Cup of Coffee

June 30, 2016: “Happy” Birthday

41 Comments

My wife is gone by the time I get up and today she'll be asleep by the time I get home. Not her best birthday, I'm sure, but the coming weekend will be cool.

41 thoughts on “June 30, 2016: “Happy” Birthday”

  1. For the second year in a row, there is a barn swallow nest in one of the fake shutters on our house. The big difference this year is the aggressiveness of the things. I thought the cat got it last night, and as I was trying to walk around looking for her those bloody things were done bombing me over and over again. They need to move out ASAP.

    1. But they're pretty and they eat insects like mosquitos and flies. They're better than getting Zika, right?

      1. Well, they didn't actually hit me in the face, so there is that.

        To make matters worse, the dang cat want even outside, she was hiding in a spot I still haven't found.

    1. Posey and Jarrett Parker have been their DHs so far this season (Posey three times and Parker once). Having Posey at the DH means Brown catches. I don't know about their catching abilities but Brown has an OPS of .713 this season and .677 for this career (small sample size). Parker has an .863 OPS this season and .980 for his career (also small sample size). Bumgarner is at .583 this season, .718 for the last three seasons (2014-2016), and .530 for his career.

      If it's Bumgarner versus Parker, it's crazy. If it's Bumgarner versus Brown so Posey can catch, especially if Posey is the better catcher, then it's less crazy. Their recent OPS is similar and Bumgarner's OBP is only slightly lower. Reasonable to argue that Bumgarner is used to pitching and hitting in his games so maybe using a DH negatively affects his routine.

      2. Giants have several regulars on the DL, including Hunter Pence, so guys they would normally DH with are probably needed at other positions, which is probably why they are doing this.

  4. MORNING GAME ALERT: Fort Myers is at Palm Beach in a game that started at 11:00 Central this morning.

    In case you didn't notice, Minor Details made its return today.

      1. We're probably getting a second hybrid, as it isn't cost-effective to do all-electric here. If you're considering putting in a fast-charge station in your garage, you might want to check if your existing panel can handle the additional circuit and is handily situated.

        1. and how cost-effective is a hybrid for you, Rhu?

          I can maybe see the all-electric for socal (Because Cali). But aren't the financials pretty dodgy on hybrids, given the price premium over their non-hybrid close substitutes? (not including the utils one might get from driving a hybrid, including its effects on local air pollution).

          1. “Hybrids are losing their competitive edge due to the improved fuel economy of gas-powered combustion engines and falling fuel prices,” says David Wurster, president of the Bingham Farms, Mich.-based firm.

            When all the costs of ownership are calculated, 2014 hybrids cost $1,450 more to operate over a five-year period, the firm says. The biggest factor is whether fuel savings can offset a hybrid’s price premium. For instance, Nissan Motor ’s Infiniti Q70 Hybrid sedan saves an owner nearly $5,000 in fuel expense over five years compared to the gasoline-only Q70. But the hybrid version costs $5,700 more, setting owners back $2,400.

            Forbes article from 2014

            2. Back when I was considering a hybrid (2010, I think), I was worried about the battery life more than anything else. I didn't want a huge expense to kick in all at once down the line. I haven't heard anything terrible lately, but I'm kind of curious what their replacement rates have been now that some of the hybrids have been "in the wild" for a while now.

              1. Me too. I like the concept of the hybrid, but worry about the financials.

                I see 2010 Prius models listing for ~$10k-$13k on Edmunds.com, 2012 Camry hybrids for $12k-$18k, and regular 2012 Camry models for $12k-$19k.

              2. Most of the new electric/hybrid cars I've researched have had pretty long warranties on the electrical components, including the batteries, which was typically 8 years/80,000 miles, most likely because most people have similar concerns.

              2. $5,000 in extra fuel costs over 5 years, vs. $5,700 more up front. So how do they get $2,400 greater cost of ownership over 5 years for the hybrid owner?

                crudely, the question is how large does the annual return on a $5,700 investment have to be such that $5,700 + investment earnings - marginal fuel costs = $2,400.

                if the fuel costs are straight-lined and the investments earnings are constant (and used to offset current fuel costs rather than being reinvested), then it's basically

                $5,700 +$5,700*5*i - $5,000 = $2,400, and the implied interest rate is 5.9 pct. That's a little high, but not cray-cray.

                did I screw something up? (again, back-of-envelope)

                1. Of course, one should expect the 5k of fuel savings to get invested too under an equitable model. Not all up front, obviously, but that's going to bring the rates even closer together. My problems with the math remain. Or maybe my problems are with the model and assumptions and not the math.

