Our World and Everything in It

I heard this on ABC news last week that food prices were rising still higher, another five percent, due to corn production for ethanol. But it’s not because of rising prices of corn overall. It’s due to high oil prices.

The following is very good report about this: http://www.ncga.com/news/notd/pdfs/061407_EthanolAndFoodPrices.pdf

One thing I noticed in this article was about the huge increase in ethanol production reported. Is anybody else finding these ethanol pumps, because I’m not locating a whole heck of a lot?

Oil prices just dropped a little so our food should be cheaper for awhile too, otherwise this equation isn’t working. Or is the oil price drop just a facade for the election? If so, and rising food prices are relative to oil, then we know what we’re in for after the election.

And what about the rest of the world that is in starvation mode because of corn? I’m going to have to look that one up. Is much of the world’s starvation due to high oil costs, or high corn costs? Either way it’s just not right.  

It’s the Friday night of Memorial weekend, and I thought this bit of info was appropriate.

Waste beer will be fueling the flex-fuel vehicles at this summer’s Democratic National Convention compliments of the Molson Coors Brewing Company. 

Molson Coors has been converting wasted beer into alcohol auto fuel since 1996.

Read more about wasted beer turned bio fuel at: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/may2008/2008-05-23-093.asp.

The BBC reported tonight that there is a worldwide food shortage. Over 100 million people will go hungry this year. Problems from a rise in food prices have crossed every border in the world, even causing riots in some countries.

This is the cost of not acting on earlier warnings. Now $1.7 billion is needed to assist farmers worldwide. The crisis is being blamed on:

· Climate change
· Population growth
· Higher demand by growing Asian markets
· Use of land to bio-fuels
· Rise in oil prices

It’s interesting because the BBC also said that many countries are rethinking bio-fuel, especially corn-based ethanol. Science has made it well known that we cannot produce enough ethanol to replace the gas we use. The land mass just isn’t there. But while other countries push away from bio-fuel, president Bush pushes it forward saying that a good way to new renewable energy is the ability to grow it. Someone needs to tell him that it’s already been figured out that route is impossible.

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7372393.stm.

I’m sorry to read that Michigan persists with pollution policy instead of sound environmental policy. We need to get the corporate friendly senate moving in a cleaner direction. We have an obligation in this state to at very least try to keep the water clean. If we keep goofing off, someone might decide we are poor stewards and should share the wealth and management of our water. Does adding more coalburners to the list of 19, including the country’s second largest in Monroe, sound like anyone here pays attention to health issues, future problems with water shortages, or the earth? The latest out of MI senate is a push to alter abortion issues in Michigan. That’s the big priority? People need jobs; we need a decent and moral economy. By moral, I mean we do our utmost not to disturb life in the process of living and producing.  A green economy can offer plenty of jobs but that ride is being held up either on a state or federal level and benefits the oil industry.

We know for instance about oil leases that have been sold in pristine areas and/or habitat for polar bears, seals and all types of birds. Drilling there is pending and the oil industry wants to get moving. It’s becoming obvious that placing the polar bear on the endangered list is purposely being stalled. All that is needed is a great motivator. Bingo, gas will go up beyond $4.00 per gallon shortly. We’re already being taunted by that forecast. People are expected to cry drill, drill, drill and to hell with the animals. And we’ll probably do that, instead of seeing the big picture and how we’re being manipulated by the utilities. Even Warren Buffet commented that we’ve been sticking straws into the earth and sorry but it’s a finite practice. We will eventually run out. We collectively had over 500,000 wells. Our demand is ridiculous, and growing and it all revolves around the same fossil sources.

Heaven forbid we advance in technology and perfect wind and solar power for the individual home, and make it cheap. Houses would stand-alone without need for utilities. It’s almost laughable isn’t it? We are street smart enough to know the powers that be won’t let that happen. Anyway, our airwaves will be controlled shortly. Can’t even get free air anymore, besides there is that ever lovin entertainment/sports world that’s always going to charge too.

