That Other Operating System Continues Its Decline

“The Federal Digital Analytics Program (DAP) reports that while Windows is the most popular end-user operating system, it’s dropped below 50 percent to 49.2 percent. This is based on 2.17 billion visits over the past 90 days to more than 400 executive branch government domains across about 5,000 total websites, including every cabinet department.”
 
See Today’s most popular operating systems
Chuckle. Linux operating systems have relegated M$’s operating system to less than 50% share of usage on the web according to the US government. Most of the change comes due to increasing usage of mobile devices where TOOS is almost non-existent. It still commands the vast majority of desktop OS.

The big winner is the Linux kernel. The vociferous opponents of GNU/Linux who haunt this blog can’t have it both ways. If GNU/Linux is not “GNU” and is Linux, then Android/Linux can’t be just Android. It’s Linux underneath. Yes, it is. We can see the source code.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

51 Responses to That Other Operating System Continues Its Decline

  1. Kurkosdr says:

    I am not trading in gold or gold options, just exploration/mining stocks.

    Aha. Wise choice, then. Glad to see there are still people who see the value of investing in stocks with actual value underneath instead of trading paper gold or Twitter bubble-stocks.

  2. dougman wrote, “the last deer you showed us, it wasn’t even you who took the shot!”

    Sigh. There were two of use guarding sectors at the same spot. If I’d had that sector it would have been I who took the shot and killed the deer. I’ve shot a lot of deer. I know how to do it.

    dougman also wrote, ” If you knew anything about plant nutrition, which you don’t, your lazy ass would never bother with such work to start. If you have clumpy grass clippings you are either waiting too long to mow the lawn, your blades are dull as a butter knife, your grass is wet, or your mower sucks.”

    Who said anything about “clumpy grass clippings” whatever those are? Grass clipping make great compost. The worms do eat them. They decay. The result has free nitrates and phosphate which plants can readily absorb. My lawn was in great shape but was winter-killed. It’s coming back and will be reseeded with a tougher grass next spring. By late summer, I will have some grass-clippings for the garden.

  3. dougman says:

    “I dare say that supplemented with venison, rabbit and grouse, we could do alright.”

    Deer? Come on, the last deer you showed us, it wasn’t even you who took the shot!

    Grouse and Rabbit does not have enough fat for you to live on, you would starve to death.

    “Lawn clipping are indeed excellent compost material.”

    WRONG! If you knew anything about plant nutrition, which you don’t, your lazy ass would never bother with such work to start. If you have clumpy grass clippings you are either waiting too long to mow the lawn, your blades are dull as a butter knife, your grass is wet, or your mower sucks.

    In your case, the best thing for you is to compost your table scraps using worms. Build some 30′ beds, continuously rotate the worm trays into each bed.

    Either way, building soils and composting is a waste of time, as I said, if you knew about plant nutrition you would be able to grow plants in any medium. For example, I use concrete sand and peat moss for my raised beds, last year I grew a stand of corn in sand, SAND!

    A local farmer saw what I’ve done and said, young man, you just learned how to grow corn on a beach. I laughed but beach real estate is expensive, and not to mention prone to flooding, high-winds and saltiness.

  4. Kurkosdr wrote, “What does the company that made your gold stock/gold contract supposedly do with the gold they supposedly have waiting for you to claim it in order to cover their security costs?”

    I am not trading in gold or gold options, just exploration/mining stocks. The gold is in the ground, safe and sound. If someone wants to take the gold they will have to pay for my shares a heck of a lot more than the current price. I have the best of both worlds. I don’t have to pay for freight, security, taxes or anything else. The only tax is on the funds I withdraw from my Retirement Income Fund.

  5. Kurkosdr says:

    bank is loans = bank loans

  6. Kurkosdr says:

    To more clear, the idea that someone will hold gold for you and hence burden the security costs associated with that practice, just to sell you a “gold stock”/”gold contract” at the normal price of a bar of gold or even below that, is insane. It is yet another scam where the actual asset backing the paper is 1/100th of what it supposed to be and which rides on the “greater fool” theory where everyone hopes to get out of it in time before the scam goes bust, much like derivatives, CDOs and Lehman. The problem is that everyone thinks that way.

    At least when it comes to a traditional fractional reserve system the bank is loans this money to other people and is intended to make a profit to compensate for the security costs involved with handling money. What does the company that made your gold stock/gold contract supposedly do with the gold they supposedly have waiting for you to claim it in order to cover their security costs? How can they sell it to you at the normal price of gold or even below when they have those security costs? It doesn’t check out. Much like CDOs, derivatives and Lehmann. Or Madoff Securities. Let’s hope the cash-out moment (where an 1.5% of contract-holders decide to redeem their contracts but the sum of the backing assets is only 1/100th the sum of all the contracts and the scam goes bust) is beyond your lifetime.

  7. Kurkosdr says:

    My bank is just my stock broker. I’m still the registered owner of the shares and they are doing quite well.

