I'd rather donate money to the government than to these scammers.

Well known before this work as that some kind of balancing system is useful, and the different types of balancing systems, either simple switched shunt resistors or DC to DC converters, have different capabilities. What this introduces is a sophisticated optimization that can compute the ideal operation of that balancing system during charging. And not at all surprising, that is shown to be better than simply putting the same current in all the cells. What I didn't find in the quick reading of the article is how much advantage there is in using this optimal approach versus using a common sense ad hoc method.

I think that the key here is that even though active balancing using dc-dc converters has been proposed by many people, it has rarely been implemented because it costs more than the simple switched shunt resistor approach. If the model was used to clearly show the advantages of better hardware, that could motivate people to make use of it.

3M makes an outdoor rated blue painters tape made of plastic. So it's pretty weatherproof, but still peels off easily. If you're looking for something to tape up all of the cracks from the outside, and removing the spring that might work. No guarantee that it will come off without damaging paint but it seems pretty likely as long as you don't peel it off while it's still too cold for that to work well.

But you'll still be losing a lot of heat through the glass, and having more layers with airspace between them will really help so putting a plastic shrink film over the whole inside will also help.

You could also think about replacing it with a single regular door with a side lite next to it. We replaced our 6ft sliding glass patio door with a 2.5 ft square window above a regular insulated wall section for 1/2, and then a 3 ft wide regular door, with a triple-pane window in it, for the other half. It looks great and the space inside of there is much warmer than it used to be.

No, plug in can add $100 to $200. You are on the 2017 code still, so a GFCI breaker probably isn't required, but it would be a good idea, and it is about $100 more than a regular breaker. And a good quality receptacle that is up to the job for EV charging can be $50 to $100. Cheap one fail too often under that continuous operation.

That's the best explanation I've heard!

Fresh ground pepper is vastly different from pepper purchased pre ground. Salt grinders aren't really necessary, unless you like to adjust the fineness of the grind for different foods.

It's interesting that they spend more on fuel than any other expense. And much more than on aircraft. That means that companies making more efficient aircraft should be able to sell them easily.

Note that the government's tax revenue isn't profit. They need to run the FAA among other things. Comparing that to profit is like calling the airline's revenue profit, and you illustrate that those numbers are vastly different.

> Thought it was pretty clearly implied standard meant daylight standard time but ok

<sigh>. There's no such thing as "daylight standard time". There's standard time and there's DST = daylight savings time. In other case, you missed the point of my comment, which was to separate the choice between those two, and the choice of whether or not to switch twice a year. Regardless of which you thought you were specifying, you were not saying the same thing as I was.

> People that advocate for daylight saving all year usually don’t see the forest for the trees. They don’t consider how it would impact the rest of the country, time shifting doesn’t operate in a vacuum and only affect NH. Sunset isn’t until almost 10pm in parts of the PNW and upper Midwest, it’s so weird going to bed with the sun still up and then it rises late in the morning. Then factor in world times and it’s more of a mess

If NH moves to the Atlantic time zone that is not going to affect the PNW and Midwest. I sure am glad that you see that your time here is wasted.

>>You seem to have missed the point of my comment. Because switching is not healthy on our bodies, you should argue for keeping it the same all year. > >That's literally what I wrote: > >>Switching is not healthy for our bodies, it should remain standard all year. >

The difference between those two is exactly what I said it was. You included the word standard. You might have a reason to prefer a standard time over daylight savings time, but avoiding switching is doesn't tell you which time zone you should prefer.

>The OP is not making an argument for time zone demarcations,

I know, it was you that said that longitude doesn't matter which is simply absurd.

> You'll always have variations between the farthest edges of one zone to the opposite edge of another. You'll also have a 1 hr difference between two areas right next to each other. There's simply no way around that.

Yes, but the abrupt change between adjacent areas and different time zones was not the issue I raised. > >The OP's argument would affect areas of different latitudes most significantly.

I think in this sub we're talking about New Hampshire. The difference in latitude from one end to the other is not much. The difference in longitude isn't much either, in fact the whole state is quite far to the east within it's time zone. Which is why it's interesting to consider either permanent daylight savings time or standard time and joining the Atlantic time zone for New Hampshire.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time_by_country

The map there would make your selections of what you consider a civilized country somewhat unique.

Of course, when Gandhi visited England and was asked what he thought of Western civilization, his reply was the he thought it would be a good idea. But I think that the reason that Europe has seasonal time changes and India does not has more to do with the latitude then the level of civilization.

I'm not a fan of the time change, but if you look at the map on this page,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time_by_country

In fact, there are lots countries that are far from the equator, whether north or south, that do in fact change time by season. So I don't think that aligning with the rest of the world is a good argument to make.

You seem to have missed the point of my comment. Because switching is not healthy on our bodies, you should argue for keeping it the same all year. Then separately, there's the question of which time zone it should be on.

The idea that longitudinally it's not much of a difference doesn't make sense. That's the reason that we have time zones, and normally, from one edge of a time zone to the next it makes exactly 1 hour of difference, which is exactly the size that we're talking about. And in fact, the Eastern Time zone extends over a little bit longer east to west difference than that.

There are legitimate arguments for what you are advocating, if you slow down and think through them carefully you'll have a better time convincing other people.

Separate questions:

1. Should we switch every six months? and, if not,

2. Which one should we stay on.

The second question is location specific. What's ideal for a state near the eastern edge of a time zone is different from what's ideal for a state at the opposite edge.

Personally, I agree, but then again, I know people who have to go to work earlier in the morning than I do and really hate having the morning commute in the dark. I think the bottom line is that they're simply is not enough light to satisfy everyone in New Hampshire in the winter. I'm certainly in favor of workplaces having flexible hours, when that's feasible, so that people can choose to drive home while it's still light, if they want to.

Maybe I'll do a free trial for this month!