Random Christmas Eve idea: we could really improve the holiday season by moving Thanksgiving back one month, to the last Friday before the last Sunday in October. The big holiday would be on Friday, then kids could all do the trick-or-treat thing on Saturday night, and adults could have their parties on the actual 31st, whenever that might fall. Moving the date would make the holiday season less of a slog, would eliminate the whole "Black Friday/Cyber Monday" madness, and would keep more people off the road during the snowy season in the northern half of the country. It would also be better for any university that uses the semester system by providing a break midway through the term, instead of having one right about when papers are due and exams start. For primary and secondary schools that use a quarter system, the new date would fall close enough to the current end of the first quarter that the school calendar could be adjusted to match. I don't see any downsides to the idea except that everyone would hate it, and retailers would scream bloody murder. But other than that, no downsides at all...
Update 2012-12-28: The timing of Election Day is not dependent on any holiday, but moving Thanksgiving up would mean that moving the election to the end of the month or early December would be a good idea. A later date would shorten the transition period in presidential years and reduce the amount of time available for Congress to perform unaccountable mischief in a lame duck session. It would also be nice to have the election a couple of weeks away from either holiday, since politics and family gatherings tend to create tension.
Monday, December 24, 2012
Sunday, December 2, 2012
You Don't Know How Lucky You Are
Random Sunday afternoon thought: on November 6, 2012, America dodged two bullets, and Romney wasn't the biggest of the two. The other bullet was anti-empiricism in the political arena. Nate Silver was the nominal target, but if the second bullet had hit, it would have taken out all facts in the public discourse for decades to come. "Skewed" polls would become the norm, and narrative would have ruled the land. All of the very considerable amount of data about climate change, growing inequality, the negative effects of lower tax rates on the rich, the exorbitant cost and low performance of our health care system, scientific measurements of the effects of polluting chemicals, and on and on and on, would have become irrelevant. The explosion of anti-empiricism would have had deeply harmful effects on the overwhelming majority of people in this country, and on the rest of the globe. But the American people dodged that bigger bullet, mostly without even knowing it was headed our way.
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Internal Division Errors
A while ago I started a project to redraw the counties and county-level equivalent areas in each of the 50 states. I have several reasons for undertaking such an odd task. First, I like maps and playing with maps. Second, it is way for me to virtually visit places I'll never have a chance to get to in real life. Between the various online map layers, one can get a decent sense of what just about any area of the country is like. Third, in many states, reconfiguring the internal divisions is something that should be done. Some counties are too large, others are divided by nearly impassible geography, many could be re-drawn with more natural boundaries, and quite a few are very under-populated. The new boundaries attempt to balance size, population, watershed boundaries, economic interconnections, and other factors. Not every newly-drawn or re-drawn county is optimal, but I feel the states I have completed are much better divided than than they are now. Eventually I'll get to all of the states, but it will take a few more years.
Due to limitations in GMaps, some states may be split into two pages. In the case of California, I manually split the map up to avoid having to jump around between three or more pages. You can view more than one of the maps at a time by bookmarking each one in your GMaps account, and then clicking on each in your "My Places" list. It's kludgy, but it works.*
* - If you have a GIS program installed, download the KML for each state, and then load them all into a new project, along with state and county layers.
Due to limitations in GMaps, some states may be split into two pages. In the case of California, I manually split the map up to avoid having to jump around between three or more pages. You can view more than one of the maps at a time by bookmarking each one in your GMaps account, and then clicking on each in your "My Places" list. It's kludgy, but it works.*
|
|
Monday, November 19, 2012
Picture This and That: November 2012 Comparison Chart Edition
Note: I post updated versions of this chart every six months or so. Check the photography category for the latest.
Photokina has come and gone for the biennium, and we're now entering the season of the holiday consumption orgy. To assist gift-givers and gift-demanders, below is a chart of the available (or announced and shipping before Christmas) interchangeable-lens cameras (ILC). There are a slew of newcomers this time, and I have added a row for entry-level full-frame digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) cameras to accommodate what seems to be a new market category. I also added a row to the rangefinder-style mirrorless system camera (MSC) section because Sony filled a gap in their pricing structure. I've left in place the row for the now-empty full-frame flagship studio DSLR category as I anticipate Canon and Nikon will fill it again. I am still excluding Fuji's X-series (I am so, so tired of "X" everything) even though a second, less expensive model was added because... well, because it would screw up my chart. Maybe next time.
On to the newcomers, with the old models in parentheses. Canon introduced the EOS-M (n/a), EOS 650D/T4i (600D/T3i), and EOS 6D (n/a). Nikon introduced the J2 (J1), V2 (V1), D3200 (D3100), and D600 (n/a). Sony introduced the NEX-F3 (NEX-C3), NEX-5R (NEX-5N), NEX-6 (n/a), and SLT-A99 (n/a). Pentax introduced the Q10 (Q), K-30 (n/a), and K-5 II (K-5). Olympus introduced the E-PM2 (E-PM1) and E-PL5 (E-PL3). Panasonic introduced the DMC-GF5 (DMC-GF3), DMC-G5 (DMC-G3), and DMC-GH3 (DMC-GH2). And, finally, Samsung introduced the NX1000 (NX100), NX210 (NX200), and NX20 (NX10). Canon discontinued the EOS 1100D/T3 and reduced the price on the EOS 600D/T3i to replace it. There are no direct replacements for the Canon 1Ds Mk.III, Nikon D3x, Olympus E-P3, Olympus E-620, and Pentax K-r. As always, older models are often still available new, and (initially) at a discount relative to current models. (Old new stock tends to get more expensive several years out.)
A previous version of this chart is here, and a general background post can be found here. If you're a first-time ILC buyer, remember that cameras are just tools, and the raw pixel count is very likely not the most important selection criteria. Along with selecting a body, it's also important to consider what gets attached to the front of the camera: glass. And one shouldn't forget to budget for accessories when making a decision. A minimal accessory package should include two storage cards, one spare battery, a UV filter (a.k.a. scratch protector) for the lens, and a basic carrying case.
1 - If multiple zoom kits are available, the price is for the cheapest, which usually includes an 18-55mm (equivalent) lens.
2 - dual-lens kit
3 - Sony's web site is horrible so I'm not linking to it.
4 - prime not zoom lens
5 - The K-5 II and D800 are available without an anti-aliasing filter for a modest additional price.
Photokina has come and gone for the biennium, and we're now entering the season of the holiday consumption orgy. To assist gift-givers and gift-demanders, below is a chart of the available (or announced and shipping before Christmas) interchangeable-lens cameras (ILC). There are a slew of newcomers this time, and I have added a row for entry-level full-frame digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) cameras to accommodate what seems to be a new market category. I also added a row to the rangefinder-style mirrorless system camera (MSC) section because Sony filled a gap in their pricing structure. I've left in place the row for the now-empty full-frame flagship studio DSLR category as I anticipate Canon and Nikon will fill it again. I am still excluding Fuji's X-series (I am so, so tired of "X" everything) even though a second, less expensive model was added because... well, because it would screw up my chart. Maybe next time.
On to the newcomers, with the old models in parentheses. Canon introduced the EOS-M (n/a), EOS 650D/T4i (600D/T3i), and EOS 6D (n/a). Nikon introduced the J2 (J1), V2 (V1), D3200 (D3100), and D600 (n/a). Sony introduced the NEX-F3 (NEX-C3), NEX-5R (NEX-5N), NEX-6 (n/a), and SLT-A99 (n/a). Pentax introduced the Q10 (Q), K-30 (n/a), and K-5 II (K-5). Olympus introduced the E-PM2 (E-PM1) and E-PL5 (E-PL3). Panasonic introduced the DMC-GF5 (DMC-GF3), DMC-G5 (DMC-G3), and DMC-GH3 (DMC-GH2). And, finally, Samsung introduced the NX1000 (NX100), NX210 (NX200), and NX20 (NX10). Canon discontinued the EOS 1100D/T3 and reduced the price on the EOS 600D/T3i to replace it. There are no direct replacements for the Canon 1Ds Mk.III, Nikon D3x, Olympus E-P3, Olympus E-620, and Pentax K-r. As always, older models are often still available new, and (initially) at a discount relative to current models. (Old new stock tends to get more expensive several years out.)