    People who bought Lehmann paper also had a bank that was “just their stock broker”. They were too “the registered owner of the shares and they were doing quite well” (for a while).

    youtu(dot)be/YtamjvrZWA8

    Make what you will out of that.

    PS: But just in case, have look at those gold stocks/gold contracts and double-check they say you will get your gold no matter what otherwise the bank will be held criminally liable (they probably don’t say that, there are terms attached, just like those people who tried to get their money out of Lehmann the last moment discovered).

  8. dougman wrote, “You cannot live off fruit and nuts. I dare you to try though, be my guest!”

    I dare say that supplemented with venison, rabbit and grouse, we could do alright. Lawn clipping are indeed excellent compost material. Proper composting kills most weed seeds and a good lawn will not have many weeds except some clover and dandelions both of which are easy to control in a garden. I’ve several times made a lawn on clay and created a lush lawn and rich garden with the results.

  9. dougman says:

    “dougman, pulling random numbers out of his anus, wrote, “$2000/year will be sucked out of you pension Pogsey to start””

    Coming from someone that does not use toilet paper, I find that last part humorous.

  10. DrLoser wrote, “you built your useless and dangerous T-Frame”.

    It has served us very well. I will use it to lift the engine and the alternator into place perhaps this week as spring-like weather has arrived. In the future I could also use it to lift some Big Max pumpkins or heavily loaded pots.

  11. dougman says:

    “I have dozens of fruit trees started, a few nut trees and I’m going to put in two long rows of grapes this year. It should yield hundreds of pounds of fruit annually. I haven’t had much success with vegetables lately but with the lawn clippings I should obtain it will happen.”

    You cannot live off fruit and nuts. I dare you to try though, be my guest!

    Lawn clippings will do nothing to provide you with vegetables Pogsey. In fact, you’ll get nothing but weeds, you should build yourself a plot say 40×40, tilled with that stupid Alibaba monstrosity down to about 6″ or so. Then get yourself a seeder, some irrigation tape, some poly low-tunnels then a few hand tools. Start with that, otherwise you are just pissing into the wind.

  12. DrLoser wrote, “25% was simple import duties”.

    We have free trade with China. No duties. There were some federal tax and various fees to move the equipment through Canada Customs. Ocean freight was about $500 as was delivery to my yard from the seaport. I was charged for some silly stuff like moving goods from a Chinese pallet to a Canadian one to keep foreign wood out of Canada, or was that for the alternator. I forget which one but the port of Vancouver makes a lot of money from trade.

  13. DrLoser says:

    Silly, Trump is the most socialist president I’ve ever encountered in my life.

    Just when I think I have seen you plumb the very depths of your ignorance, Pog, you can “trump” me by being even more ignorant.

    Boiled any frogs recently?

  14. DrLoser says:

    About half of the final cost of my cultivator went to Canadian businesses operating in Canada.

    You did once show us the math, Robert, but without referring back, this sounds like the pathetic squeaks of a weasel.

    From memory, about 25% was simple import duties — and it would be hard to define those as “going to Canadian businesses” — and about another 25% went to trucking and delivery.

    Logistics is all very well and good, Robert, but to maintain a healthy economy, you actually have to build things, rather than just shuffle other countries’ produce around.

    The local economy also benefits if you don’t buy a piece of totally worthless crap.

    Still, it made you happy for a few weeks whilst you built your useless and dangerous T-Frame and all the rest of it. You can’t buy happiness! (Chuckle.)

  15. dougman, pulling random numbers out of his anus, wrote, “$2000/year will be sucked out of you pension Pogsey to start”.

    Nonsense. I don’t use anywhere near that much in carbon-fuels and I don’t buy that much in goods each year. The tax is a tiny increment in costs of most businesses. Labour is their biggest cost often and the tax doesn’t touch that.

  16. dougman wrote, “I do not see you growing one iota of anything. Besides that, you need protein as well, are you going to grow chickens and cows?”

    I have dozens of fruit trees started, a few nut trees and I’m going to put in two long rows of grapes this year. It should yield hundreds of pounds of fruit annually. I haven’t had much success with vegetables lately but with the lawn clippings I should obtain it will happen. Deer-hunting certainly brings in plenty of protein but I’m trying to grow peas and beans as well. Peas will grow in my soil as long as it doesn’t rain too much. Beans, not so much. I get back my seed…

    My bank is just my stock broker. I’m still the registered owner of the shares and they are doing quite well. I suppose it’s possible some criminal act could deprive me of my shares or inflation could reduce the value of the currency to nothing, but since my wealth is ultimately based on gold in the ground it’s about as secure as it gets. Holding gold is silly as it’s not a liquid currency. If you have kilos of gold piled up, how do you shop for peanuts?

  17. dougman says:

    “Nope. I’m leveraged extensively with a big bank guarding the account. It’s pretty safe. There’s lots of gold in the ground just waiting to be dug up.”

    A big bank guarding your account? Big banks can easily wreck your account, leaving you with nothing.