We could practice conservation. We could develop an RPS for Michigan, (more on that in another blog), which would entice green developers to come here. I’ve been saying this for quite awhile. What green industry is going to plant themselves next to a bunch of pollution? We’ll never get away from polluting industries once they are established without paying for it dearly. The buck will pass on to us for corporation’s stubborn business sense if and when in the future a big conservation effort needs to be enacted because, gee, we really are polluting ourselves to death. 

I was reading the Sierra Club’s “The Mackinac” and it states what I’ve been reading elsewhere, that many places in this country are not giving permits to more coalburners. The front-page article said 44 proposed coal-fired plants were either denied or withdrawn in 2007 thanks to The Sierra Club. So what happened here? 

There were five more coalburners looking for environmental permits in Michigan, with three more new plants under discussion the article said. It also stated that the challenge to put a moratorium on coal-fired plants in Michigan is daunting. Well I guess, especially with a corporation friendly senate. It said, “The state has refused to regulate the CO2 from coal plants that contribute to global warming (so long as the applicants address other pollutants, the state will let them be built). So that’s why the rush to install scrubbers? The scrubbers address other pollutants that are breathing irritants, but not the mercury that is permeating through the water to the fish, to the birds, and eventually anyone who drinks the water—one of the world’s largest freshwater supplies that is no longer so fresh. Or the CO2, that’s warming us up and causing some really bad weather—almost tornado season. What’s the sense of the Great Lakes Legacy Act?  What a tail chase, and meanwhile the water and Michigan loses, while the polar bears, seals, fish, and birds, the entire earth, take a back seat to our excess.

 Take a stand and participate. Read: http://michigan.sierraclub.org/.

I was listening to Good Morning America this morning and it seems cities around the country are having a hard time controlling speeding drivers. Follow along here. Scottsdale, AZ was the first city to have speed enforcement cameras on one of its highways. Other cities are following suit. A county in Maryland that has speed cameras simply sends a citation to the speeder in the mail if they are clocked at more than 11 mph over the limit. Eleven miles over is a far cry from one driver that was caught doing 131 mph past a 65 mph sign. This camera system has its detractors that claim the cameras aren’t always accurate and they are limited. But the cameras work.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety knows that Americans speed and on all types of roads.  The speed cameras have got the 75 mph crowd way down from 15 percent to less than 2. That’s quite a drop.  But why do we speed? Because we can. And most of the time we do it around 20 percent over the limit. We should be asking why during this oil crunch and with CO2 emission overload hasn’t our federal government lowered the speed limit to 55 mph like it did in the 70’s?
The idea of speeding because we can is bolstered by our car industry. Don’t get me wrong; it’s sheer joy to hear pistons slamming while jumping out in front of the guy that wasn’t going to let me on the expressway. But that’s about it. Keep traveling too fast and get caught, not to mention burning way too much gas and emitting excessive CO2 in the process. We should wonder about the contradiction of producing speedy cars in a country of speed limits. It’s stupid irony.

Lowered speed limits and the introduction of ethanol pumps, something I have yet to see anywhere, were the combination of choice in the 70’s when gas was high. I don’t think ethanol is the best idea, it will burden the space for food crops and give us another empire that is corn rich, but among alternative choices, it has its place. So where are the ethanol pumps? Are they gone the way of a lower speed limit?

Some of the excuses look extremely flimsy for all the things we do and don’t. If we had ethanol pumps back in the 70’s, than we should most surely be able to get them out there now and fast. It isn’t like we don’t have the technology. Ditto for lowering the speed limit. As for car manufacturers, Daimler-Chrysler (at the time) had the technology to produce hydrogen buses for Iceland 5 years ago but “nada” for us now. Ford and GM are slow to present true hybrids and keep lobbying on fuel economy issues. They claim they need time to produce 40-mpg cars. But back in 1984, the Big 3 automakers produced a total of 35 cars that got 40 mpg or more.  GM had 19, Ford had 6, and Chrysler had 10 of those gas savers. I say drag out those engineering plans and slap a new, sleek, light weight body on those babies and get em out there! My girlfriend who is in the market for a hybrid came back from the auto show disappointed and a little unnerved by the propaganda she heard like, “this is a REAL car,” because it goes too fast for the speed limits and burns mega petro.

