Free Shooting Introduction

In the effort to promote responsible gun ownership and rights awareness, I make the following open offer to any resident or visitor in the Metro DC area:

If you have never shot a gun and would like to try, I am willing to take you shooting free of charge. I will provide the firearms, ammunition, eye/ear protection and I will cover your range fees. I guarantee if you are on the fence about gun ownership and usage, you will not be at the end of the session. You will have fun and learn a little in the process.

I do my introductions in Northern Virginia. Evenings or on the weekends at your convenience with minimal prior arrangements. Contact me for details and to schedule your free introduction!

If you are in the Chesapeake/Hampton Roads area, Brian, an NRA instructor in Virginia Beach, is willing to do the same if you're in the area on a Sunday afternoon or Monday evening. Drop him a note to make the arrangements.

5 people have learned to shoot! Would you like to be next?

Friday, July 10, 2009

Sit in a Bedroom and Be an Asshole

Courtesy of Bruce comes a link to this blog post on CMT with John Mellencamp in which he describes his disdain for the current freedom of speech we enjoy. Go give Bruce's post a read as he captures the fecal gem that falls from Mellencamp's mouth.

I felt the need to reply on the original posting and I'm posting it here as well. Here it is my thought on the matter...

John Mellencamp doesn't "think people fought and gave their lives so that some guy can sit in his bedroom and be mean.". Furthermore, he describes freedom of speech as "Freedom of speech is really about assembly for us to collectively have an idea. We want to get our point of view out so we can assemble and I can appoint you to be the spokesman. That’s freedom of speech to be able to collectively speak for a sector of people. But somehow it’s turned into ‘I can be an asshole whenever I feel like, say whatever I like, be disrespectful to people and not be courteous.’ It’s not good for our society. Not being courteous is not really freedom of speech.".

You don't think people gave their lives to protect the freedom to say mean things, eh?

That's going to come as quite a shock to the Founding Fathers. You see, it seems they did the whole collective thing too. They had a collective idea. But it required them to say some really mean, and I do emphasize "mean", things about King George III. They accused him of all kinds of terrible things like levying horrible taxes, not listening to their numerous and collective attempts at sending spokesmen to discuss their grievances as a sector of people, about how they were unhappy with the idea of soldiers living in their houses and so on.

Finally, they had had enough of this, sat down and wrote a very long document called the "Declaration of Independence" that described in lengthy and very mean detail all the things that King George III had done and that they just weren't going to accept any more.

In this document, they wrote down their collective ideas while sitting in a small bedroom and, in eloquent 18th Century terms, did call King George III an "asshole" many times over. It was very disrespectful of the King. You don't say and talk about a King in that way. It was not gentlemanly or polite at all.

And when they were done, they signed it as a collective group and contrary to your belief, did fight and gave their lives to sit in that room and be mean by ending their discourteous rant against the King by stating "we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.".

So what do you think? Was it appropriate or wasn't the Founders sacrifice enough for you?

By the way, the freedom of assembly is only ONE of the five items specifically covered by the 1st Amendment. Assembly is useless without the freedom to speak at the same time. There are many countries that will punish the mere attempt to assemble very seriously before one mean word ever leaves the mouths of the people attempting it.

So have a little respect for the asshole in the bedroom because you just might need him someday.

Thursday, July 9, 2009

iPod Video and Ubuntu

This is a post for geeks. If you don't use "Ubuntu Linux" and an "iPod Touch/Video", don't continue. Your eyes will glaze over and the contents of this post will cause you to drool uncontrollably.

I'm throwing this up for future reference and to help fellow Linux users who may happen to own an iPod Touch or iPod Video and are having a devil of a time creating video that will play properly on it. Specifically under Ubuntu Linux.

It's no secret I'm a media junkie. Movies, specifically. I have slowly spent the past year or so ripping and encoding my DVD collection. When I started, I was using a Sony PSP as a music and video player. For DVD ripping, I use a program called dvd::rip. Works well and will rip 95% of the DVDs I've thrown at it. This can be installed from the Ubuntu package manager.

This program produces the basic AVI and MPEG movie files for computer playback and media server usage. To convert them for use on the PSP, I used a program called PSPVC. This has to be compiled and installed separate but it likewise works well. I used it to produce the MP4 files the PSP expects for video along with the movie thumbnails.