A previous version of this chart is here, and a general background post can be found here. If you're a first-time ILC buyer, remember that cameras are just tools, and the raw pixel count is very likely not the most important selection criteria. Along with selecting a body, it's also important to consider what gets attached to the front of the camera: glass. And one shouldn't forget to budget for accessories when making a decision. A minimal accessory package should include two storage cards, one spare battery, a UV filter (a.k.a. scratch protector) for the lens, and a basic carrying case.
| Big 2 | Upstart | Little 4 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Camera category | Brand (2010 ILC market share) | Canon (45%) | Nikon (30%) | Sony 3 (12%) | Pentax (?) | Olympus (5%) | Panasonic (?) | Samsung (?) |
| RF-style MSC price w/ zoom 1 | Low-end | - | J2 10.1MP $550 | NEX-F3 16.2MP $500 | - | E-PM2 16.1MP $600 | DMC-GX1 16.1MP $470 | - |
| Mid-Range | - | - | NEX-5R 16.1MP $650 | Q10 12.4MP $600 | E-PL5 16.1MP $700 | DMC-GF5 12.1MP $520 | NX1000 20.3MP $600 | |
| High-end | EOS-M 18.0MP $799 4 | V2 10.1MP $800 | NEX-6 16.1MP $1000 | K-01 16.3MP $830 2 | - | - | NX210 20.3MP $800 | |
| Flagship | - | - | NEX-7 24.1MP $1300 | - | - | - | - | |
| Consumer DSLR / SLT / SLR-style MSC price w/ zoom 1 | Beginner | 600D/T3i 18.0MP $500 | D3200 24.2MP $650 | SLT-A37 16.2MP $600 | - | - | - | - |
| Mid-Range | 650D/T4i 18.0MP $800 | D5100 16.2MP $650 | SLT-A57 16.2MP $700 | K-30 16.3MP $850 | E-M5 16.1MP $1100 | DMC-G5 15.8MP $800 | - | |
| Enthusiast | 60D 18.0MP $1200 | D7000 16.2MP $1300 | SLT-A65 24.3MP $900 | - | - | DMC-GH3 16.1MP $900 | NX20 20.3MP $1000 | |
| Professional DSLR / SLT price body only | Mid-size crop sensor | 7D 18.0MP $1600 | D300s 12.3MP $1700 | SLT-A77 24.3MP $1300 | K-5 II 16.3MP $1200 5 | E-5 12.3MP $1700 | - | - |
| Entry-level full frame | 6D 20.3MP $2100 | D600 24.3MP $2100 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Mid-size full frame | 5D Mk.III 22.3MP $3500 | D800 36.3MP $3000 5 | SLT-A99 24.3MP $2800 | - | - | - | - | |
| Flagship action | 1D X 18.1MP $6800 | D4 16.2MP $6000 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Flagship studio | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
1 - If multiple zoom kits are available, the price is for the cheapest, which usually includes an 18-55mm (equivalent) lens.
2 - dual-lens kit
3 - Sony's web site is horrible so I'm not linking to it.
4 - prime not zoom lens
5 - The K-5 II and D800 are available without an anti-aliasing filter for a modest additional price.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Glad to Be Wrong: 2012 Election Edition
As something of a pessimist when it comes to predictions, I'm always glad to be wrong. Last week, I predicted a narrow win for Obama. But the President won the Electoral College handily, 332-206, verses my prediction of 290-248. And I was two seats too negative about the Senate, which I predicted to be split 53-47. I was about right with the popular vote, which Obama won 50.3% to 48.1% to 2.6% (mainly for Gary Johnson), verses my prediction of 50% to 49% to 1%.
Unfortunately, I was several seats too positive about the House, as the Democrats only picked up seven seats in the House of Representatives. I predicted a 230-208 split, but the final result looks like it will be 235 to 200 (barring any flips during a recount, which is unlikely). The Republicans appear to have done a very good job of protecting their candidates during the 2011-2012 redistricting process. This will make actually governing the country even harder than I expected, because the remaining Republicans will have even less reason to fear the displeasure of their constituents. Another reason Republicans won't worry about reelection in 2014 is that there is a historical pattern of the president's party losing House seats in mid-term elections. I haven't looked at the details yet, but I am fairly sure that none of the Republican freshman are moderates, so the caucus will be even more radical. All this points to gridlock no matter how many generous offers of compromise Obama makes.
I'll be happy to be wrong about my prediction of gridlock, though it will take a bit longer than a week to see the outcome.
Unfortunately, I was several seats too positive about the House, as the Democrats only picked up seven seats in the House of Representatives. I predicted a 230-208 split, but the final result looks like it will be 235 to 200 (barring any flips during a recount, which is unlikely). The Republicans appear to have done a very good job of protecting their candidates during the 2011-2012 redistricting process. This will make actually governing the country even harder than I expected, because the remaining Republicans will have even less reason to fear the displeasure of their constituents. Another reason Republicans won't worry about reelection in 2014 is that there is a historical pattern of the president's party losing House seats in mid-term elections. I haven't looked at the details yet, but I am fairly sure that none of the Republican freshman are moderates, so the caucus will be even more radical. All this points to gridlock no matter how many generous offers of compromise Obama makes.
I'll be happy to be wrong about my prediction of gridlock, though it will take a bit longer than a week to see the outcome.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Election of Perfection
While the 2012 election isn't the first in America where the mechanics of voting make for news stories, this is the year when I've finally had enough of the doubt-inducing hiccups and quirks. We really need to move to a uniform national system based on paper ballots. Given America's overall election process, here's how I think it should be done.
Prior to election day:
1 - Machines of any sort are in no way necessary for successfully conducting an election. But Americans are impatient and like technological "fixes", so I've included optical scan machines.
2 - The point of permits is to prevent chaos during the post-election period (which may include a recount) while still allowing public access.
3 - A small group of precincts should be hand-counted on election night so that any gross discrepancies between hand and machine counts are detected immediately. It should be done before the totals are read off of the machine so that vote counters have no expectations of what the outcome might be.
4 - In almost every election, identifying and tabulating the write-in votes is a meaningless exercise, but for whatever reason it is done.
Updated 2012-11-08: Added more steps.
Updated 2012-11-12: Added more steps.
Prior to election day:
- States run their nominating processes, and finalize the ballot seven weeks before election day.
- Ballots are printed and verified.
- Early voting runs from from five weeks until one week before election day. Ballots are placed in boxes, which are secured by well-known procedures, by the voters.
- Absentee ballots are issued starting five weeks and ending one week before election day. Ballots are accepted unconditionally until close of voting on election day, and provisionally based on postmark for a week after election day.
- Optical scan machines are configured, tested, and secured by one week before election day.1
- Applications by groups wanting access to the paper ballots during the four weeks after the election are accepted until one week before election day, and issued by the day before the election.2
- Voter rolls for polling places are generated.
- Scan machines are set up the day before election.
- Voting begins.
- A small random group of precincts (1 to 3 percent) are selected for hand counting.3
- Early and absentee ballots are scanned.
- Voting ends.
- Vote totals are read off the scan machines and reported, except where hand counting is being done.3
- If a machine fails, or if the number of write-in votes exceeds the votes for each of the other candidates, the precinct is counted by hand.
- The hand counts are reported.
- The hand counts are verified using the scan machines, if possible.
- The optical scan machines are inspected for tampering, and then moved to a central site or sites.
- Any failed scan machines are replaced with standby machines.
- A second random group of all precincts are hand-counted.
- The other precincts are verified by running the ballots through the scan machines again. If the number of write-in votes exceeds the votes for each of the other candidates, the precinct is counted by hand.
- The optical scan machines are re-inspected for tampering.
- If a recount is deemed necessary, a third random selection of precincts are counted by hand, and the rest are re-verified using the scan machines.
- Write-in votes are tabulated.4
- Challenges are considered for provisional in-person and absentee ballots.
- Paper ballots and optical scan machines are made available in controlled conditions for any pre-qualified group to examine.2
- Provisional in-person and absentee ballots are counted two business days before final results are issued.
- Provisional ballots are recounted one day before final results are issued.
- Final results are issued four weeks after the election.
- Scan machines are released for repair and reprogramming.
- Paper ballots are archived for 10 years, but can be viewed under controlled conditions by any member of the public.
1 - Machines of any sort are in no way necessary for successfully conducting an election. But Americans are impatient and like technological "fixes", so I've included optical scan machines.
2 - The point of permits is to prevent chaos during the post-election period (which may include a recount) while still allowing public access.
3 - A small group of precincts should be hand-counted on election night so that any gross discrepancies between hand and machine counts are detected immediately. It should be done before the totals are read off of the machine so that vote counters have no expectations of what the outcome might be.
4 - In almost every election, identifying and tabulating the write-in votes is a meaningless exercise, but for whatever reason it is done.
Updated 2012-11-08: Added more steps.
Updated 2012-11-12: Added more steps.
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Odds of Sods: November 2012 Edition
In the three preceding post I have made my predictions for the outcomes of the contests for the Presidency, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. Below is how I see the cycle as a whole. The second best outcome, which preserves the status quo, is also the most likely. The very best outcome - full Democratic control - is the third most likely. Unfortunately, the sixth best (or third worst) outcome is the second most likely. The chances of the other outcomes are very low at this point, as it would mean that people predicted two or more of the three contests wrong. Modern polling is reasonably good, and there are enough of them for the Presidency and Senate that the degree of confidence for individual contests is fairly high. The House is a little more dicey, as there aren't as many polls for individual races. In fact, most professional poll crunchers avoid the House altogether, and others look just at the overall picture. The redistricting process creates some additional uncertainty in the meaning of the generic congressional ballot, but I still think it indicates moderate gains for the Democrats, if not as many as I'd like. But, overall, I think Democrats should be moderately pleased at the end of next Tuesday night.
| Outcome | Legislative Outlook | Implication for County | Odds of Happening | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democrats | Republicans | (1 = best/highest, 8 = lowest/worst) | ||
| President, Senate, House | - | Slow advance | 1 | 3 |
| President, Senate | House | Neutral | 2 | 1 |
| President, House | Senate | Neutral | 3 | 6 |
| President | Senate, House | Slow retreat | 4 | 4 |
| Senate, House | President | Fast retreat | 5 | 7 |
| Senate | President, House | Fast retreat | 6 | 2 |
| House | President, Senate | Fast retreat | 7 | 8 |
| - | President, Senate, House | The Apocalypse | 8 | 5 |
One Office to Herd Them All: November 2012 Edition
As is the case every four years, the grand prize for the election cycle is the office of the President of the United States of America. This cycle pits the Democratic incumbent, Barack Obama, against the Republican challenger, Willard Romney. The key to understanding the presidential race is that it is 51 state races, not one national race. Given the electoral college system, which I really don't like, I believe (as of now, November 1st) that Obama will be the winner on November 6, with 290 electoral votes to 248 for Romney. The best outcome Obama is likely to get is 332 to 206, and the worst is 265 to 273. 270 EVs is the threshold for winning. 269 EVs for each would send the election to the House of Representatives and the end of the world as we know it. (I'm kidding about that last bit. I hope.) In reality, the chances of Obama losing in Nevada are less than 15%, so it would have to be a very bad night for the Democrats if Obama were to receive less than 271 EVs. A lot of current polling gives Obama a victory in Virginia, but I think he will just barely lose. Winning that state would put his EV total over 300, which doesn't mean much by itself, but people tend to fixate on nice, round numbers.
