Give me an outlet!

Congrats to Edison2 the Progressive Automotive x prize Winner!

2010-09-19T19:55:00.000-07:00

Sorry

2010-09-14T20:55:00.000-07:00

I am so sorry about the bad language (though hidden, still plainly viewed), of the previous post.
If there was anything I could do about it, I would. I guess I could delete the video. Once I figure out how to edit such things out, I will do it!

Anji

An energy independent future...

2010-08-16T19:58:00.000-07:00

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

An Energy-Independent Future

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor

Tea Party

2010-05-24T06:26:00.000-07:00

How Do We Use Energy in the United States?

2010-05-10T19:43:00.000-07:00

Click on the following link to see a brochure visually depicting US energy use.

This is a brochure showing how the US uses energy.

Solar church buildings. I want one!

2010-04-27T19:20:00.000-07:00

Who wouldn't be excited about seeing a building with solar panels on it? And then learning it is your church building? I wish I could be so lucky!

Click here to see the whole article.

SALT LAKE CITY 27 April 2010 The Presiding Bishopric of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints introduced the latest environmentally friendly construction efforts by the Church at its first solar powered meetinghouse in the Northern Hemisphere. The new building in Farmington, Utah symbolizes the continued innovative use of technology by the Church in its construction design. The roof-mounted solar panels are projected to generate enough electricity to completely power the structure, saving an estimated $6000 in energy costs annually.

“It’s about creating a place of worship that works in harmony with the environment,” said H. David Burton, Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and responsible for the physical facilities of the Church. “For decades we have looked for innovative ways to use natural resources in our meetinghouses that reflect our commitment as wise stewards of God’s creations.”

The solar panels are only part of the green building design. Some other construction alterations include tankless water heaters, lowered energy use during "peak" hours, and xeriscaping (less grass, more native plants that require less water).

Read it, it is exciting!

2010-04-21T20:39:00.000-07:00

Iceland's Volcanic Eruption
Earthquake in Chile

Considering my love or solar power, the picture of the volcanic eruption struck a cord for me - a bad one. No sun due to overcast situation means no way to generate solar power!!!

It also got me thinking:

Recent MAJOR earthquakes around the world + volcanic eruptions = related movements of the earth.

Which brings up more questions: If these earth quakes are in any way related to the volcanic eruption in Iceland, how is the Earth going to move next? By the way, the Earth is not supposed to move. I like it to stay still underneath my feet. I guess I can't take that for granted anymore!

Just some food for thought.

Generate my own power

2010-04-11T21:08:00.001-07:00

I really wish I knew how to build my own generator to use my elliptical, or the toys my kids play on, to generate electricity for my house. That would be a dream come true. I could buy a solar panel, or a wind generator, but what about these other things that I already use in my household?

On a positive note, I bought a solar oven a few months ago. I LOVE using it. I don't have to use any electricity whatsoever to cook my food (whenever the sky is clear)! Having an alternatively fueled... something...in my ownership has been one of my ambitions since 7th grade shop class with Mr. Hilliard. That is where I first learned about alternative energy, and absolutely fell in love. But up until this year, I hadn't fulfilled the dream!

I still won't be perfectly happy until I own my own solar/electric vehicle. My ideal solar/electric vehicle would be a Hummer. Someday maybe..., or maybe not.

For now, I have to be satisfied to use my awesome oven!

Nissan Leaf

2010-04-11T20:54:00.000-07:00

I think the Nissan Leaf is the best thing to come to the market ever. It is about time an electric vehicle was almost available, rather than who knows how many years in the future. The Nissan Leaf is supposed to be available by December of this year!!!

Click here here for the Nissan Leaf website. I am so happy about this car!

2010-04-11T19:38:00.000-07:00

2010-04-07T11:49:00.000-07:00

Solar plane soars, slowly, on first flight
Swiss team's goal is to promote renewable energy over oil
The Associated Press
updated 12:58 p.m. ET, Wed., April 7, 2010

PAYERNE, Switzerland - A solar plane with wings as wide as a 747 and the power of a small motorboat took to the skies for the first time Wednesday, cruising a mile high at bicycle-like speeds for nearly 1½ hours in a step toward becoming the first sun-powered aircraft to circle the world.

In its maiden test flight, "Solar Impulse" — designed by Swiss adventurer Bertrand Piccard's team — completed a series of turns, slip maneuvers and bank angles reaching 5 degrees. Most importantly, it proved able to take off and land.

The team plans to fly it around the world in 2012, the goal being to show that renewable energy can replace fossil fuel.

"There has never been an airplane of that kind that could fly — never an airplane so big, so light, using so little energy," said Piccard, who in 1999 copiloted the first nonstop round-the-globe balloon flight. "So there were huge question marks for us."

At a military airport in the Swiss countryside, the plane lifted off at a speed no faster than 28 mph after only a short acceleration on the runway. It slowly gained altitude above the green and beige fields, and disappeared eventually into the horizon as villagers watched from the nearest hills.

The descent was even slower, as the sun-powered craft hovered ahead of the runway for a couple of minutes before touching down to cheers from spectators.

The weather for the maiden flight was sunny, and there was little wind.

Earlier hops
"Flea-hop" tests have been made since December, taking the plane no higher than 2 feet in altitude and 1,000 feet in distance. A night flight is planned before July, and then a new plane will be built based on the results of those tests.

"The goal is to fly day and night with no fuel, the goal is to demonstrate the importance of renewable energies, to show that with renewable energies we can achieve impossible things," said Piccard, who monitored but didn't pilot Wednesday's test run.

Test pilot Markus Scherdel said the plane isn't designed for maneuvers, but showed it was able to take off and land safely with handling like a passenger jet.

"Everything worked as it should," he said.

Using almost 12,000 solar cells, rechargeable lithium batteries and four electric motors, Piccard and co-pilot Andre Borschberg plan to take the plane around the world with stops to allow them to switch over and stretch after long periods in the cramped cockpit.

The entire aircraft weighs about 3,500 pounds, about the same as a midsized car.

The batteries allow the plane to fly day or night, but the circumnavigation will take time.