This setup served well for video up until I got an iPod Touch. Initially, I had few problems because I found the MP4 files produced by PSPVC were compatible with the iPod and played just fine. So I kept using the tools. Why change what was working? Alas, it seems sometime in the not-too-distant past Apple decided to change its iPod firmware and for no apparent reason, some MP4 files produced by PSPVC would no longer played on the iPod. I hadn't changed the formats but the iPod, for whatever reason, felt these were invalid video files. What was worse is there was no rhyme or reason for it. Two movies ripped the same day and only one would play.

This became very aggravating. So I began looking for a new encoding solution.

After working with various video tools on Linux for any length of time you'll quickly learn that most of them are front-ends to a program called ffmpeg. ffmpeg is the Swiss Army Knife of video converters. With sufficient codecs available for various video and audio formats and a proper knowledge of its myriad of command line switches, you can make this program convert any video from one format to another. Such is the utility of this program that there are pretty much no competitors to it. Video tools on Linux often simply put pretty front ends onto ffmpeg and invoke it on your behalf to save you from having to knows its arcane details.

This works very well when the defaults of your video tools produce the desired results. Both dvd::rip and PSPVC use ffmpeg for their video encoding. Where it becomes a problem is when the output you get doesn't work for you. That is the boat I found myself in a little while ago on Ubuntu Linux 8.0.4 LTS and my iPod Touch.

Since video is one of the primary uses of my iPod, frustration quickly mounted and I set out to figure out a way to get good video for my iPod under Ubuntu. Google quickly revealed numerous sites with detailed command lines to invoke ffmpeg to produce videos compatible with the iPod Touch. However, when I used these command lines they would either not run at all with bit rate or resolution errors or they would produce video with no audio.

I quickly found that Ubuntu for all its niceties occasionally leaves stuff out. The ffmpeg install on an up-to-date 8.0.4 LTS is decent but like any packaged software tends to be behind current releases. So many of the command lines that reference the iPod as a target output format don't work because the version installed on Ubuntu isn't new enough to recognize it. Past that, it seems that the out-of-the-box Ubuntu ffmpeg install can't handle the AAC audio codec for output properly.

These are my observations only but was the result of tinkering away with ffmpeg in a terminal window in a fruitless attempt to come up with a command line based on my reading to produce a good MP4 file for my iPod Touch. So I did what any good Linux user would do and decided to build a new version of ffmpeg and see if I could get it to work with iPod video.

I succeeded.

So, if you are an Ubuntu Linux user and have an iPod Touch or iPod Video, here's what to do to create compatible video for your movie watching enjoyment.

To create iPod video under Linux, you will need:
  • The latest version of ffmpeg. Follow the instructions on the Download page to get the current version from the Subversion repository. You will likely need to run sudo apt-get install subversion before you can do this since Ubuntu desktop installs don't have Subversion installed by default.
  • Current versions of the libfaac and libfaad audio codecs available here. This is important. Without both, the iPod video encoding won't produce audio.
Open a terminal window. You should be in your home directory. Run the following commands

sudo apt-get install subversion
svn checkout svn://svn.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg/trunk ffmpeg

You'll get an ffmpeg directory in your home directory. This is where you will build your new ffmpeg from. But before you can, you need to install the audio codecs.

Unpack the faac-1.28.tar.gz and faad2-2.7.tar.gz archives you downloaded into your home directory. For me, I use Midnight Commander to open them and copy their contents to my home directory. Or you can use the archiving tool that Ubuntu provides. Once you've unpacked both, go into each directory and run the commands ./configure, make and sudo make install. That will install the latest and greatest versions of these libraries to your system. Overwriting the existing ones doesn't appear to hurt anything.

With the AAC libraries installed, you can now build ffmpeg. Go into the ffmpeg directory and run the following command:

./configure --enable-libfaac --enable-libfaad --enable-nonfree --enable-gpl

Once this command completes, run make. After a cup of coffee or a can of soda, you'll have a new version of ffmpeg sitting in this directory. Since I didn't want to upset my system, I installed the new binary/executable into the bin directory in my home directory. This directory allows you to override system programs with your own versions without having to overwrite them. Since I didn't want to upset Ubuntu with a version of ffmpeg installed outside of its package tree, this is the best option.

Copy the new ffmpeg to your bin directory with the command cp ffmpeg ~/bin.

