docj

I agree that most of the carbon is sequestered in the biochar but in normal biomass pyrolysis I thnk some of it ends up as syngas and syn-oil the value of which is in their fuel content so some combustion remains in the process. https://www.ars.usda.gov/northeast-area/wyndmoor-pa/eastern-regional-research-center/docs/biomass-pyrolysis-research-1/what-is-pyrolysis/ What I can't figure out is what is the economic rationale for the plant. It appears that the real driver is a desire to help alleviate an economic slump caused by the closing of a timber mill as discussed here: https://cvnmtc.com/north-fork-bioenergy-plant/ This plant will take biomass waste being removed from the forest for fire reduction purposes and will derate its energy value by turning the carbon into biochar and burning the syngas and syn-oil to provide the process heat needed. Presumably, the net benefit is to reduce the volume of biomass waste without having to burn all of it. Presumably the combustion of the syngas and syn-oil still has to release carbon into the air so it would appear to me that what's primarily been done is to reduce the amount of carbon that would have been released by burning all of it in a more conventional manner. What I'd like to see is a economic and societal benefit analysis that compares this with the alternatives which might just be burying the waste so it decays in the soil. Or why can't it be chipped into mulch? I'm not proposing solutions but I sure don wonder if this is anything more than a typical DOE pork barrel "demonstration project" of the kind that often lacks economic basis and, as a result, goes nowhere. In the past I've had multiple years of managing similar projects at DOE in the renewable energy area, so I do speak with a basis of at least some experience.

Actually, it probably won't since not all the organic, carbon-containing compounds in the tree will be aerosolized. Some, probably a lot of them, will end up in "stuff" that gets mixed into the soil.

But it's still contributing to the CO2 problem, so I can't get excited about it. EV's powered by electricity that contributes to the overall problem don't buy society that much of a benefit. JMO

FWIW, I got my CDL by talking a course at the local community college. I used the college's truck for my driving exam and my instructor drove it there! All very legal.

As I said in my previous post, the rules relative to what you can legally drive are those of the State from which you hold a drivers license. The reciprocity principal states that if you are legal to drive that vehicle in the State that issued you a license, you are legal to drive it in any State.

I'm puzzled as to how a MT LLC has any impact on one's driver's license. Most people who have MT LLC's don't become MT residents, so they still have to obtain drivers licenses from another State. Your home State's rules govern the class of license you need to carry in order to to drive a specific vehicle; not the State in which the vehicle is registered. FWIW we have a Class A MH registered to a MT LLC and we are SD residents and have been for ~11 years. Under SD law our MH can be driven by anyone holding a "regular" class of license although I happen to hold a Class B CDL.

It all depends on what specific plan the Jetpack is using. Most Verizon Jetpacks are on plans with ~15-25GB/mo of high speed data. Beyond that allowance they drop to 3G speeds. That's not a lot of data if you're planning on streaming TV and using laptops. You might want to check the specifics of your plan.

After half a dozen years as full-timers my wife and I purchased a site at a small park in Rockport TX to use as our winter location. Of course, it's served us well in this time of COVID. It's a very attractive community that will eventually have <90 sites all of which are privately owned. We have "fee simple" ownership of a roughly 3,000 sq ft site on which we have erected a structure that contains a ~14x11 heated/cooled casita and an 8x10 storage shed as well as expanded driveway and patio space. The price range for a site with just a driveway is roughly what the OP was interested, in starting at ~$55k. The park suits us just fine but some would find it lacking because it isn't a "resort". There are washers and dryers but those are the only amenities. At present there's no club house and there are no organized activities. As I said, that's fine with us because we prefer to arrange our own activities but if you're looking for a snow-bird park this wouldn't suit you. Most of the owners are folks from Houston and San Antonio who use their sites for weekend getaways but we have an increasing number of people living here full time. If anyone has further interest in our park, please PM me and I'll be glad to provide more info.

The differences between carriers are often so localized and time-of-day dependent that IMO it's difficult to make generalizations. The Verizon service at my property in coastal TX varies between 10 and 20 Mbps depending on time of day. Yet a few miles down the road it's consistently up around 100 Mbps. I agree that VZW and AT&T are the top dogs in the fight, but every once in a while I get surprised by how well my T-Mobile hotspot is working.

