More dangerous cars!

[Doug[_3_]]

But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.

"GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk

General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
the heated washer system.

The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.

GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".

These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
US carmaker said.

As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."

More:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm

--
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

[Dr Zoidberg[_8_]]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame?

Why do you think that cyclists and walls are more valuable than
non-cyclists?
What happens if a cyclist is driving or walking at the time?

--
Alex

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

Doug wrote:
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
> doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
> Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
> continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.
>
> "GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk
>
> General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
> the heated washer system.
>
> The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
> Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.
>
> GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
> problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".
>
> These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
> US carmaker said.
>
> As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
> module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
> Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."
>
> More:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm

so the reality is some melted plastic on a few cars that are not in this
country. hardly massively dangerous to anyone.

[GT[_2_]]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame?

That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
people!

Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

[Adrian]

"GT" > gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points
> that everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

Duhg never replies to any post that risks becoming inconvenient to his
line of logic. This, apparently, is because he "doesn't have the time".
You'll note that my reply to his decrying of motorists "polluting" his
beloved cycling newsgroup - the in which I pointed out that he started
the vast majority of cross-posted threads, and had never once posted in
the "motorist-free" urcm group...

Strange, then, how he simultaneously finds the time to trawl all sorts of
corners of the web for other - totally unrelated - new threads to post.

[ash[_2_]]

On 9 June, 06:03, Doug > wrote:
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
> doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
> Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
> continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.
>
> "GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk
>
> General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
> the heated washer system.
>
> The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
> Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.
>
> GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
> problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".
>
> These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
> US carmaker said.
>
> As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
> module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
> Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."
>
> More:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm
>
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns.http://www.zing.icom43.net
> A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Hey Doug, I agree with you totally. These electrical fires are a
nightmare in vehicles. You really need to do your homework - people in
glass houses.....

Quote - I have just had the misfortune (or perhaps fortune) to
discover that my li-ion battery has suffered a thermal event! This
evening I noticed that the plastic casing of the battery pack had a
small dimple in it that look like it had melted a bit. On removing the
outer casing and taking a look at the cells inside I was horrified to
see that one of the cells had burnt at one corner! Thankfully the
damage was limited to just that one cell and obviously the battery
pack has not (yet) gone into a castastrophic runaway thermal breakdown
(or huge fire to you and me!).

I have of course placed the battery as far from my house as possible
(it's in the shed and it's staying there!) while I contact
electricbikesales.co.uk to claim under the 6 month warranty. I shall
keep you posted as to how things go with them. I'm not sure I want a
replacement li-ion though!

I consider myself lucky that I have discovered the problem prior to
the pack causing a fire. I had read that li-ions must be treated with
a healthy respect and thus thankfully always stored my battery outside
of the house and never left the battery charging unattended either.

Let this serve as a wake up call to all li-ion owners! Store those li-
ions outside your house when not in use. They are not house pets!


http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/electric-bicycles/195-dangers-li-ion-batteries.html

[Doug[_3_]]

On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" > wrote:
> "Doug" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> > fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> > who then is to blame?
>
> That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
> they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
> of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
> accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
> people!
>
> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
> everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.
>
if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some
of them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore
does not warrant a response.

I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

[Adrian]

Doug > gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

> On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" > wrote:
>> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points
>> that everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

> if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
> because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some of
> them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore does not
> warrant a response.
>
> I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.

What did I say his reply would be...?

He's so utterly predictable.

[Tony Dragon]

Doug wrote:
> On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" > wrote:
>> "Doug" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
>>> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
>>> who then is to blame?
>> That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
>> they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
>> of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
>> accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
>> people!
>>
>> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
>> everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.
>>
> if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here,

Why should he mean that, is it because you can try to separate motorists
(who might also cycle) & 'real cyclists'?

> I don't always reply
> because there are too many of them responding to my posts.

If you don't like people responding, don't post.

> Also some
> of them ask silly questions

You mean ones you can't answer.

> or are insulting,

You mean like calling a group of people 'killers'?

> etc, which therefore
> does not warrant a response.
>
> I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.
>
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns
> www.zing.icom43.net
> A driving licence is a licence to kill.


--
Tony Dragon

[Derek C]

On Jun 9, 6:03*am, Doug > wrote:
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
> doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
> Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
> continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.
>
> "GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk
>
> General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
> the heated washer system.
>
> The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
> Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.
>
> GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
> problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".
>
> These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
> US carmaker said.
>
> As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
> module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
> Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."
>
> More:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm
>
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns.http://www.zing.icom43.net
> A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Do you fancy moving yourself and your electric bike to the States,
where there are plenty of Buicks, Cadillacs and Chevrolets Doug? They
seem to welcome nutters over there.

