I concur with nearly all of the above. Most root vegetables and greens will be sweeter & better flavored if planted for Fall harvest. Brussels sprouts should definitely be harvested after several frosts, they can be down right unpleasant if picked in warm weather. The problem is that most planting charts give only Spring planting dates, except those intended for 4-season climates. Some personal experimentation is necessary to get the best results. Getting advice on the forums from others with similar climate really helps shorten the learning curve... one of the great things I like about garden forums (this one in particular, since experts from so many areas are represented). Personally, I plant chard, carrots, and snap peas for Fall harvest (and beets some years). I plant them July-August; the snap peas even have better germination than when Spring planted. I freeze a lot of chard, and the difference in flavor between warm weather & cool weather harvest is very pronounced... I always plant it late (right about now). A second planting of cucumbers, about 30 days after the first, will give you some really sweet cucumbers late in the season. The same can be said of a late planting of a short-DTM bush bean. In my experience, peppers harvested in the cool days before frost become much sweeter than those harvested during warm weather... this probably accounts for the fact that a pepper which is "mild" for me (such as "Beaver Dam") can be "hot" for those in warmer climates. "Pizza Pepper" (my favorite gourmet-quality green pepper) is actually a "hot" pepper that I harvest in its immature stage just before frost. Under those conditions, it becomes almost completely sweet, and develops a very crisp texture. It would stand to reason that if you prefer heat in your peppers, you want to get them in early, so they can ripen during hot weather.

Yea, thats really strange that there is no new growth with this plant; I'm going with the lack of nutrients theory. The good news is that overall the plant does seem relatively healthy and the current pods are maturing nicely (and are decent size). I see what you are saying regarding the cycle, because the plant next to it has already started the growth cycle after its harvest and the same with one that we have planted outside (which is closer to what you were saying above in that it always as some flowers/peppers on it). I added another smaller dose of fertilizer (when normally I would have waited one more watering), so we'll see what that does. On a side note, these are Scotch Bonnets and I was expecting them to be wayyyy hotter. I think in terms of heat, the orange habs blow them away.

It boggles my mind that people think 10 years is a long time. After installation, you pay each month (including financing) about what you were already paying anyway (probably less). You do it for 10 years, (especially with all the new government incentives, rebates, and low-interest financing now available) and after 10 years you're paying a ridiculously paltry amount for heat. Of course it makes sense. Think of the payback over 20 years once that loan is paid off! Even if you only end up paying even 1/2 of the normal cost over that period (including the cost of your system and electric), you're still saving substantially. I know not everyone lives in a home for that long, but seeing low energy bills does increase home values. I've seen homes sold almost immediately with their main advertising point being their geothermal system even in our horrible present climate while others still linger on the market. Not only that, but why not decrease your monthly bills slightly (before the loan is paid off)? Slightly lower bills, a higher sales price which will pay off the rest of that loan - still makes sense. We had someone come out to our house and they specifically calculated everything from current estimated heating costs, heating/cooling with geo, then savings/payback period. This was a full service option, including thermostats, etc. Finding that should not be difficult. One argument I saw above made no sense. If it really is worth insulating your home to use a normal system, it is a no-brainer to insulate your home using geo. Whether you decide to use geo or not, you can't say, "Well, normal is better, because we insulated, too." That makes no sense. Insulate either way. Then compare. The financial analysis does not make much sense, either. Yes, it would be wonderful if we could just stop paying the oil company, live without heat, and invest that money! Realistically, while you could want to put away the whole $25,000, you really are still using it for heat either way over those 14 years as projected. Geo, with the loan, electric, etc, will cost about the same each month as heat before the loan is paid off, so you can't just pretend that money could be invested elsewhere. Use it upfront with geo, use it over several years with oil, it makes no difference. That money is being spent on heat. Should it be spent on something worthwhile, or just, at the end of 10 years, have you still spending the same amount on more heat with oil? Geo will typically initially cost you a little less (including the loan and electricity) per month than you would be paying otherwise, then suddenly drop dramatically to only the cost of using the system as soon as that loan is paid off. That's money you would have spent anyway each month with your normal system (even though some of it went to financing, it is still less that what you would have paid for oil). Then suddenly, once the loan is gone, you actually DO have perhaps $1,000 a year in money saved that you can invest if you wish over 10 years. If, with financing costs, it does cost more per month than your normal heating system, that's one thing; but if not, the argument that it is wasting money is not valid. You're spending it anyway. Might as well spend it on something that will, in the future, save you tons of money. (Not just a little, a lot.)

Your kitchen designer sounds like a person who does not see all roads leading to home meaning there are many different ways to achieve the same goal... Most semi custom cabinet companies that are limited to be more Henry Ford like in production do not offer the 12" high cabinets in each 3" width from 9" to 36" or wider. They tend to offer them for the sizes used over the appliances which use them the most. So 30, 33, and 36" would be commonly needed. Your kitchen plan normally has a lot of other widths used that are not those sizes. The companies that have the stacked cabinets pre made are generally 42" or higher. I have 5 cabinets lines I offer. 3 of the 5 do not have stacked cabinets in the book.... One of the 3 has 12" high cabinets starting 12" wide but does not have a corner cabinet less then 30" high.... They happen to offer custom cabinets on a quote by quote basis which is why I like them. But you should see my point... Your kitchen designer should have explained better the reason why they did not offer you what you were looking for. It is either they feel a 27" under a 12" with a 3" crown over that is not a good use of space or.... they do not have a company they can do it at all or for the price they are planning to present to you.... That discussion would have been much more meaning full.... I can for example use a stacked cabinet that is 42" having 2 open compartments, with Showplace and shrink it 3" if you want the molding as most would... I can also with them as was suggested above just build the door with a glass panel in the top section of it. They are # 4 out of my 5 as 5 being the highest price in general.... 18" is the general rule of thumb for recommended clearance to the countertop. 15" is considered as low as you should go and 21" is pushing the upper side of reasonability for most projects... The codes as noted above are concerned with being able to set fire to combustible wood cabinets having appliances that generate heat under them... You should be able to do what you are looking for. You just have to decide what look you like, crown or no crown, and find who can offer it to you at a price you can afford...