Have you followed the logic and gathered a clear idea that nothing adds up here? We chase our tail—backwards! The experience and technology is there, so we have to look to the reason it’s not happening. There is only one industry that benefits from speeders, inefficient fuel economy, and no alternative fuel sources readily available—OIL.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=4221537

http://www.mpgomatic.com/2007/10/19/super-cheap-high-mpg-cars-1984/
 

Get a load of our democratic process with this latest veto out of Washington. The Bush EPA nixed California’s proposed emission standards for the state that targeted the trucking, shipping, cement, semiconductor and consumer product industries. Instead Bush signed into law a new energy bill that requires automakers to cut emissions by 25 percent by 2009 and by 40 percent by 2020. The EPA said this covers the issue of emissions, end of story. Was that apples to apples?

Sixteen other states have already approved emissions laws and were waiting for this waiver by the EPA too. The EPA is supposed to have sole authority to make pollution rules, but our Federal Clean Air Act allows states to create their own rules with an EPA-approved waiver. The waiver was nixed today. The Supreme Court just ruled in favor of 12 states that sued the same EPA for dragging their feet about CO2 emissions. The Supreme Court had to tell the EPA that greenhouse gases can be considered “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act and they were in violation for not regulating them. And today the EPA blocked California and the other states from doing what should have been the EPA’s job and substituted with Bush’s flimsy energy bill. 

So the states go through a lot of effort for nothing. The emission laws were part of California’s “Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.” The NRDC and many public interest groups co-sponsored it. California committed to reducing overall global warming pollution by 30% by 2020. They figured on new technologies as well as pollution cutting strategies to meet these goals. They sought the help of E2, “a national network of business people who work with the NRDC to champion the economic benefits of good environmental policy” and “who built a solid case for the ways in which curbing global warming could actually benefit California’s economy” (Nature’s Voice Newsletter by the NRDC Jan/Feb 2008). Just what I thought. Green is good for the economy.

I was intrigued by E2 and read on that they argue, “that clean technologies would create jobs and attract new companies to the state…supported by the fact that clean tech now ranks third in venture capital investment in North America.” Told ya so Michigan. Clean technology isn’t likely to coexist alongside coalburners and refineries. They showed that California would save “barrels” of money by reducing dependence on fossil fuel. It also stated that it took 124 meetings at the state capital by E2 volunteer members to “present their business-based argument.” They worked hard to come up with legislation that protects the environment and creates economic opportunity. They believe global warming controls will spur economic prosperity. This was a great program, until the automobile lobby got involved. Yeah, another lobby.

According to our own Detroit News:

Using a one-page script and a list of auto facilities obtained from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a trade group that represents automakers, staffers at the Department of Transportation called nearly every congressional member from Michigan and Ohio, urging them to oppose California’s request, according to records released this week by the House Oversight Committee. They also targeted other auto-heavy districts and governors in at least seven other states.
While federal law bars government officials from lobbying lawmakers on issues before Congress, there are no such restrictions on regulatory questions, such as the California waiver.

California filed a lawsuite challenging the EPA’s denial of the waiver. And there is a House Committee investigating the agency’s decision to deny it also. This is getting good.

.
Read more about the veto at: http://lawyersusadcdicta.wordpress.com/2007/12/20/epa-nixes-states-plan-to-limit-greenhouse-gases/#comment-285.

Read more about E2: http://www.e2.org/jsp/main.jsp.

About the Supreme Courts decision: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/jan-june07/emissions_5-29.html.

The Detroit News article about the auto lobby: http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070705/AUTO01/707050350/1148.

I blogged about the Farm Bill and the changes that are needed if we are ever going to get healthy and get the nation turned around so that the small farmer thrives once again. Not going to happen. The November 12th, 2007 issue of Time Magazine had a scathing article by Michael Grunwald called “Down on the Farm” about the farm lobby and the lopsided business of farm subsidies. The article is too long to outline here. But our future for free range chicken, pork, or beef, more fruits and vegetables, and less tainted meat and food supplies in general instead of the top five commodities—corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, and rice is mighty bleak.