[Doug[_3_]]

On 9 June, 13:49, ash > wrote:
> On 9 June, 06:03, Doug > wrote:
>
>
>
> > But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> > fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> > who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
> > doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
> > Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
> > continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.
>
> > "GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk
>
> > General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
> > the heated washer system.
>
> > The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
> > Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.
>
> > GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
> > problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".
>
> > These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
> > US carmaker said.
>
> > As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
> > module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
> > Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."
>
> > More:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm
>
> > --
> > UK Radical Campaigns.http://www.zing.icom43.net
> > A driving licence is a licence to kill.
>
> Hey Doug, I agree with you totally. These electrical fires are a
> nightmare in vehicles. You really need to do your homework - people in
> glass houses.....
>
> Quote - I have just had the misfortune (or perhaps fortune) to
> discover that my li-ion battery has suffered a thermal event! This
> evening I noticed that the plastic casing of the battery pack had a
> small dimple in it that look like it had melted a bit. On removing the
> outer casing and taking a look at the cells inside I was horrified to
> see that one of the cells had burnt at one corner! Thankfully the
> damage was limited to just that one cell and obviously the battery
> pack has not (yet) gone into a castastrophic runaway thermal breakdown
> (or huge fire to you and me!).
>
> I have of course placed the battery as far from my house as possible
> (it's in the shed and it's staying there!) while I contact
> electricbikesales.co.uk to claim under the 6 month warranty. I shall
> keep you posted as to how things go with them. I'm not sure I want a
> replacement li-ion though!
>
> I consider myself lucky that I have discovered the problem prior to
> the pack causing a fire. I had read that li-ions must be treated with
> a healthy respect and thus thankfully always stored my battery outside
> of the house and never left the battery charging unattended either.
>
> Let this serve as a wake up call to all li-ion owners! Store those li-
> ions outside your house when not in use. They are not house pets!
>
> http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/electric-bicycles/195-dangers-li-ion-...
>
So no huge fire then and the important other difference is that a car
crashing is much more dangerous than a bicycle crashing.

Do you have a mobile phone or laptop? There is probably a lithium
battery in those too, they are everywhere these days, so will you
leave them outside? Much depends on how the batteries are treated of
course. I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.

BTW are you familiar with the use of quote marks to distinguish
between your text and text you have quoted? It makes reading much
easier.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

[FrengaX]

On Jun 10, 7:15*am, Doug > wrote:

> Do you have a mobile phone or laptop? There is probably a lithium
> battery in those too, they are everywhere these days, so will you
> leave them outside? Much depends on how the batteries are treated of
> course. I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.

I keep mine in the laptop. It tends to work better that way.

[Derek C]

On Jun 10, 7:15*am, Doug > wrote:

> I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.

Another example of strange behaviour by Doug!

[bod]

Derek C wrote:
> On Jun 10, 7:15 am, Doug > wrote:
>
>> I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.
>
> Another example of strange behaviour by Doug!
>
>

Batteries don't work so well when they are cold.

Bod

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

bod wrote:
> Derek C wrote:
>> On Jun 10, 7:15 am, Doug > wrote:
>>
>>> I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.
>>
>> Another example of strange behaviour by Doug!
>>
>>
>
> Batteries don't work so well when they are cold.
>
> Bod

and fridges cause pollution

[bod]

Mrcheerful wrote:
> bod wrote:
>> Derek C wrote:
>>> On Jun 10, 7:15 am, Doug > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.
>>> Another example of strange behaviour by Doug!
>>>
>>>
>> Batteries don't work so well when they are cold.
>>
>> Bod
>
> and fridges cause pollution
>
>
Doug! stop killing the planet!

Bod

[GT]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...
> On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" > wrote:
>> "Doug" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
>> > fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
>> > who then is to blame?
>>
>> That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to
>> ensure
>> they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out
>> most
>> of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
>> accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
>> people!
>>
>> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points
>> that
>> everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.
>>
> if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply

Yes I did mean motorists - this is a driving group!!

[David[_11_]]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...
> if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
> because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some
> of them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore
> does not warrant a response.

Well don't ****ing cross post in the first place!!!!!!

[bugbear]

Doug wrote:
> On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" > wrote:
>> "Doug" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
>>> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
>>> who then is to blame?
>> That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
>> they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
>> of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
>> accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
>> people!
>>
>> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
>> everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.
>>
> if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
> because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some
> of them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore
> does not warrant a response.
>
> I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.

So you're only preaching to the converted,
which is pointless.

BugBear

[Doug[_3_]]

On 10 June, 08:49, Derek C > wrote:
> On Jun 10, 7:15*am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.
>
> Another example of strange behaviour by Doug!
>
Duh! Its recommended practice as a precaution against overheating/fire
and it is supposed to extend the life of the battery when it is not
being used.

Doug.

[Doug[_3_]]

On 10 June, 11:27, bugbear > wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" > wrote:
> >> "Doug" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> >>> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> >>> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> >>> who then is to blame?
> >> That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
> >> they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
> >> of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
> >> accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
> >> people!
>
> >> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
> >> everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.
>
> > if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
> > because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some
> > of them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore
> > does not warrant a response.
>
> > I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.
>
> So you're only preaching to the converted,
> which is pointless.
>
They are not all converted, yet.

Doug.

[Adrian]

bugbear > gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

>> if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
>> because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some of
>> them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore does
>> not warrant a response.
>>
>> I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.

> So you're only preaching to the converted, which is pointless.

