Automobile technology that will really save lives and energy

Hybrid-shmybrid.

A couple weeks ago a driver in Ontario got caught doing 250 km/hr in a 100 km/hr zone. (For you yanks that's about 155 mph in a 65 mph zone).

Wow. $10,000 fine.

Question is, if Canada's top speed limit is I believe 120 km/hr, why are street legal vehicles able to exceed that by over 100%?

Here in Quebec, cruising at 120 km/hr in a 100 zone is very unlikely to result in a ticket. Let's say that 120 is a reasonable top speed.

So, first thing that automobiles should be required to have when delivered at the dealer is a throttle cutoff at, say, 140 km/hr. Period.

Pushing this a little further, highways could have transmitters that broadcast the top legal speed of the road. In a 100 km/hr zone, the car would not be able to exceed, say, 120.

And as a benefit to highway maintenance and construction crews, orange zones would transmit appropriately lower limits with only a small overspeed allowance. (if the zone is 80, then the top speed cars would go would be 85).

Tamper with the device and the car is seized and destroyed at the owners expense.

Now that we've got the idea going, let's take it a step further: tax the fuel hog - reward the miser. Here's how it works.

1) Every car has a province issued transponder (a digital two-way radio). Whenever you pull up to a gas pump the transponder and the gas pump have a conversation. The car reports the car model, mileage since the last fill up and the number of litres at that fill up.

2) The gas pump assigns a tax according to the efficiency of the vehicle. The less efficient, the heftier the per-litre tax. The more efficient, the less tax. For the really efficient a tax rebate is given.

3) Every year or so, the mileage requirement to get a rebate increases. The tax for the fuel hogs increases. The rebate for the efficient goes up more and more (since the returns will be slimmer and slimmer, you have to reward more for those who push the limits).

4) Now the above is a bit harsh on some vehicle operators such as car pools, schools, businesses and so on. So a method to soften the blow needs to be built in.

Summary: the above is the way to go if you really want to reduce fossil fuel consumption at the pump.

Junk Heat

Some industries use a lot of energy to heat cold water for use in various processes.

Some industries reject heat as a by product of their operations. One of these is the server farm. A server farm consumes a lot of electrical power and generates enormous amounts of heat. This is typically 'rejected' to the atmosphere by large coolers (basically radiators: a coil with a fan).

Quebec is an ideal place for server farms. Lot's of relatively cheap electricity and very high speed optical networks.

Further Quebec has many industries that heat water for use in many processes.

As a means to getting more out of our electricity (freeing up more to be sold to the US, for example), we should co-locate server-farms with industries that take in cold water and then heat it for use in their processes.

In this way the enormous heat generated by a server farm could be used to pre-heat the cold water for the co-located industry. This would reduce the energy consumption of that industry while providing a heat sink for the server farm.

The server farm would charge the industry for that heat, say 2 cents per kWh. This is much cheaper than what the industry is paying for the same amount of heat (whether electric or natural gas). In turn, less 'new' energy is consumed, costs are less and the carbon footprint is reduced for both companies.

As an example, a 1000 server farm consumes about 500,000 W for annual cost of about $175,000. That same 500 kW can be sold as heat to the adjacent industry at, for example, 2c / kWh. That would be a return of about $87,000 per year.

Further, the need for air conditioning would be avoided - in effect the cool water used by the adjacent industry would be the air conditioning for the server farm.

Don't junk heat - recycle it.

Auto Emissions - physical realities

As the twin evils of over consumption of fossil fuel to power cars and the resulting emissions seem to be finally (after over 20 years of insanity) getting new attention, let us review a few inescapable facts surrounding automobile design.

More fuel is used during highway acceleration at any rate than while cruising down the highway at 110 km/hr. And the more vigorously one accelerates, the worst this is.

Why? Mainly because gasoline and diesel engines are horribly inefficient in cruise and much worse during acceleration. In cruise an engine delivers about 25% conversion to mechanical energy. That is to say that for every 100 litres of gasoline you buy, 75 litres is wasted as heat, never providing a benefit. As if that were not bad enough, it is even worse during acceleration, especially if the driver has a heavy foot. During acceleration all kinds of parsitic drag act on the engine. This includes induction air resistance (which the engine has to use more fuel to overcome), accessories (alternator, air conditioning, power steering, power brakes, etc.) and a richer mixture of fuel to air required when the engine is accelerating not to mention getting the exhaust out of the engine which adds a load just pushing it through the tailpipe (erroneously called 'backpressure'. It's simply resistance).