With the motors providing only 10 horsepower each, the plane will fly almost like a moped in the sky, at an average flight speed of 44 mph. The trip will be split up into five stages — keeping the plane in the air for up to five days at a time — with the stopovers also allowing the team to show off their creation.

Solar flight isn't new but Piccard's project is the most ambitious.

In 1980, the fragile Gossamer Penguin ultra-lightweight experimental solar plane flew short demonstration flights with one pilot on board. A more robust project called the Solar Challenger flew one pilot from France to England in a five-hour-plus trip in 1981.

Solar plane technology recalls the early days of manned flight, and the slow ascent of the Solar Impulse was somewhat reminiscent of the Wright brothers pioneering experiments over a century ago.

"The first crucial question was: Do we have enough power to fly?" said Borschberg. "The second crucial thing was: are we capable of landing this airplane, is it controllable?"

"It was two hours of deep emotion," he added, calling it the high point of seven years of work on the project. "The airplane has landed but we have not yet landed."

5,500 feet reached
Borschberg followed the flight in a helicopter; below waited numerous people involved with the project and Piccard, who comes from a long line of adventurers. His late father Jacques plunged deeper beneath the ocean than any other man, and grandfather Auguste was the first man to take a balloon into the stratosphere.

Solar Impulse said the flight reached an altitude of 5,500 feet. After landing, Scherdel emerged from the cockpit with his arms raised and the team broke open bottles of champagne.

"It went so silent, so soft," Piccard said.

He acknowledged the role of good weather, however.

Because the solar panels are needed for day flying and for charging the 880-pound lithium batteries that power the plane by night, it relies on sunshine, and Piccard said his team will have to scrupulously monitor conditions and divert routes to avoid storms.

Personnel on the ground will also have to be able to keep up with the plane as it follows the best weather to provide service at each stop, he said.

"Round-the-world will seem impossible until we do it." Piccard said. "Today is an absolutely incredible milestone."

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

A little too brief

2010-03-15T20:27:00.000-07:00

I think I was a little too brief in my last post on my anti-nuclear stance.
Yes, I am completely against nuclear energy, but not just because the waste is deadly for millions of years.
Just like the rest of our main energy sources, a lot of super-wealthy people get paid a lot of money to produce nuclear energy.
I would like to know how many lobbyists there are fighting for nuclear energy vs. how many lobbyists there are fighting for clean energy. I wish ther were people throwing millions of dollars at lawmakers to build clean energy plants. Nuclear plants cost a bundle, so much that new ones aren't being built very quickly, but clean energy plants have to cost less than a nuclear plant!

Nuclear energy is just so dangerous and deadly. I don't understand why anyone could be for something so deadly, even if it produces a lot of energy.

Not only is nuclear generation and waste deadly to us, it is also deadly to our land. This is our only planet to live on - for the foreseeable future at least. There is no where else to go. So why would we choose to ruin it?

I could ask similar questions about energy from oil, but at least the effects don't last for, well, forever.

http://www.aei.org/article/101759

Totally Anti Nuclear

2010-01-31T20:24:00.000-08:00

I am completely anti nuclear power, just in case anyone was wondering. I just wanted to make that clear.

I think producing nuclear power is up there with people shooting at each other in boats or airplanes - suicidal. At least when people shoot at each other on the ground, they aren't going to fall out of the sky afterwards, or sink into the water.

I have been thinking about this because of the recent earthquake in Haiti, and all the costly damage it caused.
Earthquakes break things - it's just their nature- buildings, anything stationary that doesn't like to shake a lot, like nuclear waste containers for example.
Chances are good that the earth will experience a few serious earthquakes where nuclear waste is being stored - at least sometime in the next few million years. Too bad for anyone living around those sites whenever that happens, and then for the next millenia.

This is just one reason why I think producing nuclear energy is short sighted.
I just had to get that off my chest!

A Place Where Violence Against Women Has Doubled: On TV

2010-01-28T06:52:00.000-08:00

Well, this is no surprise.

With Incidents Doubling In Five Years, It's Fair To Question Effect On Culture

November 29, 2009

By JEFFREY M. MCCALL

You might think any community would be outraged to discover that violence against its women had more than doubled during a five-year period. Our nation has seen such an increase in the on-air television community, but no outrage has yet materialized.

The results of a study by the Parents Television Council, which focused on the story lines of prime-time television and portrayals of victimization and violence against women, show a 120 percent increase in such portrayals in the past five years.

Stories about damsels in distress go way back in dramatic history, of course, but the council's study should give us pause for concern. Beyond the general jump in portrayals of violence against females is an even larger increase in violent story lines involving teenage girls. The big four networks all registered increases in violence against women. Much of the overall increase involved violence against women by intimate partners.

Moreover, the violent incidents portrayed against women on television are increasingly graphic.

ABC had the lowest increase and lowest total incidence of portrayals of violence against women. CBS had the most total violent acts, while NBC demonstrated the greatest percentage increase.

For years, media critics have described television as a cultural legitimizer. At some point, what is seen on television becomes normative. Studies consistently show that media consumers who view televised violence become desensitized to it. This trend is particularly evident for younger viewers.

While television is just one factor among many in the high incidence of violence in our society, it nonetheless is a factor that should be noted. Further, it is a factor that could be carefully monitored and managed by producers in the television industry.

Instead of viewing the council's data as a disturbing cultural trend, however, the media industry dismissed the study and blamed the messenger. TV Watch, a lobbying organization funded by big media corporations, accepted zero responsibility for mediated story lines involving violence toward women. Instead, TV Watch issued an official statement criticizing the council for "trying a new angle in its efforts to expand government control over what Americans choose to watch on television."

Translated, this means that a citizens organization should shut up about media content and leave big media corporations as the sole deciders of what is culturally acceptable. For an organization that supposedly promotes the First Amendment, TV Watch has little tolerance for opposing messages.

TV Watch went on to claim that some of the shows being criticized for graphic portrayals of violence against women are actually shows that "provide cautionary lessons." TV Watch would have us think that violent dramas involving women are similar to educational documentaries for a sociology class.

Apologists for big media helped explain away the networks' lack of concern.

