Archive for June 15th, 2011
Good to see NSW get a try. They made a big boo-boo when they kicked for goal from a penalty rather than taking the tap and trying to score a try. They lost momentum after that. It’s good to see them get a try and get some energy back as this has all the makings of a great Origin match as long as both teams fire on all cylinders.
Still, go QLD. A win in extra time would be awesome.
I’m taking credit for this! Once again I tip a team and they lose, so I’m taking credit for us going to a decider. Now if only I could make a profit out of tipping the losing side, I’d be set.
Great call as always, can’t wait for Origin Three. Bring it on!
June 15th, 2011 at 11:53pm
G’day Andrew and (insert random noise here as a greeting to the big marn)
I just got up from my afternoon nap and turned the radio on, did I hear you talking about banana bread? I live on banana bread on morning shift!
By the way, just for you Andrew after your Sunrise appearance, and because it’s the truth, my Facebook status is “I just woke up from a nap”.
Go the Maroons! Have a great call!
For some context of Andrew’s spot on Sunrise this morning, here is that segment courtesy of Yahoo7:
June 15th, 2011 at 08:06pm
A while back I was quite annoyed at the introduction of point-to-point speed cameras along two roads which I often use during my random drives for the sake of driving, namely the Federal Highway between Goulburn and Collector, and the Monaro Highway between Bredbo and Cooma.
I was annoyed, not because of the speed cameras as such, but because these things cover quite a large distance, and the only way for me to be absolutely confident that I won’t accidentally exceed the speed limit over that area is to make use of cruise control, which I don’t like doing because I find it to be a very boring experience which makes it harder to remain focussed, unlike being in full control of the vehicle which I find to be thoroughly engaging and interesting. Put simply, I don’t feel as safe when I’m using cruise control.
So yesterday, on my way back from Sutton Forest, I was taken aback slightly by a variable electronic message board which was indicating in abbreviated and broken English that the point-to-point cameras were only targeting heavy vehicles, something which is not indicated on the signs near these cameras. When I later had a chance to research this, I discovered that the variable message boards were right; cars are not subject to the cameras and these cameras are merely an extension of the existing “heavy vehicle speed and fatigue” camera network.
This means that I can once again enjoy those trips without the extended period of trying to remain engaged while waiting for the end of the point-to-point camera zone.
Given the lack of clarity on the signage surrounding these cameras, I’m sure that I’m not the only one who thought that they were tracking all vehicles, so hopefully this information helps to relieve someone else of the burden of spending an extended period of time either tediously watching their speedo rather than the road, or trying to remain engaged while cruise control increases their boredom level.
June 15th, 2011 at 03:57pm
It turns out that the good old-fashioned petrol car isn’t that evil after all…or that it is evil, and the electric car isn’t the saintly solution that it was supposed to be…or something like that. I’ll let Yid with Lid explain.
Global Warming Moonbats believe that electric cars are one of the major solutions to the problem of man-made global warming which is causing the snow caps to melt, animals to die and your public library to run out of the book you have been waiting to read. According to a new study, electric cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than gas equivalents.
According to the study, an electric car owner would have to drive at least 80,000 miles before producing a net saving in CO2. Many electric cars will not travel that far in their lifetime because they typically have a range of less than 90 miles on a single charge and are unsuitable for long trips. Even those driven 100,000 would save only about a tonne of CO2 over their lifetimes.
Yid with Lid then goes on to quote from an article out of The Australian:
a mid-size electric car would produce 23.1 tonnes of CO2 over its lifetime, compared with 24 tonnes for a similar petrol car. Emissions from manufacturing electric cars are at least 50 per cent higher because batteries are made from materials such as lithium, copper and refined silicon, which require much energy to be processed.
Many electric cars are expected to need a replacement battery after a few years. Once the emissions from producing the second battery are added in, the total CO2 from producing an electric car rises to 12.6 tonnes, compared with 5.6 tonnes for a petrol car. Disposal also produces double the emissions because of the energy consumed in recovering and recycling metals in the battery. The study also took into account carbon emitted to generate the grid electricity consumed.
Darn, and there I was feeling all warm and fuzzy because my not-overly-efficient petrol guzzling car and my penchant for going on long drives for little reason (I’ve averaged 139 km per day over the last nine months, not including the kilometers travelled in the few weeks that I had a hire car) was helping to boost the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and feeding all of the plants, when all along I would apparently have produced more carbon dioxide in an electric car.
Then again, given that I can travel further before needing to refuel in my car than I would be able to do in an electric car, I probably am coming out ahead on the carbon dioxide count, but if I ever do become one of those “I only ever drive to work and the corner shop” people, then I’ll change to an electric car to keep that carbon dioxide count up.
(h/t to: Yid With Lid for the linked and quoted blog post, Mark Levin for bringing the blog post to my attention, and Ben Webster of The Times in London for the article which was reprinted in The Australian.)
June 15th, 2011 at 12:22pm
I heard plenty of good news on the radio yesterday. One of the highlights was the decision by Cricket Australia to reinstate the Tri-Series.
CRICKET Australia has reinstated the one-day international tri-series this summer with India and Sri Lanka to contest the series in February.
The 2011-12 summer schedule was released today, boasting six Tests against New Zealand and India, two Twenty20 internationals and at least 14 one-day matches in a triangular format.
It marked the first time in four years there would be an international one-day tri-series in Australia, after the concept was dumped due to lack of interest in matches not featuring the home nation.
(h/t AAP via The Australian)
It’s actually ironic that I can pinpoint the year that I started to lose interest in the “summer of cricket” as the first year without a tri-series. I love the 50-over version of the game, and I love the competition between three sides. Sure, when Australia was dominant, we all knew who would win the series, but I found that this made the clashes between the two visiting sides all the more interesting. I’m glad that it’s back, as it will make my summer more interesting, and with Australia not being to dominant force of the cricketing world that it once was, I think public interest in the tri-series will be revived.
June 15th, 2011 at 08:14am