I'm not going to analyze the popular vote because it's complicated and it doesn't matter, strictly speaking. It does matter a lot for legitimacy purposes, but only for Obama. My guess is that the result will be about 50-49-1% in favor of the incumbent, which will make him a legitimate victor in the minds of Democrats and true swing voters, and would mostly shut the media up. If Obama loses the popular vote but wins the electoral college, the press will insist that he bow to every Republican whim, which of course they did not do for Bush the Lesser. That would be both entirely unfair and entirely unsurprising, because media has two separate standards for the two parties.
On election night, the first state to watch for will be Virginia, where polls close at 7PM EST. If Obama takes that state, he'll almost certainly have won the election (given the near-certainty of Obama winning the 265 EVS in the higher confidence categories). The networks may also call Florida at 7PM EST, but most likely they will wait until 8PM EST when polls in the panhandle close. Florida is another state that would basically guarantee that Obama was victorious. If Obama loses in both of those states, he will need to win Colorado, Iowa, or Nevada. Those states close their polls at 9PM EST, 10PM EST, and 10PM EST respectively. New Hampshire polls will close at 8PM EST, but by itself the state's 4 EVs cannot give Obama the win when added to his baseline of 265. I think we'll have to wait until after 9 PM to see the good guy win.
* - By state law, both Maine and Nebraska can split their electoral votes, but that won't happen in 2012.
I'm not going to analyze the popular vote because it's complicated and it doesn't matter, strictly speaking. It does matter a lot for legitimacy purposes, but only for Obama. My guess is that the result will be about 50-49-1% in favor of the incumbent, which will make him a legitimate victor in the minds of Democrats and true swing voters, and would mostly shut the media up. If Obama loses the popular vote but wins the electoral college, the press will insist that he bow to every Republican whim, which of course they did not do for Bush the Lesser. That would be both entirely unfair and entirely unsurprising, because media has two separate standards for the two parties.
On election night, the first state to watch for will be Virginia, where polls close at 7PM EST. If Obama takes that state, he'll almost certainly have won the election (given the near-certainty of Obama winning the 265 EVS in the higher confidence categories). The networks may also call Florida at 7PM EST, but most likely they will wait until 8PM EST when polls in the panhandle close. Florida is another state that would basically guarantee that Obama was victorious. If Obama loses in both of those states, he will need to win Colorado, Iowa, or Nevada. Those states close their polls at 9PM EST, 10PM EST, and 10PM EST respectively. New Hampshire polls will close at 8PM EST, but by itself the state's 4 EVs cannot give Obama the win when added to his baseline of 265. I think we'll have to wait until after 9 PM to see the good guy win.
| Certain Dem. | Likely Dem. | Lean Dem. | Lean Rep. | Likely Rep. | Certain Rep. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 9 | |||||
| Alaska | 3 | |||||
| Arizona | 11 | |||||
| Arkansas | 6 | |||||
| California | 55 | |||||
| Colorado | 9 | |||||
| Connecticut | 7 | |||||
| Delaware | 3 | |||||
| District of Columbia | 3 | |||||
| Florida | 29 | |||||
| Georgia | 16 | |||||
| Hawaii | 4 | |||||
| Idaho | 4 | |||||
| Illinois | 20 | |||||
| Indiana | 11 | |||||
| Iowa | 6 | |||||
| Kansas | 6 | |||||
| Kentucky | 8 | |||||
| Louisiana | 8 | |||||
| Maine * | 4 | |||||
| Maryland | 10 | |||||
| Massachusetts | 11 | |||||
| Michigan | 16 | |||||
| Minnesota | 10 | |||||
| Mississippi | 6 | |||||
| Missouri | 10 | |||||
| Montana | 3 | |||||
| Nebraska * | 5 | |||||
| Nevada | 6 | |||||
| New Hampshire | 4 | |||||
| New Jersey | 14 | |||||
| New Mexico | 5 | |||||
| New York | 29 | |||||
| North Carolina | 15 | |||||
| North Dakota | 3 | |||||
| Ohio | 18 | |||||
| Oklahoma | 7 | |||||
| Oregon | 7 | |||||
| Pennsylvania | 20 | |||||
| Rhode Island | 4 | |||||
| South Carolina | 9 | |||||
| South Dakota | 3 | |||||
| Tennessee | 11 | |||||
| Texas | 38 | |||||
| Utah | 6 | |||||
| Vermont | 3 | |||||
| Virginia | 13 | |||||
| Washington | 12 | |||||
| West Virginia | 5 | |||||
| Wisconsin | 10 | |||||
| Wyoming | 3 | |||||
| Subtotals | 217 | 48 | 25 | 42 | 37 | 169 |
| Baseline total | 265 | 206 | ||||
| Grand Total | Obama | 290 | 248 | Romney |
* - By state law, both Maine and Nebraska can split their electoral votes, but that won't happen in 2012.
One Hundred Mini-Presidents: November 2012 Edition
As is the case every two years, approximately one-third of the Senate is up for re-election in 2012. Below is what I think (as of now, November 1st) the outcome on November 6th will be. Since the last version of this post, the outlooks for four contests have changed significantly. I've moved one Democratic-held seat (VA) from tossup flip to tossup hold. I've moved one Democratic-held seat (CT) from certain hold to tossup hold. I've moved one Republican-held seat (IN) from Republican hold to Democratic flip. And I've moved one Republican-held seat (AZ) from certain hold to tossup hold . The result will be three D-to-R flips (MT, ND, NE) and three R-to-D flips (IN, MA, ME), with the final distribution for the next Congress 53-47 in favor of the Democrats (which includes the two Independents). Previously I viewed VA as a flip and IN as a hold, resulting in a 51-49 partisan split. I think the best outcome possible for the Democrats is 55-45 (winning in AZ, MT) and the worst is 50-50 (losing in CT, IN, VA).
The main reason for the changes is that the Republican candidates have been worse than I expected. Flake, Mourdock, and Allen (plus Aiken in MO) are all terribly unlikable, so they've turned off independents. On the other hand, McMahon in CT has done better than I expected, most likely because she's given herself huge amounts of money (over $42M so far). I would like to see more of the western Democrats win (Carmona, Berkeley), but the polling doesn't show that they have much of a chance. For two candidates where the polling is close (Heitkamp, Tester) I think their states are still too Republican for them to win on the same ticket as Obama. For the other other three (Murphy, Kaine, Baldwin) their states are sufficiently purple or blue that they will win. Donnelly, like McCaskill a few months ago, has been gifted a win because the Republican candidate said something vile about rape.
The Democratic caucus is likely to be more liberal after this election, with the additions of Murphy, Warren, and Baldwin, coupled with the losses of Lieberman, Conrad, Nelson, and Tester. Hirono, Heinrich, and Kaine are likely to vote in roughly similar fashion to their predecessors, and King will reprise Lieberman's role as an annoyance that frequently provides a helpful vote. Donnelly will be the sole conservative newcomer, though naturally he will be more liberal than the Republican he will replace. If Reid and the Democrats decide to ditch the filibuster (strong emphasis on "if") in 2013, at least judges and the like will be Democrats, and possibly even liberal Democrats on occasion. The importance of those positions should not be underestimated. Ditching the filibuster would also shift legislative control away from Conservadems (Pryor, Carper, Landrieu, McCaskill, Hagen, Manchin) who are numerous enough to give Republicans effective control on many issues if the filibuster remains. But even if the rule is removed, the overall legislative environment would remain poor for most of the policies I'd like to see changed because the Republicans are likely to narrowly retain control of the House.
* Sanders is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats.
** King is an independent who will probably caucus with the Democrats if there is a tie; otherwise he'll side with the winner so as to get a little more clout for his state.
*** Mourdock defeated Lugar in the Republican primary, and will lose the seat for Republicans.
Update 2012-11-02: Added sentence about Donnelly.
Update 2012-11-05: Corrected Baucus to Conrad.
The main reason for the changes is that the Republican candidates have been worse than I expected. Flake, Mourdock, and Allen (plus Aiken in MO) are all terribly unlikable, so they've turned off independents. On the other hand, McMahon in CT has done better than I expected, most likely because she's given herself huge amounts of money (over $42M so far). I would like to see more of the western Democrats win (Carmona, Berkeley), but the polling doesn't show that they have much of a chance. For two candidates where the polling is close (Heitkamp, Tester) I think their states are still too Republican for them to win on the same ticket as Obama. For the other other three (Murphy, Kaine, Baldwin) their states are sufficiently purple or blue that they will win. Donnelly, like McCaskill a few months ago, has been gifted a win because the Republican candidate said something vile about rape.