Lisa de Moraes, a television writer for The Washington Post, pointed out that most violent acts on television are still directed toward males and mockingly asked, "Isn't half of the population of this country female?"

Essentially, this is saying that until women are beaten up or stabbed equally often as men, there is no need to worry about the increase. The Post writer went on to criticize the study because it focused only on major network programs and didn't research levels of similar violence on cable channels. Even though major network viewership is down in recent years, the big four networks are still quite relevant in establishing cultural standards. Besides, mediated violence in cable programming could well be even worse than that displayed on the networks.

Big corporate media outlets do not want to be second-guessed about cultural implications when they program whatever they think can make the most money with, with the cheapest programming. While posturing about free expression and "cautionary lessons," network executives think only about one thing: getting eyeballs in front of a television set and selling those eyeballs to advertisers.

How nice it would be if TV Watch expressed even the slightest concern for the cultural implications of television in our society. If TV Watch thinks mediated violence is of no consequence to our culture, then let's see its research studies or hear its arguments. To angrily dismiss the legitimate research and concerns of a citizens organization tells a lot about what the networks think of us, the viewing public.

•Jeffrey M. McCall is a professor of communication at DePauw University in Greencastle, Ind., and author of "Viewer Discretion Advised: Taking Control of Mass Media Influences." Contact him at jeffmccall@depauw.edu.

The Potential of Biofuels

2010-01-11T19:55:00.000-08:00

I just decided that I really like this guy, and want to read more by him.
This is a great speech! I learned a lot of new things about algae biofuels, which I had heard of in the past, but only sketchy descriptions. I hope you enjoy!

Comments for the 2009 Energy Security Roundtable

By Kenneth P. Green | Institute for the Analysis of Global Security
(December 03, 2009)

Kenneth P. Green discusses the potential of biofuels to increase America's security and to protect our economy from oil price shocks. Ethanol is a losing proposition, but fuels from algae may be the path to cutting our dependence on imported oil.

Resident Scholar
Kenneth P. Green

Good afternoon, thank you for inviting me to speak to you today.

I always like to start with a bit of background. I'm a biologist and environmental scientist by training, a policy analyst by occupation, and an economist by avocation, as well as contamination from working in economic policy institutions for 15 years.

I've long had an interest in renewable fuels. In fact, I wanted to distill my own in 1975, using surplus oranges and a solar still, but the BATF wouldn't license a 14 year old to distill his own hooch.

I think that any discussion of using government policy to dictate fuel composition has to start by acknowledging that such interventions have largely been disastrous.

To meet the Bush administration's target of 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels production in the United States by 2017 with cellulosic ethanol would require as much water as flows in the Colorado River every year.

In order to fulfill air pollution reduction plans in states and localities across the country, gasoline sold in the United States has been fractionated into about seventeen different boutique fuels sold in dozens of discrete markets. With three grades of gasoline per fuel, refiners are producing over fifty separate blends. This market fractionation has raised the cost of fuels, made them more volatile, and has made our transportation fuel infrastructure more brittle: a breakdown in a refinery in one area can not be easily repaired by getting fuel from another area, as the local blending requirements can be different.

But that's trivial when compared to the absolute fiasco of corn ethanol, which has caused increases in air pollution, water pollution, freshwater consumption, coastal pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and food prices.

In 1997, the U.S. GAO found that the ethanol production process produces more nitrous oxide and other powerful greenhouse gases than does gasoline production. A decade later, Colorado scientists Jan Kreider and Peter Curtiss concluded that carbon dioxide emissions in the production cycle are about 50 percent higher for ethanol than for traditional fossil fuels.

Making ethanol from cellulosic plants such as switch grass won't help. In fact, researcher Timothy Searchinger and colleagues calculated that ethanol from switch grass, if grown on U.S. corn lands, would increase greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent compared to using regular gasoline.

Then there's local air pollution. The EPA says using more ethanol fuel would increase ozone-producing chemicals. Mark Jacobson, a researcher at Stanford University, recently estimated that widespread switching to a blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline might increase ozone-related mortality, hospitalization and asthma by about 9 percent in Los Angeles and 4 percent in the United States as a whole.

Now, let's talk about water consumption. Messrs. Kreider and Curtiss estimate that growing and refining corn for a gallon of corn ethanol today requires about 140 gallons of water. That would mean the 5.4 million gallons of corn ethanol used in America in 2006 required the use of 756 million gallons of fresh water.

Things do not look much better for ethanol made from cellulose crops, which require between 146 and 149 gallons of water per gallon of ethanol fuel, depending on the scale of production. To meet the Bush administration's target of 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels production in the United States by 2017 with cellulosic ethanol would require as much water as flows in the Colorado River every year.

There's a water pollution issue, as well. The National Academy of Sciences points out that expanding corn-based ethanol production without new environmental protection policies would pose a "considerable" threat to water quality. Corn requires more fertilizers and pesticides than other food or biofuel crops. Pesticide contamination is already highest in the Corn Belt, and nitrogen fertilizer runoff from corn already produces the most serious agricultural impact on the Mississippi River.

Fertilizer runoff does not just pollute local waters. Each summer, the nitrogen fertilizers in the Mississippi hit the Gulf of Mexico, creating a large dead zone--a region of oxygen-deprived waters unable to support sea life that extends for more than 10,000 square kilometers. The same phenomenon occurs in Chesapeake Bay.

A recent study by researchers at the University of British Columbia shows that if the United States were to meet its proposed ethanol production goals of 15 billion to 36 billion gallons of corn and cellulosic ethanol by 2022, nitrogen flows to the Gulf of Mexico would increase by 10 percent to 34 percent.

Finally, there's land consumption and food prices to consider. In a February Science article, researchers calculated that projected corn ethanol production in 2016 would require 43 percent of the land harvested for corn in 2004 that otherwise was used to feed livestock. This represents an enormous change in land use--to either replace the grain lost to food production by vastly expanding corn fields--or a significant increase in food prices of the sort we've already seen due to scarcity of grain raised for human and livestock consumption.