Here's are excerpts from Hulu's website that state that a cellular connection is not acceptable for receiving Hulu Live but that you have 30 day to establish such a "home network". You were probably able to get the "free trial" to work because you hadn't had it for more than 30 days. As far as streaming not being controlled by the FCC, all I know is that YouTube TV (which we subscribe to) gets very antsy if you're out of your area for more than a relatively short period of time even though the rule is that you can stay away for 90 days at a time. On our last trip, after a week or two we were no longer able to watch our network feed channels in real time. We could watch them after they had been recorded but not as they were being broadcast. This problem only affected the major network feeds, not the "cable channels". Maybe it's not an FCC issue directly, but I wouldn't be surprised if the streaming services have some kind of tacit understanding with the networks that they won't permit people to watch "out of area" programming in real time?

Hulu with Live TV requires that the initial sign on be from a "fixed" internet connection; cellular is not acceptable. YouTube TV only requires that you be back in your home area every 90 days and doesn't care if you use cellular. Those are the only two know something about. It's the same FCC rule relative to watching out of market TV channels which is the reason why DirecTV always made DNS service so difficult to qualify for.

I'm pretty sure he means that by downloading the manuals he doesn't need to have internet access when he needs them.

The user guides for almost any possible device you own can be found online and downloaded. Just Google "user manual for [brand name and model]" and you'll probably find it.

That might be too strong a statement. Yes, they are geo-locked but you can get online and change your address. You aren't assured that any arbitrary address will be accepted but many will. What you can't get do is use the receiver in a mobile vehicle if you plan on going outside your approved geographic "cell". I presume that inside your cell you could strap it to your roof if you were so inclined. 😁

That's an excellent summary of what to expect with Windows 11. Because this community of users tends to retain its hardware longer than most commercial users, I want to re-emphasize the fact that there will be a significant percentage of users who won't be able to upgrade to Windows 11 because their hardware isn't compatible with it. That's not the end of the world since there are plenty of people already running older versions of Windows and it can be assumed that Microsoft will support Windows 10 for a number of more years but, it is fair to say that, software development going forward will be based on the Windows 11 platform and, at some time in the future, your older system running on Windows 10 may not be able to run the latest version of some piece software. That may or may not be a big deal to you depending on how you use your computer.

Our home base location doesn't have access to wired internet of any kind. Therefore, Starlink will be a nice alternative to at least one of our current cellular connections.

I don't use cellular phone accounts for hotspot data because of the ever-present caps. I currently have multiple hotspot accounts with each of the major carriers. I have an AT&T unlimited account through MIllenicom, a grandfathered prepaid unlimited Verizon account, and two of the T-Mobile 100GB/mo accounts. The cost of each of these is $50-100/mo. That's, of course, in addition to the postpaid accounts I have for my Verizon phones and they are grandfathered onto a old unlimited plan.

Like most cellular providers it appears that the "unlimited" data is only for "on phone" use. Hotspot data is separate and limited to specific caps.

I maintain a $10/mo account with MyFax; I've been using them for >10 years. I find I use it a couple of times a month usually for things like health insurance forms. I like having a fixed number that people can use to send faxes to me even though that might only be used a couple of times a year. More and more places will accept scanned and emailed documents but not all do. Furthermore, I like having the "receipt" that a fax was sent and received.

I haven't driven the NJ Turnpike in a number of years but it's always been a place where you paid when you exited. I'm puzzled by the reference to paying upon entry?

I agree with the recommendation but the site you want is this one: Mobile Internet Resource Center

Personally, I think it's attitude not age. I suspect I'm equally as old as you, but I enjoy working for a high tech company and giving customers half my age assistance with today's evolving technology.

With all due respect, there is no such thing as a suite of fully developed apps. Even the best phone apps are updated multiple times a year to improve performance and add features. I'm sure that TV apps aren't all that different. In fact, I know that there have been multiple updates to the YouTube TV app in the past year. There's no incentive for a TV manufacturer to update apps used in TVs from previous model years and I seriously doubt that they bother. In fact, you are more likely to want to buy a new TV if they don't bother.

Built-in apps on "smart TVs" are not always better and often are less useful than using a Roku or Firestick. Do some research and you'll find plenty of people who agree with this statement. The problem is that TV apps are rarely updated by the manufacturer after the TV is ~a year old. By comparison updates to Roku and Firestick firmware is done continuously and automatically. We switched from satellite to streaming nearly two years ago. We have several internet connections with the three major carriers and subscribe to YouTube TV and several other streaming services.

We've always left some things on the counter while traveling. Most don't go anywhere. However, ask me how I know not leave the coffee grinder out! 😁