The article warns if you “eat, drink, or pay taxes—or care about the economy, the environment, or our global reputation” the Farm Bill is a big deal. We still subsidize farmers billions of tax dollars every year. The trouble is that it is redistributed to millionaire farmers mostly when 60% of small farmers get no subsidies at all. Some of the subsidies even go to farms that are no longer in business!

Besides wasting billions of our money by staying status quo and helping the rich, the way our Farm Bill is laid out:

It contributes to our obesity, and illegal-immigration epidemics and to our water and energy shortages. It helps degrade rivers, deplete aquifers, elimiate grasslands, concentrate food-processing conglomerates and inundate our fast food nation with high-fructose corn syrup. Our farm policy is supposed to save small farmers and small towns. Instead it fuels the expansion of industrial megafarms and the depopulation of rural America. It hurts Third World farmers, violates international trade deals and paralyzes our efforts to open foreign markets to the non-agricultural goods and services that make up the remaining 99% of our economy.

And this description is in the first column of a long article on just how construed our Farm Bill really is. Small farmers get next to nothing in help, and are forced out. This says much about our free market system that conservatives like to tout causes competition and keeps everyone in check. Baloney. I’ve been screaming that there is no such thing as a free market system in America any longer as long as we have lobbies and big interest groups throwing millions at Congress. Again, the wealthy rule and find all sorts of loopholes to get rid of the little guy. Some free market system!

For you and me, that means we will continue to be force-fed high fructose corn syrup in everything we eat. Type II Diabetes will continue to rise. The organic industry will continue to struggle. If you’ve ever complained about the high prices of organic, now you know why. The big guys producing the top 5 crops don’t want you buying that stuff. And you won’t at $1.00 per apple. I’ve walked into the organic section of my store more than once with determination to buy what I know is better for me. The prices drive me out. I look for sales instead and go home with half of what I planned on. Example: If you want to buy cranberry juice, and I mean real cranberry juice, no other fruit juices in it, no corn syrup, no additives, full strength, not from concentrate it’s over $7.00 for 32 oz. Thank the big megafarms and our Farm Bill for that. Or then again thank Nancy Pelosi. As a matter of fact, read the article, then contact Pelosi and tell her what you think of her accommodating the same ole farm lobby once again.

Thank goodness I have fruit trees, a vegetable garden, and know how to do good old-fashioned canning. But if our weird weather keeps up, I won’t be able to do that. If we have a water shortage and hot searing sun, I won’t be able to water like it’s needed. I lost most of my fruits this past season when the trees were in bloom and we had a freeze. By fall, the very few small apples I had also had a black, oily residue all over the skins. We’ve yet to determine what it is and where it came from. I’m leaning toward jet fuel and just peeling the skins before I eat the stuff. This is going to get about survival. People who only buy from major stores, who don’t eat healthy anyway aren’t going to notice until it gets really bad. But for people who are health conscious, and raise the things they plan to eat, much like the small, unsubsidized farmer, we know what can happen, and happen fast in a bad way.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1680139,00.html.

http://www.house.gov/pelosi/contact/contact.html.
 

So the energy bill is signed. Cars will have to get 35 mpg by 2020. And we’re supposed to produce and utilize 36 billion gallons of bio-fuel by then also. I think the biggest incentive to do this is to advertise the eventual savings to consumers, and the fact that our overall bills will decline during the trip to 2020. Do you have an idea the amount of products that contain a petroleum or derivative of it? If the cost of petro declines due to less demand then all of those products should in turn become cheaper. According to an article in About.com: “The increase in fuel-economy standards alone is expected to save consumers $22 billion in 2020—up to $1,000 annually in gasoline prices for each American family—and reduce U.S. oil consumption by 1.1 million barrels per day in 2020 – half of what we currently import from the Persian Gulf. The new standards also will cut greenhouse gas emissions as much as taking 28 million of today’s cars off the road.