There is little question that high gasoline and oil prices damage the national economy and the personal economies of individual Americans. But putting our hope in ethanol (whether from corn, switch grass or other cellulosic crops) or other crop-based fuels is not a rational policy response, however attractive it might be to the corn lobby.

There is one technology that I'm somewhat optimistic about, but it's not about electricity, it is liquid fuel made from algae. I'm optimistic about algae fuels because they have some really good attributes other renewables can't match, the challenges are mostly engineering at this point, or relatively simple science, and importantly, there's a lot of private money flowing in, from companies with a good track record for commercializing technology.

So why am I bullish on algae fuels?

First, algae fuels are less diffuse: the National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates that algae can produce up to 10,000 times more oil per acre than other biofuel crops, such as soybeans. That means, we can produce a significant amount of liquid fuel in a relatively small area. The Carbon Trust estimates that algae biofuels could displace 12% of annual global fuel consumption by 2030, if aggressively developed.

Second, they're less remote: you grow algae in long, oval race-track-like ponds or in enclosed growth systems, which can be sited just about anywhere there is a combination of flat land (non-arable land is fine) warmth, sunlight and surplus carbon dioxide.

Finally, algae fuels are estimated to be less pricey, estimated prices for algae fuels compare to oil at around $70 to $100 per barrel.

Additional benefits are numerous. Unlike ethanol (either corn or cellulosic), algae don't need to consume fresh water. They can grow on salty water, or even waste water, which they clean up as they grow.

The stuff left over after you squeeze all the oil out of algae is a mixture of protein and sugars that can be used in many different ways including animal feed, bio-plastics, and pharmaceuticals, or you can just chuck it into a furnace and generate electricity from steam.

Since algae-fuels are more akin to gasoline than to alcohols, there's no need to change the existing infrastructure that transports liquid fuels to our many millions of vehicles, nor is there a need to change the vehicles themselves. A jet has already flown using algae-based jet fuel.

Finally, there's the greenhouse gas connection. Algae fed on the carbon dioxide in regular air are carbon-neutral. They pull carbon dioxide out of the air when they grow, and it's released back into the air when they're used as a fuel. Even better, if they're fed on carbon dioxide from coal power plants, or other combustion sources, and they displace the use of a given volume of oil-based fuel, they're carbon negative, that is, they reduce the flow of greenhouse gases that would otherwise have been emitted.

Of course, there are plenty of challenges to be overcome before algae biofuels reach the pump. The best strains have to be identified for different growing conditions, and optimized for growth rate and fat content. Genetic engineering is out, as the algae-fuel industry feels it would just complicate the process of getting public and regulatory approvals. Algae grown in open ponds are susceptible to the weather, predation, and disease. If freshwater is used, evaporation becomes a significant problem, increasing freshwater use significantly. Algae grown in bio-reactors are more stable, but that technology is still considerably more expensive than open-pond systems. Harvesting and drying the algae prior to processing are energy intensive, unless you're in the desert where the problem is too much evaporation. Co-locating algae farms with greenhouse emitters may be challenging, and the oil extraction and chemical conversion processes have to be made more efficient.

The US military has already shown strong interest in algae fuels, and could contribute significantly to its development. Right now, the US military uses 130 million barrels of oil each year, which is about how much the entire country of Sweden uses. You can imagine how much energy the military could save if they could set up their own algae biofuel systems on US bases, foreign bases, and even in the field.

Now that's energy security!

Kenneth P. Green is a resident scholar at AEI.

America is no Longer Sovereign.

2010-01-04T03:58:00.000-08:00

America is no longer a sovereign country. Our government sold it for money.

I understand our debt as a country is such that each man, woman, and child, in the country would be required to pay around forty thousand dollars each to pay it off.

That is a large sum. But is it actually feasible? Probably.

I have faith in our country. I think we have enough people who love, and feel a strong patriotism toward it, that we would support an administration that stopped run-away debt accrual and paid off what we owe, or at least most of it.

Not only would we proudly support such an administration, we would respect and honor it.

Forty thousand dollars in debt per person could multiply so quickly - just by a small jump in interest charged by our foreign creditors. Forty thousand to two hundred thousand would be a whole lot harder to pay off. What about a million per person? That is not an impossible number with raising interest rates.

I do not vilify our debtors - they were only investing in the greatest country ever. But now, when our ability to actually pay up is coming into doubt, what will they require us to do?

We have already done it - we are no longer sovereign.

Corn rows in New York

2009-08-06T10:02:00.000-07:00

On our recent trip through New York, I was pleasantly surprised to see a whole bunch of corn growing everywhere. I was a little surprised because I don't remember seeing so many corn farms in the past, but I also haven't driven through New York much. This was our third time, and the first time during the Summer.

I thought, "Wow, New York must have a really great climate for growing corn."

My thoughts were all rosy as I continued to see corn patch after corn patch, that is, until I made a comment out loud about them, and Ken pointed out that they were probably being subsidized and would eventually be made into ethanol.

My thoughts turned acidic. Ethanol. One of the most foolish and least compassionate of all alternative fuels. It is bad enough that farmers are paid not to grow corn and wheat.

NOW, to add insult to injury, the government is not only encouraging farmers to grow corn with another subsidy, but it then gives tax incentives to farmers to turn it into a fuel to burn. Burning food has never been wise. Burning food that isn't even an efficient fuel, and produces more carbon monoxide than gasoline, is the insult.

Other countries (like Brazil) use sugarcane as their source for ethanol. I don't think that is as insulting as corn, because you can't really eat sugar - well it does not sustain life at least.

So why is there such a big push for corn ethanol in the United States? Could it be huge agriculture lobbyists? What else would promote such a silly fuel? Beats me.

And the final argument against corn ethanol. Food prices. Food prices rose at an unprecedented rate last year, thanks to the high demand of burning food as fuel. Poorer countries quickly found it difficult to pay the higher prices, and more people went hungry than would have if the government kept its nose out of foolish fuel production. The key word being foolish.

I am all for wise fuel production, as I have stated and restated several times before. But once again I have to resort to the same conclusion I have come to before; Until we find a way for the government to make a lot of money from the Sun, free energy - solar energy - will never be the erergy source being subsidized by the government.