Now when you run ffmpeg -version from the terminal, you should see something like:

FFmpeg version SVN-r19281, Copyright (c) 2000-2009 Fabrice Bellard, et al.
configuration: --enable-libfaac --enable-libfaad --enable-nonfree --enable-gpl
libavutil 50. 3. 0 / 50. 3. 0
libavcodec 52.32. 0 / 52.32. 0
libavformat 52.36. 0 / 52.36. 0
libavdevice 52. 2. 0 / 52. 2. 0
libswscale 0. 7. 1 / 0. 7. 1
built on Jun 27 2009 13:38:40, gcc: 4.2.4 (Ubuntu 4.2.4-1ubuntu3)
FFmpeg SVN-r19281
libavutil 50. 3. 0 / 50. 3. 0
libavcodec 52.32. 0 / 52.32. 0
libavformat 52.36. 0 / 52.36. 0
libavdevice 52. 2. 0 / 52. 2. 0
libswscale 0. 7. 1 / 0. 7. 1

This is good. It means your configuration and Subversion extracted copy of ffmpeg is in charge. This means you can now encode iPod video.

I prefer simplicity and for PSP compatibility, I've stuck with MPEG-4. The H.264 video codec is superior but takes longer to encode and produces larger files. Plus, my main complaint with most of the command lines out there is they throw every quality setting and option available out there on an iPod video. And then encode it at 640x400 or 640x480 resolution. This will produce video files almost as large as the original 720x480 rips from a standard definition DVD. The screen resolution of the iPod Touch is only 320x240. Lastly, most of these long command lines simply don't work. ffmpeg squawks constantly about bit rate settings being wrong and won't run.

So I punt. At 320x240, the bit rate will stay below the maximum permissible for the iPod Touch. So I produced a command line for ffmpeg that will produce a 320x240 MP4 video using the AAC audio codec. To produce a movie for your iPod Touch, run the following command line:

ffmpeg -i INPUT_FILE -vcodec mpeg4 -acodec libfaac -s 320x240 -f ipod -aspect 16:9 -vol 512 OUTPUT_FILE

Where INPUT_FILE is the name of the original video you want to encode and OUTPUT_FILE is the MP4 you want to produce. So an example command line might be:

ffmpeg -i TheGoonies.avi -vcodec mpeg4 -acodec libfaac -s 320x240 -f ipod -aspect 16:9 -vol 512 TheGoonies.mp4

Short, sweet and simple. And this should run fine and produce an MP4 version of your movie at about 1/3rd the size of the original input file. Use iTunes or whatever mechanism you are using to move your video onto your iPod and it should play fine.

The -vol 512 switch, by the way, is undocumented but increases the audio volume output. 256 is the default level so 512 roughly doubles the output volume. This is useful because the rips from dvd::rip tend to be quiet on the volume level. This helps even things out for iPod playback from its small speaker and headphones.

With this working, you can go one step further and encode an entire collection. For me, I dumped all of my AVI videos into a directory and wrote a little script to blow through them all to produce a iPod movie collection. To do the same, copy the files you want to convert into a single directory (no separate folders) and then save the following script to a file called convertToMP4.sh in your bin directory where you copied ffmpeg.

#!/bin/sh

for f in *.avi
do
name=${f%avi}mp4
echo -n "Converting $f to $name..."
ffmpeg -i $f -vcodec mpeg4 -acodec libfaac -s 320x240 -f ipod -aspect 16:9 -vol 512 $name
echo "done."
done

After you've saved it, run chmod +x ~/bin/convertToMP4.sh. Then go into the directory where your videos are and run convertToMP4.sh. The script will run and systematically convert every AVI file in the directory to an equivalent .mp4 file. If you are using an extension other than AVI, change tjhe 'avi' in the script above to whatever extension it happens to be.

I know it isn't sophisticated but it works. Once the script has run, you can copy the new .mp4 files to wherever you install them to your iPod from. In my case, an iPod directory on an external drive that I hook up to iTunes on a Windows laptop.

So there you have. Sorry for the length but I hope this will help other Linux users out there struggling to make their proprietary and onery Apple iPods useful and not have to use Windows-based tools to do it. Linux does video very well once you know how.

Happy ripping!

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Forever ^ 5

Ok, it's been two weeks and Michael Jackson is still dead. State funerals don't get this level of coverage. Sadly, I can't make it stop because my wife would be mad if I put a bullet through our LCD TV.

My friend Tom sends me this from Yahoo: Resolution honoring Jackson faces GOP opposition.