In effect, during highway cruise an automobile only needs a fraction of its installed horsepower. In turn it is wasting energy transporting that headroom horsepower around. Funny. (and wasteful).

It all comes to roost based on a very simple high school physics equation that is a result of the second law of motion from Sir Isaac Newton.

F = ma

Force, the 'strength' that something is pushed with is equal to the mass times the rate of acceleration.

Some people like to acclerate like crazy. 0 to 100 km/hr in 5 seconds! ("a" above). Well, to achieve that a powerful and high torque engine is required. (That's the "F" above).

Some people, often in the same group as above, also like their large vehicle and to have it lushly appointed for comfort and entertainment. That's the "m" above.

So, people want a lot of "a" and they like the comfort of "m". This means a big "F" under the hood that gobbles fuel whenever "a" is greater than 0.

Could it be worse? Well of course! In the real world there is no such thing as constant speed, at least as far as the engine is concerned. Huh? Well, it's like this: in the real world the auto faces wind resistance and rolling resistance. Wind resistance follows another equation derived from the equation above. I won't write it out here. Oh, okay, since you insist. It's:

Drag = Cd D S V^2 / 2

Where Cd is a constant representing the drag coefficient, D is the density of the air, S is the surface area of the car (seen from the front) and V is the speed (^2 means "squared").

When cars are less aerodynamic (as they've tended to become over the last 10 years) then "Cd" goes up. Cars have gotten large, so "S" goes up too. (Eg: a Jeep Cherokee is quite high compared to an automobile of the same width).

Drag goes up as a square of the velocity. There is 4 times as much aerodynamic drag at 100 km/hr than at 50 km/hr. Compound that with poor aerodynamics and large area and the Drag is really high.

Back to the top. Drag means that if you take your foot off the gas, the car will slow down. When at constant speed on the highway, your foot is always on the gas. The power of the engine is working against the deceleration (-a) due to the wind and rolling resistance. The engine is always applying a force to overcome the force of drag. It is a hidden "F=ma" if you will. Funny how that crops up to use more gas.

Clearly, other than reducing speed (say 100 instead of 120, you do the math, remember to square) a large improvement can come from improving the aerodynamics of the car, esp. by reducing the frontal area of the car and making the rear tapered so it doesn't pull a roiling mass of air behind it (notice that airliners have pointy tails?).

Next, consider rolling resistance. This is the tires against the road. Tires are soft compared to the road so energy is lost in continuously reshaping the tire as it rolls. (This is why the temperature of the tires rises as you drive). The faster you go, the more resistance. The softer the tire, the more resistance (as there is more deformation/reformation as well as more tire in contact with the road.) The larger the car, the larger the tires and even more is in contact with the road. (Trains are about 3x more fuel efficient than trucks in part because they have very high wheel pressure on the rail)

This is where things compound and make cars horribly inefficient.

As vehicles get larger they obviously get heavier. As cars get heavier, they need larger engines. Larger engines mean larger transmissions, drive trains and support structures. Larger cars have larger wheels, larger tires and larger brakes.

All of those "largers" also mean more weight. More "m" from the first equation above. And to make it worse, we seem to want a lot of "a" meaning bigger engines and the consequences of that.

Clearly it is past time to put childish things asside.

Smaller cars with moderate acceleration requirements mean a lot less surface area to resist the wind, a lot less rolling resistance against the road, a lot less weight to accelerate and stop and smaller engines that require less fuel to accelerate the above. It is a compounding effect.

The wrong use of recent engine efficiencies.

Ironically, engine efficiency has improved remarkably over the last 30 years. Electronic fuel injection, microprocessors, variable valve timing, aluminum block engines, advanced induction and exhaust systems and more have combined to get more power out of the same sized engine. However, while the power to weight ratio has improved, the consumption per hp has not improved as much.

Car makers have taken advantage of the higher power to weight ratios to push around heavier vehicles even while giving them the "desired" performance in acceleration.

One has to ask the question: since power to weight ratios have improved, why not keep power constant and make the engines smaller, lighter and cheaper? That would result in improved fuel efficiencies as it would contribute to lighter transmission and driver train, smaller wheels and brakes. Instead, led by the former "big 3", Mercedez and BMW, automobiles post records for more and more power every year with scant (if any) improvements in fuel efficiency.

Turbochargers.