The Democratic caucus is likely to be more liberal after this election, with the additions of Murphy, Warren, and Baldwin, coupled with the losses of Lieberman, Conrad, Nelson, and Tester. Hirono, Heinrich, and Kaine are likely to vote in roughly similar fashion to their predecessors, and King will reprise Lieberman's role as an annoyance that frequently provides a helpful vote. Donnelly will be the sole conservative newcomer, though naturally he will be more liberal than the Republican he will replace. If Reid and the Democrats decide to ditch the filibuster (strong emphasis on "if") in 2013, at least judges and the like will be Democrats, and possibly even liberal Democrats on occasion. The importance of those positions should not be underestimated. Ditching the filibuster would also shift legislative control away from Conservadems (Pryor, Carper, Landrieu, McCaskill, Hagen, Manchin) who are numerous enough to give Republicans effective control on many issues if the filibuster remains. But even if the rule is removed, the overall legislative environment would remain poor for most of the policies I'd like to see changed because the Republicans are likely to narrowly retain control of the House.
| Democratic | Republican | |
|---|---|---|
| 2011-2012 seats | 53 | 47 |
| Carryovers | 30 | 37 |
| Contested | 23 | 10 |
| Certain holds | California (Feinstein) Delaware (Carper) Hawaii (open D to Hirono) Maryland (Cardin) Michigan (Stabenow) Minnesota (Klobuchar) New Jersey (Menendez) New York (Gillibrand) Rhode Island (Whitehouse) Vermont (Sanders*) Washington (Cantwell) West Virginia (Manchin) | Mississippi (Wicker) Tennessee (Corker) Texas (open R to Cruz) Utah (Hatch) Wyoming (Barasso) |
| Likely holds | Florida (Nelson) Pennsylvania (Casey) New Mexico (open D to Heinrich) Ohio (Brown) | Nevada (Heller) |
| Tossups | Connecticut (open D to Murphy) Missouri (McCaskill) Wisconsin (open D to Baldwin) Virginia (open D to Kaine) | Arizona (open R to Flake) Montana (Tester (D) to Rehberg) |
| Likely flips | Indiana (R*** to Donnelly) Massachusetts (Brown (R) to Warren) Maine (open R to King**) | Nebraska (open D to Fischer) North Dakota (open D to Berg) |
| 2012 results | 23 | 10 |
| Swing | 0 | 0 |
| 2013-2014 seats | 53 | 47 |
* Sanders is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats.
** King is an independent who will probably caucus with the Democrats if there is a tie; otherwise he'll side with the winner so as to get a little more clout for his state.
*** Mourdock defeated Lugar in the Republican primary, and will lose the seat for Republicans.
Update 2012-11-02: Added sentence about Donnelly.
Update 2012-11-05: Corrected Baucus to Conrad.
435 Creepy Critters: November 2012 Edition
As is the case every two years, every member of the House of Representatives is up for re-election in 2012. Below is what I think (as of now, November 1st) the outcome on November 6 will be. I have been somewhat optimistic in my analysis, but even if it is accurate, the Democrats will fall short, leaving the Republicans with a slim 230-205 majority and an even more radical caucus. That situation will not be good for legislation I think should be passed, as the Republicans will double down on obstructionism, hoping to duplicate the 2010 election in 2014.
I'm not going to break out individual races for the House because I just don't have the patience to document the 80 or so races that are somewhat competitive, or better. At a higher level, the states to watch are Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New York. Those 10 states have the most competitive races. States definitely not to watch are Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, and Wyoming. There no competitive races in those 18 states. The remaining 22 have either only 1 competitive race, or races that are only somewhat competitive.
Because 2012 is a redistricting year, I have included a column for the change in the number of seats each state holds. I have also broken the "swing" into two separate columns because, with redistricting, one party's gains in a state don't always equal the other party's losses.
* - I have added the five currently vacant seats to the party of the previous officeholder.
I'm not going to break out individual races for the House because I just don't have the patience to document the 80 or so races that are somewhat competitive, or better. At a higher level, the states to watch are Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New York. Those 10 states have the most competitive races. States definitely not to watch are Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, and Wyoming. There no competitive races in those 18 states. The remaining 22 have either only 1 competitive race, or races that are only somewhat competitive.
Because 2012 is a redistricting year, I have included a column for the change in the number of seats each state holds. I have also broken the "swing" into two separate columns because, with redistricting, one party's gains in a state don't always equal the other party's losses.
| 2011-12 Democratic Seats * | 2011-12 Republican Seats * | Change in Seats | Comp. Races | 2013-14 Democratic Seats | 2013-14 Republican Seats | Net Democratic Change | Net Republican Change | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 1 | 6 | 1 | 6 | ||||
| Alaska | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Arizona | 3 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 2 | -1 |
| Arkansas | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 | -1 | 1 | ||
| California | 34 | 19 | 11 | 37 | 16 | 3 | 3 | |
| Colorado | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 1 | -1 | |
| Connecticut | 5 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | |||
| Delaware | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Florida | 6 | 19 | 2 | 6 | 10 | 17 | 4 | -2 |
| Georgia | 5 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 10 | -1 | 2 |
| Hawaii | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | ||||
| Idaho | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ||||
| Illinois | 8 | 11 | -1 | 6 | 13 | 5 | 5 | -6 |
| Indiana | 3 | 6 | 2 | 7 | -1 | 1 | ||
| Iowa | 3 | 2 | -1 | 4 | 3 | 1 | -1 | |
| Kansas | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4 | ||||
| Kentucky | 2 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 4 | |||
| Louisiana | 1 | 6 | -1 | 1 | 5 | -1 | ||
| Maine | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | |||
| Maryland | 6 | 2 | 1 | 7 | 1 | 1 | -1 | |
| Massachusetts | 10 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 8 | 1 | -2 | 1 |
| Michigan | 6 | 9 | -1 | 3 | 6 | 8 | -1 | |
| Minnesota | 4 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 1 | -1 | |
| Mississippi | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | ||||
| Missouri | 3 | 6 | -1 | 2 | 6 | -1 | ||
| Montana | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |||
| Nebraska | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ||||
| Nevada | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | -1 |
| New Hampshire | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | -2 | |
| New Jersey | 7 | 6 | -1 | 1 | 6 | 6 | -1 | |
| New Mexico | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||
| New York | 21 | 8 | -2 | 8 | 22 | 5 | 1 | -3 |
| North Carolina | 7 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 10 | -4 | 4 | |
| North Dakota | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Ohio | 5 | 13 | -2 | 5 | 11 | -2 | ||
| Oklahoma | 1 | 4 | 0 | 5 | -1 | 1 | ||
| Oregon | 4 | 1 | 4 | 1 | ||||
| Pennsylvania | 7 | 12 | -1 | 4 | 6 | 12 | -1 | |
| Rhode Island | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | |||
| South Carolina | 1 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 1 | ||
| South Dakota | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Tennessee | 2 | 7 | 2 | 7 | ||||
| Texas | 9 | 23 | 4 | 2 | 12 | 24 | 3 | 1 |
| Utah | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | -1 | 2 |
| Vermont | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Virginia | 3 | 8 | 1 | 3 | 8 | |||
| Washington | 5 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 1 | |
| West Virginia | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |||
| Wisconsin | 3 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 5 | |||
| Wyoming | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Totals | 193 | 242 | 0 | 205 | 230 | 12 | -12 |
* - I have added the five currently vacant seats to the party of the previous officeholder.
Friday, October 12, 2012
Picture This and That: Zooming the Bridges October 2012 Edition
Before the mirrorless rage started, the big new thing was big zoom bridge cameras. Although the excitement has faded, the superzooms still out there, and a number of them are pretty good. They'll never match interchangeable lens cameras for image quality, but they're more than adequate for anyone taking snapshots, and they offer buyers a highly flexible camera for a relatively low price.
I've looked at the latest reviews, along with a lot of older comparisons, and found that the Canon Powershot SX_0 IS series and the Pansonic DMC-FZ series have been battling for the top of the heap since the mid-2000s. The DMC-FZ100 was a bit of dud, though, so watch out for that one if you're looking into the used market. I would also be wary of the SX50 if you're going to be shooting indoors often. The 50x (1200 / 24 = 50) zoom might seem like it would be great to have, but the price is a pretty slow (small maximum aperture) lens. I think Canon should have introduced a new series for such an extreme zoom, and then done a more conservative iteration of the SX40. The DMC-FZ200 takes the opposite approach - it has a much less aggressive telephoto specification, but maintains a relatively fast f/2.8 aperture through the entire zoom range. Both Sony and Nikon offer a model with built-in GPS, but in the Nikon the price is a rather low battery life. The other brands' products are entirely meh. I really don't understand Fujifilm's strategy, which seems to be spray out a ton of mediocre models plus an occasional very expensive oddball (which is still expensive when discounted by $200 from list). And why anyone would buy a Leica-branded Panasonic camera baffles me, too, though apparently buyers at least get better software and warranties from Leica than from Panasonic.
In the chart below, I've included the previous five years of cameras to show how the category has advanced in terms of zoom and megapixels. I've also included the current (as of mid-October 2012) street price for cameras released in the past two years. The cameras are arranged more-or-less in series, except for Fujifilm and Kodak models, which aren't worth looking at anyway.
# - no electronic viewfinder (EVF).
* - Kodak is kaput, so don't expect support if you buy one.
