You can fertilize anytime. You have to ignore nitrogen in any soil test, it will always be low. P&K are reasonable stable in the soil and do not change much, and used sparingly by plants. Nitrogen is a completely different. It is extremely water soluble and the plants drink it up quickly. Cool season lawns are heavily fertilized (nitrogen) in the Fall, medium in Spring, and almost nothing in Summer. So what the extension office is telling you is accurate, but your interpretation may not be correct. I am not a cool season grass kind of guy. But I do know you should be fertilizing right now at least once a month with nitrogen starting around labor day up to T-Day. So you have already missed one or two applications. Good luck.

I will keep those Accords - my goal is 150,000 miles on each and then I will decide to either do major rebulding on them or buy a new Honda, Toyota, or Nissan. My 98 Accord 4 cyl gets 31 to 33 MPG, the 99 6 cyl gets around 25 hwy. All we do is change oil & tires when needed - they are low maintenance cars except for the darn timing belts which really tick me off - that is my only complaint about the Hondas. I reran my spreadsheet - factored in the 50 MPG on the Hybrid Civic and 10 bucks per gallon (and assuming my electric cost stays constant - which it won't) then the costs are comparable. But then if I double my current electric rate to 20 cents per kWh, the Civic wins again! My guess is that the Lion batteries will only last 5 years at best. So if you add in another 9 grand for a replacement battery over the car life (I keep cars until wheels fall off) then the business case for the Volt just doesn't close - even with a 7500 tax credit. I really want to buy an American designed, fuel efficient, 21st century car. I used to be a proud GM owner (I loved my Olds Delta 88) but have not had one since the early 80's. But I will not buy a Big 3 product unless it makes good financial sense, is rock solid reliable, and has an execellent safety rating - which probably means never. Looks like I need to write my senators and congressman again because I am sure they are clueless on this. The Volt is just a smoke screen. If that is the car that GM is basing its entire future on - it is doomed.

"Does anyone who is considering geothermal have a calculation comparing heating with gas?" I have a chart dating back to 2009, however it is Metric, in French and relates only to price structures in the Montreal Quebec region. It's the relative prices for different sources of energy broken down into the final cost per kW of heat delivered into the home. Here in Quebec there are 2-elecrtical rate structures available for residential customers. One is the single rate known as the 'D' rate and the other is the Dual Rate know as the 'DT' rate, available to clients having 2-sources of energy, one being electric (with HP as an example) and the other being carbon based. The way it works is those with the single rate pay about 7.46-cents/kW year round and those with the Dual Energy rate or Bi-energy rate pay about 4.33-cents/kW when the temperature is warmer than -12C (+10.4F) and about 18.44-cents/kW when the temperature is -12C (+10.4F) or colder. This is done for basically 2-reasons, one being not to stress the grid when it's extremely cold and the other to maintain a large supply of clean electricity to export to our American neighbours at a substantial profit. Back to geothermal verses gas, in 2009 and the prices haven't substantially changed, 1-kW of heat delivered into the house with the single rate and a 90% efficient gas furnace cost about 8.45-cents/kW. Single ratepayers with geothermal and COP-4, the cost would be about 1.87-cents/kW. Where it gets REALLY interesting here is the dual energy rate WITH geothermal. The basic cost of electricity remains at 4.33-cents for the entire year except for a period totaling about 2-weeks of the year when it's -12C (+10.4F) or colder, at 18.44-cent/kW. With a geothermal split heat pump unit and a gas furnace, geothermal clocks in at an unbelievably low rate when coupled to the dual energy rate. When it's warmer than -12C (+10.4F) the cost per kW of heat delivered into the house with a COP-4 is just 1.08-cents/kW and the gas never comes on. Even when the cost per kW skyrockets to 18.44-cents/kW with a COP-4 geothermal HP the cost per kW of heat delivered into the home is still only about 4.61-cents/kW. Remember that with geothermal there are NO defrost cycles - EVER! That when the backup gas does come on it is to assist the geothermal, not instead of the geothermal. So that when it's -30C (-22F) or colder, the gas and the geo are only on for a short while because they are on together, in tandem, the geo still at COP-4 and the gas furnace staged to whatever is required. This rate of only 1.08-cents/kW of heat delivered is the lowest rate I've ever seen for active heating. As a nice bonus, it's also the same low rate for air-conditioning in the summer, not to mention DHW production with a desuperheater especially when coupled through a buffer tank to an instantaneous gas DHW heater. Open loop geothermal with passive cooling would be about the closest thing to 'Free' at this rate as there would be no compressor running, only a blower and circulating pump! Rather long and convoluted but I hope this helps. SR

"For the question at hand, the total # hours dedicated to each function i.e. filtering, cleaning etc should be figured and compared with a proper sized pump for the application, not the Intelliflo vs 3HP whisperflo. More along the lines of the Intelliflo vs 1.5HP pump, or 2 sp etc." I was responding specifically to this statement "it will explain where and why the intelliflo is efficient at low speeds but very inefficient at high speeds." It's doesn't lose efficiency compared to a regular single speed pump at high speeds, it comes close to, or beats a single speed whisperflo in efficiencies. I dare you to find me a 2speed 3hp (true 3hp), or a pump that will work at 4 different speeds using the right amount of energy to get the job done, no more no less. In the real world I have yet to see one of these pumps move less water moving more energy. "More along the lines of the Intelliflo vs 1.5HP pump" Still less power, at least in my testing. I have yet to deal with anyone who has put one of these pumps through its paces and pass a negative judgment on it. "So in a real world application, you may actually find the opposite power usage as you state above. " Where are you getting this from? I can sell any pump I want, and I am not married to Pentair, nor is Repairguy. We are real pool professionals that are in the upper echelon of our trade, yet people still don't believe what we have to say. I never believe brochures, and I am fortunate enough to be able to take the time to do field testing of products, and everything I have experienced has refuted most of the naysayers claims. This pump is great, and other than extremely high flow low head applications, I have yet to deal with any other product that is as dynamic and well built, as this pump. In a high flow low head application( ponds waterfalls), you lose self priming ability, but can create greater efficiency, but no pool pumps currently being marketed can do this, you have to go elsewhere, but those products are not UL listed for swimming pool applications so its pretty much a moot point.