Turbochargers could help, however they are most efficient as a function of exhaust gas flowing through them (called volumetric efficiency). This means that they are very good at increasing the horsepower of an engine, but that is only a benefit during acceleration. And during an acceleration the turbocharger only helps the engine use more fuel. (Note that on piston powered aircraft turbochargers have only a beneficial effect: they allow operation at high altitude where the density of the air is lower, hence less drag [same equation above applies]).

Next: let's discuss electric vehicles for Canada. It's not a clear cut case.

Bank of Montreal cash grab on mortgages

For the last 7 years or so I've used variable rate mortgages for my home mortgage.  Variable rate mortgages usually have lower rates than comparable term fixed rate mortgages at the time they are agreed to, but carry the risk of a rise in rates when the Bank of Canada adjusts its overnight rate.

My variable rate mortgage would always be 1% above the BoC overnight rate.

I've been more lucky than not with my variable rate mortgage and over the last year nearly delighted with each down tick in the Bank of Canada overnight rate as it was applied directly to my variable rate mortgage.  So on Dec. 9 when the BoC cut the overnight rate by a whopping 3/4 of a percentage point I was self smug in knowing my mortgage rate would fall to 2.5%.

Until this morning, that is.

The "Mortgage Rate Change Update" that came from the Bank of Montreal (and later than usual following a BoC rate change) showed only a 1/2% decrease in my rate (to 2.75%).

Now you might say, "2.75% on a home mortgage, Wow! that's great!!"

But what I say is, "no way bubba, this is a NAKED CASH GRAB BY THE Bank of Montreal". They are pocketing that 1/4%.  On a $100,000 mortgage that's over $225 / year that they are taking from their customers.

Why is this so?  Well, variable rate mortgages are based on the BoC overnight rate.  The bank adds 1% to cover its own costs and to make a little profit (Never forget that banks NEVER lend you their own money, it is always someone else's, in this case the government's).

So now they are borrowing at a very cheap rate but keeping a larger chunk for themselves and not passing it on to their customers.  In the end we pay more, but it goes into the banks pocket, not back to the government.

If you have a variable rate mortgage with BMO, be sure to protest and spread the word.

Kafka meets RBC insurance

Recently my son obtained his driver's license.  Obviously, he would like to borrow my car from time to time.

So, I telephoned my automobile insurer, RBC Insurance and explained the need.  The lady took the info and then quoted a price.  (sucking sound here - he's 18).  I told her I would get back to her.  She asked, "when?"  I replied "When I can."

She phoned twice in the same week asking for an update.  On the last call, I said, "NO.  Do not insure him."

Then I received a packet in the mail showing him as an occasional driver on my insurance.  I phoned up RBC and said, "NO, this is not wanted.  Take him off."

"Well Sir, you'll have to sign a form."

"Why?"

"Well to remove him from your insurance."

"But he's not on my insurance."

"Yes, he is."

"Why? I told you 'No, don't put him on."

"Well Sir, that's not how it works."

"All I asked for was a quote, I didn't confirm.  In fact I said, 'No'"

"Sir that's not how it ...." 

I used the RBC 'comment' site.

I got a phone call from someone who could do nothing as they were not authorized to actually do anything when customers had issues.

I received a packet in the mail to sign to CONFIRM that my son was insured.

I received an e-mail reminding me to sign what I received in the mail to CONFIRM that my son was insured.

But I have yet to hear from ANYONE at RBC Insurance acknowledge that in fact I never asked for my son to be added as an occasional driver.  I said "NO".  What is so hard about the word "No" for RBC Insurance?

I can only assume that RBC Insurance excels in creative incompetence.

Not only is RBC insurance incompetent, but I suspect a degree of unethical sales behaviour, perhaps driven by commissions.

Imagine calling Ford and asking for a price on a Mustang, and the next day a Mustang appears in your driveway with a demand for payment.

I've told RBC to fix this quick.  But I suspect I'll be shopping for a new insurer very soon.

Deepest known vaccuum: Trudeau airport sucks

I spent a couple weeks in the US this July on Holiday.  Flying back I was quite relaxed in the full to capacity A-320 to Detroit and thence the RJ-900 to Montreal.

Oddly, my stress level increased only as I got close to Montreal, not as I navigated the inanities of the US air travel experience.

For some reason (mainly business travel) I seem to arrive very often at Trudeau around 17:00 - 19:00.  Just about the same time that B-747's and A-330's disgorge hundreds of passengers each.

There are a lot of Canadians on those flights, however there are an awful lot of Europeans and Africans as well.

