipped to South America, or China, or someplace labor costs
aren't so high as in America. That is changing though, as they still
have schedules they have to meet.
> The gentleman on my back property line, he used to be a backhoe operator.
> One Saturday morning, I get a knock at my front door, and it's my "good"
> neighbour, telling me the backhoe operator is destroying the back hedge.
> And it only takes him ten minutes to do it, because he is skilled enough
> to be using the downstroke and upstroke of the bucket, to destroyed pieces of
> hedge in alternate directions. That cost me $400 for a new hedge and $400
> for a section of fencing (fencing laid first, hedge laid next). So I put it
> all back up -- even though the hedge had been completely on my side of the
> line in the first place.
would have tore up my whole yard if I wasn't there, and still went in
areas they had no right to be. Of course Com Ed thinks they can do
whatever they want, and they will fix things, but it is the
inconvenience I hate. I always tried to respect the rights and property
of those wherever I had jobs, but will admit the majority of the people
in the industry don't look at it that way. It's just a job to them.
> That gentleman has passed on, and is now digging holes in Heaven.
Small girl asks mommy, "Do prostitutes have babies?"
Mom says, "Of course, that's where truck drivers come from."
> For about as much money as a taxi driver invests, you can purchase
> a pickup truck and a backhoe, and go into business for yourself.
> And a lot of this sort of equipment can be rented. You can drive the
> backhoe to jobs within the city, without owning a flatbed.
---snip---
> But to reach down into a road and reach every pipe buried in there,
> there is a much bigger excavator for that. Usually, a road will be
> nonfunctional for a year or so, when that sort of nuke and pave is going on.
> Your fresh water, during that year, is delivered via a fire hose from
> a hydrant.
good one!
Regards,
sticks
Oh, and this stuff is how I got the name "sticks". Of all the types of
work I've done, what I really loved the most was layout. Nobody could
get wood lathe in the ground like me. When I was a young man the
operators would need some help and tell the boss to get "sticks" over
here. It stuck.
--
Stand With Israel!
NOTE: If you use Google Groups I don't see you,
unless you're whitelisted and that's doubtful.
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 18, 2024, 11:29:17 PM2/18/24
to
sticks <wolve...@charter.net> wrote:
>>On 2/10/2024 3:54 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>A backhoe is defined as a large mechanically operated shovel whose
>>>operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
>>>didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
>>>and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
>>>important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
>FWIW, this is my specialty and what I grew up with. I still do like
>Adam's joke, and take no offense. That said, in reality, operators
>almost never look at a map of existing utilities, that's not their job.
>There will always be small outfits doing little jobs who don't due their
>preliminary work by getting underground utilities marked, but it is
>rare. I worked on big projects, and it was my job to organize this work
>and carry it out. It's free to get everything located, though it can
>take a couple of days before you get the go ahead to dig and everyone
>has marked what they have or don't have.
Fine. I stand corrected. If it's not the operator's job, it's somebody's
>>On 2/10/2024 3:54 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>A backhoe is defined as a large mechanically operated shovel whose
>>>operator was required to consult the map of underground utilities but
>>>didn't. It is used to destroy high-pressure pipelines for gas and oil
>>>and freshwater distribution pipelines, buried high tension lines, and
>>>important fiber-optic cables carrying data for millions of users.
>FWIW, this is my specialty and what I grew up with. I still do like
>Adam's joke, and take no offense. That said, in reality, operators
>almost never look at a map of existing utilities, that's not their job.
>There will always be small outfits doing little jobs who don't due their
>preliminary work by getting underground utilities marked, but it is
>rare. I worked on big projects, and it was my job to organize this work
>and carry it out. It's free to get everything located, though it can
>take a couple of days before you get the go ahead to dig and everyone
>has marked what they have or don't have.
job. This happens and it's inexcusable.
>Once you proceed to dig, you are still not guaranteed that everything
>has been properly marked. Nor can you know if the utilities are in the
>ground as far as required. For example, though buried electric is
>supposed to be 18" to 24" for secondary service lines, it is supposed to
>be 36" to 42" for Primary cables. I had one project where full three
>phase primary was directly under concrete pavement (10") and only didn't
>get damaged because it was running in a steel conduit. This is a life
>threatening fuck up and was caused by "pushing" the conduit under the
>road and just saying screw it by whoever did the job. If you hit these
>with a big backhoe, the spark eruptions are huge, and I have had
>backhoes burn to the ground. If you are touching the machine and have
>your feet on the ground, you're dead. Trust me, those of us who have
>done this type of work take it deadly serious.
sounds like men have gotten injured needlessly at other times.
>. . .
>>>I have no idea what the identical shovel is called when it's operated by
>>>a man who truly takes pride in limiting where he digs to locations in
>>>which he won't do any expensive damage.
>There are few of those locations left. Adam is very familiar with the
>area, but my brother was an Operating Engineer who just retired last
>year after a lifetime of working in the Chicago area. He told me he
>almost never got to work in virgin ground. Everything he did, was where
>somebody had already turned the ground. Utilities were everywhere. As
>far as utilities on private property, JULIE doesn't mark them, and that
>can be another whole nightmare. I redid an airport that the sites
>property staff did their best to mark, but some of the cabling was
>direct bury 440 volt primary, and the operator never really knew if
>things were clear.
>. . .
0 new messages