Reconsidering the moving van

The moving van concept was to convert the UHaul truck into an RV, and then live in it.

The upside is that it has enough interior room to make a good sized "tiny" home.  It also can be used to transport the car without worrying about leaving something behind that might get stolen.

The downside is that it would have no windows, and it may be hard to get out of that thing if you needed to.  The cabover is furtherest from the door.  What if you need to get out in a hurry?  It would take the longest when you don't necessarily have the time.  RV places may not accept it as a true RV.  One thing is certain, those rear doors will have to be modified.

To deal with lack of windows, peep holes could be installed.  They could have cameras inserted that would serve as well as windows.

One reason I like this idea is that I can possibly get started on it quickly.  I could buy the thing and then do the necessary modifications and be out of here by the end of March.

This one goes into the construction subseries of the off-the-grid main series of posts.

Prev  Next

Idiocracy wasn't a joke

If you look at the increasing population and the decreasing collective IQ, the world is getting dumber and dumber.  That's not a joke meant to be converted into a movie, but reality.

Once you consider that, then you know why there is this ridiculous crap that passes for intelligent discussion these days.

It's either overwhelming stupidity, or overwhelming cowardice, or some combination of both.  A prior generation would not have acted like this.  We're getting dumber and dumber.

Three U.S. Islands with Strict Gun Control and their Murder Rates

Free Republic

Here is a look at three island polities that are under U.S. Jurisdiction that have implemented strict controls on gun purchases and ownership.  These islands must be reached by air travel, where the carry of firearms is highly regulated and restricted, or by ship...Three United States island polities with quite similar, strict, gun control laws.  Two have murder rates more than 7 and 5 times  greater than the United States average; one has a murder rate one third as great as the United States average.

Conclusion is that gun-control laws have no effect whatever on murder rates. The "easy access to guns" argument is proven false.

One has to conclude that the motivation for seeking these laws have little to do with solving any problem. If such were the case, these statistics would be persuasive to policy makers so as to avoid gun-control laws for the simple fact that they do not work.

The 5x8 trailer--- bolts with holes

Number One didn't like it.  He says that it is "rickety", which means that it could fall apart.  It would need to be welded in many spots in order to make it strong enough for heavy duty use.

Nevertheless, I still own it.  So, what do I do with it?  Learn how to weld and do it myself?  Impose upon Number One and ask him to do it for me?  Or could I come up with a solution that would work that wouldn't require a whole lot ( if any ) welding?

The solution could be something like this:  Use bolts with holes that would allow the use of a cotter pin that would prevent the bolt from coming unscrewed, and thus falling apart.

Still haven't taken the trailer out of its boxes yet, so I don't know what hardware it uses and what may be replaceable, if anything.

It's possible that this is repetitive.  I know this isn't a new idea that I've had.  But the link above is new.

In order to save this material to be easily found later, it will be added to the construction subseries of the off-the-grid main series of posts.

Prev   Next

Rise and shine, senor.

Time to get up off your lazy asses and get moving!

I'll put that on the list, and get to it shortly, senor.

Been reviewing my off-the-grid posts.  What a jumbled mess it is.  It is amazing how little got said with so many posts.  When you boil it all down, Wishbone "solved" the problem and spent almost nothing, while I've been working on this for a year and a half, and spent a bunch.

No wonder I can't get ahead.  Wishbone may be the smart one.

As for me, I have this illusion that working hard will cause good things to happen.  Not always.

Illusions die hard, so I'll keep working hard.  I know no other way, senor.

I once knew this Salvadoran who once told me that he didn't think I worked so hard.  Hmm.  Well, if working hard means digging ditches, I see the point.  But if working hard means keeping busy doing stuff and making every day count for something, then I work hard, senor.

Home again, 12.4.15; Weekend has arrived

Truly, I wondered if I could put in a full week without anything going wrong.  I'm back home and the week has been completed.  It was good week, money making wise.  I needed it.

Gave the boss notice that the end of March will be the end of my stay there.  It is rather far off, but I was thinking about it this morning, and decided that I had better go while I still can.

But I won't go immediately.  After leaving the delivery job, I will continue on with Uber for anywhere from six to ten months.

Then it will be on to El Paso, where I plan to move into an apartment.  From the apartment, I will execute the transition from apartment to off the grid.  Uber will supply me with an income, and the hope is that it will be sufficient for my needs.

One idea that popped in my head was to use a large truck I saw as an RV project.  This isn't a fully developed plan, mind you.  Anyway, the idea was to put a conex and a parking spot for the car on top the flatbed in back.  That's assuming that the flat bed is big enough for both.  It could probably hold the conex by itself.  Try to imagine:  The vehicle has its own house and car.  A ramp attachment will allow the car to be backed off the truck's flat bed, and then driven anywhere.  Then drive up the ramp when I wanted to park for awhile.  For example, I could make some money for Uber, then leave El Paso for the property where I would stay for awhile until I figured I needed to make some more money, and back to El Paso again.  All the while, I have all my stuff with me.