Trudeau airport marshall all of this cattle into a long lineup at the end of which you are guided towards a half dozen to dozen customs lineups (about 10 deep) to await your greeting home.

In most other countries and certainly the EU and the US (when you clear in the US as opposed to Montreal or Toronto) there are two customs clearing areas:  those for visitors and those for nationals returning home.

There is nothing like ending up behind a family from the middle east or Africa.  You will wait behind them for a long time.

Why are Canadians being punished having to wait for visitors to clear customs?

It is time for Canadian customs to do what almost all other countries do:  have agents dedicated to Canadians returning home.

Yes, I know there is the CANPASS line for frequent travelers.  However, I was with my girlfriend who travels at most once a years by air...  and in any case that should not matter.  All Canadians should have a faster lane to return through.

Another thing that SUCKS at Trudeau:  where are the baggage carts in the US baggage area these days?  There used to be tons of carts all over, but I had to go all the way to the opposite corner of the baggage area to find one of a remaining dozen carts.  Maybe, as this flight was at 19:30 most of the carts were all over the parking lot.  Trudeau needs more people to marshal and return carts.  (At least there is no fee).

Trudeau is getting worse and worse while Plattsburgh beckons. 

I want to pay 33% on my mutual funds...

It is very often said that mutual funds managers have little incentive to work hard for returns.  After all the customer will pay.  He has no choice.  The mutual fund just skims it off the capital.  The customers capital.  My capital.

The mutual fund managers will be paid and the mutual fund provider will make money.  

Here's a better idea.  I want mutual funds ("you") to operate this way:

1. If you lose money on my funds you get 0.

2. If you make money on my funds, but you don't beat the market, you get 10% of the gains.

3. If you beat the market, you get 10% of the gains, plus 33% of the gains that are above the market.

Let lose the Alpha-Bulls.

Immigrant Accommodation - Immigrant first.

Offhand from a recent CBC report on "reasonable accommodation" and the Bouchard-Taylor commission I see too much of what "Quebecers" should do to accommodate immigrants and not enough about what accommodations immigrants should make to integrate into society here.

Chiefly among the things that immigrants should have to agree to, in writing, in their mother tongue before being accorded any right to live here, is:

-They must read (or have read to them) the complete Charter of Rights (Canada and Quebec), (in their own language if necessary) and sign a form saying they have read it (or had it read to them in their language) and understood it and understand that it applies to them and to their behavior with respect to the rest of their own family.

-agree to and commit to respect that the law here has precedence over the laws of the country they left, most especially laws enshrined in religion or in the traditions of where they left.

-that the above is perhaps much more protective of women's and children's rights than where they came from needs to be clearly understood.

-that the cost and effort of "preserving their original culture and heritage" is their own to bear and that no person, organization, company or government entity at any level is obliged, nor can be compelled to help them in these pursuits.

-that if they are not content to live by the law here, they are very welcome to exercise their absolutely unimpeded right to leave, including a return to wherever it was that they came from.

-that if they or their immigrating children are found guilty of committing a crime in the 5 years after they arrive, then they are collectively exposed to immediate expulsion to their country of origin regardless of "refugee" claims.

-that they must, at their own cost, all take French and optionally English lessons until reaching a functional reading, writing and oral proficiency allowing them to function autonomously within 2 years of their arrival. Failing which, they will be fined some amount monthly until reaching that level.

If they can't wholeheartedly agree to the above then please have great luck in finding somewhere else to live or in returning home. Next!

The above may sound unfair, tough and impractical, but the consequences over the long term are worse. I would guess that at least 75% of immigrants probably adapt well and willingly. 

But they're not the ones who cause any issues or problems after they arrive.

Bell Canada's last bill

Bell Canada have reacted with poor manners to my cancellation of their over priced land line to my house.  Since the landline is paid in the month in advance, whatever number of days were not used are credited back to the account holder.  So Bell owed me a credit of $15.29.

Then they clawed back:

$5.57 -fee: cancellation of long distance plan

$4.17 -fee: cancellation of network fees.  (eg: a fee to cancel access to a fee).

Bell Canada's ability to get their fingers into my pocket never fails to surprise.

And as Bell lose customers by the hundreds every day to cable-phone operators, they should not be surprised that none will ever come back.  There are now over 2 million Canadians with cable phone systems, a large portion of which were former Bell Canada customers.