** - built-in GPS.
*** - due to its unique high-speed video features, the Casio Pro EX-F1 still sells for over $1000 used.
Note: no consideration has been taken, given, or otherwise discussed wrt. this review. However, camera manufacturers should feel free to shower me with products at their earliest convenience.
I've looked at the latest reviews, along with a lot of older comparisons, and found that the Canon Powershot SX_0 IS series and the Pansonic DMC-FZ series have been battling for the top of the heap since the mid-2000s. The DMC-FZ100 was a bit of dud, though, so watch out for that one if you're looking into the used market. I would also be wary of the SX50 if you're going to be shooting indoors often. The 50x (1200 / 24 = 50) zoom might seem like it would be great to have, but the price is a pretty slow (small maximum aperture) lens. I think Canon should have introduced a new series for such an extreme zoom, and then done a more conservative iteration of the SX40. The DMC-FZ200 takes the opposite approach - it has a much less aggressive telephoto specification, but maintains a relatively fast f/2.8 aperture through the entire zoom range. Both Sony and Nikon offer a model with built-in GPS, but in the Nikon the price is a rather low battery life. The other brands' products are entirely meh. I really don't understand Fujifilm's strategy, which seems to be spray out a ton of mediocre models plus an occasional very expensive oddball (which is still expensive when discounted by $200 from list). And why anyone would buy a Leica-branded Panasonic camera baffles me, too, though apparently buyers at least get better software and warranties from Leica than from Panasonic.
In the chart below, I've included the previous five years of cameras to show how the category has advanced in terms of zoom and megapixels. I've also included the current (as of mid-October 2012) street price for cameras released in the past two years. The cameras are arranged more-or-less in series, except for Fujifilm and Kodak models, which aren't worth looking at anyway.
| Brand \ Year | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canon | SX500 IS 16.0MP # 24-720mm $300 | |||||
| S5 IS 8.0MP 36-432mm | SX1 / SX10 IS 10.0MP 28-560mm | SX20 IS 12.1MP 28-560mm | SX30 IS 14.1MP 24-840mm | SX40 HS 12.1MP 24-840mm $315 | SX50 HS 12.1MP 24-1200mm $480 | |
| Casio | EX-FH20 9.1MP 26-520mm | EX-FH25 10.1MP 26-520mm | ||||
| Pro EX-F1 6.0MP 36-432mm *** | ||||||
| Fujifilm | SL240 14.0MP 24-576mm n/a US? | |||||
| S5700 Zoom 7.1MP 38-380mm | S2000HD 10.0MP 28-414mm | S1500 10.0MP 33-396mm | S1600 12.2MP 28-420mm | SL300 14.0MP 24-720mm $190 | ||
| S1000fd 10.0MP 33-396mm | S1800 12.2MP 28-504mm | S2950 14.0MP 28-504mm $170 | ||||
| S2500HD 12.2MP 28-504mm | S3200 14.0MP 24-576mm $190 | S4200 14.0MP 24-576mm $160 | ||||
| S8000fd 8.0MP 27-486mm | S8100fd 10.0MP 27-486mm | S2800HD 14.0MP 28-504mm | S4000 14.0MP 24-720mm $160 | S4500 14.0MP 24-720mm $170 | ||
| IS-1 9.1MP 28-300mm | S200EXR 12.0MP 31-436mm | HS10 10.3MP 24-720mm | HS20EXR 16.0MP 24-720mm $500 | HS30EXR 14.0MP 24-720mm $320 | ||
| S100fs 11.1MP 28-400mm | X-S1 12.0MP 24-624mm $600 | |||||
| Kodak * | Z712 IS 7.1MP 36-423mm | Z812 IS 8.1MP 36-432mm | Z980 12.0MP 26-624mm | Z981 14.0MP 26-676mm | Z990 12.0MP 28-840mm $200 | |
| Z1012 IS 10.0MP 33-396mm | Z5010 14.0MP 25-525mm $140 | Z5120 16.0MP 26-676mm $180 | ||||
| Z1015 IS 10.0MP 28-420mm | ||||||
| Leica | V-Lux 2 (Pansonic DMC-FZ100) | V-Lux 3 (Pansonic DMC-FZ150) $629 | V-Lux 4 (Pansonic DMC-FZ200) n/a | |||
| Nikon | L100 10.1MP # 28-420mm | L110 12.2MP # 28-420mm | L120 14.1MP # 25-525mm $210 | L810 16.0MP # 23-585mm $200 | ||
| P80 10.1MP 27-486mm | P90 12.1MP 26-624mm | P100 10.3MP 26-678mm | P500 12.0MP 23-810mm $320 | P510 16.0MP ** 24-1000mm $400 | ||
| Olympus | SP-550UZ 7.1MP 28-504mm | SP-565UZ 10.0MP 26-520mm | SP-590UZ 12.0MP 26-676mm | SP-600UZ 12.0MP # 28-420mm | SP-610UZ 14.0MP # 28-616mm $190 | SP-620UZ 16.0MP # 25-525mm $200 |
| SP-560UZ 8.0MP 27-486mm | SP-570UZ 10.0MP 26-520mm | SP-800UZ 14.0MP # 28-840mm | SP-810UZ 14.0MP # 24-864mm $250 | SP-820UZ 14.0MP # 22-896mm $330 | ||
| Panasonic | DMC-LZ20 16.1MP # 25-525mm $250 | |||||
| DMC-FZ18 8.0MP 28-504mm | DMC-FZ28 10.1MP 27-486mm | DMC-FZ35 12.1MP 27-486mm | DMC-FZ40 14.1MP 25-600mm | DMC-FZ47 12.1MP 25-600mm $260 | DMC-FZ60 16.1MP 25-600mm $349 | |
| DMC-FZ100 14.1MP 25-600mm | DMC-FZ150 12.1MP 25-600mm $480 | DMC-FZ200 12.1MP 25-600mm $550 | ||||
| Pentax | X70 12.0MP 26-624mm | X90 12.0MP 26-676mm | X-5 16.0MP 22-580mm $280 | |||
| Samsung | HZ25W 12.5MP 26-624mm | HZ50W 13.8MP 26-676mm | WB100 16.2MP 22-580mm $230 | |||
| Sony | DSC-H3 8.1MP 38-380mm | |||||
| DSC-H7 8.0MP 31-465mm | DSC-H10 8.1MP 38-380mm | |||||
| DSC-H9 8.0MP 31-465mm | DSC-H50 9.1MP 31-465mm | DSC-HX1 9.1MP 28-560mm | DSC-HX100V 16.2MP ** 27-810mm $370 | DSC-HX200V 18.2MP ** 27-810mm $480 |
# - no electronic viewfinder (EVF).
* - Kodak is kaput, so don't expect support if you buy one.
** - built-in GPS.
*** - due to its unique high-speed video features, the Casio Pro EX-F1 still sells for over $1000 used.
Note: no consideration has been taken, given, or otherwise discussed wrt. this review. However, camera manufacturers should feel free to shower me with products at their earliest convenience.
Monday, October 8, 2012
E-Reading is Fundamental: October 2012 Edition
I'm about to take a plunge into the e-book pool, and here's my research into e-Ink-based e-readers. I have decided to go with an e-Ink device for now, because they are easier to read than LCD-based tablets such as the iPad, Kindle Fire, and Nook HD, as well as being cheaper. They are, of course, more limited. Tablets are general purpose computers, and are quite flexible, though without adding accessories they are not nearly as useful as even a low-end laptop. OTOH, e-readers are appliances, and do one thing well, though all of the readers I looked at have some amount of secondary functionality.
Right now the Kobo Glo seems to be the best all-around device. It is top-lit (as opposed to back-lit, as with an LCD-based device), it is tied for the highest resolution in the 6-inch class of readers (the standard size), and it is part of the most open "ecosystem." It has a decent web browser and decent PDF support. (Like most people, I loath PDFs, but they are unavoidable at this point.) However, the Kobo isn't available in the US yet, though it should be shortly. The Kindle Paperwhite probably has a better screen, but it is completely tied to Amazon's store, and there is a shipping delay of almost a month right now due to demand. The Nook Simple Touch Glow is available today (and in stores for pre-purchase evaluation), but it has a lower resolution screen which, according to reports on the internet, seems to be quite susceptible to damage from things being dropped on it. It also has the worst PDF support and no web browser.
The first chart after the break contains mainstream models from each of the three best vendors - Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and Kobo. The 6" readers are all about the same size and weight, though the side bezels on the Nook models are slightly wider, which would be good for anyone who plans to hold it with one hand. The second chart contains some other models Amazon and Kobo, plus two models from Icarus that seem nice, though they are not really available in the US. The latter may be of interest to someone wants their extra features. I have not included Sony, which used to be a major player, because it seems to be on its way out of the market, having reduced the number of models it offers to one.
Update 2012/10/12: Some early customer reports on the Paperwhite indicate that the screen isn't so great after all. I think they may be over-reacting to Amazon's (false) promises of perfection, as the unevenness is at the extreme bottom. But people who are looking for the absolute best screen should probably wait until more reports on the KPW come in, and until customers actually receive the Kobo Glo.
Note: no consideration has been taken, given, or otherwise discussed wrt. this review. However, e-reader makers should feel free to shower me with products at their earliest convenience.
