pilgrim's Profile

And Jose A.'s comment is a really poor rip-off of many other whiny artwork comments on AT. Not be too snide, but assemblage art isn't unique to Nevelson. And even if it were, Karol's piece (which is in his own house, after all) seems neither "Reall poor" nor a "rip-off".

This seems a bit grand for AT, and it's only a "small" space in comparison to the mansions (whether "Mc-" or not) that could be purchased at a similar price in a less pricey locale. To respond to enmnm's speculation that this is "likely a $1.5 million home" in one DC's pricier suburbs: I'd say it's likely more like $2.5 -- the kitchen renovation alone was entered in the $75K-150K category -- and Bethesda is above average, but isn't even at the top of the heap in DC. (Don't get me wrong - it's a fine palce to live. And it's walkable and largely Metro-accessible, which is keeping prices up compared to more far-flung places.)

But even if it's too big or expensive for most ATers, it's still nice to see a "big" house done in (what I think is) a tasteful style. There are some things worth "borrowing" from the design that wouldn't necessarily cost an arm and a leg, either. (Big B&W prints, and some finished wood details, to name a couple.)

Easiest way to get rid of high heating bills: buy a shredder. Those bills won't know what hit 'em.

Elan, why are you spamming the Washington, DC Scavenger with your stuff? Why not stick to the Chicago part of the site?

CallDoctorBison - Given your user name, you may be a doctor, you may even be an Indian chief, but obviously you're not a lawyer. There's nothing unconstitutional about these tax credits, just as there's nothing unconstitutional about the existing tax breaks for health insurance (you know, the kind that pays you "doctors") or tax deductions for losses on investments or gambling. You may not like them (in which case, by all means, vote against those who enacted them), but their constitutionality is not a subject of serious debate.

As for whether they are good policy, that's another question. I think that on balance, they're probably a good idea -- they add value to the economy not only by spurring demand at the nadir of a recession (and obviously the "Doctor" isn't an economist either -- one needn't be a diehard Keynesian to realize that government spending can take up some of the slack in private spending in a recession), but by directing some of that induced spending toward energy-saving investment that should yield continued savings in the year to come. (Even if one believes, as one suspects the good "Doctor" does, that the US ought to be burning coal like mad to fuel its economic progress, the energy conserved by households' weatherizing is energy that can be put to other uses, whether that use consists of making widgets, or driving humongous SUVs to distant shopping malls, or simply saving some leftover fossil fuel for a rainy day.) Moreover, many of investments make economic sense in the mid- to long-term, but are expensive to consumers in the short term. If consumers have a long time horizon and access to cash or credit to make the improvements, for the most part, these improvements make economic sense -- but with both cash and credit in shorter supply for consumers these days, the tax breaks will likely encourage some energy-saving improvements that make economic sense, but nevertheless wouldn't happen without the breaks.

That said, these don't seem like the most surgically-directed tax credits, and there's undoubtedly a fair amount of non-energy-saving waste associated with them. E.g., if I opt to replace 15 of my leaky old windows with plain-vanilla energy-efficient ones, I could get a $1500 tax break. Or I could take a nicely-insulated wall, cut 3 new holes and add 3 fancy-schmancy low-e windows that cost 5 times as much as the vanilla ones, and get the same tax credit, while actually reducing efficiency. So not every recipient is going to end up saving energy. And of course, many people might have been planning to make these improvements anyway, so for them, the tax credits are just a lucky windfall. (Those of us who still think Keynes's ideas hold some water can see that even the improvements that don't improvement overall efficiency can still help stimulate the economy, though.)

Anyway, to those whom the tax breaks are spurring to improvement their energy efficiency, good for you. And to those who were planning to improve your home's energy efficiency anyway, good for you, too. And to those of us who will benefit from having many American households using less energy to heat and cool their homes, good for us!

Oh, and Johnny, nice barn!

Uh, Elliott, believe it our not, Washington had both rich, important people, and actual artists (without scare quotes) even back when your buddies were running things. And before that, and before that, and before that.

As for "the rest of us" paying for it all, I'm unclear how, even if true, that would distinguish DC from New York. Or do you only sell your illustrations to the self-made men of Ayn Rand novels?

Wait, isn't that the Confederate flag?

LadyJ - I'm not sure I understand the problem with wearing/owning/displaying another country's flag, but if you're concerned that displaying it would somehow be unpatriotic, I'd say using a foreign flag as a doormat - literally, as in pics 5 and 9 - would probably count as sufficiently insulting to furreners to count as patriotism in many quarters. It may be a little *undiplomatic*, on the other hand...

Yeah, that looks like paint to me. And painting over stain generally leads to the paint peeling, so that makes sense (unfortunately). Powerwashing might help, and will likely take a lot of paint off, but grab a scraper, too.

josie6, Chicago is (theoretically) a great biking town. I have fond memories of many a cruise down Lakeshore Drive on my theoretical bike. (As I recall, I was very fit at the time, theoretically.)

Actually, Chicago could be a great bike town, and isn't a terrible one. It's flat, there are lots of great neighborhoods, there's the gorgeous lake for leisurely rides, and a good grid system that makes it possible to set up parallel bike corridors (facilitating longer commutes).

But yeah, I'm not really sure what's so sustainable about Chicago, or what Dallas and LA, among others, are doing on this list. It's great that Dallas is expanding public transportation, but DART ridership is still less than Pittsburgh's (a metro area 1/3 the size), let alone Portland's (also 1/3 of Dallas, with 50% more ridership). But hey, now that Big D has outlawed extended truck idling on ozone alert days, a sustainable rodeo utopia can't be far behind.

Not sure if that was a misprint, or that the compound characteristic "energy efficient and repair free" changes the claculation, but bottom-freezer models are, in general, slightly more efficint than top-freezer models. They're close enough in general efficiency that the differences between models dwarf the differneces between those two styles generally, so it probably makes sense not to get too hung up on top vs. bottom. As for repairs, the top freezer models may be cheaper. I haven't seen much data. The bottom-freezer frequently have more complicated mechanisms than the simple door, so perhaps they are more prone to need repairs. The most repair-prone parts of fridges tend to be the water/ice features, not the basic cooling mechanism, so if you're looking to avoid repair costs as much as possible, you may want to opt for a Brita and some ice cube trays instead. (Through-the-door water and ice also tends to reduce textbook efficiency as well, although I'm not sure how big the difference is in real world use -- opening and closing a fridge frequently to get water and ice could eat up the savings pretty quickl, I suppose.)