Sunday, February 19, 2006
Poltergeist
This morning I was enjoying a good sleep-in when there was a sudden and prolonged crash and clatter, of the kind most likely caused by cats knocking a pile of fragil crockery off the kitchen counter and onto the floor. I vaulted from my bed, raced into the kitchen, and found - nothing. Same in every other room in the house. Not a thing out of place. So I did my yoga, showered, fed the cats, checked my email, and went out to get the Sunday paper. Not in the driveway. I checked out in front of the fence, because sometimes it doesn't get that far. Not a trace of it anywhere. Grumbling, I went back inside, called the AZ Republic line and requested a replacement. Then I turned around, and found the newspaper sitting in plain sight on the chaise in the music room.
Conclusion: I have a noisy yet helpful poltergeist who likes to bring in the paper.
Conclusion.1: I am losing my marbles. They say memory is the second thing to go...
-------------
On the fungibility of oil
I just have to comment on today's Dilbert cartoon, because I've seen this argument before, and it's highly specious. There's no point in our conserving oil, because if we don't use the oil other (developing) countries will. This assumes demand is a constant. If Developing Country X isn't able to buy enough oil to meet its demand, it's because the price is too high, not because the U.S. got to the pump first. So if the U.S. suddenly stopped buying oil from Terrorist-supporting Country Y, Country X wouldn't be able to take up the slack unless Country Y lowered their prices - hence less money for terrorists, if that's your reason for conserving oil. More importantly, it makes the U.S. less politically beholden to Terrorist-supporting Country Y.
WTF, I'm not talking about piddlin' little Developing Country X, I'm talking about China! Damn straight. China's going to be entering the the oil market in a big way in the coming decades, potentially becoming a bigger consumer than the U.S. and putting us in Developing Country X's shoes - forced to pay more, develop alternatives, or make do with less. True, we may be able to develop more domestic sources of oil, but without an embargo or significant tarriffs, China's going to be the primary consumer of that too. This is the pragmatic argument, and more persuasive IMO. People don't agree on politics, but everyone feels a hit to the wallet.
Footnote: Personally, I find recent advancements in "alternative" energy sources one of the more exciting technological frontiers; but I'm not ready to trade in my Corolla for an Impala E85.
0 comments
This morning I was enjoying a good sleep-in when there was a sudden and prolonged crash and clatter, of the kind most likely caused by cats knocking a pile of fragil crockery off the kitchen counter and onto the floor. I vaulted from my bed, raced into the kitchen, and found - nothing. Same in every other room in the house. Not a thing out of place. So I did my yoga, showered, fed the cats, checked my email, and went out to get the Sunday paper. Not in the driveway. I checked out in front of the fence, because sometimes it doesn't get that far. Not a trace of it anywhere. Grumbling, I went back inside, called the AZ Republic line and requested a replacement. Then I turned around, and found the newspaper sitting in plain sight on the chaise in the music room.
Conclusion: I have a noisy yet helpful poltergeist who likes to bring in the paper.
Conclusion.1: I am losing my marbles. They say memory is the second thing to go...
-------------
On the fungibility of oil
I just have to comment on today's Dilbert cartoon, because I've seen this argument before, and it's highly specious. There's no point in our conserving oil, because if we don't use the oil other (developing) countries will. This assumes demand is a constant. If Developing Country X isn't able to buy enough oil to meet its demand, it's because the price is too high, not because the U.S. got to the pump first. So if the U.S. suddenly stopped buying oil from Terrorist-supporting Country Y, Country X wouldn't be able to take up the slack unless Country Y lowered their prices - hence less money for terrorists, if that's your reason for conserving oil. More importantly, it makes the U.S. less politically beholden to Terrorist-supporting Country Y.
WTF, I'm not talking about piddlin' little Developing Country X, I'm talking about China! Damn straight. China's going to be entering the the oil market in a big way in the coming decades, potentially becoming a bigger consumer than the U.S. and putting us in Developing Country X's shoes - forced to pay more, develop alternatives, or make do with less. True, we may be able to develop more domestic sources of oil, but without an embargo or significant tarriffs, China's going to be the primary consumer of that too. This is the pragmatic argument, and more persuasive IMO. People don't agree on politics, but everyone feels a hit to the wallet.
Footnote: Personally, I find recent advancements in "alternative" energy sources one of the more exciting technological frontiers; but I'm not ready to trade in my Corolla for an Impala E85.
0 comments
0 Comments:
