Earth to America
Nov 24th 2005, 3:20 am
#31
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,271
Re: Earth to America
Originally Posted by Patrick
I deleted mine too, lets delete these two and noone will ever know, it will be our dirty secret
im sorry for that one...no I really am
Last edited by Angry White Pyjamas; Nov 24th 2005 at 3:22 am.
Nov 24th 2005, 3:28 am
#32
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,264
Re: Earth to America
Don't know where mr/s Flipper get his/her imformation from but as far as I'm aware the scientific argument isn't weighted 50/50 for or against climate change it's more 90% agree 10% disagree.
But it's reported in the media as an even for or against issue.
Annette
But it's reported in the media as an even for or against issue.
Annette
Nov 24th 2005, 3:39 am
#33
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 30,102
Re: Earth to America
Originally Posted by nethead
Don't know where mr/s Flipper get his/her imformation from but as far as I'm aware the scientific argument isn't weighted 50/50 for or against climate change it's more 90% agree 10% disagree.
But it's reported in the media as an even for or against issue.
Annette
But it's reported in the media as an even for or against issue.
Annette
Nov 24th 2005, 5:50 am
#34
Just me!
Joined: Dec 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 752
Re: Earth to America
its a lovely idea to do something about the enviroment - but ultimatly it costs money, which as sad as it is to say..... most people dont want to put their hands in their pockets and would rather bury their heads in the sand!
Ant
Ant
Nov 24th 2005, 12:04 pm
#35
Concierge
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 46,383
Re: Earth to America
Same here and has been for years. A bin for glass, plastic, newspapers and cans. Location: Westchester County, New York
As for the debate on coming to the US for betterment vs. marriage to a USC, either way it is for betterment. So you married an American. You then sat down and discussed which country you were going to live in, UK or US. (and yes, some didn't have a choice because of outside factors, i.e. inability to move children from parental access) The decision apparently was that the better country for you to live in at the present time was the US since you are here. Love and marriage is only the reason why you had a choice. For others the choice was made by a different type of visa.
Rete
As for the debate on coming to the US for betterment vs. marriage to a USC, either way it is for betterment. So you married an American. You then sat down and discussed which country you were going to live in, UK or US. (and yes, some didn't have a choice because of outside factors, i.e. inability to move children from parental access) The decision apparently was that the better country for you to live in at the present time was the US since you are here. Love and marriage is only the reason why you had a choice. For others the choice was made by a different type of visa.
Rete
Originally Posted by Angry White Pyjamas
Actually I disagree there:
U.S. recycling rates for commonly recycled consumer goods in 2003 are listed below:
Newspapers: 82.4 percent
Corrugated Cardboard Boxes: 71.3 percent
Steel Cans: 60.0 percent
Yard Trimmings: 56.3 percent
Aluminum Beer and Soft Drink Cans: 43.9 percent
Scrap Tires: 35.6 percent
Magazines: 33.0 percent
Plastic Milk and Water Bottles: 31.9 percent
Plastic Soft Drink Bottles: 25.2 percent
Glass Containers: 22.0 percent
The United States, however, also leads the industrialized world in recycling. The United States recycled 24 percent of its waste in 1995, the most recent year for which comparative international data is available. Switzerland and Japan came in second and third, recycling 23 percent and 20 percent of their discard stream, respectively.
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/faq.htm#7
We have recycling bins here in out community for paper, plastic, aluminium and "Other". Which we use every day. They are completly filled and emptied every other day.
U.S. recycling rates for commonly recycled consumer goods in 2003 are listed below:
Newspapers: 82.4 percent
Corrugated Cardboard Boxes: 71.3 percent
Steel Cans: 60.0 percent
Yard Trimmings: 56.3 percent
Aluminum Beer and Soft Drink Cans: 43.9 percent
Scrap Tires: 35.6 percent
Magazines: 33.0 percent
Plastic Milk and Water Bottles: 31.9 percent
Plastic Soft Drink Bottles: 25.2 percent
Glass Containers: 22.0 percent
The United States, however, also leads the industrialized world in recycling. The United States recycled 24 percent of its waste in 1995, the most recent year for which comparative international data is available. Switzerland and Japan came in second and third, recycling 23 percent and 20 percent of their discard stream, respectively.
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/faq.htm#7
We have recycling bins here in out community for paper, plastic, aluminium and "Other". Which we use every day. They are completly filled and emptied every other day.
Nov 24th 2005, 12:51 pm
#36
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,271
Re: Earth to America
Whether anyone may think they are "better off" or not (although there has been no definition of what that actually means so far) Everyone that is or has been an expat must surely be better off in one way: Experience. The experiences that come with living in another country and living another culture. That, surely, is priceless.
Nov 24th 2005, 12:54 pm
#37
Pagan Sex God
Joined: May 2002
Location: Living in Oblivion
Posts: 3,668
Re: Earth to America
Originally Posted by Angry White Pyjamas
Whether anyone may think they are "better off" or not (although there has been no definition of what that actually means so far) Everyone that is or has been an expat must surely be better off in one way: Experience. The experiences that come with living in another country and living another culture. That, surely, is priceless.
