And bare feet to boot.
Freaking kiwis…

I work from home but don’t have any customers at my residence so I skirt the zoning that way. I assume that would hold if you’re telecommuting. In Philly someone was smart enough (I can’t believe I said) to put rail train stops in the suburbs to keep them viable I suppose. Or keep the values artificially inflated.

All Highways have the same standards on width and length and grades and stretchs for hill sides or flat levels. Every 5 miles, 1 mile must be straight in case of War time for Airplanes to land.

Now with all this said. I break the law and travel 80 mph on avg on all highways throughout America. Unless i notice the Curve (55MPH-) sign, or see a tunnel comming up, traffic, accidents, etc.

Now I also obey to the T the “guideline” for every 10mph at least give a car length of space between you and the car in front of you for braking. Most people don’t obey this and they fault crash everytime.

Which one is the more important to Obey? Our traffic rules’ priorities are messed up in this country. But it’s alright we all have mandatory car insurance. Well money can’t replace lives lost, and Earnings to a company matter not to how they are recieved even if via blood money.

As a cyclist I’d be concerned about the noise of biking next to a freeway and the air quality.

@Benjamin Bankruptcy: It’s perfectly legal to ride on the highways here in NSW, and safer than on normal roads. You just ride in the emergency lane; they have bike icons painted on, here and there. Cars and trucks are even considerate and careful in general, except, sometimes, young and stupid L- and P-platers.

I think Q has some interesting ideas as well. Perhaps cities like Detroit should encourage these manufacturing zones and build affordable housing around them (within walking or biking distance).

As far as the freeway, they need to go double-decker, take away the carpool and turn it into high-speed rail, and then make the double-decker section pedestrian and bike. Crazy and radical, but it will work.

When gas prices spiked a couple years ago we saw some progressive companies and governments going to 4 day workweeks or encouraging working offsite. If things got really bad – like $10/gal gas this could be a solution. Seems like commercial real estate could be the real loser.

*Of course there are always some occupations that physically need to show up for work – like manufacturing & retail.

Now, one thing which is a problem with oil company reporting is that they like to state numbers conservatively. Later, they can revise them upwards. This is called reserve growth and has typically nothing to do with finding new reserves but much more with initially coming out and saying that the field is small and then later saying, well it’s slightly bigger. Shareholders like upward revisions as do the managers who can hire and fire the engineers who make the predictions. The problem with this is if you take “reserve growth rates” and project them into the future, you will get massive reserves. USGS used to do that. IEA used to do it too. I think IEA has revised their method to the more reasonable one of backdating the numbers e.g. You discover a field in 1985 and say it contains 20Gbbl. Then in 1995 you revise that number to 40Gbbl. Now without backdating, that would be two discoveries of 20G each ten years apart. With backdating, it’s a discovery of 40Gbbl in 1985. Backdating kills the growth and claims that growth only happens because of conservative estimates. The peak oil theory follows from that.

—We all remember BP’s original statement that they were losing 5,000 bpd from the well. Then scientists said it was more like 100k bpd. Then the government said that it was about 10k bpd – not 100k. A few weeks later, they said “Ok – maybe it is 100k bpd.”

Now we’ve got new figures of 350k bpd spewing out of the wellhead, (ATS Link) and a total of 420-840 MILLION barrels leaked so far. (ATS link)

To me, it all seems to point to one thing – BP was lying from the outset about the amount of oil this well was producing before the explosion. If they’re lying about this one, they’re probably lying about ALL of the ones they own, as are the owners of every other oil well on the planet.

Why would they lie about it?

For starters, everyone here knows about the “peak oil” theory. If the petrocompanies say that oil is getting harder to get out of the ground, they charge more for it and we end up getting hosed. Meanwhile, they continue to set record after record in regards to company profits.

What do you think would happen if instead of having to pump like hell to get oil out of the ground, that oil was practically GUSHING out of their wells? Better still – that the wells were not “running dry” as we’ve been told, and were instead being replenished via a chemical process near the core of the earth (abiotic oil)? That the oil companies were shutting down “dry wells” just to keep the lie alive?

The answer is that the world economy would crash and crash hard.

By and large, most nations are deeply vested in petrodollars. Were oil to suddenly drop in price to $5 a barrel, many countries would simply implode – mainly the OPEC cartel and our pals in the big oil companies. They have nothing to lose and everything to gain by propagating the myth of peak oil.

I think the smoking gun is in plain-sight – surrounded by little unmanned subs and blowing hundreds of thousands of barrels a day into the gulf. ——–(end article)

This is just someone’s opinion, but it seems sensible to me.

For ERE purposes: Do not buy a home in suburbia — biggest mistake ever. These houses will lose value over the next 20 years because of their inconvenient location.