    “I’m hoping my garden will eventually feed us in a few years.”

    Few years? I do not see you growing one iota of anything. Besides that, you need protein as well, are you going to grow chickens and cows?

  18. dougman says:

    “Only a minor portion of Canada’s manufacturing depends on carbon-based fuel”

    You totally over-looked the message. Regardless of source, all manufacturing will be taxed carbon credits. At least Australia was smart enough to repeal the carbon tax. It only took them two years of higher prices, fewer jobs, and no environmental benefits before they abandoned their carbon tax.

    It will raise the price of fuel required to grow and transport food, grocery bills will rise in Canada. Annually, it will cost $1028 per person, or $4112 for the average family of four, so in essence everyone will pay it.

    $2000/year will be sucked out of you pension Pogsey to start, just so your country can tax an essential element. Next it will be a tax on carbon-based life.

  19. kurkosdr wrote, “Your gold investments are in physical gold you have touched with your hands right?”

    Nope. I’m leveraged extensively with a big bank guarding the account. It’s pretty safe. There’s lots of gold in the ground just waiting to be dug up. With Trump shaking up the world, gold prices rising, and exploration continuing there’s lots of upside. I can’t eat gold of course, so I’m hoping my garden will eventually feed us in a few years. Meanwhile, TLW has an income and she will feed me a while longer, I hope.

  20. kurkosdr says:

    Of course, but not if your country is producing anything. By 2020, Canada will see a mass migration of manufacturers due to the nefarious carbon-tax.

    At which point the government will increase taxes for everyone to cover the loss of income, while finding cute names for those taxes (“carbon tax”, “methane tax”, “parking tax”, “congestion tax”, “real-estate tax”, “because we can be-atch, tax”), and people like Pogson will flee to a more conservative country with their money, without changing their “progressive” and globalist views.

    You’ve heard of goods and services, you know stuff that makes up a GDP, eh?

    Ahh… the GDP, that marvelous accounting invention created to cover-up the fact that running a massive trade deficit will eventually destroy a country. How much of that GDP is caused by poor people loading more debt on already overloaded credit cards they cannot repay? But, the GDP is good, everything is good. Unless a credit crunch happens. At which point the GDP suddenly takes a dive and the government is forced to either increase taxes on all people, or implement the tax on money savings known as money-printing. Seriously, how is it possible to buy more than we export and still have a healthy economy?

    PS: Gotta commend you on buying gold though. Because no government can print the damn thing at will, you will never end up like the Venezuelans, wiping your ass with banknotes that used to be a life’s worth savings. But your progressivist-globalist ideas are dooming other pensioneers who rely on the country’s ability to produce and recruit people in factories (to have a healthy economy and pensions fund that will be able to support their pensions) as they have no gold investments.

    PPS: Your gold investments are in physical gold you have touched with your hands right? Because any quick search will prove that the value of all those “gold contracts” is dozens of multiple times the total amount of gold ever mined by humanity[1]. Which means that if there is ever a cash out moment, for whatever reason, there will be another Madoff Moment(tm). Only trust gold you have held with your hands (and preferably stored in a vault only you have access yourself, some banks still provide such vaults).

    [1] (don’t know if the link is reliable, I am just giving you a small clue) therealasset(dot)co(dot)uk/how-to-guide/about-gold/background-gold-investing/paper-gold/

  21. dougman wrote, “Canada will see a mass migration of manufacturers due to the nefarious carbon-tax.”

    Only a minor portion of Canada’s manufacturing depends on carbon-based fuel: Alberta, and the eastern provinces. Ontario is largely nuclear, Quebec, Manitoba and BC use hydro-electricity. Saskatchewan could be hurt by the tax because they largely are involved with agriculture and they depend on oil and coal in the southern parts of their province. The biggest effect will be on transportation and heating where diesel, gasoline and propane or natural gas are widely used. The tax is intended to discourage wasteful use of such fuels. The economy can adjust by using more efficient trucks, electric vehicles in/around cities and switching to solar/geothermal heating. It’s about time. This tax is not a burden on the economy but a stimulus. It’s a good thing in the long run and could help create many jobs during the changeover.

  22. dougman says:

    “Freight is a service”

    Of course, but not if your country is producing anything. By 2020, Canada will see a mass migration of manufacturers due to the nefarious carbon-tax.

  23. dougman wrote, “None of which actually produce anything of worth.”

    You’ve heard of goods and services, you know stuff that makes up a GDP, eh? Freight is a service and it’s necessary, desirable and people are willing to pay for it.

  24. kurkosdr wrote, “think for a moment how many of those businesses your fund has invested in will remain profitable if your country keeps churning a massive trade deficit”.