Constitutional right to life

2009-06-06T20:56:00.000-07:00

The United States Constitution states in the fifth ammendment that "no person shall... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of the law."

The fourteenth amendment restates once again: "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

No one is going to argue that we all deserve the right to life. Until, that is, you start talking about the unborn.

I have no idea how so many people skipped that concept in their minds when they decided that a woman's right to privacy somehow trumped the baby's right to life. Where is compassion? Where is the respect of law?

I am not an idiot, I know there are certain circumstances that justify an abortion.

That said, I still don't understand how it is constitutionally legal to take a child's life even before they have a chance to make a case for themselves.

In my view, this is the ultimate form of oppression - whole generations have been denied the simplest, most basic right - to LIFE. Their cries can't ever be heard, so they are ignored, relegated to nonexistence because of their silence.

PIAXP April 2009 Registered Teams B-Roll Footage

2009-05-13T06:39:00.001-07:00

I have been following the competition to build mass production ready vehicles that meet or exceed 100mpg. Last month the competitors were announced and here is a great youtube video about the competition. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IpG5hbY4WI

Electric Ford Focus

2009-05-06T19:34:00.000-07:00

Ford announced today that it will be transforming an existing plant in Michigan into an Electric Ford Focus plant. Here is the article I saw from the New York Times.

May 6, 2009, 3:41 pm

Ford Truck Plant to Build Electric Cars

By Nick Chambers

Amidst one of the auto industry’s largest wholesale shifts in modern history, the Ford Motor Company is investing $550 million to turn a factory that was dedicated to making large and fuel-hungry sport utility vehicles into a modern and scalable small-car plant that will eventually produce an all-electric version of the Focus.

The Michigan Assembly Plant, known as one of the world’s most profitable manufacturing sites during the S.U.V. boom of the 1990s, was once the hub for the Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator. The plant is expected to begin building the new Ford Focus next year, followed by production of the all-electric Focus in 2011.

The electric Focus will be Ford’s first all-electric passenger car for the mass market. In addition to the electric Focus, the company plans to sell an electric version of its Transit Connect commercial vehicle in 2010.

Ford has previously promised that they will deliver four new electric vehicles to the American market by 2012.

“The transformation of the Michigan Assembly Plant embodies the larger transformation under way at Ford,” said Ford’s president and chief executive, Alan Mulally, in a statement. “This is about investing in modern, efficient and flexible American manufacturing. It is about fuel economy and the electrification of vehicles.”

The electric Focus is part of a larger strategy announced by Ford in January to develop electric vehicles for North America quickly using its global reach and capability to keep the cars affordable.

In addition to the Michigan Assembly Plant, Ford is retooling two other factories to build new cars in the face of global market changes. The company’s Cuautitlán Assembly plant in Mexico is slated to begin building the new Fiesta subcompact early next year, and its Louisville Assembly plant in Kentucky is also expected to begin producing small vehicles based on the Focus platform beginning in 2011.

“We’re changing from a company focused mainly on trucks and SUVs to a company with a balanced product lineup that includes even more high-quality, fuel-efficient small cars, hybrids and all-electric vehicles,” said Mark Fields, Ford’s president of the Americas. “As customers move to more fuel-efficient vehicles, we’ll be there with more of the products they really want.”

Is this really happening? Are my dreams since I was 12 finally coming true? There are still two or three years before Ford is promising these cars to customers, and that seems to have been the case for the last decade. Two years are better than ten.

I love electric

2009-04-29T20:33:00.000-07:00

I finally got to take a look at this custom electric car. It is a racer, and is so fast!

I am not really a racing fan, but watching this Datsun beat fancy BMWs and Corvettes was really entertaining.

Jump-Starting The Electric Car Dream

2009-03-16T19:40:00.000-07:00

Jump-Starting The Electric Car Dream

I read this news article about the Company: Better Place.
I have written about this company before, it started in Isreal, the selling of "miles for a car, like minutes for a cell phone."

Apparently other governments in Denmark and Hawaii are jumping on the bandwagon and building charging stations for 20K ekectric plug-in cars. Where is America in the line? No where. A few cities like the idea, but not the country in general. Where are our brains?

I know electric cars aren't as cool as solar, and electricity has to be generated from something. But I think this idea is going in the right direction - oil independance.

fuel our future now

2009-03-09T21:26:00.001-07:00

I found a fun website geared towards teaching our children about alternative energy for cars. Here is the link to the website.
http://www.fuelourfuturenow.com/

I hope it is helpful and fun!

I edited my post, "The Effects of Pornography on our Rights as Women

2009-03-02T05:23:00.000-08:00

View my edited version here : The Effects of Pornography on our Rights as Women.

Battery electric vehicle from Toyota

2009-02-12T06:00:00.000-08:00

New CONCEPT vehicle from Toyota

This is a BEV- a battery electric vehicle, able to drive up to 50 miles a charge, and up to 70 mph.

This kind of car is really great for commuters, and for people like me, I rarely drive more than 15 miles away in a day.

I was really excited as I read about it on Toyota's website - excited that is, until I read that it is a CONCEPT vehicle, and won't be available until 2012! What is wrong?

It is like a car already being sold in Europe and Japan, why not here? What is wrong with Toyota? Now is the time for such a vehicle to be sold in the US. NOW! I don't get it, how long do we have to wait for progress?

I wonder what is holding them back, is it Toyota themselves, or maybe the US government?

If you would like to explore the new Toyota CONCEPT vehicle (I am SICK of concept vehicles) click on this link.

The technology has been around long enough, actually, cars like this have been around for a long time, and are being offered for sale right now online. What is taking Toyota and other mainstream automakers so long?

It's time the US started charging for Sunlight

2009-01-15T07:10:00.000-08:00

Well, since we are in another space race, this time with China, I think it is about time America claimed the sun, and started charging for sunlight before someone else does. That way we might actually get somewhere in the solar arena.

It seems plain to me that the main reason solar cars aren't available on the market is because no one will make much money fueling the cars once they have been purchased. Bummer. Maybe we could be energy independent as a nation then! And we could stop waging war for oil. That would be bad, I guess, since that isn't a priority on anyone's political agenda.