Gist of article: The House wants to pass a resolution honoring Michael Jackson.

Question: Why is everything in the form of partisan debate? Despite the fact this garbage is sponsored by a Democrat, I am certain there are other Democrats out there rolling their eyes at this, not just Republicans and Independents.

Seriously, the government has solved at the big problems of the world so they can spend time on such insignificant and symbolic crap? Excellent! That means health care reform, violating the Constitution to craft a treaty with Russia, illegal immigration and a host of other problems have already been fixed. Hurrah! Now they can cut spending since they won't need the money anymore.

Rant commentary aside, it's fisking time!

First, the sponsor:
Jackson Lee, a Texas Democrat, took the stage Tuesday at the Staples Center in Los Angeles and hoisted a framed copy of the resolution, embossed with a gold seal. The measure will be debated on the House floor, she said.
I feel sorry for her as a child. Doubly so if she was actually named after Michael Jackson. There must have been an ass-whipping in there somewhere. I got more than my fair share as a child because I had an uncommon name for the time but at least my name is correct for my gender.

Continuing on...
Without mentioning King by name, Jackson Lee noted at the memorial that Michael Jackson was acquitted of child molestation charges. She blasted critics who "don't understand the hearts of entertainers" and "don't know how they heal the world on behalf of America."
Entertainers heal the world? Really?!? Then what do we have doctors for? Decoration? Why spend a dozen years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to become an MD when all one really needs to do is pick up a microphone and win American Idol? That's going to be a blow to a lot of medical practitioners out there since it appears they've all done it wrong.

Critics don't understand the hearts of entertainers? Is there something special and superhuman about entertainer hearts over regular people hearts that give them special powers? Must be since entertainers can heal the world on behalf of entire countries! That power must have a really short range though since things are still a shithole in Africa despite Madonna and Bono both tripping through several times. Maybe the people had to get really close for them to be healed.

Hmm, maybe Lee is on to something here with Michael Jackson?

I wonder though. If we're sending entertainers out into the world to heal it on behalf of America, that is going to come as quite a surprise to the US Navy. I don't recall seeing a flood of supplies being carried ashore on the backs of entertainers after the tsunami a few years ago or entertainers swooping in to drop supplies on Myanmar from the sky. We've wasted billions of dollars on carrier battle groups that can do things like this and it was entertainer's the whole time.

Amazing people, those entertainers.

Now for the math lesson...
Her legislation, House Resolution 600, lists several charitable acts by Michael Jackson over his long career and proclaims him as an American legend, musical icon and world humanitarian. He is, Jackson Lee said, "someone who will be honored forever and forever and forever and forever and forever."
Wow! How long is "forever to the fifth power"? Must be a really big number. I get lost after "infinity squared". Man, Michael Jackson dies and his honor will outlast the Universe. Who knew? Then again, he could heal the world so why not have his honor woven into the fabric of spacetime and travel beyond unreachable horizons?

If I were the Universe, I wouldn't be so keen on having Michael Jackson's "honor" woven inside me. Wouldn't that be an honor violation?

Poor Jackson Lee is running into problems though...
In the House, non-controversial resolutions honoring a person who has died or carried out a noteworthy accomplishment normally move quickly from committee to the House floor and then pass on a voice vote. The Michael Jackson resolution, introduced June 26, is awaiting action in the House Foreign Affairs Committee, of which Jackson Lee is a member and King is not.

An opponent could ask for a recorded vote, which then requires a two-thirds majority for passage. So far, Jackson Lee's resolution has just one co-sponsor, Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif.
One co-sponsor. I guess Michael Jackson's healing powers didn't work domestically since she's only managed to get one other fool to sign on to this.

Then again, we're talking about the same body that passed a 1200+ page energy bill that wasn't even completed, no one had or could read and did it in a few days. Michael Jackson must be pissed off that his forever and forever and forever and forever and forever honor is taking so long. It took the House less than a week to fix "global warming", er "climate change", er "The Earth will kill us all!" but is into the second week of deliberating whether to do something as important as honoring Michael Jackson beyond the Heat Death of the Universe.

Well, it does take time to do important things. We wouldn't want to rush something as important as this, would we?

I think they should stick an amendment into this resolution forming a special guard to watch over Michael's grave though. They are going to bury him without his brain and that should be a concern for us. If he rises tomorrow, he'll be the head zombie and with no brain to kill, he'll be really hard to take down. Bullets won't stop it. We'll need to be ready for that. He could amass a legion of other dead celebrities and begin walking among us. Then again, how would they stand out against the living celebrities? They don't have functioning brains either.