Obligatory, 12.4.15; Just chugging along

Got through another week, almost.  It's Friday.  Really, I thought I might not be able to put in a full week's work anymore at this.  I have to buckle down to stay in good enough shape, it seems.

As far as the burnout is concerned, perhaps I've said all that I can say.  After that, it becomes repetitious.  If there's no response to it, well, what's the point?  Maybe that's the feeling.  Don't know what it is, but just seems like a drag now.  Nevertheless, I will continue.  If there's anything new, in truth, it will come from the project out West.

Yes, I still think about that.  I haven't written any posts on that project in about a month.  The thing I've been thinking about lately is that shack.  Did it hold up for going on nearly 8 months now?  Even if it fell apart, I can rebuild it.  Next time would be better because I have learned something.   I could have continued out there if I wished back then, but felt as if I should come home.  There was more to do in order to make it a more sturdy structure that could hold up.  Also, to make it livable.  Yep, I think I could make it livable.

One thing about that place out there:  you can't get reliable weather info.  Just checked the weather sites I keep track of and they have gone silent.  What's up out there anyway?  Not enough staff?

It might be tough living out of the van all of the time.  But if I were to get a trailer, I would have to pull it around with me or let it stay on the property.  Neither of those propositions do I like.

Once I get my greenhouses going, I'd have a food source and a water source in place.  It would be possible to start limiting my excursions off the property at that time, but I'm thinking it will be necessary to leave the place from time to time.  It would be best not to leave a lot of stuff out there.  I hear that they will steal the paint off the walls out there.

The planning is mostly complete.  But I don't know how the plan will stack up against reality.  Time will tell.

What would have happened if the Isolationalists refused to support the Second World War?

Pearl Harbor is just around the corner.  Something may have been forgotten about that bit of history.  Back then, the USA was bitterly divided over getting involved in the War that had been raging since the Nazis attacked Poland in 1939.  The people who were opposed to any involvement were called Isolationalists.  Yet, they ceased their opposition to War when the Japanese attacked.  The division was over and did not return again until the Vietnam War.  It wasn't the Isolationalists at that time that sowed the division, it was the left.

If the Isolationalists had acted the way the Liberals acted towards Vietnam and now the War on Terror, we might have lost the War against the Nazis.

Just saying.  Ever since the Liberals have taken over the Democrat Party, America hasn't been able to win its wars.  You might get to thinking they'd like our enemies to be victorious.

So, instead of decades of relative unity against the enemies of America didn't happen when 9-11 occurred.  Nope, the left didn't give up its opposition to America.

So why should anybody be surprised that we are still fooling around with terrorists some 14 years after 9-11.

One way to add content

Is to write about my job.  I write very little about it, because I never really did think that highly of my work.  It has always been just a job to me.

So, what about this job of mine?  I can write a little about yesterday's last delivery.  It was a round trip for just South of Downtown to Reliant Park to the Texan's office, and then back with a return.  Getting there wasn't that big of a deal, but getting back was.  It was rush hour, and that stretch of freeway was blocked up pretty good last evening.

So, I decided to stick with the back streets instead of the freeway.  Don't know if that saved time, but I managed to keep moving towards the destination.  It took about 25 minutes at about 4:30 pm.  Bad or Good?  Really don't know.  But I've taken a LONG time getting through that area during rush hour.  It's probably one of the worst spots to be at that hour.

Earlier in the day, I stopped by an RV place.  They had some RVs on consignment, and I asked about them.  The impression that I get sometimes is that people have really unrealistic expectations of what they can get for their RVs.  I didn't bother spending much time there once I heard the asking prices.

Earlier in the day, I went to Dallas.  That takes most of the day right there getting back and forth is more than eight hours.  I don't do this very often, so it was a bit unusual.  One thing I remember is seing that new stadium they got there.  I didn't see it up close, but about 10 miles away.

Sound very interesting?  It may to some folks.  Those who seem envious of my job are those who are stuck inside on beautiful weather days.  But you don't hear from them when it rains.

Obligatory, 12.3.15; Here we go again

A mass shooting and a call for more gun control.  Note that France doesn't do this.  They've already got gun control, if I am not mistaken, but there have been two incidents in the past year.

The first thing France does is to shut down their borders.  What a concept!  Keep the bad guys out.  Who'd a thought such a thing!  Why, it is ingenious!  /sarc

While you're at it, lock up the bad guys.  Uh-oh.  Too many of them are people of color.  That would be RAAAAAAAAAAACIST!  Nope, can't do that.

Isn't it strange that the things that would actually solve a problem are the last things that the government will do?