    My stock portfolio has risen 14% in the last 24h. I’m up 41% since Trump was elected. Things are looking good for gold the more Trump threatens the world’s economy. I’m laughing all the way to the bank. Keep it up, Trump. Just don’t push “the button”…

    I give up. I can’t edit this comment fast enough to keep up with the market that Trump is influencing… 😎

    PS: It’s been a great day. Up 16% in the last 24h and up 45% since Trump’s election! Thanks, Trump and all your supporters for making my day. I hope you have a wonderful inauguration with total silence in the crowd…

  25. dougman says:

    “About half of the final cost of my cultivator went to Canadian businesses operating in Canada”

    None of which actually produce anything of worth. Pogsey, should be supporting his own country, but refuses to do so and instead spends his money in China.

  26. kurkosdr says:

    “About half of the final cost of my cultivator went to Canadian businesses operating in Canada: freight and customs clearance.”

    Keep up the illusion that the merely act of shipping things from China is enough to 1)sustain a country and 2)pay for your pension.

    ” my pension is not paid by current businesses but by my own investments and investments by the Government of Canada, in Canadian businesses”

    If you think you don’t need any ‘young people on the treadmill’ (your words), go and ask whoever is responsible for your pension to show you the bank accounts backing your pension, or whether all those supposed businesses they have invested in make enough profit to support the sum of the pension your get from the fund. My hunch says that some of the pension you get is money given to the pension fund from people just entering and which are redirected to your pension.

    After you are done that, think for a moment how many of those businesses your fund has invested in will remain profitable if your country keeps churning a massive trade deficit (create to a large extent by retirees funneling their money to China to buy dirt-cheap tractors) for ever.

  27. kurkosdr wrote, “He thinks his pension money falls from the sky, so he prefers to funnel his money into China when buying tractors, an act which results in not a penny of his purchase going to bolster his pension fund.”

    About half of the final cost of my cultivator went to Canadian businesses operating in Canada: freight and customs clearance. The Chinese freight company operates in Canada in Vancouver. The trucking company was operating in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Customs clearance was by a business in Calgary but the clearance was in Vancouver.

    So, shut up, ignorant fool!

    Further, my pension is not paid by current businesses but by my own investments and investments by the Government of Canada, in Canadian businesses. My pension portfolio which I manage is entirely in Canadian funds in Canadian equities in Canadian businesses. Further, all those businesses which benefited from my purchase pay suppliers so the money multiplies in its economic effects.

  28. kurkosdr says:

    Not that I care about Trump, but he is not: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/21/trump-republicans-plan-to-target-government-workers-benefits-and-job-security/ Socialists never trim the government because that’s where their voter clientele is. In fact, they fatten it and send you the bill. Also, he is not going to fund any more failed green businesses (another trait of socialists: pretend to help economic growth by funding failed or failing private businesses as long as they are green hip startups)

    Oh, you mean the import tax he is going to impose on corporations that take advantage of Foxconn sweatshop factories? Ok, keep dreaming Pog that people who have not yet retired will accept competing with Chinese workers (16-hour workday for peanuts) despite the fact Chinese workers live in a dictatorship and can’t negotitate better conditions while they are living in a democracy and can, just so you can import dirt-cheap tractors from China. Because that’s what China’s labor conditions do, they create a race to the bottom that cannot be good for people who have not yet retired. This will also benefits retirees in the long run, because all those new domestic factories will create new jobs and hence result into new money for pension funds, but the average retiree (like Pog) doesn’t care about such things. He thinks his pension money falls from the sky, so he prefers to funnel his money into China when buying tractors, an act which results in not a penny of his purchase going to bolster his pension fund. But such people will benefit regardless.

  29. Kurkosdr wrote, “Fortunately the people are starting to realise that and all those “socialist” and “liberal” politicians are losing elections left and right.”

    Silly, Trump is the most socialist president I’ve ever encountered in my life. He’s telling businesses how to do business. He’s promising healthcare for everyone. He’s promising huge tax-increases. How socialist can a president get? He’s not conservative with his ill-considered rants and raising public outcries against business and news media and the Constitution. At the same time he’s the most corrupt president ever. He’s openly nominating corrupt people who are not anywhere close to the common man. It’s clearly a tyranny he’s setting up, not representative government. He doesn’t represent anything like a majority of USAians.

  30. Kurkosdr says:

    “environmental protection, international trade, freedom from having another country invade and kill every person to acquire territory, currency, banks, healthcare, and only the wealthy could afford anything. ”

    Those fall under safety and military, which are necessary. But why fund the feel-good government spending I mentioned in the paragraph next to the one you quote? Fortunately the people are starting to realise that and all those “socialist” and “liberal” politicians are losing elections left and right.

  31. kurkosdr, ignorant of the wealth of benefits of governmental investment, wrote, “For how long are we going to accept to get punished with “green taxes” which accomplish nothing green other than drain cotton paper in the form of banknotes from our wallets into the government coffers?”

    Do you realize that much modern technology came from governments investing in basic research and development in science and technology?

    e.g. The original Bell Laboratories resulted from an award to Alexander Graham Bell by the French government. Later, Bell Labs was operated as a business but did a lot of business with the US government which resulted in the invention of the transistor and the laser. Should that redistribution of wealth be taken back? Should we return to wires and vacuum tubes?