Does anyone know of a sun resistant material we could make a flag out of and send to the Sun?

The Affects of Pornography on our Rights as Women.

2008-12-30T20:07:00.000-08:00

Women in America fought a long time to achieve the right to Vote and the right to own property. Having been simply objects of possession, tools and entertainments to men it was quite the turnaround. It took so long to get where we are today. We have the right to go to school, to pursue college and graduate degrees - as far as we have the inclination, and funding. We can own our own businesses, our own houses.

We continue to fight the long fight for equality in the workforce and in normal day to day interactions. Most women in the workforce and at home feel like they are treated with respect. There are some professions where this is integrally not the case - the military where respect is absent period- women are scarce and the realities of war harden the average man. But on a large scale, women are recognized and treated with a high level of equality socially, in the workforce, and in the home.

However, there is an new trend. This trend results from the proliferation of pornography acted out by those who use it and our ever increasing sex obsessed society. Without professional expertise, I rely on what I have witnessed in the behavior of those around me or seen in the media. My eyes are open and I have intelligence enough to notice that the more a person consumes pornography, the less likely they are to hold women in any sort of esteem. People who use pornography devalue any contribution in thought or action by woman, except of course if it is sensual. The more deeply involved in pornography, the less they value women as people - at home, at work, anywhere, and the more they view women as objects, without intelligence, without respectability. This is a return to the status women held less than forty years ago as passive, worthless, entertainment.

In the media pornography is portrayed as something "that men do." It is no big deal, no one is getting hurt by it. And now, as time has passed, normal day to day people are beginning to believe the lie. Nothing could be so opposite of how it is shown to be. It is amazing how blatant the lies are. On the sitcom, "Friends" the men were known to view pornography, and it was laughed at in disgust, but laughed at nonetheless. This casual use of pornography had no visible side affects on TV. There is no mention made of the destruction of the user's ability to love in a healthy and normal way.

What are the women like on TV? Are they treated with respect? Are they strong and are they making a positive impact in the world? No, the only way to get good ratings is to have hardly anything on, and sleep with anyone who smiles at or hits them.

For those women who act the parts of pornography, or who promote it, or allow it to continue in ignorance of the reality; "Do you really want to derail our progress in this world as women? We have come so far. Look beyond yourselves and open your eyes to what you threaten our daughters with." As pornography spreads throughout our society and the world on the Internet, filling the pockets of villainous vultures, think what that will do to our Civilization, to our hard-won rights as women.

The disrespect towards women I have witnessed has only been on the personal level. Imagine the consequences on a national scale. I have no doubt this is exactly what our daughters will face in just a few years: scorn and objectification once again, only worse, because our sons will remember our current level of equality and opportunity and grind their faces with the memory.

Smart Car

2008-12-03T16:24:00.000-08:00

Smart Car Website

Last year I saw a Smart Car on the road for the first time. I was so excited, I went home and looked it up on the internet, because I had only read about it cursorily. I thought it might be an electric vehicle, but I didn't remember exactly. So I looked it up, and was not too surprised that it is run by gasoline, but I was surprised when I read it's gas mileage: 33 city/41 highway mpg. I was shocked. Someone had obviously gone to a lot of trouble to buy that car. It's not easy to get, you have to order it, and wait a long time, and it isn't cheap. But I wondered why they had gotten it. For it's size, the fuel economy was outrageous. Horrible! My van is at least four times that size, and it gets about 16 MPG. That is not a good mileage, I know, it rankles. Back to my point, though, I would think that a vehicle 1/4 the size of my van would get at least as good mileage- comparatively, but even if it was as efficient as my van, it would get around 64 MPG. If my van were as inefficient as the smart car, it would get about 8 MPG.

So, basically, I think anyone who buys this car is being tricked. Personally, I think it wouldn't be that difficult to get the mpg on a vehicle this small and light up near 100 MPG. I am just sizzling with frustration at our "Green" options.

2008-11-02T18:31:00.000-08:00

Seven-part anti-pornography series reported by the LDS Church News

   » Part 1: March 3 — In your family?
   » Part 2: March 10 — Protecting homes from pornography
   » Part 3: March 17 — Young and trapped
   » Part 4: March 24 — Dual relationship with family, fantasy
   » Part 5: March 31 — Finding recovery from porn addiction
   » Part 6: April 14 — Fight to stop porn
   » Part 7: April 21 — Defending the home against pornography

Hurray for Plug - In's

2008-10-19T15:03:00.000-07:00

Whooppee, this is what I have been waiting for since I was 12, electric cars being widely used and promoted. I saw a news article about Steve Bernheim finding places to plug in his Corbin Sparrow in Edmonds, Washington. Of course it was Washington! Washingtonians are very energy conscious:).

Goodbye for now, we are making sugar cookies for Halloween.

The Unpopular history of Feminism, and the Danger of Porn

2008-08-04T19:31:00.000-07:00

I feel so inspired to assert myself in my civil duty. It is because of an inspiring article on the history of feminism- an unpopular history. My eyes have been opened to what is truly influential in affecting change in our society, and since there are many things I could wish were different in our society, I want to start trying to influence some change! Here is a link to the article, a well written report calling women to be more active in changing our world. So, here we go.

I would like to bring people around me, especially women, to a higher awareness of the dangers of pornography. Pornography is not innocent entertainment, and I hardly think anyone considers it so, however, there are many who don't see it for what it is: a bomb, a tidal wave of immeasurable proportions, a tsunami, a force of ill-nature so broad it threatens our whole world, especially the women, for we are the ones who feel the brunt of the force of this ill-nature.

There are many who view it as unwise, distasteful, unpleasant, but not dangerous. To any who think that pornography is somehow acceptable, you are seriously deceived. Carefully deceived. Even deliberately deceived.