Right now the Kobo Glo seems to be the best all-around device. It is top-lit (as opposed to back-lit, as with an LCD-based device), it is tied for the highest resolution in the 6-inch class of readers (the standard size), and it is part of the most open "ecosystem." It has a decent web browser and decent PDF support. (Like most people, I loath PDFs, but they are unavoidable at this point.) However, the Kobo isn't available in the US yet, though it should be shortly. The Kindle Paperwhite probably has a better screen, but it is completely tied to Amazon's store, and there is a shipping delay of almost a month right now due to demand. The Nook Simple Touch Glow is available today (and in stores for pre-purchase evaluation), but it has a lower resolution screen which, according to reports on the internet, seems to be quite susceptible to damage from things being dropped on it. It also has the worst PDF support and no web browser.
The first chart after the break contains mainstream models from each of the three best vendors - Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and Kobo. The 6" readers are all about the same size and weight, though the side bezels on the Nook models are slightly wider, which would be good for anyone who plans to hold it with one hand. The second chart contains some other models Amazon and Kobo, plus two models from Icarus that seem nice, though they are not really available in the US. The latter may be of interest to someone wants their extra features. I have not included Sony, which used to be a major player, because it seems to be on its way out of the market, having reduced the number of models it offers to one.
Update 2012/10/12: Some early customer reports on the Paperwhite indicate that the screen isn't so great after all. I think they may be over-reacting to Amazon's (false) promises of perfection, as the unevenness is at the extreme bottom. But people who are looking for the absolute best screen should probably wait until more reports on the KPW come in, and until customers actually receive the Kobo Glo.
Note: no consideration has been taken, given, or otherwise discussed wrt. this review. However, e-reader makers should feel free to shower me with products at their earliest convenience.
Friday, September 28, 2012
435 Creepy Critters: October 2012 Edition
As is the case every two years, every Representative in the House is up for re-election in 2012. Below is what I think (as of now, September 28) the outcome in November will be. I have been somewhat optimistic in my analysis, but even if it is accurate, the Democrats will fall short, leaving the Republicans with a slim majority and an even more radical caucus. That situation will not be good for legislation I think should be passed, as the Republicans will double down on obstructionism, hoping to duplicate the 2010 election in 2014. However, momentum seems to be with the Democrats right now, so the final count could be better than what I expect.
I'm not going to break out individual races for the House because I just don't have the patience to document the 80 or so races that are somewhat competitive, or better. At a higher level, the states to watch are Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New York. Those 10 states have the most competitive races. States definitely not to watch are Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, and Wyoming. There no competitive races in those 18 states. The remaining 22 have either only 1 competitive race, or races that are only somewhat competitive.
Because 2012 is a redistricting year, I have included a column for the change in the number of seats each state holds. I have also broken the "swing" into two separate columns because, with redistricting, one party's gains in a state doesn't always equal the other party's losses.
I'm not going to break out individual races for the House because I just don't have the patience to document the 80 or so races that are somewhat competitive, or better. At a higher level, the states to watch are Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New York. Those 10 states have the most competitive races. States definitely not to watch are Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, and Wyoming. There no competitive races in those 18 states. The remaining 22 have either only 1 competitive race, or races that are only somewhat competitive.
Because 2012 is a redistricting year, I have included a column for the change in the number of seats each state holds. I have also broken the "swing" into two separate columns because, with redistricting, one party's gains in a state doesn't always equal the other party's losses.
| 2011-12 Democratic Seats |
2011-12 Republican Seats |
Change in Seats |
Comp. Races |
2013-14 Democratic Seats |
2013-14 Republican Seats |
Net Democratic Change |
Net Republican Change | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 1 | 6 | 1 | 6 | ||||
| Alaska | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Arizona | 3 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 2 | -1 |
| Arkansas | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 | -1 | 1 | ||
| California | 34 | 19 | 11 | 39 | 14 | 5 | -5 | |
| Colorado | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 1 | -1 | |
| Connecticut | 5 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | |||
| Delaware | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Florida | 6 | 19 | 2 | 6 | 11 | 16 | 5 | -3 |
| Georgia | 5 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 10 | -1 | 2 |
| Hawaii | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | ||||
| Idaho | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ||||
| Illinois | 8 | 11 | -1 | 6 | 13 | 5 | 5 | -6 |
| Indiana | 3 | 6 | 2 | 7 | -1 | 1 | ||
| Iowa | 3 | 2 | -1 | 4 | 3 | 1 | -1 | |
| Kansas | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4 | ||||
| Kentucky | 2 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 4 | |||
| Louisiana | 1 | 6 | -1 | 1 | 5 | -1 | ||
| Maine | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | |||
| Maryland | 6 | 2 | 1 | 7 | 1 | 1 | -1 | |
| Massachusetts | 10 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | -1 | |
| Michigan | 6 | 9 | -1 | 3 | 6 | 8 | -1 | |
| Minnesota | 4 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 1 | -1 | |
| Mississippi | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | ||||
| Missouri | 3 | 6 | -1 | 2 | 6 | -1 | ||
| Montana | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |||
| Nebraska | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ||||
| Nevada | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | -1 |
| New Hampshire | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | -2 | |
| New Jersey | 7 | 6 | -1 | 1 | 6 | 6 | -1 | |
| New Mexico | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||
| New York | 21 | 8 | -2 | 8 | 23 | 4 | 2 | -4 |
| North Carolina | 7 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 10 | -4 | 4 | |
| North Dakota | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Ohio | 5 | 13 | -2 | 6 | 10 | 1 | -3 | |
| Oklahoma | 1 | 4 | 0 | 5 | -1 | 1 | ||
| Oregon | 4 | 1 | 4 | 1 | ||||
| Pennsylvania | 7 | 12 | -1 | 4 | 6 | 12 | -1 | |
| Rhode Island | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | |||
| South Carolina | 1 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 1 | ||
| South Dakota | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Tennessee | 2 | 7 | 2 | 7 | ||||
| Texas | 9 | 23 | 4 | 2 | 12 | 24 | 3 | 1 |
| Utah | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | |
| Vermont | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Virginia | 3 | 8 | 1 | 3 | 8 | |||
| Washington | 5 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 1 | |
| West Virginia | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |||
| Wisconsin | 3 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 1 | -1 | |
| Wyoming | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Totals | 193 | 242 | 0 | 213 | 222 | 20 | -20 |
Friday, August 17, 2012
Romney's Returns Rumors
There are so many reasons for Romney not to release his federal income tax returns. Choose your speculation from the following:
- He participated in the 2009 IRS Swiss tax haven amnesty.
- He paid zero or negative taxes in one or more years.
- He voted illegally in 2010.
- He lied on legally binding documents about his status at Bain between 1999 and 2002.
- He has various issues related to tithing (not 10% or more than his taxes).
- He built his $100 million IRA using dubious means. (This may not be detailed in the returns, though.)
- He gave $100 million to his sons using dubious means
- He's worth a heck of a lot more than $250 million.
- He made lots of now-embarrassing donations earlier in his career.
- He committed outright fraud. (This is the least likely, IMHO, as his companies have shown considerable skill at legally "evading" taxes.)
- He’s Mitt Fucking Romney, and he’s told all you people need to know.
- All of the above
Monday, August 6, 2012
Presidential Candidate Tax Returns
From what I can tell, below are the years for which various presidential candidates and presidents have released their tax returns. Bold checks are for returns released as candidates, "e" is for estimate, "s" is for summary, and "p" is for partial. Click to embiggen.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Activists'R'USSC
Update 2012/07/13 - Still happy I was wrong, wrong, wrong about this.
I'm not a SCOTUS watcher, so any prediction I make on the PPACA ruling due this week is a WAG. Nonetheless, based on the political nature of the case, rulings handed down last week, and the general trend of conservative actions over the past decade, I think the ruling will come down as follows: 5-4 to overturn the mandate, 5-4 to overturn the Medicaid expansion, and 6-3 to uphold the rest, with at least one concurrence on the 6-3 ruling.
Update 2012/06/25 - I'm not changing my prediction, but the speculation by commenters at BJ that Scalia and Alito blew their cool today because the PPACA will be upheld on Thursday seems reasonable. I hope they are right and I am wrong.
I'm not a SCOTUS watcher, so any prediction I make on the PPACA ruling due this week is a WAG. Nonetheless, based on the political nature of the case, rulings handed down last week, and the general trend of conservative actions over the past decade, I think the ruling will come down as follows: 5-4 to overturn the mandate, 5-4 to overturn the Medicaid expansion, and 6-3 to uphold the rest, with at least one concurrence on the 6-3 ruling.
Update 2012/06/25 - I'm not changing my prediction, but the speculation by commenters at BJ that Scalia and Alito blew their cool today because the PPACA will be upheld on Thursday seems reasonable. I hope they are right and I am wrong.
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
One Hundred Mini-Presidents: June 2012 Edition
As is the case every two years, slight more than one-third of the Senate is up for re-election in 2012. Below is what I think (as of now, June 3) the outcome in November will be. Among the tossups, Obama's coattails will be enough to pull along McCaskill in Missouri, which has an AA population of about 15%. In Wisconsin, a re-energized left will turn out well enough to give Baldwin a victory. In Montana, Obama hate will work to defeat Tester, and the same emotion in Virginia will defeat Kaine. If Obama really drives turnout up, Dems will hold Virginia and Montana, and possibly take Indiana. OTOH, if Obama only wins narrowly, both Wisconsin and Missouri would fall to the Republicans, and possibly one or two others currently in the likely category.
Since the last version of this post, Snowe has retired. The likely winner in Maine is King, who will caucus with the Democrats while doing his best Lieberman imitation. Wingnutty candidates have won Republican primaries in Indiana and Nebraska, but the states are so red that the kooks will just reduce the margin some, not give Democrats real hope of winning.
