Martin Hardee posted an excellent video on this subject yesterday, to make things efficient, I’ve posted it below.



Rarely have I seen such an accurate satire of humans faced with the adoption of new technology. My favorite quote: “Compared to the scroll, it takes longer to turn the pages of a book.” This all boils down to another one of Harding’s Laws: What you know is what you love. I still remember WordStar’s Control-KD to save a document and ESC-q-BANG to exit without saving in vi…Wordperfect was a step backward, Word was a giant leap backward…Ah progess, or our perception of progress. Thanks for the hearty chuckle Martin.



If you liked this entry, Digg It!
Tune: One Love by Bob Marley and the Wailers
Technorati Tags: Book or Scroll | Technology | Adoption | Mike Harding Blog

This video gives us a little something to think about on President’s Day. One has to wonder what Washington and Lincoln would make of our current leadership: executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Thus far, I’m entirely underwhelmed with our “new” congressional leadership. Executive leadership has already shown its true colors. The judicial branch might be in the best shape of all, and that’s not saying much.

Alot has been made about mistakes over the past six years. Here’s something to think about: If one is presented a situation and thoroughly considers all of the available information, seeks more context, consults others about the situation and then makes a decision with a negative outcome, it’s a “wrong” decision. The kind of decision I think many people (myself included) can live with, understand, and support.

However, if one is presented a situation and uses only the information that supports a single perspective, dimisses people with understanding, and directs others from a position of ignorance and then simply makes a decision, regardless of the outcome, that is a “bad” decision, also known as, a mistake.

What we’ve seen is a virtually uninterrupted chain of mistakes from our leadership. This is the kind of decision that is lazy, self-serving, dangerous, and damaging. It’s the kind of decision many people (myself included) cannot and will not tolerate.

Here’s to hoping we start seeing a track record of “good” decisions. And if we can’t have that, I’d settle for an increase in “wrong” decisions. But the time of “bad” decisions must quickly fade into the past for all our benefit.


If you liked this entry, Digg It!
Tune: President by Wyclef Jean
Technorati Tags: President’s Day | Mike Harding Blog

An airline pilot in Minnesota won the lottery two days in a row…not enough to retire, but if you’re superstitious, lucky enough to make you think he shouldn’t get back into an airplane. The first day odds were 170,000 to 1 on winning. Betcha he goes ice fishing next…


If you liked this entry, Digg It!
Tune: Money For Nothing by Dire Straits
Technorati Tags: Lottery | Two wins in two days | Mike Harding Blog

Traditional wind systems have had either a horizontal axis with a single blade (95+% of what is in use today) or vertical axis with a single blade (think large egg beater anchored to the ground.) A company called Mass Megawatts Wind Power Inc. is advancing the application of multi-axis vertical turbines, that is many blades mounted vertically in a box-like array around 20 meters off the ground.

The thinking behind this technology is that with more smaller blades, lower wind speeds will be able to output power than in traditional horizontal turbine systems. The design has two generator modes, one 7.5 kilowatt that cuts in at under 4.5 meter/second (~10mph) and another 22.5 kilowatt that cuts in at 6.25 meters/second (~14 mph.) Each unit has 32 generators attached to 32 shafts with blades. That means in a 6 m/s wind, 100% output would be around 864 kilowatts/hour and in a 8 m/s wind, 100% output would be 2,592 kilowatts hour. The image above is a smaller prototype system.

Wind systems rarely operate at 100% capacity, in fact, the average capacity factor is 30% across the installed wind farms. If we take this into account, the MAT system would produce somewhere between 2,267 and 6,811 megawatt hours per year depending upon which generator has the dominant share of time in action. At the prevaling wind rate of $45/MWh, that gives a revenue spread per unit per year of $101,015 on the low end to $306,495 on the high end. The acquisition and construction cost of each unit is estimated (by Mass Megawatts) to be $210,000 per unit. If the MAT unit performs as above and maintenance costs don’t kill it, it might be economically viable.

The science of harvesting kinetic energy from the wind is pretty straight forward, the density of the air moving through the swept area of the turbine at some speed dictates how much energy can be harvested. The formula is: Power = 0.5 x Swept Area x Air Density x Velocity³. Without accurate measurements of the blades on the MAT we can’t make the calculation, but at first blush, the swept area doesn’t look sufficient to produce the stated power levels. This is physics, the equation has to solve so if the area is smaller, then the velocity has to increase and/or air density has to increase.

The other claim made by the MAT folks is that the maintenance costs are lower. I’m high skeptical of this as basic physics dictates the more moving parts an object has, the more opportunities for things to break. In a traditional horizontal turbine there is one blade assembly, one gearbox, one turbine etc you get the picture. On the MAT, there are 32 turbines, 32 shafts, who knows how many blades; it’s at least 32x more likely to experience failure in a given time frame. Now, with the horizontal turbine, a failure tends to be complete. In a MAT, that’s not necessarily so, if 1 shaft/generator/blade combo goes, theorhetically, the other 31 are still in business.

I’m all for experimentation and open minded that breakthroughs can and do happen, but I don’t think we’re seeing one here. A part of me hopes that there is something to this, but the evidence seems to suggest that this design introduces more problems than it solves. We’ll see as Mass Megawatts installs their wind farm, the business plan calls for 100 units to be installed this calendar year. Proof will be in production and we’ll be able to see that as a result of their quarterly reports. We’ll be watching with interest.


If you liked this entry, Digg It!
Tune: What’s Up? by 4 Non-Blondes
Technorati Tags: Energy | Wind | Multi-axis Turbine | Mike Harding Blog

Before reading this post, watch this movie:



In science, there are thousands of these (my favorite is Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle) types of things and in technology too, though they tend to be described as “laws” – i.e., Moore’s Law, Metcalfe’s Law, etc. I felt that I had at least one minor contribution to make in this area, and here it is.

Harding’s Water Principle:
Common sense and good judgment are water soluble.

Corollary:
The rate of decline of common sense and good judgment accelerates as the temperature drops.

Kind of boring, I know. But if you think about the principle and simply observe one trait of our society when water is added in vapor, liquid, or solid form, you’ll know it’s a true principle: driving. The data support this, accidents increase in the presence of precipitation. Intellectually, everyone knows to slow down when it’s foggy, wet, snowing, and/or icy, but somehow our common sense and good judgment are suspended or somehow degraded at this time. I don’t know why it happens, I can only observe that it happens.

Don’t believe it? See the entry on “Snow snorkeling” and tell me how that contradicts the principle….oh, you want DATA, ok, here it is:


Data Sources: California Highway Patrol and the National Weather Service.

There you have it, a new principle. Please feel free to use and abuse it.


If you liked this entry, Digg It!
Tune: Drivin’ My Life Away by Eddie Rabbit
Technorati Tags: Harding’s Principle | Water | Stupidity | Mike Harding Blog