    ISTR a lot of the push to miniaturize electronics along the lines of Moore’s Law originated from NASA’s need to put more payload in a rocket in smaller spaces with less weight. Should we go back to discrete components? I know a lot of the basic research for nuclear energy was subsidized by government. Remember the Manhatten Project? The taxpayers paid for all those $billions which brought us the Atomic Age with a big bank. I remember in the 1970s using a lot of data from governmental sources in my research and development of a charged particle detector.

    Sure, individuals and businesses can do just about anything but will they considering that there’s no profit in basic research and often not in prototypes of stuff that might eventually be useful in business? No, we need governments to guide whole economies to become more productive and resourceful. Certainly governments can go wrong but that’s why we have votes and public consultation, to steer them. Participate, don’t denigrate government.

    We can’t individually get a business to do the right thing with respect to the environment but collectively through governmental laws and regulations accomplish that. It’s a good thing. Otherwise businesses might as well pollute if all they consider is the bottom line for the next few quarters.

  32. kurkosdr wrote, “services I deem necessary? Aka security (police, military), safety (firefighters), schools and unemployment benefits in the form of a loan gradually repayable when you get a job and with a maximum loan amount? (aka not in the form handouts).”

    Oh, you want to go back to the caves and live in a world without environmental protection, international trade, freedom from having another country invade and kill every person to acquire territory, currency, banks, healthcare, and only the wealthy could afford anything. No. It’s much better to have big government set limits on the rich and powerful and to see that even poor individuals get what they need. You may not appreciate that it takes years of development for an individual to learn some skills during which time he/she may need some subsidy, not a loan, to carry on so that we have some really cool stuff from them to share when they mature and become productive. In the old days, that was done by rich folks picking winners and losers. Now, everyone can win. It’s a good thing.

    e.g. When I was young, I got a basic education, all provided by government out of general revenue and some “education tax” on real estate. I got a university education with minimal payment of fees, a tiny student loan, support from my parents but the big shot was paid by governmental subsidization of higher education. So, I graduated with $375 in debt, mastery of a field of science/technology three degrees and a certificate in welding.

    The world has been a better place as I was able to pass on a lot of skills and ideas to young people who came from homes where there was no educated role-model. I was able to introduce real IT to many schools which had nothing but consumer off the shelf IT from retailers until I came by and showed them what is possible. I also raised kids who had both parents with university education and knew there were better ways to do lots of things. They are now making the world a better place now that I’m retired. All that is mostly a result of big government eliminating obstacles by doing for me things I could not do for myself. I could not fund universities. I could not afford to pay 100% of the cost of my education. I had no collateral for a normal loan. My income was tiny. Yet, I was able to do a lot of great things and have a much better life. I wrote in the preface of my thesis a thank you to the people of Canada for paying their taxes. Government can work if you support it and everyone works together.

    Trump is breaking government, doing the job of enemies foreign and domestic, like Putin.

  33. kurkosdr says:

    that private-sector workers = than private-sector workers

  34. kurkosdr says:

    Of course, there are other forms of waste such as fat state pensions to ex-state employees (I never understood why they deserve to get fatter pensions that private-sector workers like me for the same number of year worked and sometime for the same type of job), and money thrown down the pit of “cultural events” (aka friends of someone in the government) and on useless stuff like subdisizing opera shows (isn’t that something the private sector should sponsor?) You know, stuff that every Western country feels compelled to spend on.

    But since those are thorny issues (“our seniors! our culture!”), let’s focus on the following: For how long will we the citizens be able to afford to fund obviously feel-good spending like the ones I mentioned in my first post? For how long are we going to accept to get punished with “green taxes” which accomplish nothing green other than drain cotton paper in the form of banknotes from our wallets into the government coffers?

    That’s what small-state is about.

  35. kurkosdr says:

    to pay planned-parenthood = to do planned-parenthood

  36. kurkosdr says:

    Until, of course you actually need to depend on the services that the ebil government provides, n which case you squeal like a stuck pig for help.

    Can I only pay for the services I deem necessary? Aka security (police, military), safety (firefighters), schools and unemployment benefits in the form of a loan gradually repayable when you get a job and with a maximum loan amount? (aka not in the form handouts).

    Can I choose to not pay for stuff like the funding of worthless art and art galleries (let’s be honest, art that doesn’t have genuine demand to cover its costs should be funded by the person doing it, not by the government), housing and food for illegal immigrants, investments into all kinds of failed green energy companies, investments in startups that go nowhere and handouts to people for having lots of children (why should I compensate for their inability to pay planned-parenthood?) or handouts to people for being unemployed on purpose?

    Oh, yeah, that’s what “small-state” is about (remember I said small-state, not no-state).

    Which means you are doofus TEG err… I mean Wizard Emeritus

  37. oiaohm wrote, ” House designed to use the passive solar power effectively costs about the same to build from scratch as a house not designed to built from scratch.”