Overall, the results below would be a lousy outcome for the left because there would be more than enough Conservadems to give Republicans effective control even if there are enough Democrats to retain nominal control (with the vote of the Veep). (Note: I'm not 100% certain how the Veep's vote works when assigning control, but AFAIK it would be like any other vote where there is a tie.) So, even if Obama wins (very likely) and the Democrats win back the House (unlikely but possible) the overall legislative environment will remain poor for most of the policies I'd like to see changed.
* Sanders is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats.
** King is an independent who will probably caucus with the Democrats if there is a tie; otherwise he'll side with the winner so as to get a little more clout for his state.
*** Mourdock defeated Lugar in the Republican primary, and will likely hold the seat for Republicans.
Since the last version of this post, Snowe has retired. The likely winner in Maine is King, who will caucus with the Democrats while doing his best Lieberman imitation. Wingnutty candidates have won Republican primaries in Indiana and Nebraska, but the states are so red that the kooks will just reduce the margin some, not give Democrats real hope of winning.
Overall, the results below would be a lousy outcome for the left because there would be more than enough Conservadems to give Republicans effective control even if there are enough Democrats to retain nominal control (with the vote of the Veep). (Note: I'm not 100% certain how the Veep's vote works when assigning control, but AFAIK it would be like any other vote where there is a tie.) So, even if Obama wins (very likely) and the Democrats win back the House (unlikely but possible) the overall legislative environment will remain poor for most of the policies I'd like to see changed.
| Democratic | Republican | |
|---|---|---|
| 2011-2012 seats | 53 | 47 |
| Carryovers | 30 | 37 |
| Contested | 23 | 10 |
| Certain holds | California (Feinstein) | Arizona (open R to any R) |
| Connecticut (open D to Murphy) | Mississippi (Wicker) | |
| Delaware (Carper) | Tennessee (Corker) | |
| Hawaii (open D to Hirono) | Texas (open R to any R) | |
| Maryland (Cardin) | Utah (Hatch) | |
| Minnesota (Klobuchar) | Wyoming (Barasso) | |
| New Jersey (Menendez) | ||
| New York (Gillibrand) | ||
| Pennsylvania (Casey) | ||
| Rhode Island (Whitehouse) | ||
| Vermont (Sanders)* | ||
| Washington (Cantwell) | ||
| West Virginia (Manchin) | ||
| Likely holds | Florida (Nelson) | Indiana (Mourdock)*** |
| Michigan (Stabenow) | Nevada (Heller) | |
| New Mexico (open D to Heinrich) | ||
| Ohio (Brown) | ||
| Tossups | Missouri (McCaskill) | Montana (Tester to Rehberg) |
| Wisconsin (open D to Baldwin) | Virginia (open D to Allen) | |
| Likely flips | Massachusetts (Brown to Warren) | Nebraska (open D to any R) |
| Maine (open R to King)** | North Dakota (open D to any R) | |
| 2012 results | 21 | 12 |
| Swing | -2 | 2 |
| 2013-2014 seats | 51 | 49 |
* Sanders is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats.
** King is an independent who will probably caucus with the Democrats if there is a tie; otherwise he'll side with the winner so as to get a little more clout for his state.
*** Mourdock defeated Lugar in the Republican primary, and will likely hold the seat for Republicans.
Friday, April 27, 2012
Has the Jury Reached Its Verdict?
The hypothesis: austerity now will increase growth rates because businesses will invest because they will be confident that interest rates (or inflation, or something) will remain low.
The counter-hypothesis: austerity now will reduce growth rates (which can go below zero) because the government will spend less and tax more, which will cause businesses to be uncertain about having enough demand for their products, and thus to hold off on investments.
The test: austerity.
The results: Austerity has reduced growth because the government is spending less and taxing more, which has left business uncertain if they will have enough demand for their products and causing them to hold off on investments.
The verdict: suck it, austerians.
The counter-hypothesis: austerity now will reduce growth rates (which can go below zero) because the government will spend less and tax more, which will cause businesses to be uncertain about having enough demand for their products, and thus to hold off on investments.
The test: austerity.
The results: Austerity has reduced growth because the government is spending less and taxing more, which has left business uncertain if they will have enough demand for their products and causing them to hold off on investments.
The verdict: suck it, austerians.
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Grody to the Max
Today I spent the afternoon taking apart and reassembling my Kenmore-branded Whirlpool-made top-loading clothes washer (Series 80, model number 110.27822790). What I found was so disgusting it's against the Geneva Convention to post pictures of it. Well, actually, I didn't take pictures because I always forget to take pictures once I get my head into a project. But it was disgusting in there. Trust me on this. And because it was disgusting in there that means my clothes are disgusting, including all the ones I can't bleach. Grr.
Anyway, I strongly recommend to anyone that detects the slightest whiff of mold in their washing machine to at least take the cabinet off and look around. There are loads of instructional videos on the web that walk you through everything. It's not that hard to take the basket out on models like mine if you want to do the whole thing yourself, though it does require a special wrench. Otherwise, call a pro. Or if you're rich, buy a new washer.
Anyway, I strongly recommend to anyone that detects the slightest whiff of mold in their washing machine to at least take the cabinet off and look around. There are loads of instructional videos on the web that walk you through everything. It's not that hard to take the basket out on models like mine if you want to do the whole thing yourself, though it does require a special wrench. Otherwise, call a pro. Or if you're rich, buy a new washer.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Picture This and That: 2012 Exotic Creatures Edition
For reference, here's a chart of some of the exotic ILC cameras on the market (or announced and coming soon). I haven't included makers of medium-format and large-format view cameras because they are just kits of parts, essentially, rather than complete cameras that are more-or-less usable out of the box.
* - output JPEG pixel count; actual photosite count is 3 times greater for the Foveon X3 sensor
** - shipping later in the year
*** - the GXR system uses bundled lens and sensor modules (aka lensors)
| Uncommon | Unaffordable | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Camera category | Fujifilm | Ricoh | Sigma | Hasselblad | Leica | Mamiya Leaf | Pentax | Phase One |
| RF-style MSC no sensor or lens | - | GXR *** n/a $350 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Consumer DSLR / SLT / MSC body only | - | - | SD15 4.7MP * $1000 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Professional DSLR / SLT body only | - | - | SD1 15.3MP * $2300 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Rangefinder body only | X-Pro1 ** 16.0MP $1200 | - | - | - | M9 18.1MP $7000 | - | - | - |
| Fixed back medium format body only | - | - | - | - | S2 37.5MP $23000 | - | 645D 40.0MP $9000 | - |
| Removable back medium format no lens or back | - | - | - | - | - | 645DF n/a $6000 | - | 645DF n/a $6000 |
| Removable back medium format with back no lens | - | - | - | HD4-40 40.0MP $18000 | - | - | - | - |
| Removable back medium format with back and lens | - | - | - | HD4-31 31.7MP $14000 | - | DM-28MP 28.0MP $10000 | - | P 30+ 30MP $17000 |
* - output JPEG pixel count; actual photosite count is 3 times greater for the Foveon X3 sensor
** - shipping later in the year
*** - the GXR system uses bundled lens and sensor modules (aka lensors)
Monday, March 19, 2012
Picture This and That: March 2012 Comparison Chart Edition
Note: I post updated versions of this chart every six months or so. Check the photography category for the latest.
Spring announcement season is over for 2012, so here's a chart of what's available today (or announced and coming soon). The newcomers are the Nikon D4 and D800 digital single-lens reflex cameras, the Canon 5D Mk.III and 1D-X DSLRs, the Sony A57 single-lens translucent camera, the Olympus OM-D E-M5 mirrorless system camera, the Pentax K-01 MSC, and the Panasonic GX1 MSC. Fujifulm re-entered the interchangeable lens camera market when introduced the X-Pro1 rangefinder-style camera in January, but I'm not including it for now because the high price means it will likely remain a relatively rare camera. Sony has put the last of its DSLR models to bed, and both Olympus and Samsung have probably discontinued all models as well. Pentax announced the retirement of one camera, but it's still in stock. The new cameras from Canon and Nikon replace similar existing models.
A previous version of this chart is here, and a general background post can be found here. If you're a first-time ILC buyer, remember that cameras are just tools, and the raw pixel count is very likely not the most important feature to consider. It's also important to consider what gets attached to the front of the camera body: glass.
* - listed on manufacturer site but not in stores - probably discontinued
** - dual-lens kit
*** - still listed on manufacturer site and in stores, but officially discontinued
Update 2012-09-01: made minor edits
Spring announcement season is over for 2012, so here's a chart of what's available today (or announced and coming soon). The newcomers are the Nikon D4 and D800 digital single-lens reflex cameras, the Canon 5D Mk.III and 1D-X DSLRs, the Sony A57 single-lens translucent camera, the Olympus OM-D E-M5 mirrorless system camera, the Pentax K-01 MSC, and the Panasonic GX1 MSC. Fujifulm re-entered the interchangeable lens camera market when introduced the X-Pro1 rangefinder-style camera in January, but I'm not including it for now because the high price means it will likely remain a relatively rare camera. Sony has put the last of its DSLR models to bed, and both Olympus and Samsung have probably discontinued all models as well. Pentax announced the retirement of one camera, but it's still in stock. The new cameras from Canon and Nikon replace similar existing models.