Even better, if a guy running for office, like Trump, suggests doing any of these things, try to destroy him and spend millions doing it.

BEAM ME UP SCOTTY.  NO INTELLIGENT LIFE HERE.

Laugher of the day: Milbank calls Trump a racist

Maybe Milbank just doesn't like the taste of paper.  He offered to eat his own words awhile back when he declared that Trump wouldn't win the GOP nomination.

Milbank is a sore loser.  Trump will win, but Milbank will welsh on his bet just like I predicted.

Bwah, hah, hah!!!!

Nuclear ammonia as a Killer App ( repost )

Note:  Given that the elimination of carbon from fossil fuels cannot be done in any practical way, the only alternative that can implemented in the near future would be molten-salt reactors.  So-called "nuclear ammonia" could be synthesized with these reactors and could de-carbonize the economy.


Next Big Future

I wrote about ammonia and methanol synthesis as a hydrogen sources for fuel cells.  I noticed Kirk Sorensen is a contributor to this idea as well.  I've written about thorium too.  Got it covered!

Climate hysteria will lead nowhere

As I wrote previously, I've learned a couple things about carbon I didn't know.  It was even enlightening, to a certain extent.  Not only enlightening, but sobering.

Just now, I was thinking about how lacking in seriousness the current climate talks are.  If there really was a problem with carbon, these talks aren't going to even begin to solve them.

Of course, there's the political problem.  If you can agree that there is a long term problem with carbon, and there is, then don't you think that there needs to be an agreement upon the same?  The argument is over the causes and effects of what a problem really is, and that is to say, whether or not carbon is causing a change in climate.  But even if you set that aside, you still have the problem of what comes next after carbon.  That's because carbon is a declining resource.  Eventually, we run out of the stuff.  Something has to replace it.  If you can reach an agreement upon that fact, then something may be possible.  The focus on climate goes nowhere.  You can argue forever on that even if the climate does getter warmer.  You could argue about what's causing it, for example.  No, you need agreements.  One agreement that can be reached is that is a limited resource.  Eventually, it must be replaced by something.

There is a way to replace carbon, but it has been overlooked for forty years.  That's how you know this is completely non-serious discussion.  If you are running out of gas, you don't argue about the weather.  You look for a gas station.  We are arguing about the weather.  It is an absurd argument.

Molten salt reactors can replace carbon and it can happen soon if people would get serious about it.

Cutting back on the use of carbon will only delay the inevitable.  Wind and solar power cannot replace the role that carbon has taken on in our lifestyles.  Either we give up our lifestyles, or we find another source of energy.  Those who wish to impose taxes are only cutting back on carbon, these types of proposals cannot do anything about the need for a new energy source.

The "Coexist" bumper sticker

Saw one of these today on the road while driving.

The problem with this notion is that religions do not mix, they are like oil and water.  Some things in human experiences are like that.

If you are a true believer of a religion, then for you, your religion is the only true religion.  How can that square with accepting other religions?  It is a plea to ask someone to set aside one's own faith.  It isn't going to work.

I've read a couple articles about the bumper sticker, and I'm a little surprised at the acceptance of this rather left wing notion of coexistence.  It is ignorant in my opinion.  No religion is going to allow itself to be watered down in order to please some secular types who want it so.  If the effort becomes aggressive, so will the response be.  History has shown that religions don't die out easily.  Indeed, the Romans tried to wipe out Christianity, but failed.  So did the Communists.  Underneath the suppression of the religion lie the tiny embers of belief that will grow back into flame once the pressure is off.

Yes, it is a little surprising that in this country so much acceptance for this idea exists.  In this country, one has the opportunity to learn whatever one wishes.  Then why do so many people here seem to be so ignorant?

Two things that I didn't know about carbon dioxide

What bummed me out yesterday was the realization that the carbon issue isn't as easy as I thought.  That's the second thing I learned.  You need to "oxidize" carbon in order to get all the energy out of it.  When you do that, by definition, you create carbon dioxide.

The other thing is that human activity really is changing the atmosphere.  The political controversy is about what significance that holds for the climate.

I still don't think it holds much significance, but over the long run, it may make some difference.  We'll probably run out of fossil fuels before it does, I suspect.

How urgent then, is the problem?  Again, you will run out of fossil fuels eventually, so there really is a problem in what comes after fossil fuels.  My thinking is that if you really want to de-carbonize the energy industry, you'd better start supporting more research and development into alternatives.

Wind and solar aren't viable.  That means some new energy source must be found; like fusion, molten-salt reactors, or even so called cold fusion.

Muslims celebrating on 9.11 debunked, huh?

The media keeps saying it, but evidence that it happened keeps appearing.  Like this, for example.

