March 28, 2024, 11:52:15 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: NEW CHILD BOARD CREATED IN THE POLITICAL SECTION FOR THE 2016 ELECTION
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Barack Delivers On Savings - Are they what they seem?  (Read 1748 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
WhiskeyGirl
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7754



« on: July 30, 2009, 12:05:46 AM »

I'll borrow a few things from the news -

Quote
The Federal Emergency Management Agency is turning over 120,000 temporary housing units called “Katrina cottages” to the General Services Administration for maintenance and disposal, saving $3.8 million in “operational savings.”

http://www.thekansan.com/news/x639780504/Obama-delivers-on-pledge-for-100-million-in-cuts

What is the value of each Katrina Cottage?

$3,800,000 divided by 120,000 cottages = $31.67

Why so little?  Are these the toxic units?

Where I live, counties often make people with older mobile homes (20 years plus) put  deposit on the disposal of the unit.  Prices I've heard are about $2,000 per unit.  The deposit discourages folks from buying cheap old trailers and parking them on hunting property for a once or twice a year visit.  The old trailers degrade and no one cares for them.  A small pop-up or travel trailer may be less, about $1,000.

$2,000 times 120,000 units = $240,000,000 dollars. 

How much is it going to cost the "General Services Administration" to dispose of these trailers?  Are these the toxic trailers that will cost more due to mold and toxic gasses?

Hmmm...$240 million v. $3.8 million

Is this really a savings?  Boosting the waste disposal business?  Maybe there is a Chicago waste disposal contract somewhere?  Maybe a union business?
Logged

All my posts are just my humble opinions.  Please take with a grain of salt.  Smile

It doesn't do any good to hate anyone,
they'll end up in your family anyway...
WhiskeyGirl
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7754



« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2009, 12:11:07 AM »

Quote
The Treasury Department will shred and recycle classified materials rather than burn them, saving $40,000 this year.

http://www.thekansan.com/news/x639780504/Obama-delivers-on-pledge-for-100-million-in-cuts

Hmmm...I seem to recall television journalism sensational reporting on shredding and recycling operations. 

Will they shred on-site?  Contract out the shredding? 

I've seen contracted shredding operations that take your bins and shred infront of your business, using a specially equipped truck.  The truck is noisy, and sometimes, a few papers go flying.  What if something important is left blowing in the wind?

Other scheme's I am familiar with have bins that are emptied by the cleaning crew into dumpsters on a loading dock or in a warehouse or garbage area.  The dumpster is not secure.  Sensitive information is left in a public place for anyone to see.

I recall the tv journalist going behind businesses and finding confidential stuff in dumpsters.

Is it possible that sensitive or confidential information will find it's way into the environment?
Logged

All my posts are just my humble opinions.  Please take with a grain of salt.  Smile

It doesn't do any good to hate anyone,
they'll end up in your family anyway...
WhiskeyGirl
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7754



« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2009, 12:12:37 AM »

I forgot to add...

How much will it cost to shred and recycle?  Has an outside company been contracted for the shredding?  How much will that cost?
Logged

All my posts are just my humble opinions.  Please take with a grain of salt.  Smile

It doesn't do any good to hate anyone,
they'll end up in your family anyway...
WhiskeyGirl
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7754



« Reply #3 on: July 30, 2009, 12:39:08 AM »

Quote
In an example of sizable savings, $52 million, the Air Force will use commercial jet fuel plus additives instead of using JP-8, the standard fuel used by the military.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mnGreenAutos/idUS12603345820090723

The first thing I ask myself, is what is JP-8, and why does it cost more?

Quote
Commercial aviation uses a similar mixture under the name Jet-A. JP-8 in addition contains icing inhibitor, corrosion inhibitors, lubricants, and antistatic agents.
Quote

How much will it cost to add the additives?  Any breakdown of the numbers?  Will there be something like a can similar to gas line dryer we add in the winter up north?  After fueling, the pilot jumps out, pops the top, and adds it to the fuel tank?  Special mixing tanks?

If you're adding additives, are you really saving money?  Breakdown please?

Here is a site I found pricing on, a little confusing, so if anyone can help me understand, please do.

Jet A = $1.44/GL
JP-8 = $1.44/GL

There are several entries, and I do not understand the differences.  However, the prices seems to be about the same for many - $1.44/GL.

https://www.desc.dla.mil/DCM/Files/FY2009%20PRICES%20%28$60.48%20Standard%20price%2C%20Effective%201%20Apr%202009%29%20Prices%20for%20Publication-3.pdf

Where is the savings?  What about the price of additives?  Who got the contract for the commercial fuel?  Who lost the JP-8 contract?

From the wiki, JP-8 seems to be used for many military purposes.  What about tanks?  Stoves? 

What about the environment?  It seems like a biofuel replacement was recently made available. 

Quote
New Biofuel Could Lead to 100% Clean Flights
Thu Jul 23, 2009 10:02am EDT


Earlier this month, a team of scientists at the University of North Dakota's Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) successfully tested a new biofuel based on a mixture of canola and soybean oils, and claim it may be the key to zero emission aviation.

The new super-biofuel, known as Jet Propellant-8 (JP-8) was used to launch a rocket above the Mojave Desert, where it approached the speed of sound and reached an altitude of 20,000 feet - a major leap forward in biofuel-powered flight.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mnGreenAutos/idUS12603345820090723

Is this biofuel the same stuff?  Did the Obama admin miss a green opportunity?
Logged

All my posts are just my humble opinions.  Please take with a grain of salt.  Smile

It doesn't do any good to hate anyone,
they'll end up in your family anyway...
WhiskeyGirl
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7754



« Reply #4 on: July 30, 2009, 01:01:25 AM »

Double-sided or duplex printing/copying

In my experience, there are a number of ways to pay for printing/copying.  Today, printers and copiers are often the same machine.

Printers keep track of how many images are made.  Simple to figure - each image counts as one.  It doesn't matter to the printer if it prints images onto one side of the paper or both sides. 

Two single sided images = 2, two images duplexed = 2.  The difference?  One sheet of paper or two.

If you pay for your printer by the number of images, are you really saving any money?  500 images is 500 images, single or double sided.  If an image costs $.10 each, the price of 500 images is $50.  No change.

What about the paper savings?  500 sheets instead of 1,000?  If a ream of paper costs $2.50, 1,000 pieces would cost $5.00.  By printing duplex, in theory, you'd use less paper, and cut your cost in half, a savings of about $2.50.

In the real world, I would imagine that there are times you would only want to print on one side.  If you reprogram your printers for duplexing, some may not catch on, and print the same jobs several times.

What assumptions did they use for the printing/copier savings?
Logged

All my posts are just my humble opinions.  Please take with a grain of salt.  Smile

It doesn't do any good to hate anyone,
they'll end up in your family anyway...
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Use of this web site in any manner signifies unconditional acceptance, without exception, of our terms of use.
Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC
 
Page created in 6.155 seconds with 19 queries.