A previous version of this chart is here, and a general background post can be found here. If you're a first-time ILC buyer, remember that cameras are just tools, and the raw pixel count is very likely not the most important feature to consider. It's also important to consider what gets attached to the front of the camera body: glass.
| Big 2 | Upstart | Little 4 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Camera category | Brand (2010 ILC market share) | Canon (45%) | Nikon (30%) | Sony (12%) | Pentax (?) | Olympus (5%) | Panasonic (?) | Samsung (?) |
| RF-style MSC price w/ zoom | Low-end | - | - | NEX-C3 16.2MP $600 | - | E-PM1 12.3MP $500 | - | NX100 * 14.6MP $425 |
| Mid-Range | - | J1 10.1MP $650 | NEX-5n 16.1M $700 | - | E-PL3 12.3MP $650 | DMC-GF3 12.1MP $550 | - | |
| High-end | - | V1 10.1MP $900 | NEX-7 24.1MP $1350 | Q 12.4MP $900 ** | E-P3 12.3MP $900 | DMC-GX1 16.1MP $800 | NX200 20.3MP $750 | |
| Consumer DSLR / SLT / MSC price w/ zoom | Beginner | 1100D/T3 12.2MP $500 | D3100 14.2MP $600 | SLT-A35 16.2MP $650 | K-r *** 12.4MP $600 | E-620 * 12.2MP $600 | - | NX10 * 14.6MP $700 |
| Mid-Range | 600D/T3i 18.0MP $800 | D5100 16.2MP $800 | SLT-A57 16.2MP $800 | K-01 16.3MP $999 ** | E-M5 16.1MP $1000 | DMC-G3 15.8MP $630 | - | |
| Enthusiast | 60D 18.0MP $1200 | D7000 16.2MP $1450 | SLT-A65 24.3MP $1000 | K-5 16.3MP $1350 | - | DMC-GH2 16.1MP $900 | - | |
| Professional DSLR / SLT price body only | Mid-size | 7D 18.0MP $1600 | D300s 12.3MP $1700 | SLT-A77 24.3MP $1400 | - | E-5 12.3MP $1600 | - | - |
| Mid-size full frame | 5D Mk.III 22.3MP $3500 | D800 36.3MP $3000 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Flagship action | 1D X 18.1MP $6800 | D4 16.2MP $6000 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Flagship studio | 1Ds Mk.III 21.1MP $7000 | D3x 24.5MP $8000 | - | - | - | - | - | |
* - listed on manufacturer site but not in stores - probably discontinued
** - dual-lens kit
*** - still listed on manufacturer site and in stores, but officially discontinued
Update 2012-09-01: made minor edits
Friday, January 27, 2012
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Generation What?
Note: this is an updated version of an older post.
Below is a quick rundown of most of the reactors being marketed as of early 2012. I'm using the term "marketed" somewhat loosely here, as not all reactors are being offered in all countries due to intellectual property rights, nationalism, or other considerations. I have ignored a number of small reactor designs that I feel are just vaporware at this point. The three small PWRs plus the ten of other types account for over half of the 24 models, but medium-large (for lack of a better term) PWRs such as the AP1000 have captured the overwhelming majority of the orders.
An oddity to note is that Westinghouse no longer markets a PWR derived from the ones it created in the 1960s due to a series of corporate mergers. But the basic Westinghouse design lives on in the EPR, APWR, Amtea1 and CPR-1000 designs. Westinghouse, which is 77% owned by Toshiba, now offers reactors derived from Combustion Engineering designs. A minor point to note is that both GE-Hitachi and Toshiba are both marketing the ABWR.
By neutron speed, there are:
Note: the PHWR-700 is not being marketed per say, but it is the current standard domestic plant for India, and there are several examples under construction.
Below is a quick rundown of most of the reactors being marketed as of early 2012. I'm using the term "marketed" somewhat loosely here, as not all reactors are being offered in all countries due to intellectual property rights, nationalism, or other considerations. I have ignored a number of small reactor designs that I feel are just vaporware at this point. The three small PWRs plus the ten of other types account for over half of the 24 models, but medium-large (for lack of a better term) PWRs such as the AP1000 have captured the overwhelming majority of the orders.
An oddity to note is that Westinghouse no longer markets a PWR derived from the ones it created in the 1960s due to a series of corporate mergers. But the basic Westinghouse design lives on in the EPR, APWR, Amtea1 and CPR-1000 designs. Westinghouse, which is 77% owned by Toshiba, now offers reactors derived from Combustion Engineering designs. A minor point to note is that both GE-Hitachi and Toshiba are both marketing the ABWR.
By neutron speed, there are:
- 21 thermal reactors (150 to 4590 MWt)
- 3 fast reactors (30 to 2100 MWt)
- 14 pressurized water reactors (PWR; 150 to 4590 MWt)
- 4 boiling water reactors (BWR; 3370 to 4500 MWt)
- 3 pressurized heavy water reactor (PHWR; 2080 MWt)
- 2 sodium-cooled fast reactors (LMFR; 30 and 2100 MWt)
- 1 lead-bismuth-cooled fast reactor (LMFR; 75 MWt)
- 4 Westinghouse (WH) pressurized water reactors
- 4 Combustion Engineering (CE) pressurized water reactors
- 4 GE boiling water reactors
- 3 VVER pressurized water reactors (Russian PWRs evolved separately from western designs)
- 3 CANDU heavy water-moderated reactors
- 1 B&W small pressurized water reactor (probably derived from US Navy designs, may be new)
- 1 KLT-series small pressurized water reactor (evolution of Russian Navy designs)
- 1 BN-series sodium-cooled fast reactor (designed by a state-owned organization in Russia)
- 1 new small pressurized water reactor (stated as being derived from the AP1000, but so small that it's probably all new)
- 1 new small lead-bismuth-cooled fast reactor (probably a new design)
- 1 new small sodium-cooled fast reactor (probably a new design)
- 12 "Generation III" designs (designs from the 1990s and 2000s with some passive safety features)
- 8 "Generation II+" designs (slight improvements over 1960s designs)
- 2 "Generation II" designs (basically 1960s designs)
- 2 designs I haven't classified because I lack familiarity with them
| Reactor | Type | Gen. | MWt | MWe | Company | Family | Oper./ Const./ Frm. Pln. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4S | SCFR | ? | 30 | 10 | Toshiba Power Systems | new SFR | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| Power Module | LBFR | ? | 75 | 25 | Hyperion Power Generation | new LFR | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| BN-800 | SCFR | II | 2100 | 800 | Atomstroyexport (Rosatom) | BN SFR | 0 / 1 / 2 |
| PHWR-700 | PWHR | II | 2170 | 640 | NPCIL | CANDU | 0 / 3 / 1 |
| CANDU6 | PWHR | II | 2200 | 690 | Candu Energy, Inc. | CANDU | 11 / 0 / 0 |
| EC6 | PWHR | II+ | 2080 | 750 | Candu Energy, Inc. | CANDU | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| CPR-1000 | PWR | II+ | 3000 | 1000 | China Guangdong Nuclear Power Group | ANP (WH) PWR | 2 / 20 / 14 |
| OPR-1000 | PWR | II+ | 2825 | 990 | Doosan Heavy Industries & Construction | DHIC (CE) PWR | 7 / 3 / 0 |
| System 80+ | PWR | II+ | 3400 | 1120 | Westinghouse (Toshiba) | CE PWR | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| VVER-1000 | PWR | II+ | 3000 | 950 | Atomenergoproekt / Atomstroyexport | VVER PWR | 2 / 2 / 2 |
| VVER-1200 | PWR | II+ | 3200 | 1170 | Atomenergoproekt / Atomstroyexport | VVER PWR | 0 / 5 / 5 |
| KLT-40S | PWR | II+ | 150 | 35 | OKBM | SSSR PWR | 0 / 2 / 0 |
| ABWR | BWR | III | 3900 | 1380 | GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy | GE BWR | 2 / 4 / 0 |
| ABWR | BWR | III | 3900 | 1350 | Toshiba Power Systems | GE BWR | 2 / 1 / 2 |
| Atmea1 | PWR | III | 3150 | 1150 | Mitsubishi Heavy Industries-Areva NP | MHI/ANP (WH) PWR | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| AP1000 | PWR | III | 3400 | 1150 | Westinghouse (Toshiba) | CE PWR | 0 / 5 / 17 |
| APR-1400 | PWR | III | 4000 | 1350 | Doosan Heavy Industries & Construction | DHIC (CE) PWR | 0 / 2 / 10 |
| APWR | PWR | III | 4450 | 1700 | Mitsubishi Heavy Industries | MHI (WH) PWR | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| EPR | PWR | III | 4590 | 1630 | Areva Nuclear Power | ANP (WH) PWR | 0 / 4 / 1 |
| ESBWR | BWR | III | 4500 | 1600 | GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy | GE BWR | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| Kerena | BWR | III | 3370 | 1250 | Areva Nuclear Power | KWU (GE) BWR | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| MIR-1200 | PWR | III | 3200 | 1170 | Atomstroyexport/Skoda | VVER PWR | 0 / 0 / 2 |
| mPower | PWR | III | 400 | 125 | Babcock & Wilcox | USN PWR? | 0 / 0 / 1 |
| WSMR | PWR | III | 800 | 225 | Westinghouse (Toshiba) | CE PWR? | 0 / 0 / 0 |
Note: the PHWR-700 is not being marketed per say, but it is the current standard domestic plant for India, and there are several examples under construction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)