There's a piece in the New Testament where Jesus said that somebody was straining at gnats and swallowing camels.  That seems to be an appropriate metaphor here.  The left wing media is straining themselves to find a gnat of "untruthfulness" in what Trump said, but the camel of terrorism has been swallowed whole.

They'll never want to do anything about it, while continuing to deny that it even exists.  Let's just sweep it into the memory hole and maybe it will disappear.

You could keep the bad guys out of the country in the first place, and that would be simple enough, but we can't do that of course.

Home again, 11.30.15; Another month in the can

November is now going into the history books.  It's getting close to evaluation time for the year.  What kind of year has it been?

Not a good year for the blog in terms of pageviews.  Just looked at it this time last year.  Traffic has fallen off the cliff.  Not sure what that's about.

I'm a year older, but a year wiser?  Hmm.  You know what?  I don't know if I am.  Don't seem to be getting anywhere with anything.  If anything, things are going downhill.

Seems like I've lost track of an item, and it is driving me nuts.  It's an off-the-grid item.  It's not that expensive, and I can replace it.  But still...

As for that off-the-grid project, well, it just gets delayed and delayed.  Maybe I get out there before I croak.

This post seems like a downer.  Should I put it up?  Well, I have to put up something.  Can't let a day go by without putting up something.

Could be that I am burnt out.  Some inspiration has been lost somewhere, somehow.

It could be time to try something different.  I've been thinking of it.  But I won't mention it now.  Perhaps I will never mention it.  It's just that it isn't the same kind of thing I've been doing here.  It would be different.  A new direction.  The old one may be stale.

Obligatory, 11.30.15; Mea Culpa with respect to Clean Coal

It looks like I overlooked something with respect to clean coal technology.  When coal is converted to coke, which is a valuable product of destructive distillation, not all that much hydrogen is produced.  Most of coal is carbon.  A significant proportion of the coal's energy comes from the conversion of carbon to carbon dioxide.

This is what I overlooked.  My idea was to not combust the carbon, but put it back into the ground.  This would in effect increase the cost of the coal by a significant amount, as much of its heat production potential comes from the combustion of the carbon, not the hydrogen.  The most valuable part of the coal then, would not be used.

A careful analysis may reveal that it would still be cheaper than other methods of energy production.  Just not nearly as cheap as before.  Without doing that careful analysis and just making a very quick guess, I'd say at least 3/4ths of the energy would be unavailable for use.  This would increase the cost by at least a factor of 3.  Or to put it another way, instead of being 20 times cheaper than oil, it would be about 7 times cheaper.  Of course, this rough ( and quick ) estimate is probably wrong as well.

Not only that, the practical consequence of putting a valuable product back in the ground would be to reject the idea.  There's no way that anybody is going to allow that.  It's like burying money, you might say.

So, I am going to walk back that rather brash statement that the destructive distillation of coal would yield a solution to the so-called AGW problem.  Perhaps it still could, but more extensive study would be required, and the industry would have to swallow hard and accept that a lot of their product could not be used anymore.

My fault here may not be absolute here.  It may still be possible to do what I proposed, but the probability of success isn't nearly as good as I thought.

Update:

The fault is absolute.  This is a bad idea.  You use up the fuel resource too fast and it doesn't produce enough energy.  Scrub this idea.

Update:

Not enough time for an entire post.  Reviewed energy ideas that I like.  Obviously, clean coal doesn't go on the list.  As for the contents of that list, it is still good.

Something Is Moving Out There

Free Republic

Dovetails nicely with what I've been writing.

However, the end result could result in anything.

Obligatory, 11.29.15; Why Globalization is failing

It will fail because it is secular humanist.   Such organizing principles do not last.  The reason being that they have no concept of future generations.  The people in these societies tend to think only of themselves, so they eventually must fail.  It is seen from the practical standpoint in the failure to reproduce.  If there are no children, there can be no society after just one generation.

Now the secular humanists think they've gotten this one beat- with immigration.  However, the Muslims will no assimilate into a Godless society.  Instead of doing that, they are going to overtake the secular humanists and take over power once their numbers get large enough.

The only way that Globalization can work if it incorporates a religion into it, which is against what drives globalization anyway--- money.  No religion will allow money to come before its conception of God.  Especially the Muslims.   Evidently, Christianity has lost that focus if it ever had it in the first place.  Christianity is other worldly and does not go well with Empires, as was seen in the late Roman Empire.

The Muslims most likely cannot hold their Empire either.  Their former Empires fell away after a short time.

Secular humanists will have to wipe out religions, but even if they do, they will die out anyway.  Nothing can sustain them over time.  With that also goes Globalization, and Globalization must fail.

Globalization must come to terms with religion if it is to survive, but it will kill itself off because it isn't compatible with religion.  Thus, it will try to exterminate religion and in doing so, will kill itself off.