What Keeps a Train on the Tracks?

I didn't know this:

Vaclav Havel Dies At 75 Years-Old

In all the news coverage over Kim Jong-Il's death, the death of one of the truly great heroes of the modern world, that of Vaclav Havel, seemed over-shadowed. For those who do not know, Vaclav Havel was one of the key people in contributing to the ultimate break-up of the Soviet Union, a true hero for human freedom and liberty. He co-authored in 1977 Charter 77, a human rights manifesto calling on the Soviet Union to respect human rights and freedoms. He served time as a political prisoner for his views, but ultimately led a peaceful revolution of Czechoslovakia against the Soviet Union, eventually serving as the first president of the newly-formed Czech Republic.

I find it personally rather ironic that right after one of the great oppressors of human rights and freedoms dies, one of the great heroes for human rights and freedoms also dies. May he Rest In Peace.

High-Speed Rail Is Dead in America

This is about a week late, which is my fault, I meant to post it earlier but forgot:

LINK1
LINK2

To be honest, even though in a previous posting, I lambasted high-speed rail a good deal, I actually wouldn't mind it if it was viable, as I wouldn't mind taking a train from say New York to Los Angelos that goes slower than a jetliner but that is far roomier and more comfortable. I would not want high-speed rail to replace using the freeways though, or to require high gas taxes to subsidize it. But none of that matters now, as the whole concept is for the most part dead it seems.

The Truth About Wealth

LINK

Light Bulb Regulations Put On Hold for Nine Months

     As part of the government's recent spending bill, the Republicans in Congress inserted a piece of legislation that cuts the funding from the Energy Department to be able to enforce the new light bulb stnadards that are about start going into effect, for nine months anyway. This is a temporary reprieve, but probably won't change much, as the major light bulb manufacturers will continue along as they have been. Personally, I hope that these regulations are eventually repealed, but that is a long-shot. This is not progress, as the alternative bulbs do not offer the same quality of light as a conventional incandescent. They can get close, but they still differ, and the ones that are close cost a lot. Contrary to the claims of the advocates, incandescents are being outright banned in the U.S., just not immediately; in the short-term, the efficiency standards are just being increased (high-efficiency incandescents), but by 2020, incandescents will be banned (although I think this will be modifed if the price of the LEDs doesn't come down significantly by then): LINK
     From what I understand, it was actually the major lightbulb companies that lobbied for these higher-efficiency standards in the first place, because they wanted to force people to buy the alternative bulbs, as the regular incandescents are so cheap that the profit margin on them is very slim. If this is true (it is a fact that they lobbied for the higher-efficiency standards, but the companies official statement is probably that they did it out of care for the environment), then it is not surprising they are against any attempt at overturning or stalling the new legislation.
     The problem with the alternatives is that as it stands, aside from the high-efficiency incandescents, there is no known alternative that provides an equivalent quality of light to a regular incandescent bulb (and as said, the ones that get close are very costly). CFLs have the problems of not being dimmable or working well in the cold and of taking a bit of time to light up fully (unless again you're willing to pay a lot for the best CFLs), while LEDs have the problem of being directional light, which makes them fine for things like flashlights and headlamps, but for a general-purpose lightbulb meant to scatter light in all directions, it creates a problem. LEDs at the moment are also extremely costly (anywhere from $25 to $50 to $100 for bulbs that come close to matching a regular incandescent). The lightbulb industry thinks LEDs are the future of light and that their cost will come down rather quickly, I am skeptical of this though. Time will tell.
     What I really find ridiculous is how those criticizing the stall in the enforcement are saying that it is denying Americans more energy-efficient light bulbs that will save people money. It doesn't. People could buy those lightbulbs anytime they wish to. Allowing the original to stay wouldn't outlaw the alternative. If these alternaitve bulbs are really so superior, people would buy them and they would already be making the original incandescent obsolete. But people do not buy them because they cost too much and their light quality is inferior.
     Now in Europe, where the incandescents have been banned altogether, some are selling them as heaters (as technically, that's what conventional incandescent light bulbs are---heaters that produce some light; 95% of their energy is heat...only 5% is light). So if you sell conventional incandescents as heaters, you can say they are 95% efficient at their job! What I am wondering is, could someone start a company manufacturing conventional incandescents in the U.S. after they have been outlawed, but market them as heaters that happen to produce light...? I have a feeling the law would come down on the person...would it then go to the Courts? I could imagine the person having to prove that their "heaters" are really used as heaters and not just as an illegal way to manufacture conventional incandescents. Might be interesting to try though if one had the money to just start such a company.

Here are links to the websites selling incandecents as "heaters:"

Heatball (I love the little art graphic of the light bulb holding the sign on this site, looks hilarious)
Heatbulb

EDIT: Well as it turns out, the Heatballs were outlawed in the EU (rats!): LINK

On Regulation

This is an article on the subject of how to simplify the (likely) excessive levels of regulations in the United States: LINK

Figuring out how many regulations there are is a difficult subject, but two ways to attempt it are to look at the number of pages in the Federal Register, which publishes every regulation produced by the federal government, or to measure the amount of funding going to the federal regulatory agencies and the sizes of the staffs at said agencies. The Weidenbaum Center on the Economy, Government, and Public Policy publishes a yearly "Regulatory Report" which does just this. They can be found here: Regulatory Reports

"Hating America" by Bruce Bawer

This is from 2004, but I think the author makes some very good good points (the essay is not any anti-American diatribe, quite the opposite, but goes in-depth discussing the issue of anti-Americanism, particular in Europe): LINK