The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan should take a sharp look at why Bell are losing customers by the hundreds every day.  I can give them one area to focus on: Bell's abusive pricing.  There is absolutely no justification for charging $2.80 per month for touchtone service, for example, not to mention a $5.95 network access fee.

Videotron charge me a mere $16.95 for the same service that Bell provide at $28.69.  All tolled, I will be saving $160 per year (with tax) by canceling Bell.  So their petty last cash grab is a sad note of their desperation.

In the 2007 annual report, BCE notes that the "churn" level went from 0.9% in 2005 to 1.2% in 2007.  This is customers voting increasingly with their feet and leaving.

Bell Canada is clearly not competitive.  But I don't care.  I'm gone.

I paid my last Bell Canada bill yesterday.

US Strategic Oil Reserve - Idiotic Senators and House members

Today I read that the US Senate has voted 97-1 in favor to stop filling the US Strategic Petroleum reserve in order to slow rising prices.  

The House is set to overwhelmingly vote for a similar house bill

How stupid can elected Americans be?

The US Petroleum reserve is taking in about 70,000 bbl of oil every day.  This is about 0.3% of US consumption and less than 0.1% of world consumption.

This symbolic act will have absolutely no effect on the price of oil and certainly no effect on the poor consumption habits of Americans.

“this is one little thing we can do, and I think we should go ahead and do it," said Sen. Pete Dominici of New Mexico.

It is LONG PASSED TIME for the US Congress to stop doing 'little things' and start doing real things to slow the exorbitant 21 M bbl of oil per day of US consumption, ( 1 out of 4 barrels consumed worldwide.)

Canada in Afghanistan - stop the puffing

A recent CBC article lauds the Canadian military for re-building housing for Afghan military families in Afghanistan.

Commendable, however, anyone who believes that "re-building" in a place like Afghanistan carries any enduring memory or loyalty is regrettably deluded.

Afghanis have been the serfs of local warlords for millennia. Their hearts and minds are connected directly to their stomach and living for another day. 

Canada and allies could build them anything required to cover basic needs, help them with water, farming, education, light industry, commerce and local government.

And a month after Canada and allies leave it will all fall to pieces again. Whatever of value is built up will be plundered or destroyed because the people of Afghanistan do not have the desire or courage as citizens to take and hold their own country.

The tribal mentality of these people is burned-in in a way that would take at least 3 generations to fade. To expect them to convert to a western democracy within 10 years or 20 is foolhardy, wasteful and dangerous.

The real mission in Afghanistan is only to find, arrest or kill Al Queda and then leave. The fate of Afghans is for Afghans to determine. And if they are not determined to take and hold their own government and to hold it against religious or tribal fanatics, then they do not deserve the fruit.

Canadian and allied countries should be burning the poppy fields that fund the Taliban and Al Queda. Every dollar earned for heroin and opium is a dollar being used to kill Canadian and allied soldiers.  Put our underemployed CF-118's to work: napalm the poppy fields.

Al Queda is hiding in Pakistan. We need the Pakistanis to step up as well as allow Canadian, American and other allied troops to hunt there. And if they won't do that, they are not allies.

The Canadian military has done us extremely proud in their Afghani mission. The first time that Canadian soldiers have been engaged so hard, so deep, so long and so tough in combat since Korea. Some have paid the ultimate price and their families continue to pay the price.

It is sickening not because soldiers make sacrifices, but that they are doing it for the wrong ends. The goal is Al Queda. NOTHING ELSE.

And if the "average" Afghani won't fight for his own country why should Canadian soldiers?

Some will reply that the Afghan military is being trained and becoming effective in fighting its own battles with the Taliban and Al Queda.  I've yet to see anything resembling concrete proof. (A little hint here: CDN or US military press officers are not purveyors of concrete proof).

Toyota Canada's despicable pricing practices

My girlfriend has had her sights set on a Toyota Prius.

If we were to saunter down to Plattsburgh, NY, the price for the most basic US model is US$21,000 (plus NY state tax and a few other minor fees).

However, the best price for the most basic model Prius in Quebec is CAD$30,000, plus tax and fees.

I spoke with Toyota and they explained that, get this, the Canadian "most basic model" comes with air conditioning, electric-windows and a few other doo-dads.  The US "most basic model" does not (I do have to check that out).  This is not worth $9000 by any stretch of the imagination.

As we all know, the exchange difference between the US and CAD is on the order of 1 or 2 cents of late with no sign of the US dollar recovering significantly.