When will this stop?

Monday, July 6, 2009

"Snickers Bar, Not Dark Chocolate"

I meant to post this last week but I figured I'd save it for a post-Fourth rant.

Here we have an article from CNN discussing the trend of single black women choosing to adopt children versus marrying and having them. If you've ever heard Chris Rock go off on how some relationships just can't work ("you're a black woman, he's a black man"), you'll understand where the basic point of this article is coming from.

The article even confirms Rock's premise:
"We're seeing more and more single African-American women who are not finding men," Caldwell says. "There's a lack of qualified black men to get into relationships with."
But I am stunned that CNN printed some of the other stuff in here and did so with apparent seriousness. Read on and be shocked.
Yet there are some single African-American women who are not emotionally ready to adopt an African-American child who is too dark, some adoption agency officials say.

Fair-skinned or biracial children stand a better chance of being adopted by single black women than darker-skinned children, some adoption officials say.
Not emotionally ready?!? Is that the new code word for "black racist"? Because that is exactly what it sounds like to me.

It gets better/worse. Very next sentence:
"They'll say, 'I want a baby to look like a Snickers bar, not dark chocolate,' " Caldwell, founder of Lifetime Adoption, says about some prospective parents.
Can you imagine the outcry if any white couple uttered such a thing if they were looking to adopt a non-white baby? You'd have demands for their heads on a pike next to very shrill cries of "Racism!" and so on. But when a non-white person makes such an utterance, its simply news and information for the reader. No controversy, no issue, no big deal.

It is a child not a bloody chocolate bar! I'm amazed they didn't also specify whether they wanted nuts under the wrapper or not.

But the sentence that follows this is the hands-down winner:
"I had a family who turned a baby down because it was too dark," she says. "They said the baby wouldn't look good in family photographs."
If any white person looking to adopt said this, there'd be a guillotine on their front lawn the following morning courtesy of Jesse Jackson with Al Sharpton under the black hood looking to take their head off. Complete with news crews and a crowd cheering them on.

"Wouldn't look good in family photographs"?!?

Words escape me.

I am floored that CNN published this. In any other context, this material would be worthy of a standalone hatred screed on Stormfront. And would fit right in among those white supremacists and their varieties of vile hatred.

But it is perfect OK for a black person to say such things and see them as perfectly acceptable. Simply recognizing the realities of the world as it were. These would be the same people, whom I suspect, would launch into a fit of apoplectic fury at the prospect of a non-black couple adopting a black child because such an act would be "denying them their black heritage" or "deprive them of important black cultural roots".

It is no less racism when it comes out of their mouths and it is way past time people started calling them out on it.

The subjects of these excerpts should be ashamed of themselves. It's hard enough to adopt any child and the fact that these people would pick and choose based on the color of an innocent child's skin as the factor that will determine whether that child is worthy of living with them is disgusting.

The only saving grace is that by their ignorance and xenophobia, those children will wind up in better, more loving and tolerant homes. But I despair for what the poor unfortunate child raised by such narrow-minded, intolerant, race-baiting dumbass individuals will be taught. In my opinion it would be no different than handing a baby over to a openly practicing, preaching member of the KKK.

Now I understand why so many children are in need of foster homes if this is the prevailing attitude among the available population of potential black foster or adoptive homes. "Too black, send'em back!". And pillory me for even suggesting that non-black couples are fine for fostering or adopting black children.

Weren't we supposedly to be over all this now that The One has ascended?

Just goes to prove that racism knows no bounds. Even down to the hatred of children who don't know any better. This affirms what my mother taught me is that racism is a learned behavior and it all starts with the parents.

Glad to see another generation of parents will be perpetuating it. All they need is a nice lawn and a burning cross to complement the landscaping. Except they'd be the one's putting them up and lighting the match.

Cross That One Off

I hope everyone had a good Fourth of July. I certainly did and I get to cross an item off my "To-Do" list. It took me almost 7 years but I finally got to see the Capitol fireworks display from the Potomac River. And it was quite a sight! The fifteen minutes of the very large Mall show plus a half-dozen or so smaller displays all the way down the opposite shore as far as we could see. It was a panorama of fireworks.