Please open your eyes to the addictive qualities of pornography. Please open your eyes to the heartbreak it creates in families. Please open your eyes to all the news articles printed every day about violence and abuse afflicted on women and children - and the perpetrators blame their pornography addictions for their actions.
Viewing pornography alters anyone who watches it - eventually people start to act out the sickness of what they see, and, disappointed, the next step is violation of others either in or out of their own family. For pornography is a lie - a trick that changes a natural loving relationship into insatiable and uncontrolled lust - lust that is impossible to satisfy - because it is a lie. Just like a drug addiction, someone hooked on pornography seeks out larger doses of their drug because their senses become dulled over time. The person seeks larger and larger doses until there is nothing left but an animal, worse, a predator of the vilest kind.
Pornography consumption is so rampant that I believe if it goes unchecked, the illness, the mental derangement of addicts will become a danger to us all.

Just do it, and get out of the way.

2008-07-29T22:15:00.000-07:00

I am really excited about the Pickens plan. Can you tell? I think his plan can actually work. Here is a funny quote from an interview this week.
"If only we had a Congress and president who, instead of chasing crazy schemes like offshore drilling and releasing oil from our strategic reserve, just sat down with Boone and Shai and asked one question: “What laws do we need to enact to foster 1,000 more like you?” Then just do it, and get out of the way. "
Shai is an Israeli electric car maker who was also interviewed. I like him! He has a unique company that has, (or will have,) electric cars available like cell phones - except you buy miles a month rather than minutes. I don't exactly get it. But it sounds promising. If you would like to read the whole article click: here.

My take on the Pickens Plan

2008-07-21T21:03:00.000-07:00

The previous two posts are about a plan to lower our use of foreign oil. I am so excited about it. It could really work!! T Boone Pickens has a great idea to develop wind to replace natural gas used to make electricity, and in turn use the natural gas to fuel more cars. This would save us $700 billion spent on foreign oil in ONE YEAR! That is amazing. He is also pushing for the real development of all alternative energy sources. This is exciting to me, though I am absolutely repulsed by the development of nuclear energy. That is the one thing I disagree with in his plan. But, since this is the first effort anyone is making to actually move forward rationally at all in our energy policies, I am enthusiastic. I couldn't be more delighted, actually.
I hope anyone who reads about this will look into the matter for themselves. I think the rationale is self-evident. Please, lets do our part to have righteous dominion over our earth, our home.

Pickens plan encapsulated

2008-07-21T21:02:00.000-07:00

Texas oil tycoon sees answer blowin' in the wind
BY T. BOONE PICKENS SPECIAL TO THE NEWS
Saturday, July 19th 2008, 12:25 PM
Most New Yorkers remember the old national debt clock in Times Square. It ticked upward every second to show how deep in debt our country was growing - to awaken Americans to a crisis.
We've got an even greater problem now, with consequences far more significant: Our dangerous and growing dependence on foreign oil, an issue that will require us to spend $700 billion this year, which is more than four times the cost of the Iraqi war.
Like many of you, I ignored the telltale signs as our imports of foreign oil grew from 24% in 1970 to 42% in 1990 to 70% today.
With only 4% of the population and 3% of the world's oil reserves, we now consume 24% of the world's oil.
We have had three years of record oil price increases. And while oil supply is decreasing, demand will only increase as developing nations consume more oil. Which will drive prices even higher.
We have drifted for decades without an energy plan. We cannot afford to wait any longer.
Here's my plan to reduce America's foreign oil imports by more than one-third in the next decade.
It starts with wind. Wind is 100% domestic, 100% renewable and 100% clean. In the middle part of our country from Texas to the Canadian border, we have some of the world's largest wind reserves. Using private investment in wind farms, we can tap that power and create 22% of the nation's electricity.
Wind energy can replace the natural gas we currently use to fuel our power plants to create electricity. We can then use that freed-up natural gas for transportation. Natural gas is cleaner, cheaper and better than gasoline, and it's found in abundance in the U.S.
At the same time, I also want to see us explore all avenues, from more R&D into batteries and fuel cells to development of solar, ethanol and more conservation. We should also consider drilling in the outer continental shelf.
It may seem simple, but these three steps would displace more than one-third of our foreign oil imports and get us to our goal. My plan can be accomplished through private investment with no new consumer or corporate taxes or government regulation.
We have a golden opportunity in this election year to build support for this plan. We can solve this one - if we come together and take on the responsibility of change.
Pickens, a life-long Texas oilman, is chief executive officer of BP Capital. Learn more about his ideas at www.pickensplan.com

2008-07-10T07:39:00.000-07:00

The global food crisis and its causes

2008-07-08T22:49:00.001-07:00

Another article from AEI about the global food crisis. I share in the frustration of biofuel. But I was surprised to see that Biofuel production is only incraesing food costs by 20 percent. The other causes are trade restrictions, and the inflation of the dollar(he hem, please refer to my entry on Jan 08 08 about the hegemony of the dollar). There are more, but I can't remember exactly what they were. I hope you will take the time to read this article, I found it very eye opening.

Ahh, I found another article on the same subject that is much shorter and to the point. And explains the causes much better.

Forget Economic Stimulus, Fix the U.S. Tax Code

2008-01-22T21:35:00.000-08:00

The President, and Congress have presented an emergency economic stimulus package consisting of temporary tax cuts. Will it be helpful? Will I be greatful for an extra $2000? Yes, but at what cost?
I was interested to find out what the authorities had to say (authorities as in American Enterprise Institute - the governments own thinktank.) about the proposed stimulus package in congress. We all know it is going to pass. Ken said, "this is an election year, of course it will pass!" So I looked at AEI, a very reliable information source - unlike the news. I read an artical by Kevin Hassett (Kevin A. Hassett is a senior fellow and director of economic policy studies at AEI). According to Hassett, "The end result (of the stimulus package) will be that we have a slightly smaller chance of having a recession."
He basically says that, if the goal is to avert a recession, this package may help a little, if the goal is to increase spending, it will, to a point.
Wealthy people will spend on average an extra 5 percent.
Poor people will spend 100 percent.
Businesses will spend an extra 5 percent as well.
Those numbers do not sound that great. Well, except for the lower class spending. If what you are looking for is spending, that is. Where does wisdom enter in?
I was pleased to see that Congress is looking into an education program to teach people about finances. Too bad government can't really teach.

