Keith,
I always say that with a little common sense, you will do a lot better that
the architects, building and HVAC engineers. He is applying a lot of common
sense, even if some of the explanations tends to get quite wild. LOL
I skimmed it and had a lot of fun so far, but many of the consequences are
quite logical. This even if the explanations for them are on the limit of
magic and too far from the simple truth. It is also easier if you have a
lot of land, where you can find the good place to build and do not have to
bother about neighbors, city planning and other small problems that
irritates our earthly life.
He got anyway further than many architects, building and HVAC engineers,
when he discovered radiation, they got stuck at air temperatures. LOL He
probably have to write a new book when he discover evaporation. I am not
sure that he really got this with convection, conductive and radiation
completely right, but that is not really important, because at least he
think a lot.
Then we come to his quite amusing and fantastic explanations on humans,
heat, sound transmission, noise and room acoustic. You can imagine that I
enjoyed it, since they are my special fields. He is at least much more
entertaining than me, who have this burden of science to carry and have a
tendency to be a lot more boring. Many of the things he recommend at the
end, are quite correct and I really enjoy how he gets there.
I look forward to get some more time to read it more in detail, it will be
fun.
Hakan
At 08:21 AM 11/26/2004, you wrote:
Hi Hakan, and all
What do you think of this, Hakan?
http://www.soilandhealth.org/03sov/0302hsted/0302homested.html
Homesteading Catalog
Roberts, Rex. Your Engineered House. New York: M.C. Evans Company, 1964.
This book can't be praised enough! Roberts is both a master builder and a
master house designer; he takes the reader step by step through designing
and building a totally sensible wooden house that defies all conventional
approaches. Roberts will help you reconsider which materials are most
sensible, instruct you in design principles, and to stand outside many
building styles that aren't really as sensible as the mass of people
might believe. Sadly, after the so-called energy crisis of the 1970s, the
so-called energy-conservation legislation in the United States mandated
national building codes that prohibited much of what Roberts suggested in
this book. Still, it is highly valuable, particularly in places where one
may freely design and build their own house largely out of wood. OUT OF PRINT.
http://www.soilandhealth.org/copyform.asp?bookcode=030211
Best wishes
Keith
If I said to the group that we could replace 50% of the use of finite and
fossil fuels, I am sure that it is not many who see that as both
realistic and achievable. In fact, most people would see it as a
reasonable goal and it could even be done within a 20 year period. This
for at least tertiary buildings, domestic buildings and transport. Brazil
is already there or even at better numbers.
Electricity production from wind, solar, hydro and biofuels will
definitely be achievable at 50%, nobody doubt that at all.
This will help a lot and will not be any risks for not continuing with
any activity.
Hakan
At 11:15 PM 11/24/2004, you wrote:
I'd say that considering biofuels as a substitute for fossil fuels in our
current parrent of economy/society, Monbiot is right.
However, biofuels from waste material and small crop diversions, as a
means of keeping mechanically powered farming and a frugal local economy
functioning in a time of fossil fuel supply shortages and dislocations
which is fast approaching, has a crucial role to play in our overall
energy supply.
It may not be possible to continue mechanically powered farming in the
long term, but we will need to keep it going for some time; we can't
switch to animal power and gardening methods overnight.
Biofuel production and use will be developed by those who want to do it
for their own purposes, and I don't think it is very important whether
those uses are viable (e.g. McDonald's parasites) over the long term.
The important thing is that the technology gets developed and spreads.
As long as we have metals and reasonably accurate machining (and it may be
possible to replace a lot of metal with ceramics), I expect that biofuel
powered engines will have a place.
Doug Woodard
St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Myles Arnott wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> I'm pretty new to this group, and have been following
> most of what has been posited and discussed with much
> interest. However, I came across this article today
> and was made to feel a little uneasy.
>
> I believe there is a lot of good (both environmental
> and humanitarian) to be achieved throught the use (and
> governmental support) of this sort of renewable
> energy, and call upon those better informed than
> myself to put my mind at ease.
>
> Are we missing the bigger picture?
>
> Yours,
>
> Myles.
>
>
>
>
> "Fuel for nought"
>
> The adoption of biofuels would be a humanitarian and
> environmental disaster
>
> George Monbiot
> Tuesday November 23, 2004
> The Guardian
[snip]
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