It was worth it. We spent most of the day just sitting at anchor just outside the marina. We had sailed for a bit previously but found it a little too rough for comfort. Still, I was glad we got some sailing in to let my friend Tom and his son experience a little of life under canvas.

I need to recharge the house battery. We ran it dry just after sunset. It might be too far gone to save since I don't know how old it is. If so, there's another $200 for a new house battery. I have some work to do when I get the boat hauled in a couple weeks. Hopefully, that should be the last of the lightening of my wallet for some time.

Back to work.

Monday, June 29, 2009

Green Living

I'm wondering what the recent visitors of the repairman stripe were thinking as they bopped around my basement fixing stuff and saw the green cabinets and stacks of military green ammunition cans on wire racks? Especially given that several of those cans had a stack of very menacing looking knives of various stripes and styles. To those in the know, we call those "bayonets". Unfortunately, there was no room in the 80mm mortar round case for those since I was trying to hide the stacks of FAL and G3 magazines from those who might be exceptionally curious about the contents of said green cabinets.

I think the Sears guy was fine but the Comcast guy was more worried about the red and white, very ferocious cattle dog we had to sequester in the next room than he might have been about the close proximity of numerous implements of personal warfare, mayhem and destruction. Foster does not like be locked in a room all by himself, especially when there are new friends to be made.

I cannot understand why Achmed fears dogs. As long as the tail is wagging, you'll leave with the same number of holes in your body that you started with. Foster loves to make friends. He'll give up the tummy and give kisses freely so I just can't figure that fear out. Any takers?

Achmed should consider himself fortunate. The last Comcast guy Foster met resulted in a rapid visit to the vet the following week for some overdue canine alteration. I can't say he was fixed because, honestly, he wasn't broken. That much he made apparent to the Comcast guy's misfortune. Pushing 8 years later, we're still convinced that the vet missed one somewhere. The romance never really left Foster's life. And I have the pictures to prove it.

On to other topics...

You don't know how hard I found it on Saturday to not untie the boat and head out for an hour to two to enjoy what were perfect sailing conditions. Steady 10 knots out of the north on the Potomac. Just ripples for waves. Those are conditions that define the term "day sailing". Alas, I promised my wife that after I finished tracing the electrical system and making sure all was working prior to the 4th this week that I would not take her out and singlehand. She quoted the Boater Safety Course on me to back it up! I'm impressed. I kept my word and left her tied up.

But it was very tempting. An O'Day 22 is an easy boat to singlehand provided you can lash the tiller in place while you're forward handling the sails. You need to keep her up into the wind while raising them and that usually requires two people or a means to keep the bow into the wind. Nothing a length of line and two cleats can't handle. As I said, very tempting.

But I'm set for the 3rd and the 4th now. Masthead light is not functioning but since I am under 23 feet in length, I am not required to have one. A handheld light shone on the sails or forward under power is fine. I plan to fix that at haulout.

Which leads to today's minor rant...

For those of you all high and mighty on "green living", shut the fuck up. Buying compact fluorescents that require EPA instructions and a hazmat suit to clean up when broken, driving a Prius that polluted enough water to kill a coral reef in making its frame and batteries and sticking your cardboard into a plastic bin that uses more oil to produce than you will ever save driving said previous electric tinkertoy does not make you a guilt-free, environmentally aware, eco-sustainable, planet-saving citizen.

It makes you a hippie. And a particularly stupid one at that.

My plan is to live the green lifestyle you spout so proudly of from your pedestal. But you have no idea how difficult a problem that really is because it requires thought.

My sailboat, even a lowly 22 foot daysailer is more green that your supposed green lifestyle will ever be. And here's why:
  • My sailboat is recycled. It is 32 years old and still going strong. How long will your Prius last?
  • My sailboat is powered by the wind to get anywhere it needs to go. The gas engine is optional. How far will your Prius get on a single charge if we took its gas engine out?
  • I can travel anywhere in the world on my sailboat without using a drop of oil. That's 24,000 nautical miles and seven continents. What's the range of a Prius on a single charge? 50-100 miles and maybe the next county?
  • My electricity production is done by solar power. My boat is entirely a closed-loop. A single house battery provides me with all the light I need and the solar panel keeps it charged. So I'm two up on the sustainable living thing. How much oil does your Prius need to charge its battery?
  • Marine regulations prohibit the discharge of polluted water into any inland waterways. So I'm not dumping toxins into the river. How much CO2 comes out of the tailpipe of your Prius?
  • White sailboats don't contribute to solar global warming since they reflect heat away from their hulls. Just doing my part for the environment.
Seriously though, before I met my wife I was in the process of planning out my lifestyle. That involved me living aboard a 32-38 foot sailboat in Annapolis. While that seems insane, the cost advantages were (and are) very compelling. Done right, I could have retired in my 40s with enough money in the bank to let me sail anywhere in the world and live a life of reasonably luxury anywhere I landed for the rest of my life.