Hassett said, "A broken tax code is an asset in bad times, because there are so many things to fix. Any number of reforms could help turn the economy around. By focusing only on temporary measures, the administration and Congress are overlooking our greatest asset, our lousy tax code.

So, I guess I wish congress would listen and focus on changing the tax code, because that would be a much longer term fix, according to Hassett. And I am a long term, big picture, person right?! Right.
I hope you find the article as educational as I did.
Tax cuts, hurrah!

Snow ball man

2008-01-21T13:10:00.000-08:00

Grace thinks the snowball man is pretty amazing!

Who wants to go out and get wet to make a snow man? Everyone? Well, today I just brought the snow inside to make one!

This is a short, but cute video showing all the snow at our house. We have even more today.

Better gas mileage in your current car is possible!

2008-01-20T14:09:00.001-08:00

How to get good gas mileage in your car: From Consumer Reports
and another from off the net: Hypermilers. I was looking for information on all wheel drive. I was wondering if I would get better gas mileage if I turn mine of. Does anyone know?

Dance lessons

2008-01-17T15:17:00.000-08:00

Chris is living in our basement along with his friend Chance. Chris was teaching Eliza a few baisic swing dance steps. How fun is that!

Cute Christmas day photos

2008-01-09T22:04:00.000-08:00

Eliza is dancing here. Swirling in circles to some ballet music

An influential article (at least for me).

2008-01-08T21:46:00.000-08:00

The End of Dollar Hegemony

I read this article a few years ago, and it has influenced my thinking about the dollar ever since. I wanted to share it with any who might read on my blog.
Anji

global non-warming

2008-01-08T20:55:00.000-08:00

I haven't taken much interest in global warming. I don't have strong political or emotional responses to it either way. That may be very surprising considering my "green" leanings.

I am, however, strongly concerned about taking care of our planet because that is our responsibility, not because I am afraid of global warming. This is our home!! Who, in their right mind, would trash their home? I believe in acting responsibly, which means trying my hardest to take care of my own house, my neighborhood, and on and on, to my world.
That said, here is an article regarding the subject from the Cato Institute.
Have a jolly read!

A fun day of sledding

2008-01-06T22:05:00.000-08:00

Isn't she darling?!

2008-01-06T18:24:00.001-08:00

I was surprised to read an interesting article about Geothermal energy from the American Enterprise Institute. It is very informative. I hadn't even thought of geothermal before. I was glad to read it, I hope you enjoy it too!Fascinating article on geothermal energy.

Joshua's birthday

2007-11-10T21:42:00.001-08:00

Here are some darling pictures from Joshua's birthday. We had such a great time together!

Pictures of our Fall

2007-11-07T20:01:00.000-08:00

From Halloween to raking leaves; this has been a great season! I didn't know raking leaves could be so much fun, and neither did our kids!

Alternate wind generators

2007-11-06T19:22:00.000-08:00

There is a new wind technology that harvests wind energy through a simple piece of plastic stretched between two poles with magnets and copper wire. I heard about this technology Sat and got the link today. I was up thinking about how great it sounded last night. I was a little dissappointed that these generators don't produce more energy, but am fascinated anyway. I commented to Ken that it seemed like a wind generator on a car seemed like a good idea. I hope I get to see one on a car someday!
Flutter wind generator
This link sends you to a conference with some inventor interviews.

hydrogen induced sleeplessness

2007-10-22T21:05:00.000-07:00

The other night I found myself awake most of the night, upset over Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles. I think it is great that they don't produce any pollution - fantastic point in their favor actually. But I was thinking of the hundreds of millions of dollars the US government has spent on developing hydrogen fuel cells . My simple point I want to make is that if our government had spent as much money developing Solar Electric Vehicles, which are also non-pollutive, I am convinced we would be much closer to a viable form of transportation. We might even have had the cars available for purchase - since they actually are already available. President George W. Bush, in the State of the Union address on January 28, 2003 said "Join me in this important innovation to make our air significantly cleaner, and our country much less dependent on foreign sources of energy."

It is true that hydrogen powered cars is an answer, but it isn't the anwer that has made any difference in our environment or in our goal of being less dependent on foreign energy since then .

If you are like me, pro-solar, you might question his motives on moving towards such a difficult to procure source of energy. The answer is painfully obvious - $$$. Sure he has our economy in mind - we can't just get energy for free, how would all the fuel companies get paid? What would happen to all the gas station owners, builders, fixers, cleaner-upper-afters? What would people spend their money on that they would otherwise be spending on fuel?

Now I say that sarcastically, but it is also true - what would happen to our economy if we weren't dependent on foreign oil?

That is the subject for a future discussion!

I just want to point out something interesting. Look at the picture above very carefully. Do you see the Shell label and symbols? I don't know much about Shell. But I do know that buying hydrogen fuel from Shell seems a little removed from the effort to distance ourselves from foreign energy, not just oil.

But to get back to my sleepless night, I want to relate something funny. I was all unhinged about hydrogen, but when I traced back what had caused me to get upset, it was a notice from my dairy telling me that, "due to the rising cost of corn and feed," they were raising the cost of my milk. I had confused ethanol and hydrogen in my sleepy mind. I could go off on government subsidies and ethanol too. But that will have to wait.

Enjoy!

Trip to the Treehouse museum

2007-09-05T19:45:00.000-07:00

The Treehouse Museum is so fun for our children, each one finds so much to do and enjoy - you can see that Joshua loves trains. It takes a tremendous effort to get him to look at anything else, and even then he is only diverted from the trains for a little while.

Eliza loves the flowers and the grocers best, then the computers. Grace loves the floor. :)

2007-08-07T14:59:00.001-07:00

This is Ken's sister's dog, Sophie. She really liked our fish, who had never known danger before. Even now, our fish remains ignorant of its (brief) dire peril.

Sophie jumped up at the fish for perhaps four hours and ran around the fish tank hoping to get a clearer shot. It was amusing to say the least to watch the fruitless attempt of one so determined to get what she wanted.

2007-08-04T22:06:00.000-07:00

One of my goals in life is to get a solar powered electric vehicle. Solar is the way to go!