Nov 24th 2005, 1:41 pm
#38
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,271
Re: Earth to America
Originally Posted by Patrick
For the rest of us, there's Mastercard
Nov 24th 2005, 2:46 pm
#39
Account Closed
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 853
Re: Earth to America
Originally Posted by Angry White Pyjamas
Actually I disagree there:
U.S. recycling rates for commonly recycled consumer goods in 2003 are listed below:
Newspapers: 82.4 percent
Corrugated Cardboard Boxes: 71.3 percent
Steel Cans: 60.0 percent
Yard Trimmings: 56.3 percent
Aluminum Beer and Soft Drink Cans: 43.9 percent
Scrap Tires: 35.6 percent
Magazines: 33.0 percent
Plastic Milk and Water Bottles: 31.9 percent
Plastic Soft Drink Bottles: 25.2 percent
Glass Containers: 22.0 percent
The United States, however, also leads the industrialized world in recycling. The United States recycled 24 percent of its waste in 1995, the most recent year for which comparative international data is available. Switzerland and Japan came in second and third, recycling 23 percent and 20 percent of their discard stream, respectively.
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/faq.htm#7
We have recycling bins here in out community for paper, plastic, aluminium and "Other". Which we use every day. They are completly filled and emptied every other day.
U.S. recycling rates for commonly recycled consumer goods in 2003 are listed below:
Newspapers: 82.4 percent
Corrugated Cardboard Boxes: 71.3 percent
Steel Cans: 60.0 percent
Yard Trimmings: 56.3 percent
Aluminum Beer and Soft Drink Cans: 43.9 percent
Scrap Tires: 35.6 percent
Magazines: 33.0 percent
Plastic Milk and Water Bottles: 31.9 percent
Plastic Soft Drink Bottles: 25.2 percent
Glass Containers: 22.0 percent
The United States, however, also leads the industrialized world in recycling. The United States recycled 24 percent of its waste in 1995, the most recent year for which comparative international data is available. Switzerland and Japan came in second and third, recycling 23 percent and 20 percent of their discard stream, respectively.
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/faq.htm#7
We have recycling bins here in out community for paper, plastic, aluminium and "Other". Which we use every day. They are completly filled and emptied every other day.
That's good to know AWP - it must be that Oklahoma is lagging behind, as usual!
Nov 24th 2005, 2:55 pm
#40
Mr. Grumpy
Joined: Jun 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 3,100
Re: Earth to America
I think the US government should slap a huge gas-guzzler tax on vehicles (non comercial) over 4 litres in engine size.
this will affect the big german luxury cars where the owners can afford it
and it will affect the domestic manufacturers who will be disincentivised to manufacture cars and suvs with engines that have crap power per litre figures
for example, the v8 engine in the grang cherokee is crap - 4.7-liter produces 235bhp
the 3 liter engine in the bmw x5 produces on 10bhp less
the 2 liter engine in the honda s2000 produces more power FFS! (albeit not a great comparison)
this will affect the big german luxury cars where the owners can afford it
and it will affect the domestic manufacturers who will be disincentivised to manufacture cars and suvs with engines that have crap power per litre figures
for example, the v8 engine in the grang cherokee is crap - 4.7-liter produces 235bhp
the 3 liter engine in the bmw x5 produces on 10bhp less
the 2 liter engine in the honda s2000 produces more power FFS! (albeit not a great comparison)
Nov 24th 2005, 3:04 pm
#41
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,271
Re: Earth to America
Originally Posted by BritGuyTN
I think the US government should slap a huge gas-guzzler tax on vehicles (non comercial) over 4 litres in engine size.
this will affect the big german luxury cars where the owners can afford it
and it will affect the domestic manufacturers who will be disincentivised to manufacture cars and suvs with engines that have crap power per litre figures
for example, the v8 engine in the grang cherokee is crap - 4.7-liter produces 235bhp
the 3 liter engine in the bmw x5 produces on 10bhp less
the 2 liter engine in the honda s2000 produces more power FFS! (albeit not a great comparison)
this will affect the big german luxury cars where the owners can afford it
and it will affect the domestic manufacturers who will be disincentivised to manufacture cars and suvs with engines that have crap power per litre figures
for example, the v8 engine in the grang cherokee is crap - 4.7-liter produces 235bhp
the 3 liter engine in the bmw x5 produces on 10bhp less
the 2 liter engine in the honda s2000 produces more power FFS! (albeit not a great comparison)
My truck is 5.3L and produces around 300 bhp. But...it also produces large dollops of torque - around 330ft lbs at low revs - which means it can haul large payloads and tow heavy trailers. So should I be penalised for having a vehicle that I use to tow a large trailer when a lesser engine wouldnt do it? (the s2000 produces 167ftlb and so could hardly tow a wet paper bag).
Nov 24th 2005, 3:10 pm
#42
Forum Regular
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 249
Re: Earth to America
Originally Posted by Angry White Pyjamas
My truck is 5.3L and produces around 300 bhp. But...it also produces large dollops of torque - around 330ft lbs at low revs - which means it can haul large payloads and tow heavy trailers. So should I be penalised for having a vehicle that I use to tow a large trailer when a lesser engine wouldnt do it? (the s2000 produces 167ftlb and so could hardly tow a wet paper bag).
Nov 24th 2005, 5:11 pm
#43
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,750
Re: Earth to America
Originally Posted by Roadster280
The Dodge Charger Hemi (and I believe some other Hemis) has a variable displacement system. Basically it shuts off fuel to 4 of the cylinders when not needed, and opens up instantly on demand. What a good idea. Huge power and economy too. Its fuel figures are great. So is its performance. If only the body were more practical than a 4 door saloon.
Much as I hate the dodge adverts and all that macho crap associated with dodge, trucks and even cars in general, that is a great idea