While my list of point above might seem like hyperbole, they really aren't. In looking to live in what is essentially a floating prison, you learn to prioritize and one of the things high on the list is power. Since boats at sea can only carry a limited amount of fuel and have limited room, you have to figure out your power usage accurately and plan accordingly. In doing so, you begin to weight the pros and cons of various approaches but when it comes right down to it, a sailing liveaboard is about as green as you can get.

When most people talk about "living off the grid", crusing liveaboards have no choice but to do so. Wind generators and solar panels are regular features on these boats and done right, can provide all of ones power needs. These are not new ideas. Crusing boats have been doing this stuff for over 20 years.

You can power everything from a generator hooked up to your engine (called an "auxillary" in the sailing world), you have to deal with your available fuel capacity, how long you'll be at sea and the possibility of these two very expensive pieces of mechanical equipment breaking and leaving you in the dark. Hence why most boats and smart owners use two or more systems for keeping the lights on.

And nothing will teach you more about the reality of so-called "green living" than planning the power budget for a sailboat as a liveaboard. If you think the solution to all the world's ills are wind generators and solar panels, you haven't studied the problem. Crusing sailboat owners have done so and know the subject backwards and forwards.

I find it funny in Googling "off the grid" solutions for power generation for houses that except for the house in the picture, I'm looking at the same techniques and equipment sailboats use. If you think generating all your home power from solar and batteries alone is sufficient and easy, I guarantee the price tag will knock you flat.

It costs thousands in a sailboat to use solar as a primary power source and you definitely won't be running a refrigerator, hot water tank or air conditioning unit with such a setup. If you can't do that in a oddly shaped 35x14 foot space with every top surface covered in high efficiency panels, you sure as hell aren't going to do it in your suburban McMansion without an acre or two nearby. And an expenditure equal to a significant fraction of the value of the house without you making significant lifestyle changes.

Solar is used to keep batteries topped off. Batteries are the primary source of power. When you need extra, you need a diesel powered generator (up to a few kilowatts) or a wind turbine.

It is amusing to see people touting wind as the next big thing in energy. Apparently these folks have never opened a West Marine catalog or picked up a copy of Cruising World. Wind turbines on a boat can produce a nice chunk of power. As long as the wind is blowing, you have lights. The downside of wind turbines and what they don't talk about for home use is noise and limits to usefulness.

A 36 inch sailboat wind generator at speed will sound like you're living next door to a neighbor with a Cessna in his garage. Yes, the blades make noise and as wind speed increases, so does the noise. Newer turbines have addressed this in various ways and look very appealing. Not cheap though.

There are two types of wind generators for power generation and each have their pluses and minuses. I personally prefer constant output generators since they don't require as much circuitry to handle them and tend to be more maintenance-free. But they don't produce as much power as the variable rate turbines. And both types of turbines do need someone to keep an eye on them since if the wind speed gets too high and the turbine doesn't have self-feathering or lockdown ability, they can literally spin themselves to death.

It's not fun dodging shrapnel as a two thousand dollar wind turbine explodes next to your head.

Still, one or two turbines can keep your batteries topped off and your lights on without running your diesel generator with all that icky oil. Just as long as the wind is blowing fast enough. 10+ knots usually.

After power, sailboat living just generally requires downsizing. While the period after my ex-wife and I separated wasn't fun, it was that period that taught me that I could indeed liveaboard and got me pursuing it. You see, after she left, she took the bed with her. So I had no reason to go into the bedroom and since we only had one bed, I slept on the futon in the living room. The kitchen was at my back and a small kitchen table was nearby. Despite the fact I was in a 1400 square foot apartment, I actually only lived for the better part of a year in a 12x14 foot room and used the rest of the space for storage.

That changed when I started dating my wife-to-be but for a very long time, I lived in a space typically found about a small sailboat. And enjoyed it.