    Nope. It costs about twice as much. You need a lot more insulation on the shady sides, roof and foundation. You need more window on the south side and little or none on the north side. That’s a killer. TLW wants the house to look like a house from three sides as we are on a corner lot. She doesn’t want any solar panels and mass costs money. Concrete, for instance, costs us more than $100 a cubic metre. The property doesn’t have enough rock to supply the mass so water or trucked in stone would be needed. That all costs money for freight, the rock and labour. Then you have the problem of actually regulating temperature. You need good ways of limiting insolation or pumping heat around. It all costs money.

    TLW and I designed a house once. The majority of windows were on the north side because that’s what she wanted. There was a bit of insolation in the living room and that was it. The rest was wood heat and no cooling in summer. We have lots of forest so wood heat is much more feasible than solar as long as you have strong-willed women like TLW involved. A bird just has to supply the nesting site his mate requires…

    If I were building a solar-powered house it would be trivial: concrete and steel construction dug into the south side of a hill, lots of solar electric and heating panels, aqueous thermal storage and pumps, a windmill for winter power and at night, a bank of batteries just in case, lots of insulation and … Alternatively, I would like a dome that rotates to keep windows towards Sun… TLW keeps buying land in swamps and “improving” it…

  38. oiaohm says:

    It’s a matter of capital costs. Most people buy a home related to their wealth. They can’t afford that kind of house plus a huge expenditure for renewable-resource energy.
    This is a yes and no. House designed to use the passive solar power effectively costs about the same to build from scratch as a house not designed to built from scratch. If you are starting from a blank block of land and building the capital cost difference is not that bad. If you are talking active solar heat systems that are not as restrictive on building design there is a slightly higher capital cost. This is where regulation needs to step in to get a pool of building that are correctly built of either active or passive solar.

    Existing building that are not designed right you have fighting with the building so you need more to generate the same results. So incorrect design means needing more heating/cooling but its normally between 300 to 1000 percent more heat energy to cover up the design defects. Of course even 300 percent is a nightmare if you in a location like some of Canada were you would have need 100 percent of your solar exposed area for heating/power needing 300 percent you are so far stuffed it not funny let lone 1000 percent this level of issue fairly much mandates an active system.

    we can easily heat one quarter of the house passively but not all.
    You might be a 400 percent problem. Ground temperature of 10 degrees is no fun to deal with when a floor with massive insulation be it 1 metre of solid concrete or rock or modern equals(that can be less than 4 inchs) were not put above the basement. We humans like above 23 C for breathing and the like not to have coughs and the like. So you are needing 13 degrees warmer than the basement temperature.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasonal_thermal_energy_storage

    If I remember right you have a septic tank from a septic system going end of life. That reconditioned and insulated may be able to help you a bit by storing hot water from summer to use in winter. Of course it will be on the small side for what is need.

    The problem for heat storage in places like Canada you are looking for approx 20-30 cubic metres of storage to store the heat from summer to use in winter. Doing that without redesigning the building is down right tricky. Most cases that would not have been hard if when building the house instead of going 1 floor into the ground for the basement you went two and heavily insulated deepest floor as a heat storage tank for active or thick walls for passive. Of course suggesting giving up basement for heat storage tank I guess will not fly but might fly if cost get too bad it would be a maybe.

    It takes a complete redesign to fix that and TLW doesn’t like the shape/looks of such homes anyway. She won’t buy what she can’t sell.

    This is in fact the bigger problem lot put up hands and say 100 percent redesign is required don’t need to think about it. Due to house not designed right active heating with some form of storage solution will have to be used if you are not redesign the complete building. So you can store the heat from summer for winter. Will get you 200+ percent more sun heat time of course this altered on how good your heat storage is and how long of summer days you have.

    It can get funny as you travel around the world taking photos finding the same design house all over the place. So the kind of houses you see on TV/Magazines … that totally don’t suite the locations weather conditions people want to own.

    I am not saying this problem is easy. The reality is that having a power effective house does not mean having a house smaller than what you already have in cold areas of the world. In fact in cold areas size is important. If house is smaller than a particular size it has too much surface area to loss heat on. If it bigger than a particular size it too hard to heat but that is bigger than the average usa 4 bedroom house if designed right and if you house is bigger than that you just have sections that you don’t use in winter for living areas.

    People are not going to invest in capital to reduce their power usage a lot while using power is cheap. This is the idea of carbon tax to attempt to convince businesses to invest in capital to reduce foot print. Of course in my eyes building regulation would be faster way to go about it and of course both are going to upset business.

  39. Kurkosdr wrote, “what do you use to heat that comfortable house of yours in the northern country that is Canada during the winter months?”

    Water running downhill in the northern parts of the province. We are blessed to be a choke point for a huge watershed. It’s nothing spectacular. No huge drops, just huge volume. Lake Winnipeg, for instance, is our nearest reservoir. It’s not deep but it has an area of 9,465 sq mi. It supplies several generating stations on the Nelson River.