Not quite. He's more akin to the loon that stands on the High St wearing
a sandwich board proclaiming loudly that the end of the world is nigh,
whilst steadfastly ignoring both heckling and attempts at rational debate.

[GT]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...
On 10 June, 08:49, Derek C > wrote:
> On Jun 10, 7:15 am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.
>
> Another example of strange behaviour by Doug!

Doug didnt post properly:
"Duh! Its recommended practice as a precaution against overheating/fire
and it is supposed to extend the life of the battery when it is not
being used.
"

Recommended by who? No one in the IT support sections I have worked in has
ever heard of that and not by Dell, from whom we buy all our laptops!
Putting a laptop battery in the fridge is actually dangerous because when
you remove it from the fridge it will attract condensation until it has
warmed to room temperature. So if you want to store it in there, I would
recommend placing it in a sealed plastic bag before putting it in and
leaving it somewhere to warm up for at least an hour before you use it. Damp
around the contacts of the battery could easily blow the charging circuit on
the motherboard, leaving you with a high repair bill - probably new
motherboard on a laptop!

[GT]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...
> On 10 June, 11:27, bugbear > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>> > On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" > wrote:
>> >> "Doug" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> >>> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
>> >>> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
>> >>> who then is to blame?
>> >> That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to
>> >> ensure
>> >> they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron
>> >> out most
>> >> of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call
>> >> them
>> >> accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
>> >> people!
>>
>> >> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid
>> >> points that
>> >> everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.
>>
>> > if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
>> > because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some
>> > of them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore
>> > does not warrant a response.
>>
>> > I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.
>>
>> So you're only preaching to the converted,
>> which is pointless.
>>
> They are not all converted, yet.

And preaching is not the way to convert most people to a cause. You may be
easily brainwashed by preaching, but the rest of us rely on facts, figures,
information and our own experiences in life. Hence me using my safe,
reliable, cost-efficient vehicle (a 2 litre petrol family car) to transport
my family here and there, rather than public transport which tends to get
blown up, runs late, or gets caught in rock falls etc etc. My 3-year-old and
5-year-old are not confident enough to ride their bicycles on the motorway
when we go for days out yet, so we are rather limited that way!

[Doug[_3_]]

On 10 June, 13:20, "GT" > wrote:
> "Doug" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On 10 June, 08:49, Derek C > wrote:
>
> > On Jun 10, 7:15 am, Doug > wrote:
>
> > > I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.
>
> > Another example of strange behaviour by Doug!
>
> Doug didnt post properly:
> "Duh! Its recommended practice as a precaution against overheating/fire
> and it is supposed to extend the life of the battery when it is not
> being used.
> "
>
> Recommended by who? No one in the IT support sections I have worked in has
> ever heard of that and not by Dell, from whom we buy all our laptops!
>
You don't surprise me. Check this out...

http://batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm

"...If you have a spare lithium-ion battery, use one to the fullest
and keep the other cool by placing it in the refrigerator. Do not
freeze the battery. For best results, store the battery at 40% state-
of-charge..."

> Putting a laptop battery in the fridge is actually dangerous because when
> you remove it from the fridge it will attract condensation until it has
> warmed to room temperature. So if you want to store it in there, I would
> recommend placing it in a sealed plastic bag before putting it in
>
Which I do.
>
> and
> leaving it somewhere to warm up for at least an hour before you use it. Damp
> around the contacts of the battery could easily blow the charging circuit on
> the motherboard, leaving you with a high repair bill - probably new
> motherboard on a laptop!
>
Very unlikely. I have no doubt the manufacturers have covered that
one. The main problem is the fully charged battery attached to your
laptop all the time, when you are running off the mains, which can
overheat and catch fire, though I gather this is less of a problem
than it used to be.

Doug.

[Mr. Benn[_3_]]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...
> On 10 June, 13:20, "GT" > wrote:
>> "Doug" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>> On 10 June, 08:49, Derek C > wrote:
>>
>> > On Jun 10, 7:15 am, Doug > wrote:
>>
>> > > I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.
>>
>> > Another example of strange behaviour by Doug!
>>
>> Doug didnt post properly:
>> "Duh! Its recommended practice as a precaution against overheating/fire
>> and it is supposed to extend the life of the battery when it is not
>> being used.
>> "
>>
>> Recommended by who? No one in the IT support sections I have worked in
>> has
>> ever heard of that and not by Dell, from whom we buy all our laptops!
>>
> You don't surprise me. Check this out...
>
> http://batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm
>
> "...If you have a spare lithium-ion battery, use one to the fullest
> and keep the other cool by placing it in the refrigerator. Do not
> freeze the battery. For best results, store the battery at 40% state-
> of-charge..."

But there are two kinds of lithium. Good lithium and bad lithium.

[Brimstone]

"Doug" > wrote in message
...

> Do you have a mobile phone or laptop? There is probably a lithium
> battery in those too, they are everywhere these days, so will you
> leave them outside? Much depends on how the batteries are treated of
> course. I keep my laptop battery in the fridge.
>
One of your oft repeated themes is that we should all use much less
electricity. Why then do you use a fridge when there are electricity free
alternatives?