It was refreshing to just pare away the non-essentials. How much counter space does one need to cook small meals once a day? How much space do you really need for a place to sleep? How much room do you actually have to set aside for your favorite books and a computer. "Not much" turned out to be the answer for me.

So I found myself contemplating and actually planning a "green lifestyle" long before the term was fashionable. Not that I considered it such since the "boat bum" lifestyle had some appeals all their own. Not everyone walking around downtown Annapolis could claim to have a view of the Bay and the Naval Academy from their home. $8000 per year for the liveaboard slip may seem outrageous but it was a lot cheaper than rent. My boat payment, insurance and slip fee would have been significantly less than my apartment rent at the time. And I would have had no utility bills since shore power was included in the slip fee and I would have had my own onboard power options.

With the advantage that if I tired of my Annapolis view, I could have St. Michaels a couple hours later and Baltimore the following night and back to Annapolis in time for work Monday if I so chose. I think a lot of people can see the appeal in that.

It never got out of the planning and phone call stages (just starting to call boat brokers) when I started dating my wife. But this desire has never let go and so far, she's been receptive to the idea of our weekend home in the future being a 30-40 foot sailboat on the Chesapeake Bay.

Our 22 foot sailboat on the Potomac is merely the first step in that direction. But on its own scale, it is just as much a green lifestyle as that future sailboat will be. The nice thing about sailboats is that there are lot of 20, 30 or even 40 year old boats out there that will work just fine depending on your desires and pocketbook.

The boat I was looking to liveabord ran between $15,000 and $28,000 depending on condition and equipment. A Gulfstar 37 center cockpit. Saw one recently on Craigslist in Annapolis for under $20,000. No one can argue that would be a cheap home after five years. Hell, a lot of new cars nowadays aren't that expensive. $25,000 for a house that you'll own free and clear in 5-10 years depending on how you structure the loan and $8-10K per year in rent and maintenance? Not a bad deal in my book.

Admittedly, there are downsides to this but your outlook and expectations matter a great deal in what you get out of it. I've been very pleased with my experiences aboard my new "old" 22 footer so far. I had my netbook playing movies on the cabin counter while I checked out the onboard wiring. Forward hatch open, 85 degrees outside and it was comfortable down below. Motion of the boat within the slip didn't bother me at all.

You scale that up to a small apartment and you'll have a hard time prying me off on weekends. The next step after that is to cast off the lines and not look back until I've reached St. Thomas.

Bet a Prius can't do that. So knock the "I'm green and doing my part!" (not to mention channeling Robert Heinlein) stuff off until you've actually tried it. Until your house is fenstooned in solar panels with a few wind turbines in the backyard, you've pried the engine out of your Prius and using it as a decorative yard display and an axe is lying next to the power pole you've just chopped down, can it. You're no more green than a Saudi Sheik with a fleet of oil tankers and an oil refinery dumping CO2 into the atmosphere faster than cows can fart.

I don't believe in all this eco-conservation bullshit and neither do you. Unlike you, I'm willing to admit it and actually give it a try someday.

What's your excuse?

Friday, June 26, 2009

Random and Messed Up Thoughts

Great, now we get to be bombarded for the next several days on non-stop Michael Jackson coverage. If I was Farrah Fawcet in the afterlife, I'd be pissed right now. She deserved better than what she got. It's terrible to die of anal cancer and she kept her dignity only to be upstaged hours later. The Universe can have a sick sense of humor.

Get ready for "Wacko Jacko" TV right up to the funeral coverage. And I can't even enjoy a diversion of looking for Amish porn on the Internet because my home connection is down. Thanks Comcast! Then a couple weeks of shuffled programming on the cable networks for biographies, retrospectives and tribute shows.

I had an extremely wrong thought pop into my head when I heard he died on the drive home last night. It involved me with the ability to draw comic panels and hot flames.

C'est la vie. I hope the guy found some peace. Unfortunately, we get to live with the fallout.

On an unrelated subject, for the next person who suggests that universal healthcare is a wonderful idea, ask them how good Medicare/Medicaid would be if it was 7 times larger than it is today in terms of cost and inefficiency? For a really fun response, ask a member of the AARP that question and then be prepared to duck.

If the questioner still believes universal healthcare won't suffer those issues, write them off as something other than human. You need a brain for that and they'll be clearly lacking. Why do we have universal suffrage again?

Sorry, in a messed-up mood today. Going to try avoiding some channel markers tomorrow to work it out.