    “The Nelson River is a river of north-central North America, in the Canadian province of Manitoba. The river drains Lake Winnipeg and runs 644 kilometres (400 mi) before it ends in Hudson Bay. Its full length (including the Saskatchewan River and Bow River) is 2,575 kilometres (1,600 mi), it has mean discharge of 2,370 cubic metres per second (84,000 cu ft/s), and has a drainage basin of 1,072,300 square kilometres (414,000 sq mi), of which 180,000 square kilometres (69,000 sq mi) is in the United States.”

    That is a wealth of cheap energy, all derived from Sun. I guess you would be shocked to learn we have another similar river with a large flow, half that of Nelson River, and only a quarter of the drainage area, the Churchill. It was partially diverted into the Nelson River to add to the resource with less capital cost. We are blessed. Barring nuclear war or terrorism/vandalism, it has proven to be a very reliable and cheap resource for most of my life.

  40. oiaohm wrote, “in Canada its possible to have a zero heating bill exploiting solar and thermal mass heat storage. Are Canada building designed to take advantage of this tech most cases no.”

    It’s a matter of capital costs. Most people buy a home related to their wealth. They can’t afford that kind of house plus a huge expenditure for renewable-resource energy. e.g. My home has geothermal to multiply the effectiveness of electrical power. On a sunny day at -40, we can easily heat one quarter of the house passively but not all. Ground temperatures are ~+10C so the basement is a heat lost year round. The north and east sides don’t get nearly as hot as the south side. It takes a complete redesign to fix that and TLW doesn’t like the shape/looks of such homes anyway. She won’t buy what she can’t sell.

  41. oiaohm says:

    Name for one me, one business, just one, that can absorb a 723% increase in their utility bill?

    BP has absorbed a 10000% increase in utility bill at times. Kinda happens when you own all the power supply towers to a major mining operation and storm havoc on it major destroys the towers repeatable many years in row.

    Utility bill is not be all/end all. There are many examples of insane Utility prices around the world.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-17/joe-hockey-550-electricity-prices-carbon-tax-fact-check/6668552
    Carbon tax add and removing it made bugger all difference for consumers long term. Mostly because when power generation companies were forced to face a carbon tax they started shutting down power plants that were 20 years past their official end of life date.

    Carbon tax is a short term pain mostly. As carbon input made more expensive companies update their engines/power generation methods sooner mostly resulting in the price of power not moving.

    Canada mistake is not a carbon tax. Its giving carbon tax breaks at all. If you drop it on everyone like a sledge hammer as what was done in Australia a lot of good happens with very little cost gain. The reality is if power generation in Canada was world best efficiency using fossil fuels power generation should be using 30 percent less. There is a major obsolete technology in usage problem in Canada.

    Kurkosdr even house design. The reality is in Canada its possible to have a zero heating bill exploiting solar and thermal mass heat storage. Are Canada building designed to take advantage of this tech most cases no. So living in a comfortable house using the most modern technology can be using less power than a person in a small apartment using old technology.

    http://solarwall.com/en/home.php
    Even a non complete system like these Solarwall are cut Canada heating bills by 30-50 percent what is missing is storage.

    The reality is a well designed house uses solar to heat and cool. If you are paying a power bill to heat or cool your house your house was not designed for where it is.

    (if you use diesel or natural gas to heat your house)
    This is really a serous sign of a problem. Building were designed to take advantage of cheap electricity, diesel or natural gas. Its like states in the USA that had to regulate that double glazing would be used. Why a window single layer of glass is half the cost short term but long term in power usage costs a lot more. There are other things like internal walls having no insulation so that heating or cooling of building can be segmented. So small building with poor insulation and poor cooling/heating management is going to eat more power than a large building with effective insulation and effect cooling/heating management.

    What can be surprising to most people is a segmented design building that is bigger that you live in the centre in colder months can be way more power effective than a smaller unit. Due to each wall between you and the outside being insulated with thermal mass it resists environmental heating and cooling.

    Small apartments the reality is most cases you cannot make it work in cold area. Not enough thermal mass to store heat. Using walls and other things to store heat is something vikings and others living in very cold areas have done. Its scary some old vikings building with usable floor size of a average USA house in places like greenland only need 200 Watts(yes a small wood fire is over kill) of heating even in the coldest winter but you are talking 1 meter thick walls and roof with very limited windows.

    There is a big issue of humans getting use to living in buildings that don’t suit the local weather conditions and using fossil fuel to make the building work. Yes the unsuitable building were cheaper to build just not cheaper to run. We don’t have a small price to pay to fix this mistake. Hundreds of years building buildings of wrong design. So if places are not going to have a carbon tax they need to have really heavy regulation on new building construction.

  42. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “I am a small-state man (aka “keep your grubby government hands out of my life and my choices”), but to each their own…”

    Until, of course you actually need to depend on the services that the ebil government provides, n which case you squeal like a stuck pig for help.

  43. Kurkosdr says:

    “. So, my carbon tax will be <$100."

