Next time you’re out on the road try testing a theory of mine. I’ve found it pretty reliable in predicting how hapless a driver may be so you can make allowances. What you’re looking for is an indication of how hard their CPU is peddling just to stay on the road. Firstly if both sunvisors are up or if they’re down only when facing in to the sun, they’re not too hopeless, you’ll need to use a different idiot test. The following tests apply when the person in front of you is not driving towards the sun, or there is no sunlight - either cloudy or night.

1. drivers side down - a little skittish/oblivious, give them room,

2. passenger side down - not a reliable indicator since the driver can’t account for passengers. My mum does this when I’m driving, drives me nuts!

3. both down fulltime - watch out! Seriously oblivious driver; everything takes this driver by surprise and they usually don’t react well when they become aware of any impending disaster. They spend time switching between blissful ignorance and panic.

And yet, these are illegal:

Why yes, as a matter of fact I am in that 60% of drivers who consider themselves better than the average driver, picking other drivers minor faults while ignoring their own. Why do you ask?

Tags: idiocy

Had to change a bulb yesterday, well Kathy did while I was still getting ‘round to it, and it occurred to me that with the Australian Govt.’s proposed phase out of “inefficient incandescent” bulbs in favour of fluorescent bulbs (a.k.a. Compact Fluorescent Lamps - CFLs) due by November this year, they’re dumber than they look.

First the good side of CFLs: they use a fraction of the amount of energy normally used with incandescent lighting, and this is the Govt’s main selling point. Hey that’s great, I’m all for sustainability and helping Gaia out, but try thinking it through a little more...

1. CFLs are more expensive and take more energy to produce,

2. CFLs are wasteful: when you turf a CFL you’re chucking not only the bulb but the integrated ballast which could last much longer,

3. Recycling? Not according to the govt., they recommend disposing of these in general rubbish, ie. landfill and not recycling because the bulbs wouldn’t make it through to the recycling plant and “contaminate recyclable items.” Y’see where an “inefficient incandescent” bulb is made up of glass, a sliver of tungsten, copper and alloy, a fluoro (be it a tube or CFL) is made up of glass, plastic, alloy, copper, ballast (usually a small electronic circuit) phosphor, and mercury vapour.

The last one is the worry. Sure it’s a tiny amount, but aren’t we trying to decrease the noxious substances we’re putting into the ground? Can’t be that noxious, you say? Why, then, does that very page say that the first thing you should do if you break one indoors, is open all windows to ventilate the room? Oh, and don’t use a vacuum to clean it up.

Enough whinging, how about putting a positive -er- light on it. One good move would be to move the ballast part of the CFL into the socket so you’re not replacing it unnecessarily. These are available but they’re hugely expensive and could/should be subsidised if you want any kind of adoption rate, like say solar panels. Oh, don’t get me started on solar panels...

My thought? CFLs are relatively good for energy usage, but bad for everything else. Use them for commercial applications where the energy difference will be noticeable, but don’t put them everywhere. The real solution, IMHO, is LEDs. They’re nearly indestructible, last pretty much for ever, and are energy efficient enough to put CFLs to shame. Refine that technology and you’re laughing, until then, well...

Tags: energy, waste, idiocy