Further, Toyota's US warranty is not honored in Canada if the car is sold to a Canadian resident.  (Honda have the same sleazy policy; Ford and GM honor the warranty without conditions (I don't know about Chrysler, but I suspect they have the same policy as Ford and GM)).

I don't know why Toyota have this sleazy policy, but I suspect part of their excessive Canadian price is their raking in of the Canadian tax credits for highly fuel efficient vehicles.  The owner is supposed to get that benefit, not the car maker.

While I've always driven Japanese cars, their pricing policy and their cross-border warranty restriction (based on supposed differences in models) is absolute sleaze.

It is anti-competitive.

It is gouging.

It is wrong.

While I am the last person to urge people to eschew the quality of Japanese cars, it is also certain that the quality of the US "big three" has improved markedly over the past decade.

And as the US "big three" seem to understand cross border competition, I urge you:

To not buy from Toyota and Honda.

To buy US brand cars... from New York state.  (Vermont sales taxes are higher and I don't know if the sales tax can be avoided from either for Quebec sales).

Hydro-Quebec policy stunts home alternate energy

I had heard recently that Hydro-Quebec would allow home owners who generate their own power to 'sell' the excess to Hydro-Quebec in the same manner that so many American utilities have been practicing, some for over a decade.

In fact, what Hydro-Quebec really offers is a 'trade'.  If you provide so many kW-h to Hydro Quebec, then you can draw them back when needed at no charge.  So if you generate 50 kW-h per day and only use 40, then you have a 10 kW-h "credit".  This is all fine and dandy if your average consumption outpaces your average power generation.

But what if you generate more that you use?

While solar might not get Quebecers into this regime, wind and micro hydro might.

For serious transformation to take place, HQ will need to credit, in cash, for excess beyond need generation of hydro power.

Hydro-Quebec needs to do more for customers and itself

Hydro-Quebec has a limited palette of price options for Quebec homeowners.  As such, creative energy savings has little impetus.

The two basic homeowner electric plans offered by Hydro-Quebec are:

• A two-rate tarrif based on average daily consumption.  This is aimed at the home with electric heating only.  Below 30 kW-h / day, one rate, and for every kW-h/day (on a 2 month average) above that, a higher rate applies.  (about 1 cent difference)

• For people with gas, oil or other non grid heating systems that use far less electricity.  If the temperature is above -12 degrees, then a fairly low rate applies, and when the temperature is below -12 degrees, then a much higher rate (around 16 c per kW-h) applies.  (A temperature sensor on the electric meter switches in the higher rate at lower temperatures).

This system made sense during the 80's and 90's for a variety of reasons including metering technology and fairly low oil and gas costs, but it is outdated with Hydro-Quebec's power network, generating capacity and transmission network and its customer base today, especially in light of rising fossil fuel costs and a movement to reduce anthropogenic global warming.

What is a bit surprising to most Quebecers is that Hydro-Quebec imports electricity from the US, New Brunswick, Labrador and Ontario as well as "internal" non-HQ suppliers.  When power is supplied from the US, it is the most expensive peak rate power and mostly fossil fuel based, at that.  When power comes from the other sources, the mix is a little less evil, but in the case of Ontario it does include coal.

It is high time that Hydro-Quebec provide a new metering scheme based on time of day use.  In this way water heaters could delay heating until after peak hours.  Clothes dryers could be started after peak hours and so on.

But the biggest electricity cost for many Quebecers is heating.  As the price of oil and gas continue to climb, new home builders will be avoiding these heating sources and adding their heating load to the HQ grid.  During winter cold snaps, Hydro Quebec is forced to purchase power from other sources.  It simply does not have the generating capacity.

In order to off-peak the heating load, homeowners could install heat storage systems which essentially are a larger than average furnace with the heating elements embedded in a mass of ceramic.  During the night, when most people have their thermostats turned down to 17 or so, there is little electric demand.  So, this is the perfect time for the ceramic furnace to turn on and heat up the ceramic plates, but with the fan off, the heat is stored at high temperature in the ceramic plates.  When the plates reach a maximum temperature, the heating stops.  As the furnace is extremely well insulated, the ceramic plates cannot cool.  There is nowhere for the heat to go.  The next morning when the thermostat jumps up to 20, the fan turns on to send the heat into the house.  Since the heat was stored, only power for the fan (less than 1 kW) is needed instead of the typical 20 - 25 kW of an electric furnace.  Over thousands of homes, this means much less importation of electricity from the US at peak deliver rates.

