Great for West of the Rockies, but how to cool the humid east?

This company (coolerado.com) has a great design for A/C in the low humidity West, as their first stage heat exchanger relies on evaporative cooling for much of its function.

There must be a way to work with nature to air condition Miami without huge power company bills. The humidity is the big culprit to be overcome. These things pique my interest. Got to be a way.

Anything that decreases dependence upon the grid, government and utility monopolies, in general is a worthy thing to pursue. It only makes sense anyway. The idea is to increase standard of living at lowest possible cost.

I guess I will add it to my list of such things I ponder from time to time over the years. I am still stuck on how to design the ultimate mobility vehicle for wheelchair bound people; something that achieves access to cabinets, stairs, wilderness, etc, and hauls ass.



Or This


this guy doesn't appear to be having fun
I think his issue is more mental illness than physical disability
He's wondering how he got there, frozen with fear

Maybe this is not exactly it, but it looks closer than some powered chairs I've seen.


That is an industry which needs to advance by leaps and bounds. Due to relatively low demand it has been stuck in primitive designs forever. The difficulties daily encountered by chair bound people in conducting basic life tasks are not always obvious to those of us without the same roadblocks. The way people get treated when we think they are sick or in need may also limit imagination in this field.

Inadequate mobility machinery somewhat adds insult to injury when all about them they see technology advancing by leaps and bounds.

Just think how much easier it is to type a letter now that we have delete buttons etc. Some of you may remember typewriters and carbon paper, and what a thrill it was when white-out came on the scene.

I still think the money spent renovating buildings could have been put toward R&D to design devices that overcome the obstacles, which would serve the handicapped individual better in the long run. Ramps are good but the whole thing became ridiculous, like most public projects.

That is what it is. I'd love to figure out this engineering problem. Someone will. I research it from time to time but never have found that one answer that hits the spot and covers all the functions I think modern technology could do.

With luck, nano technology, molecular engineering in the medical field will be able to solve many of the ills which render people confined to a chair.

I hope the ultimate, kickass, 40 mph, do-it-all wheelchair design comes to me someday soon. That is a project I could sink my teeth into. It would be a fun obsession and just the kind of workaholic endeavor I need.

Here's an example of How it Works: Oakland marijuana

OK, so now the Teamsters have managed to organize workers of a marijuana growing outfit. The biggest one I guess, or the biggest California-legal one. Feds still think they have the right to tell states how to deal with that issue. (Yay CA for ignoring the overreaching feds--for once) But, that aside, is it not obvious that unions are merely businesses who worm in under completely bogus pretense?

I assure you, no workers in the marijuana factory are angry and feel victimized. There is a payoff for the company though. That brings us to part 2.

Part 2 is that the city of Oakland has decided to issue 4, count em, Four, permits to commercial pot growers. Right now that covers the medicinal marijuana industry. I do not know the ins and outs, but people commission outfits like the unionized place to manufacture their pot for them. Plenty of cancer patients have no realistic ability to cultivate it themselves. Besides, in my mind it is just natural trade.

OK. So why are there only four permits, or permits at all? You know if it gets to be legal all around, the competition is going to be wicked--high quality, low prices, yipee! Maybe not.

The Oakland model which is reminiscent of many business boondoggles throughout history, guarantees a dearth of competitors, higher prices and to make it tougher, they'll let the union have a say directly or indirectly. The union being as superfluous a player as the Oakland City council. I'm sure they'll also manage legislation which prevents outsiders from competing by bringing in product from Alpine, for example.

If this decision, regarding who, out of the dozens and dozens of applicants, will get the coveted permit, doesn't reek of corruption to you, then someone's been drinking the koolaid far too long. They are pretending to look at all these noble parameters, but that is always the way they play the corruption game.

The Oakland/teamsters example appears so transparently corrupt and sleazy to me, I had hoped that pointing it out might cause people to consider other issues which have been similarly handled.

Although cloaked in nobility, the result is to lock out the competition, individual honest entrepreneurs, and make money dishonorably. It really does happen a lot. All due to the simple process of ignoring the question, "Does this really need to be under government's thumb to this extent, or at all?". Unions only get these extortion opportunities because government backs them. But the union part is minor. Just a piece of the puzzle.

You know they are in bed with the commissioner responsible for deciding who gets to do business. And it is one big orgy between the mobster pot companies, union and government. If a pot company wasn't mobster, by the time they play ball with the union and government, they will be by default.

The point is not the product, but the dynamic. All kinds of industries and businesses have followed this path. It is what has lead to many societal problems and economic strangeness over the years, Also to wars, I venture to say. Because no one insists on answering the above stated question, and the additional question; "where in the Constitution is this right granted to government?" Simple as that.

From most statements out of Obama and other politicians I can see that they have somehow decided the functions of government cover any that may appeal to them on a given day. That is where it goes awry.

West'll Get You

Sometimes I look around out here, just driving to the PO Box or wherever, and wonder would I ever be happy anywhere that did not have an escape into scenery and such like this. In no time you can be out away from the madding crowd. Of course where I live it is less than no time because I live out where people are more scarce than rabbits and coyotes. So is paving.

The legal and law aspect of the state annoys me greatly but until I make reasonable money that is no issue. Must be the way illegals feel. It is to their detriment to attempt to be legal up to a point. In the old days you weren't punished for initiative. Now you are and unless you really make it to a substantial level the process runs you ragged. If you are too poor to matter you don't see it. Very stupid way to do things.