‘This bill is a huge Christmas present to the hardworking American families suffering under record high energy prices,’ said Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope. ‘It will offer them over $20 billion in relief at the pump and some $400 billion in additional savings through greener buildings, more efficient appliances, and better light bulbs. It will also help us begin fueling our cars with greener fuels from the Midwest instead of expensive imported oil from the Middle East.’

I know I liked my $103.00 combined gas and electric bill this summer. Just a few changes got me there, and I wasn’t put out at all. Two of my other bills for previous months were $114 and 115 each. I was even happier that I decreased my allotment to my local utility company. And I feel really good that I helped in some way with the environment. It’s pretty much in that order now. I started out thinking about the environment first, but when my energy bill kept going down, I noticed my motivation grow. It’s like losing that first 5 lbs., or being the first to arrive at a 50% off sale. My eyes start glowing, the gears start spinning…how can I get more of this? I went so far as to look into wind turbines. So I can see where the more we get into the “green” in this country and realize the bargain in the deal, the more we will seek out that change. That’s what Germany and a lot of Europe has done. It’s not so inconceivable for the U.S. to eventually follow suit. This energy bill, although watered down from the House’s original bill, is a good start. http://environment.about.com/ 

I’ve been interested in investing in “green” business and/or stocks but didn’t know who or where to look for these particular type of stocks and ran into this great website, InvestorIdeas.com, that lists almost 400 “green” stocks in 16 categories. There are a handful of mutuals featured too.

Every company listed is an active link and has a little description and history about the company. I especially liked the categories. Already people have preferences. I know I lean toward hydrogen fuel cell technology and yup it’s a category. There is the basic solar, wind, geothermal, and hydrogen technologies along with biogas, ethanol, and clean power plants to the companies that supply parts like turbines and flywheels.

So there are a lot of choices out there already. I guess I lean toward hydrogen fuel cells because Daimler-Chrysler was the company that supplied Iceland with their first commercial hydrogen buses back in 2003, and recently GM said that was an avenue they will pursue. Just yesterday I saw the commercial for Honda’s new fuel cell car that emits only “clean water vapor.” Hydrogen is on its way. If you ever get a chance to catch the Eco Tech series on the Science Channel watch for the engineer that invented hydrogen pellets that supply power on demand. He commented that we may be putting pellets in our tanks before long.

While I don’t know about that one, automakers are leaning toward hydrogen. Hopefully we will utilize hydrogen power and clean our water in the process. Now I would like a piece of that!

Check out this informative investment website: http://www.renewableenergystocks.com/Companies/RenewableEnergy/Stock_List.asp.
 

It’s really funny to me that scientists from around the world declared global warming to be real and that we are the cause of a lot of it, and people–senators, judges in England, all types, argued and some are still arguing the point, but once again capitalism and the old pocketbook is the catalyst for change in America.

Rising oil prices have industry scrambling to invest in energy saving technology. Wind is taking off so fast, GE, one of the biggest producers of wind turbines, are strapped to keep up with demands. Four billion gallons of ethanol were produced last year. We have 100 ethanol plants already, although I don’t like this trend. Wind good, corn NOT.

The MSNBC article I read stated that it’s no wonder. Industry consumes 1/3 of all energy. Without cutbacks, their profits get squeezed. Since there are some government incentives to invest in alternative energy sources, high oil prices are just the catalyst needed to drive industry into conservation ur umm going green, never mind that without massive change we suffer bad, bad consequences. Fires, floods, tornadoes, no matter, the real motive is profit.

I say, whatever works! I’ve read other articles that predicted the retail and industrial market is what will drive environmentalism forward. Those articles speculated that governmental policy in this administration would not likely be the catalyst, duh. The article also said what I blogged about before, there is more and more capital available for going green.

It’s a very encouraging article about how companies are cutting costs, making changes that are driving the market forward. This is good folks. The more interested industry is, the better the innovation gets, and the lower the cost to us.

Read: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12040418/.