Started reading the thread and I'm enjoying the back and forth. Particularly since I support your position fully.

I just wanted to point out that the referenced Reuters article about the Canadian ban actually states that the ban IS based on efficiency standards. "By banning inefficient lighting..."

I attended the Make Faire in NYC last weekend and there was a dune buggy that was turbine powered on display. It was basically a stock frame where he had removed the engine and drive train. The engine was replaced with a small turbine from a military power generator and in this particular case he used a PTO to go to a hydraulic pump and the 4 wheels were hydraulically driven. The thing was pretty sweet and was definitely something a good mechanical person could build at home. Glad to see a major manufacturer going the same route and doing it up as electric instead. This is the way to go in the future, more power, more efficient.

As a firefighter as well, I totally agree with you that there are significant challenges associated with extrication from hybrid vehicles. But most of them can be mitigated with the right training and resources. Check out some of the stuff published by Holmatro, they have tech sheets with locations of cables and sensors etc. and at least in my area they offer training courses where we can spend a night reviewing the locations and techniques on actual cars. The cables shouldn't move too far from the original locations in a crash.

Also agreed about the difference in speed. But what really scares me about these cars is the turbine. Most of the time the engine is no longer running when we show up but a turbine could still be spinning at a high rate of speed and securing the battery could get a whole lot more interesting. Not to mention what happens if the turbine fractures and exits the housing.

Yup as a matter of fact I do know how to create more land. Check out what they have done in Japan with Kansai airport as an example or Mexico City as another. Additionally there are numerous ways to develop vertically instead of horizontally (Burj Khalifa). The only things that stop most cities from expanding is restrictive zoning and cost. If you can dream it and then pay for it, you can build anything anywhere.

This is a common problem with new developments, the builders want to minimize the return period for their investment. What is the easiest way to do that? Sell the structures for a boat load of money. In the event that they are not being sold but are rented, a high cost would indicate a greater demand for housing in that area and a lack of supply. The supply could be due to poor planning or restrictive zoning. One of the most common methods to combat this problem is to through the permitting and zoning process require that a portion of the units be sold as affordable housing. There are numerous cases across the country you can reference including several recently in NYC and Chicago. You are correct about the public transportation being a problem but any sufficiently large city worth a damn has at least a bus system (notable exception of Venice due to the canals).

And that just about saran wraps it up for the bag jokes

There in lies the problem my anonymous counterpart, they are lawyers. They have an understanding of the law and the judicial process. In no way whatsoever does that alone qualify them to make decisions on what is better for the majority of the population. They have interests to protect and loyalties to pay for just the same as anybody else. When was the last time you saw a congresscritter actually put something in legislation that was good for the many and not the few, wasn't sneaked into something completely unrelated, and displayed that they have an understanding of the rights of the people and that they are working to strengthen those rights?

Wake me when the legislature actually checks executive power instead of enabling it. Wake me when the USA Patriot Act is repealed. Wake me when ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF RACE, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS have the same rights. Lastly wake me when an individual has more rights than a corporation again.

Fighting with yourself and beating yourself up about something is definitely not the same as beating yourself off about something. Be careful to separate the actions.

Not having cable doesn't mean a thing when you can have cable and still not get your local sports broadcast because the rights are owned by a rival company. Comcast owns the rights to both the NBA and NHL team in Philadelphia and you can't watch either during the regular season (normally) without having Comcast. [diety] help you if you have FIOS and are a Flyers or Sixers fan.

*Bender shines the F-Ray on Fry*
Fry: "Ow my sperm!"

So NoScript blocks this? It also says on the page that clearing the LSO will no matter so I don't think that BetterPrivacy will help with this.

Stripper Gin? I thought I noticed a distinct hint of desperation.