A ceramic based furnace can store heat for more than a days worth of heating for even a large house.  So this most important source of power draw is the best opportunity for HQ to shift enormous peak loads into the wee hours making more power free for cooking dinner and evening lighting and home entertainment.

To make this attractive, Hydro Quebec needs to:

• Implement time of day metering and billing rates
  
• Provide a cash incentive for existing oil, gas and electric furnaces to be replaced with thermal storage systems.
  

Not only is the above a greener alternative, it is in the long run a net money saver for Hydro-Quebec as it will avoid both costly peak-power electricity purchases and the development of new generation and transmission.

Finally! 100% satisfaction with Bell Canada

An hour ago a couple tech's from a Videotron contractor came in and disconnected my Bell Canada line.  Within a few minutes, they replaced my ancient cable modem with a new one. This new modem connects like the old one to my computer as well as to my home phone.

So why did I switch off Bell Canada?

It seemed odd that I was paying $28.69 / month for a telephone land line.  So I examined the bill a little closer:

• $5.95 for "network access" - very creative, Bell.
  
• $  .19 for 911
  
• $  .47 for 911 (municipal charge)
  
• $2.80 for "touch tone" service - 1970 says "Hello"
  
• $19.28 for a residential line.

What's going on here?

• The $5.95 is a simple money grab.  I guess Bell copies this from the cell phone world.  Frankly I just don't get this one and my only basis to complain about it is that it was never there before...

• The $2.80 for touch-tone services is an insulting profit pad.  The days of mechanically switched dialing are long, long, long in the past.  The equipment today is the same whether rotary dialed or tone.  Bell should be ashamed of themselves for this petty thievery.  How many people have rotary phones today?  Bell has 13 M landline subscribers pretty much all using touch tone, so this equates to a stunning $500 M per year in profit for something that does not cost any more to operate than 'old' rotary dials.

On the flip side, Videotron charge me $16.95 for the same service.  Including the 911 charges.

That's $11.74 before tax every month saved.  $160 per year with tax.

I'm finally 100% satisfied.  Like a fast growing number of Canadians I completely disconnected Bell Canada.  Good riddance.

Social lending in Canada - Cut out the middleman

I have been impatiently waiting for a peer to peer lending service in Canada that will provide person to person lending across Canada.  Such services exist in the US, notably www.prosper.com which has many borrowers and lenders.

In a nutshell many lenders participate in a given loan to a borrower.

Say Sally needs $5,000 to buy a used piano for her home based music school.  She teaches music at a local high school and there is demand for a tutor.  Her credit card is a bit loaded and she would not be able to pay it off when the bill comes in.  Her bank is willing to lend her the money, but they want a stiff 9.5% for her personal loan.

Sally sets up a borrower account at prosper.com.  This takes about a week to setup and involves providing personal financial data.  The information is verified by prosper.com.  Her name and particulars are hidden from the lenders at prosper, but her credit rating and other details like home ownership are provided.

Sally places a "loan listing" with a title, declaration of need, her cash flow (incomes and expenses) and assets and a narrative about what she is trying to do with the money.  She also posts the interest rate she is willing to pay.  Let's say she posted 7%.

Interested lenders who believe Sally is a good risk and that the interest rate matches the risk then bid in slices on the loan.  Bob bids $100 at Sally's rate.  Jerry bids $50.  Joan goes $250 and so on.

If Sally's loan request is filled before the deadline (say 7 days), then other lenders may think they've missed out on a good thing.  So they can now (in a spirit of good hearted competitiveness) bid lower interest rates.  Now David comes in at 6.5% at $100.  So the last bids into Sally's loan are removed and replaced with Davids bid.  And so it goes.

(There are options for immediate loan also, as soon as Sally hits 100% of her loan, then she gets the money and bidding on it is cut off).

The money is transferred from the lenders accounts into the borrowers account.  Sally can buy her piano!  Next month her payment is withdrawn from her bank account.  In the prosper.com setup, loans are set for 3 years.  The borrower may pay back faster without penalty.  Her payment includes a small fee that prosper.com collects.

The lenders see their proportional "slice" from the payment go into their account (minus a small fee that goes to prosper.com.  The lenders can then lend the money again or transfer it to their own bank.

The middleman being cut out here is big banking.  Between deposits and GIC's earning paltry interest rates and the high lending rates of the banks are their operating costs and profits.  P2P lending is very operations lean.  Lending risks are taken on by the lenders (a little detail worth noting for lenders2be).