                  1. For sake of ease, I called gas savings at $80/mo. Put into investment monthly at the same rate of 5.9% yields interest of $919. That means the benefit is more accurately calculated at about $1500.

                    The real question, I suppose, is the timeline, and possible increase in fuel costs vs. return on investment. You put all that 5700 into a bad investment and the benefit of the hybrid goes up dramatically. Converse is true too. I guess my objection then comes in terms of the assumptions. We can much more accurately project the time it takes to "earn back" the price difference in fuel savings (and even that has speculation) than we can do what this projection claims to do. And doesn't do equitably, if we're honest.

                    1. This is all assuming you don't mind paying a small premium just to lower your carbon footprint.

                      There is a nearby dealership with a used 2015 Accord hybrid (50/45 mpg) w/30K miles at a nice price...

                    2. ok, Phyllo wants to complexify a bit.

                      it's (upfront capital savings) + (earnings on investment of upfront capital savings) - (marginal fuel costs) - (lost earnings on what could have been invested rather than spending on marginal fuel costs).

                      If you invested $80/month at 5.9 pct, you'd have about $5,700 at the end of 5 years. If you invested $5,700 at 5.9 pct, you'd have about $7,600 at the end of 5 years. The difference is about $1,900.

                      At 7.0 pct, the difference grows to about $2,100. At 8 pct, $2,300.

                      to Rhu's excellent point, there is a philosophickal question. Is it better to pay a premium to lower your carbon footprint directly (ignoring any potential, marginal carbon footprint effects of the manufacture and disposal of the hybrid) or to use any net savings on the non-hybrid to contribute to lowering carbon emissions?

                2. What about the $1450 additional operation costs of a hybrid?
                  1450+5700-5000 = 2150. Figure the $250 difference is from interest (calculated time value of money: it doesn't have to be invested for this to be a legit calculation: $5700 now is more valuable than $5700 in five years.) You don't pay for the gas or the operating costs up front, so those cash flows need to be discounted (although that sounds ridiculous to the casual reader/listener, so it's more easily described at the end of the period as interest earned).

                  1. I read that differently, and as somehow factoring in fuel costs, etc. I probably read it wrong. What are those additional costs of operation?

                    1. I have no idea. Given the answer, I was trying to find a reasonable-looking way to get there from the values provided.
                      I cannot vouch for the validity of any of those numbers, or whether combining them in that way is a valid calculation.

    2. My dad has also considered a similar approach. He's got a 4 mile round trip commute. He wants to put a solar panel on the garage to charge it, and it'd be for in-town use only, with Mom's car being for long-haul.

      He did the math (I don't have the numbers) and found it a good deal with the rebates on the panel and stuff, but I'm not sure how much it was costing up front and that would be made back in the long run.

      1. If he's using the car as a battery system, that allows him to smooth consumption of the energy generated, but isn't the solar panel hooked up for net metering (i.e., run his meter backwards)? Unless he works at night, his car isn't in the garage to be charged during the sunniest part of the day.

        My sense is that the tax incentives and rebates have been ginormous drivers of the economics of solar at this point, unless you live off the grid. I think the cost of rooftop PV is about $4/w installed, which is getting pretty close to break-even in many parts of the country.

        1. Theoreitcally, he could go like 3 weeks on one charge, so keeping it constantly full wasn't necessary. I think his plan was just to run the panel straight into the car, no meter or anything, which wouldn't be the optimal use of the panel's power-generating ability but would save on gas...eventually. But I may be wrong about that. I honestly don't remember too specifically.

  6. The outside door of the fridge has a drooping edge on the gasket. We have been considering how to handle.

    I called 'Pauls Appliance' today.

    Paul: Hey, NBB, whassup?

    Me: Fridge issues - here's the model ID I cant make out (sent pix). Seems to be running all the time...

    Paul: OK. I used A.I. to decipher the model ID.

    Me: Gasket on the fridge is in shreds (sent pix).

    Paul: I can get a new gasket, but most of the gasket is still there. The real thing to check is if you have any lint/dust on the coils underneath the fridge. Pet's are a problem...

    Me (looking with flashlight): Yeah it's bad. Previous owners had pets... (Vacuuming sounds ensue. A huge amount of dust/hair is sucked into the vortex...) More to come...

Comments are closed.