But it is such a pleasant place geographically and climate-wise. Something about the West, its history, I don't know. It gets into you and going back to small country seems un-enticing. Somehow the world just looks bigger in the west. It starts in west Texas or thereabouts and goes from there. I miss places that did not constantly worry about fire or bears, but damn. What can you do?

At the same time I miss parts of the South and the fact that the Atlantic Ocean is not cold like the Pacific--most of the time. The beaches here, as far as the beach itself, could spoil you. They are all OK.

No doubt about it, the only way to bring inner peace is to make some dough and have the mobility and dwelling angle worked out so I can spend time as I wish in about five or six spots around the country. If I achieved that, I bet I'd spend the Lion's share in Colorado, but you never know.

The grandeur, that one might not notice unless he came in fresh as I did, is such that when you get away from the traffic and el cajon highway patrol, you can't help but believe there is much in life to grab, and that life is good whetheryou participate in it or not. I really do want to be a participant, and hope to eventually feel a part of it the majority of the time rather than just once in awhile, like now.

My landlord has a plaque by her front door, near the basket where I leave the rent. It says "joy is a choice". That's it. It fits the place and the lady of that house. I never noticed that until last week when I paid rent. I really believe that is true.

Flags and I'm Either Confusing Myself or I'm On to Something

Many things that people consider patriotic in the sense of revering and honoring the concept of a free nation which honors the idea that the individual owns his own life and property may be just the opposite. Considering that the Pledge of allegiance was not put in place right off the bat, and I believe motivated toward reinforcing to new settlers what country they were in, I'm not sure its modern usage is always in concordance with the principles of a nation whose rights are granted by the people rather than visa versa. Also the "under God" phrase was not in the original pledge -- not a huge issue to me, but obviously it has been used to squander tax money in the courts.

According to flag rules the order of flags, if flown on the same pole or in a procession always place country supreme. I wonder, since the national authority is supposed to derive from the people, then the states if the order should not be reversed; city most prominent, then state, then country. In matters of international nature, then country should be first.

If one holds to the philosophy of the national authority only setting certain limits on all government within its boundaries but then having no rights to meddle in local affairs which do not step on the hard and fast rights of individuals, I wonder if the symbolism of constantly subjugating local and individual autonomy to the whim of the federal authorities has not been somewhat destructive. Destructive here meaning a contributor in the erosion of individual liberties, and the increasing burdens placed on citizens at the national level.

Many would argue that it took federal action to abolish slavery therefore leaving things to local authorities is bad. I would argue that slavery violated the spirit of the principles which were to be observed by all and that it was a big flaw from the beginning. They are throwing the baby out with the bath water. Slavery retards the development of any society and no good comes of it. In matters of public works and how taxes are spent, the least centralized control is generally the most effective while also allowing for maximum individual choice and freedom. We lost that.

I don't know, it just makes me wonder. Many of the conventions, pledges, under God mottos and such came about in the 1900's and served more as a conditioning for a national conformity reminiscent of vowing allegiance to a king. I do not believe it would have been so easy to deploy military forces to places which most of us had to look up on a map because we never heard of them, and still have questions about the real reasons for the action. The Guard was supposed to be the state militia, not something the president could order overseas when they spread the military too thin. That went out the window. I do not approve of that.

A vow to defend the Constitution is a vow to defend liberty of the citizens. That is different than the Pledge of Allegiance and makes more sense to me. I had to take that vow in my fringe military adventure. It is easier to swallow that vow because the Constitution is a document which was designed in hopes of preventing tyranny, and limiting the scope, authority and growth of the federal government. Most lawmakers have violated that oath from the mid 1800's on.

A blind pledge of allegiance discounts the duty set out in the Declaration of Independence to buck authority when it oversteps too far.

These things are what I wonder about. I'd be happy to see the people now in power get voted out, but I am highly suspicious of those who may replace them. The thing on their side is that many are not life long politicians. I would vote out all career politicians, and certainly encourage any new ones to repeal all provisions which give elected officials health care, pensions and other perks which make no sense for people claiming to sacrifice for public service.

The main worry is that in defrocking the Islamic movement for what it is, people get all wound up trying to attach religion of other sorts to politics, and that is a huge mistake. For one thing they will end up clouding their reasonable fiscal policies and attention to other substantive matters will be lost. Got to go on reason and principle which would not infringe on their ability to practice their religion. I'm afraid one side will lay down and let lunatics really make a religious problem in communities while the other will give fuel to it by reinforcing the notion of a holy war. I say you screw with rights of others you get squashed. And if you try to make mini religious states within our boundaries, with practices that violate our laws, you get nailed. Simple as that.

Anyway, I'd like to feel less under the thumb. I do hear more and more talk of repealing the 16th amendment and disbanding the IRS which is nice, and this from groups and people not generally maligned as wackos. I know Homeland security suggests anyone who touts the Constitution or suggests the IRS is bad is a terror possibility. But I consider Homeland security department to be as big a threat of domestic terror as any we have. And they have a track record of it.

Yea. Maybe we think upside down. The highest authority should be the individual, then his community, and on down the line to the national authorities. The idea being that we voluntarily grant rights to these entities, and agree to be represented in the larger bodies; city, state, etc., but only to the degree that such organization must exist. Their power is from the people, and their rights are privileges granted by us, in theory. Our rights are automatic and anything not forbidden is fair game. And there is supposed to be a big limit on what can be forbidden or demanded by government.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see it at this point.

I do realize that my idea of what is right, and what I most would love to see enacted would be a system which probably goes a little beyond what we started with in this country in regard to installing severe limits on the power of government and the whim of the majority and any authorities.