While prosper.com is running in the US and Zopa is running in the UK, Italy and the US, there is no Canadian P2P lending system in operation ... to date.

CommunityLend is in its runup to getting Canadian approvals in place.  It is running late.  Originally scheduled to open in the fall of 2007, its schedule has slipped to the right and it still has not started.  Good news is that its website is improving and that the company has both a board of directors (see the site) and advisors.

In a reply to an e-mail, Colin Henderson, co-founder and CTO of CommunityLend says that operations are imminent.  As soon as regulatory issues are solved they will go into Beta mode.

This Blogger intends to be a lender from the get go... so impatiently waiting on Communitylend to get started.

CBC "expert" and misleading reporting

The CBC had an expert weigh in on the death of a child last week that was due to a poorly handled 911 emergency call over Voice over IP (VOIP).  The CBC article stated:

Calls made with VoIP cannot be automatically tracked because there is no physical address linked to the digital signal. As a result, call centre operators must manually reroute the calls to local 911 operators.

Emergency calls made on analog land lines are answered by local 911 operators and automatically have addresses and phone numbers attached to them, making it easier to dispatch an ambulance or other emergency vehicle.

The above statements are false for those voice over cable (VOC/VOIP) carriers who implement 911 properly.  For example, Videotron, a major cable service supplier in Quebec, automatically routes 911 calls to the closest 911 center and includes caller data (name, address and phone number).

Voice over cable. Bye-bye Bell Canada.

(Originally posted 2008.05.04)

With bated breath I await Tuesday the appearance of the Videotron man to install my telephone over cable system.  An early adopter of cable modem for the internet and generally pleased with Videotron (generally does not mean perfectly), I finally called them up for the telephone bit.

Then I will be free of Bell Canada and their very high monthly prices for local calling service.

For example, why does Bell charge $2.80 for "touch tone" capability?  Surely in 2008 it makes no difference to their equipment whether or not touch tone dialing is used.  This is an "acquired right" from premium pricing in the 70's that they are using to generate raw, unadulterated profit.

Why does Bell charge $5.95 for the "Network".  That surely should be part of the residence line fee, after all that is what it is all about...

So, instead of the basic price of $28.69 per month for old, tired Bell Canada Beavers gnawing away at my checkbook, I will loudly seque over to Videotron where their chainsaw fast system will be a little lighter ($16.95) on my wallet.

Those pesky beavers, slow internet, continuous drain on the wallet.

My only concern is I now have 3 services with one company.  Now to be sure, the bundling gives me access to lower prices, I simply hope Videotron deliver.

The Secret. Where credit is due.

Fooled ya.  This is really about personal financial habits.

Credit cards are a favourite to make people angry.  People rail about their 18% interest rate and fees and penalties and so on.

So, I laugh.  All the way to the bank.

I have 3 credit cards with enough combined limit to buy a 'benz.  I drive a 2001 Honda Accord.

None of my credit cards requires an annual fee.

I only use one of them.  The other two are backups as I travel quite a bit.

It's like this: the bill for the main card is posted on the 6th day of each month.

So, if I buy something on the 6th day of the month it misses that billing and it goes on the bill for the following month.  Then, when that bill comes in, I have 21 days from the billing date to pay it.

For purchases made on the 6th day of the month I get a combined 28 - 31 days, plus a 21 day grace period for a total of up to 52 days of interest free money.

Of course there's a little catch.  For this loan to really be interest free you have to do something dreadful: pay the entire amount due on the credit card.  (Corollary: charge only what you can pay).

And that is 'The Secret' (forget the wretched book and DVD.  What claptrap! Well, they made a bundle, so they really do know the secret: exploiting people's lazy greed!).

Never, ever, complain about credit card terms and conditions.  Used correctly, it is interest free money.

Here's another real secret:  if you approach the owner of a retailer with a little care and ask him real nice, he will violate his terms with the credit card co. and give you 1.5 - 2.0% more off of the price if you pay cash.  Especially if you wave the Amex card.  They hate the Amex card.

Quebec Anglo

Dear friends,

Greetings and welcome to this magnificent blog.  Okay, it's not magnificent yet, but given time and attention..

Despite the name of this blog, I hope to post as rarely as possible on "Quebec issues" as a subject.  Issues that I will write about include our pathetic veneer of a Canadian democracy and the urgent need of a triple-E senate (stop snoring please), the economy, the environment, energy, transportation and other things that get me angry, concerned, upset, etc.

Regards,

Quebec Anglo