    So… what do you use to heat that comfortable house of yours in the northern country that is Canada during the winter months?

    Remember how every car above 1.6 litres was branded as a gas guzzler in some parts of the world? Wouldn't be surprised if your government did the same thing to house heating, aka any house larger than a small apartment gets to pay a large carbon tax (if you use diesel or natural gas to heat your house), or make electricity really expensive (723% increase average you said? add in some exponential pricing calculated on monthly consumption, as to make it more palatable to the folks living in small apartments just like the government wants, so only the "guzzlers" living in comfortable houses get to fell the sting). Understand where I am getting to?

    Do you still feel certain about your choices, Pog?

    I am a small-state man (aka "keep your grubby government hands out of my life and my choices"), but to each their own…

  44. dougman wrote, “Pogseys pension and stock investment winnings, will be absorbed by future carbon-taxes.”

    Let’s see. I have a few small engines that use ~50L of fuel per annum. I have one gas-guzzler I can live without (perhaps not TLW). So, my carbon tax will be <$100. That’s easily affordable, so your assertion is void. If they make a carbon tax like 10000% there would be an impact but that’s not the case. It’s just a little nudge, not a revenue-grab. I’m already trying to reduce carbon use with diesel, and electric, and driving less. I don’t need a little nudge. I’m being held back by the market, like PV panels, inverters and NiFe batteries being made in China and not here. Freight from China is a much larger barrier than any carbon tax for me. Oh, yes, then there is TLW who insists I not plant too many trees or PV panels or … I’m trying to wear her down but it will take much larger fuel prices than the carbon tax. For Pity’s sake, oil/gasoline are very cheap at the moment. She won’t even notice the carbon tax. She barely notices speeding tickets…

  45. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “Lets talk about the decline of Canada businesses shall we? ”

    Why do that Dougie. Like exercising your ignorance?

  46. dougman says:

    Pogseys pension and stock investment winnings, will be absorbed by future carbon-taxes. But like a good socialist, he happily praises it and admonishes the brilliance of his dear leader Trudeau.

  47. Kurkosdr says:

    Name for one me, one business, just one, that can absorb a 723% increase in their utility bill?

    I am sure there is a government-funded research somewhere saying the impact will be minimal and everything will be peachy. Nothing to see here, there will be no impact on jobs or anything…

    Maybe all those people who voted for Dubya in 2000 weren’t the uneducated hillbillies the mass media made us believe they were. For those who are too young to remember, Dubya run against AlGore, a person who wanted to impose an “excise tax” on the non-green energy companies use in the form of “carbon offsets”. He also happened to own a for-profit company selling carbon offsets. Keep in mind that this happened during an era that China and India were expanding rapidly (without having to care the slightest bit about their “CO2 footprint”) and with many US businesses moving their business to China and India. Also keep in mind that AlGore didn’t want to tax the “carbon footprint” of goods imported from China and India. He only wanted to impose offsets on business activities with a footprint done in the US. One can only imagine what would have happened all those US jobs which have a carbon footprint had AlGore been elected back then.

    Oh, history… you sure have your way of humiliating people who are so sure about their choices and so quick to condemn the choices of others…

  48. dougman wrote, “Name for one me, one business, just one, that can absorb a 723% increase in their utility bill?”

    Well, suppose a small business has a $100/month utility bill. They grow and the bill becomes $723. Volume has increased 100-fold. The share of the bottom line due to that utility may well have dropped to a tiny percentage. Everyone is happy, the utility, the business, the employees, and the customers. Even if the bill increased without some corresponding increase in usage/production, a business may well absorb such increases. It all depends on how large a proportion of the bottom line is the cost of the utility.

    It would be insignificant for a small business with ten computer-programmers just running lights and a bunch of PCs and a few servers. The payroll would dwarf the bill. It would be critical for an aluminium smelter where the major cost after capital is electricity. An aluminium smelter could still survive by abandoning the operation and relocating in a location with cheaper electricity. Usually, such a business would have negotiated long term agreements or generate its own power to manage costs. In Canada, several aluminium outfits build plants at locations with cheap hyrdoelectric power. About the only thing that could jump up and bite them would be taxes, in which case the whole economy would be in the tank, not just one business.

    Bad things happen and intelligent people hope for the best but plan for the worst.

  49. dougman says:

    Name for one me, one business, just one, that can absorb a 723% increase in their utility bill?

  50. dougman wrote, “unless this carbon taxing plan is reversed, Canada will see a huge migration of Canadian business”.

    Or, not. I think Canadian businesses will just pay the tax and/or use less carbon. Businesses can adjust to almost anything given time and gradual change.

  51. dougman says:

    Lets talk about the decline of Canada businesses shall we?

    I have a prediction that by 2020, I could be wrong but I am usually not, that unless this carbon taxing plan is reversed, Canada will see a huge migration of Canadian business. No one will put up with it for long, and I suspect that Canada will have its own Trump election.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6VHmUKY2F8

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *