>:( Dear John Baird

Dear John, (my first letter to you)

Thanks for speaking. It is always good to hear a  “CPC” speak. It confirms, for me, what is wrong with the CPC.

But first, some fun: I was speaking with a university-conservative group this morning. They remind me of the  GOP parrots in the USA, chirp, chirp. Are they reading from the “ Rove” binder again? Just insert the topic in the yellow text blocks? You would think these whippersnappers would have some innovation to support CPC policies.

Here is our “short” “discussion” (I know these kids are only in university, but, look at the critical thinking they are asserting on CPC policies. Do they defend their leaders' action? Or, just go for the personal attacks?). I think it basically reflects your positions, use of “talking points” and your leaders' positions. Either you are “with us or against us”. Yes / No. “Good for people, bad for people”. Sounds familiar? Here are “your” “future lemmings”, in training: (I did not correct their spelling, I don't have the goodest english either).

From a comment (CUConservatives):

RT @DeanTester: RT @timhudak Ontario families continue to pay for Dalton McGuinty's of waste http://bit.ly/hjq01p #cdnpoli1

@CUConservatives I suppose you fully endorse @pmharper and his wasting our environment and tax dollars of planned F-35 fighters? #cdnpoli

@deepgreendesign why do you hate our military? @pmharper fights for the best for our soliders and it would be nice if you supported them

@CUConservativs #pmharper You are misinformed. Again. I support our military, not our "leader". Learn before you spew. #iearth1st

@CUConservatives Still waiting for you response. Or is this your "cut 'n run"? I will write you an open letter. Maybe you will learn.

@deepgreendesign Busy actually working, not worrying about dellusional environmental activists. Best of luck!

@CUConservatives Let me know when you have time to be educated about toxic pollution. I feel it is important. Do you?

@CUConservatives You think toxic pollution is delusional thought? Would you like to debate that statement in a public forum?

Nice work conservative youth! Your future looks "dirty and expensive". Like it is in the USA. I seem to always get this "conclusion" in a discussion. They disappear, without support assertions with science.

Anyways, John let's get back to this. Nice tie! Did you know that the colour green is the most toxic colour, perfect! More PR damage control? I digress.

I saw the defence of your party policy on the environment: " Eye of the beholder",  Three Fossil awards John, the green market is growing. That means it is an economic opportunity. What is my big fuss? Lowering operating costs, innovation opportunity and reducing energy consumption. These things let corporations "give you" more taxes? Is that good? You answer that.

"Greasy O'Leary" talks about his " $60 barrel of oil". That is the market price. The total cost is not reflected in the market price.

The Cato Institute, a libertarian think-thank, did a study on the subject. What they found is simply mind-boggling. They calculated that the US spent between $30 to $60 billion (with a 'b') a year safeguarding oil supplies in the Middle East during the 1990s, even though its imports from that region totaled only about $10 billion a year during that period. A more comprehensive study that includes the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and other oil protection services (the coast guard is clearing shipping lanes and doing navigational support to oil tankers, etc) shows that actual subsidies to Big Oil are between $78 to $158 billion (again, with a 'b') per year.

So, in the US a barrel of oil costs a minimum of about: $450. This reflects the market price, taxes and the taxes spent to "get the oil". These are called "Free Markets", John, seems too high? Yes, best stick to the "market cost". You seem to be thinking "market" and not "environment".

Of course, Kevin O'Leary thinks that " Free Markets" work best. I hope he felt like me, letting the big banks fail first. I am not sure. I believe in making clean money. Lots of it.  As an aside, he is investing in AE. Some of it is terrible, but, maybe he will find a winner ( after many losses ). Looks like Kevin needs a course in complex math. I was laughing at his "investments" in "new technology". Looks like Kevin got screwed out his money on a few "new ideas". Thanks for the laughs, Kevin. Keep it up?

You have to look at the "total costs" of things. The "environment cost" does not see "Free Markets" as a definition of value. The environment is the tangible asset we share. The environmental costs are complex in nature,  not a line graph.

Your weak stance of "stepping back", in retreat, and waiting for an "international agreement" ( which you will not accept, regardless?) is another cowardly move. Your party lacks leadership and  "balls". I see no progressive CPC plan. I see no proof ( the scientific kind ) that you ignore the environment. You need to get that information from your "advisers" ( would be cool to only have leaders that are experts, like in China, but really, how well is China doing? They use science, but, not human rights and in GOP talk "DO YOU HATE HUMAN RIGHTS?" ;). But, you should listen to what the scientists have to report (as in a scientific report) not "your" truthiness.

But John, I know the science is " this and that". Have scientists observed "acceleration" in genetic mutation from climate change? Many physical examples exist, yet you "stall" and cower. Inaction.

So, where is your science, John? Is it peer reviewed? Is it internationally accepted?

Anyways, John, let's move on. Did you know that some European A.E. Companies have " backlogs" for their equipment? That is called equity, or "money in the bank". You can tax that stuff! Called "tax revenues".

I know the tarsands have a  backlog, but, what about all the pollution and water consumption in the prairies now? This is acceptable to "your model environment"? What is the total "environmental cost" of tarsands oil versus the total "environmental costs" of geothermal energy? Please, break it down for me! I already have and I want to check my assumptions. I want to see you demonstrate real mathematics, not "O'Leary" math.

Regardless of the "total environmental costs", let's move forward.

Our government has a dirty secret. It is called toxic pollution. Mountains of science showing that we need to have "greener" solutions: solutions that create less toxic waste.

I know you are "focused" on climate change now, but, what are you doing to control toxic pollution from Canada's energy, industrial and residential processes? Oh yes, and some toxic commodities coming in from foreign producers with no legal health standards. Seems like China is innovating and improving its "toxic accountability". Why? To make more money? "Innovation = money"?. Money for the corporation, and "tax money" for the government, through taxes.

Do you endorse the use of  CFL's?  Those are toxic.

What about the sale of AECL? Will the new owners clean up the mess, or will Canadians "flip the bill" (can we make a side bet)?

Why are people allowed to "block" AE installations with failed "science"?

You seem to be focused on climate change, so, let's start there. How can you prove that your actions will not impact negatively on our environment and our "Free Markets"? Are you moral enough to be "steering the car" now, John?

You regress from progress, waiting for other nations to lead? Canada was a leader, now "we" are "a joke", because your party cannot lead.

Are you afraid of making money (GOP:101 lemming-parroting)?

How will "your stance" impact the image of Canadian "climate expertise" and their "global business models"? I can tell you from experience, negatively. You are hurting companies and damaging reputations: to endorse "your big tar-patch bonanza". Your "yes/no" arguments rarely include innovation. Why is that? Do you think Canadian experts cannot figure out these problems? They, in most cases, already have.

By cowering from the challenge, we all face, you make us look "weak and ignorant", internationally (I guess someone did go to the "Bush motivational" sessions? Did you get the  GWB bobblehead and the new Rove "How to" pamphlet?).

You are afraid to lead. Leadership means innovation, here are some innovations by Canadians. Innovations brought on by opportunity and profit. Let me know if you find anything that has made lots of money ( except the Polo Vaccine, Salk gave it "free", to help people. What a man!)

Did you know that Canada helped with that too?

Here is a more detailed list.

Enjoy!

P.S. - Do you use a Blackberry? By using one, are you demonstrating "innovation brings increased efficiency to all"?

P.S.S. - will you deliver me quality?

>:( N.I.M.F.Y. ( or Ontario horizons either )

Not in my front/back yard or so I can see it.

One of the hurdles, in big wind farms, seems to be our systems of administration. The administration costs: Federal and Provincial. Now, I see, there is some resistance building against wind farms. The zero value added political "fresh meat" lawmakers drool over.

I can understand people fighting dumps ( Stop Dumpsite 41 (worked!): Tiny rocks! ), fracking, coal fired generation plants, lead water mains, particulates, air pollution in Ontario, high volume traffic, nuclear waste (Hey Tony Clement, nice anti-spam laws), the list goes on. Check out this site, emitter, shows pollution in your area.

Man, this summer I wanted to start a petition on "Elephant Grass" or Pampas Grass. Whats up with this? They cut the grass along roads and let this stuff thrive? I would rather see wildflowers than grass, plus, tall weeds slow down cars a little bit more ;) This stuff is invading and taking over. What is being done?

Making any argument, against investment in “green”, seems baffling. Energy Independence, for me, means green-energy Canada, then sitting on a big stack of oil. Think of it as Canadas “savings account”. All these “councils meetings”, green energy awareness programs are cute, but, why not dump the cash into infrastructure that generates "green" energy.

The ROI on these wind systems, located in our lakes, is great. We can put the “big mamas” out "there". Hopefully some 4MW action! I also think we should support the guys in Peterborough at GE. The company has been there for ~100 years. They make electrical motors. Buy local? Hmmmm. I am not a fan of all GE divisions, but these guys are "somewhat cool". Very specialized stuff. Talented people. Ontario innovation.

But, what about the wind-haters? Clearly, subsonics are present in wind operations. But, these folks must also understand that the blade designs, currently available, are not optimized, yet.

Many advancements are being made using natural systems designs (modelled after a whale fluke, with bumps to optimize stall characteristics and hopefully reduce noise (lost energy)). I am sure someone is working on a subsonic damping system? Who knows! The technology is still young. Once the towers are installed, they can upgrade systems, providing a founded economic benefit.

So, the planning starts then screech! NIMBY/NIMFY or I can see them! Oh no!

In Ontario, there are about 40 or so “local community” groups that have assembled to oppose new development in wind energy. Do you know who funds the groups? Not sure. ;)

Its members even pull the "carte de terror" on: “bat beatings”, “bird blenders” and subsonic “waves of death”. I wonder if the “waves of death” study is reliable? Are these environmental “talking points” based on false or flimsy science? And these complaints get heard even though some of these studies have been disproven already.

By having a “1st Annual Symposium” in Picton, Ontario (was held October 29-31, 2010): does not provide credibility to their intent to stall wind development. This group tells you in the disclaimer, that this is “new stuff” and they are not responsible. We need to all make changes, in how "we do this".

I understand that Prince Edward County is a gem, but, what about the health concerns of: irradiated areas, lower income areas around industrial sites, schools and living beside big highways, living near a coalgen station? What about the health concerns about the toxicity in Hamilton, etc.?

Some see the wind turbine as an imposition on natural beauty, but, one can also think of it in terms of progress and working with nature to help nature. I have been under some "big gigs" and "small gigs". There is noise, yes. There is subsonics, sure. I read some the "startling health effects" stated on this site: lost sleep? I also wonder what percentage of the population does not find wind turbines offensive. Maybe some people are supersensitive? I am not sure. Perhaps they can move to Hamilton?

Coal fire plants, other sources of atmospheric particulates and chemical pollution are my present concerns.

Its funny to see a "no smoking sign" outside the entrance to a building, in downtown Toronto, turn around and traffic is spewing "its stuff". If Ontario dreams of “Electric Cars” it better clean up the coal emmissions. Car in genergal, poisons all of the environment. Even Picton, Ontario. Is the government using diversion tactics? Second hand smoke? Go sit beside a campfire.

I have seen many documentaries on wind opposition, etc. People saying how off shore “utilization” ( wind, wave energy, etc. ) somehow destroys “the natural beauty” or “decreases property resale value” ( would their taxes go down or something? ). I guess this is "their" “sacred chunk of the planet”.

Would "be fun to float one of these $20,000,000 family" “cottages” out to the middle of the pacific garbage patch and let them set up shop. All that excess “surface area” breeds tons of unnatural bateria. Must stink! Poor turtles, fish, birds, sharks and Larry from Hawaii, with air matress in tow.

"They" paid for "their" "nature spot". I guess me complaining about mega-mansions as an eye sore and over consumption, would not get far in court.

Our planet is carved with: superhighways, new urban “California-Style Shopping Experiences”, widening country roads giving way to heavy traffic. Urban sprawl chewing up natural spaces. I was always kind of sad to see those quaint country drives turned into through traffic.

Our cities have dirty air, our beaches are strewn with decaying plastic ( which “they” say “may” be “health-impacting” “sometimes” under “specific unknown circumstances” ), wetlands turned into parking lots. Complaints from the Picton on this stuff?

But, not in my back yard. “Windmills are ugly”. Funny, I do not see the symposium talking about oil spills, or dead animals or sick children. This opposition is global, some are so rich they have enough legal power to “try to put out the sun with a garden hose and make NASA do it”.

Not in my back yard! Did they start the "1st Annual Meeting" to complain about: Nestle Waters, sue the American Plastics lobby, or fight against "big oil" incompetence?

Check out their website. If they only mentioned the health effects I would look closer, but when they “slap” up the other talking points, it really discredits them. Most of them have been disproven already. Light pollution in cities kills more that some wind turbines. Ever see a bird hit a tree? Some die from turbines, but, how many die from pollution?

Please people, its not strip mining Alberta, its some windmills, chill out. After a while, you will might find them pretty. Some folks say they are hypnotic when they are driving. Please.

Do they find: magestic highways, endless powelines, colourfully polluted water, smog alerts, sunset “enhancements” acceptable?

Funny how some see positive changes as negative. Can you do your part and "rethink what is important" for your “beautiful view” of our planet?

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

:) Reformat Me!

Technology sometimes seems like "crack". When The Beatles released their “new stuff” on iTunes, I shook my head, again.

Technology is based upon planned obsolescence: designed to last a few years, to be replaced by the next "shiny gotta-have-it-gadget".

Seems like most line up for the new toys. "Got to be first, so I can be different, like all the other different people".

Wish they lined up to vote or help save the planet, like that. Perhaps the GOP will give a “free” “Shiney9000” preloaded with  Conservapedia for each "smart" Palin voter in 2012? Maybe that is against the law, so, will they have to stick to just " corporate funded lies" again?

I have designed many systems: some corporations would "joke around" and ask to make it “kinda breakable" or "moderately robust" so it goes "bust" when it hits the ground. Oops, did I say that?

I have a book on it (Making Technology Happen). Lots of charts and math to "maximize innovation". This book discusses high technology, mostly.

Most technology breaks when it hits the ground. Designers plan it like that, that is their instruction from the "product marketing experts". When a cellphone is dropped or dropped in the toilet, it is designed to fail. Why? So you buy it again. The cost of repair is “prohibitive”. That is why we have $500 "throw away" phones. People love “the next one” more. I have seen girls that pray their phones break, so they can upgrade to the new "pink" one. Even more entertaining are vegans with cellphones.

Makes you wonder about that "old hardcore" Beatles fan: They bought: the original vinyl records, the 8 tracks, the cassettes, the CD's, the MP3s, now the iTunes. Amazing "free market" business model!

See, markets are  leveraged on overconsumption and this “planned obsolescence” to “ stay in the black” for next quarter. Being able to repair electronics is a no-no. They need all “the lemmings” to go and by the next “bleeding edge” of technology. Is this “sustainable”? Some marketing firms tell you that Apple is “sustainable”. How their operations are sustainable and their products are recyclable. What about the resources to make them? Are they sustainable? Now, I see "green" cellphones: 30% recycled plastic. Wow! But what about the electronics? That is where the energy is burned, the most.

Is it "sustainable": what does that mean, exactly? Is it "green"?  There is no standard definition, something the marketing firms use for "schlep-ization".  Poor Willie Lowman, if only he had planned obsolescence and a website!

When you buy your music, by law, you own the rights to play the song? You cannot copy it or copy to sell it. Okay, that sounds fair. So, why do people have to buy "the same songs six times"? It makes the corporations tons of money using forced innovation. Why create new stuff when you can innovate the format and sell it all again? Better yet, get the music industry and electronic industry together to form a "mutually beneficial partnership". All you need is an MBA and no conscience for our planet.

Same with televisions: CRT, plasma, projection, LCD, HD and now 3D TV. Keep innovating in small steps and let the consumer gobble up the new shiny stuff. Some buyers are very keen to do it. Cannot wait to watch  Dr. Strangelove in 3D! " Ridem' cowboy!"  , Or even this!

I remember living in Windsor, Ont. I did not buy cable, all I had was TVO / CBC and Fox News. It was fun to contrast the three, for quality. TVO: loaded with information. CBC: all fuzzy and vacant. Fox News: I called it "the murder channel". I could watch the Fox “news”, which was a "fear-based murder role call for the day" and maybe a "cute Christian puppy story" for that "ounce of hope".

My “rabbit ears” system, on my TV, was totally ghosted. I would watch a hockey game, not a sports fan anymore, and I saw two pucks. Irritating? Kind of, for a few minutes. Our brains adapt to the visual, we take in, then the image is corrected in our minds. Our "imaginations take over". After 2 or 3 minutes, I would “forget” that there were 2 pucks and my brain fixed it. Amazing! After you are watching an HD image, same thing. Wow, at first, then our brains interpret the story, not the quality of the image. Our imaginations are in “4D-Ultra Non-Linear Picture Quality”**** and they can "guess the next scenes".

Our consumption habits need to be upgraded to “Reality 1.1”? Yes.

So, really, do we need all this reformatting? Filling the landfills with the “passe” and passing our cash over for the “Next Thing 1.1”.

If you are a "product channel executive", at an electronics company, talk to me. Our company used to design military laptops that could drop 25 feet onto concrete, waterproof and could have components upgraded, quickly. See, in battle, they need reliable equipment,  so that's what the government regulated, quality. "They" were the customer, and with "tax dollars in hand", no expense was spared. The old “ if it saves just one life” bit?  Do we have the choice?

Do you think the government would define regulations, that would benefit “Joe the Consumer”, the way they regulate the "quality standards of military equipment"? Would they improve product requirements to help protect our investments in products and our environment? They do it for military, why not us? Because “regulations hurt the economy”. Interesting? Not really. "Same 'ole", for me.

Wake up, make changes and say no! Say “I will not keep buying this stuff to support the destruction of our environment”. I dream of the day Apple comes out with the iNewspaper 1.0 and consumers boycott buying on the launch date, by 3 months. Apple would be "kaput", out of business. Can humans possibly resist such new toys? No. When Hannah Montana is schilling the next “Disney Pop-Culture Upgrade”, the teen girls feed on it. Do the boys look and say “I need that to attract girls”? Not sure. Not going to get into “product peer pressure” psychology. It's actually a science for maximizing consumption habits.

I love music. I bought a reasonable stereo with very high-quality sound ( Class A Amplifier, an old military specification) and incredible speakers made in Canada ( Energy Connoisseur Series: A “monitor” speaker). My CD player is a bit junky.  Never buy a NAD CD player. I could buy another, but, it does the job.

My Amp is only 35Watts, but high current. It weighs a lot, heavy. Loaded with transformers and high power solid-state electronics. No treble, bass, nothing. Just a switch and a volume knob, and of course a channel selections switch. Simple quality.

35 Watts sounds wimpy, but it can deliver ~450 Watt “Dynamic Bursts” due to its high current. Compare this to you standard IC amplifier ( “the chip amp” in all electronics ). My system always puts them to shame. But, even "my kinda" equipment attracts the super-over consumer( 1000W Mono-block Class A amplifier usually starts at $80,000 to $160,000 a pop, and you need two of them, one for each speaker) don't forget your $30,000 8 foot speaker cables. Would not want " the guys to laugh at you".

Of course, this is completely unnecessary, but, remember, buying quality items that perform well and last, is less harmful to our environment. My stereo is now over 10 years old. Spent $1,200 bucks for a complete 35 Watt system. Works great! I am happy. It has lasted. Music, for me, is listening to what the artists recorded. No signal processing to pretend I am “in a cave” or “in the concert hall”. Just an honest representation of what the “mixing dude” put with the artist.

So, look at your next purchases. How long will they last? How well do they perform? How does cheap equipment stack up to buying quality? In the long run, you will thank yourself for thinking it through. Consume smarter!

Glenn Gould never sounded better! That's what I wanted! That's what I got! Some people think I am a music snob, but, in reality, I just want my simple music. I have loaded my "Glenn Collection" on my computer, but, it sounds terrible. I have heard the sound quality on iPods, same thing. That is my opinion. Some audiophiles shutter at the quality of CD's, but, they last longer than "Master Vinyl" records at $100 a pop.

Enjoy!

P.S. -

Genius is curiosity?

Genius is sharing? Makes you wonder why Glenn “disliked people”.

**** -December 7th Brain News! More self validation! hanks, Duke University! You guys are sma-rt!

:) Sorry, David Suzuki!

Open letter to: David Suzuki, CC, OBC, Ph.D LLD,

Hi David,

For a long time I have seen you as a champion of our environment. No question. Your education, for me, is invaluable, thank you! You are a huge asset to science, Canada and Earth. I respect your opinions and how you share them. Your curiosity inspires me to learn more.

I have had a grudge about you, though. I admit it. I guess it was my "frustration with the lack advancement of environmental issues". I firmly believe that we must take action, make changes. I misplaced this "one grudge". I felt that you were not accomplishing as much as I would like you to. Weird huh? Don't worry, its gone.

I have let this go a while back, now I am sharing my feelings with you. It was my brain tricking me? Yes. I was using transferrence, when I should have kept a positive attitude for progress. That is why I wrote: "METAMAN 101". I see science being ignored and I decided to take my own action. I want science to be "safe" and progressive.

Good luck, thanks, and "thanks for all the fish!"

Regards,

Graham Chivers, Active Blogger.

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

>:( Atomic Energy of Canada Limited: FIRE SALE?

I do not hear "a thing" about the sale of  AECL. Is it still on the auction block?

Why no news? Because it is a sensitive subject. There are no Conservative "Tweets" on this stuff. That would be a no-no! Not much, as far as news, from what I "have seen". Best to keep Canadians in the "dark"? Just like the GOP in the USA? Nothing new here.

I wrote a Blog, " Delivering Quality?". You should read it. I get into some details and experience I have had with " Quality" and " Free Market Economics".

Will the new owners of AECL deliver me, and you, "quality"? Will they act responsibly? What are the conditions of sale? I do not know. Do you? Do you care?

I do! Let's all get proactive on this issue. It is important!

Let's start talking. Best not to wait for Harper to push "another lame duck" past the "goal line"

Enjoy!

>:( Delivering Quality?

Opinion: Public or Private systems: Deliver Quality?.

Seems like the “private business model” is touted as “delivering the best products”? Well, that is what they tell us, anyway. Public systems have a tough time competing with them on cost, but, what about quality? Which delivers quality?

I can use a simple example:

Fox News

vs.

TV Ontario

news products. Which produces a higher quality product? Some would argue that Fox News delivers a better "informed Republican". And in a funny way, they do, but is that a "quality Republican"?

I guess people assume that “free markets” are designed to deliver quality? Or are “interested” in delivering quality?

No, most “free market” systems are designed to deliver profits to shareholders, at any cost. For example: downsizing "capability of profits".

But, wait, what about "Publicly Traded Companies: stock markets" that "hide secrets", only to "blow up" and investors lose it all? Is that quality?

How much did George Soros pump into GM, when "I bailed" from the Auto Industry?

I will force you to look into it. You will see that, for me, "the game was" up. I left the United States. Good thing. Wondering if I stayed: what my "imaginary Michigan mortgage" would be doing, right now, as I lined up for the "welfare".

I used to argue about innovating our technology, but, the company would not. When I returned to Ontario, it was like seeing "monkeys with sticks" versus the tech-savvy companies in the USA. There is a reason they have high productivity. I could see that many of these places were dead already. Now that is 80% true for my "innovation segment", in Ontario. That is why I went "green", that is a growing segment!

My US company did not see a future in innovation nor investing to do it. I was promoted inside the company to help innovate. After the "establishment" figured it was too hard, even though we designed and assembled a very complex machine, the first time without major headaches. They said no.

Instead, it reorganized using expensive "MBA brats", and then the company eventually failed. Sold to the French. We provided all the advanced flexible manufacturing systems for drive train ( engine blocks, cylinder heads, transmission casings ) and Custom Modular Manufacturing equipment ( Boeing, Air Bus and a guy named "Big Tony" ).

Our company was smart, they had made this, "grow and divide" its business model. They had been doing forever. Made them very rich. Our "segment" was sold off, and the other "segment" became

Intermec

. My last big projects were: the "blocking line" for Chinas first big car company:

Tianjin motors

, Advanced Machining System lines for

Clean Emissions Diesel Truck Engines

( Navistar ), and

Automating Boeings Wing Spar

Advanced Machining Process, eliminating human "error". Dudes, with angle grinders and sometimes hangovers.

The "spin-off" segment, Intermec holds

RFID patents

with

IBM

in an "Intellectual Property Sharing" agreement. Meaning, they share knowledge for mutual benefit! Go figure! Seems like IBM sees the potential in keeping their little "busy beavers" smart, informed and competitive. Makes them more loot!

Imagine if our government were interested in making more tax revenues? Would we benefit? I am not sure.

Do they think "smaller government" will make Canada a flagship country and we will all laugh and play in the streets?

RFID is changing the world, being able to track things in real-time. The US military already uses it, they bought in first! They slap an "RFID tag" on a box with "

Winnie the Pooh

" dolls for kids in Iraq, and program the tag with "what is inside the box". You can also monitor remotely, the temperature, speed, shock characteristics and have it display on Google Earth in "real time". good for security and anti-theft. Imagine putting RFID on "politicians budget dollars"? Then we could see whats going on. ;)

Sharing information is important. Now IBM and Intermec are scooping up business like "there is no tomorrow". Why? It reduces costs and improves information for its customers: provides for "instant info.". And hey, technically, there is no tomorrow, because the sun shines on this planet constantly.

Tomorrow is a human

construct,

not reality. Reality is science.

Something, I think, Canada's government would dictate to us ( sharing quality information ) as "wasting taxpayer dollars": sharing quality information and empowering us.

Can we trust "private schools" to teach progressive science? Would private schools behave in the "best interests of the students"? No, private models are based on profits, not quality of education.

Am I wrong? Sometimes, if a school has an incredible reputation in science, art, dance, music, cooking, fashion and lifeguarding. People recognize its quality first, not its profitability. Are private schools responsible? You decide. Look at the quality of the product first.

If you had the choice, would you go to the "most recognized school" or "the most profitable"? You decide. What if your parents decide for you? Is that a choice?

Do “free markets” deliver quality? Can “free markets” ever deliver quality? Maybe, if we all had a vote: in government policy and corporate responsibility.

What if governments force corporations to deliver more quality:

AIG

,

GM

?

Well, that is called a “bailout by the public taxpayer”. But wait, that is not “free markets”! It's another bad investment. Like Canada's stimulus package ( first, was it needed? ), not investing in our futures, but fixing roads and expanding buildings when real estate vacancy is on the rise and driving cars is bad for the environment. "Build it and they will pay". Sounds lucrative.

Good thing we have a free system (

Wikipedia

) to learn about things, because governments do not want you to learn about "any of this". It would "scare the 1% that control huge company assets" and jeopardize "global stability".

If governments stop regulation of business, does that deliver "better quality", to you, or "better profits" for corporations?

Today, do you think the governments are public or private? You decide ;)

Enjoy!

P.S. - Would Canada be better/worse off, now, without our platform and "history of public systems"? Are they selling my future? They just did, again.

GREEN BLOG :) Bacteria!

Bacteria for what?!

Bacteria is mother natures little busy body. They “munch and munch” till there “ain't no more”.

Without bacteria, we would have no plants or animals. Why? Because bacteria are in symbiosis with all living things, most of the time. See life on earth is just one big symbiosis party. Until homosapiens discovered science! With science, homosapiens are out of control, add medicine, it gets worse, add computers and look where we are at now! Seems like when you evolve “beyond” “mother nature”, the rules change. How true is that! Mother nature cannot keep her simple balance formula going. She still has tricks though, tricks to eliminate a lot of homosapiens from the planet.

I like bacteria, especially in some foods! Yum. Some bacteria is good, some bad!

Bacteria can eat lots of stuff. Its natures tiny “recycling heebee – jeebee” that works 24/7 given the right environment to do “the dance it does”. I have known about “special” bacteria for almost a decade now. Special? Yes, Special. I know of bacteria that eat oil, eat lead and even make yogurt so yummy.

In fact, some companies use them to treat toxic materials with no long term damage to our environment.

Why did BP not use bacteria to clean up the oil spill? Simple! BP, and the oil-boys-network own a company! It makes COREXIT ( get it? Corexit – “corrects it” - those oil marketing guy sure are slick! Almost as slick as my #iearth1st , but hey, I am a greengenius and they are just scumbags #nailedya )! Thats the stuff they use. It is toxic to wildlife? Yep! So, why do they insist on using it? Because it makes them money “on the other side of the street.” Every time they screw things up: oil spills, tanker spills, municipal oil spills, etc., they can make more money by buying their own stuff to "fix it". Why do they not use bacteria? Because it replicates and solves the problem, over time, itself!

This is a poor business model for greedy corporations. Things that fix themselves are a no-no! They would prefer to sell things that only they make and can sell lots of. It makes sense, if you could care less about the environment and life on earth!

I talk about bacteria, in my blog “Green Electronics”, "how to compost your electronics". Check it out when you are emotionally stable!

So, now you know! You know that companies never do anything unless there is a profit to be made, no matter the environmental damage. Its the American way (the old way)! And has been adopted by many countries through privatization of foreign governments. Like Canada!

Sounds gloomy huh? Well, there is always a bright side in my blogs!

I rarely make a shout outs, but, I will today. And, this is a shout out to all companies that clean up toxic “whoopsies” using bacteria, or use bacteria to help improve processes. I am located in Toronto, Ontario, Canada! So, I am giving my shout out to this company (you just got the deepgreendesign "jolt")! Good work guys! You are part of our green future! I hope you keep decreasing your carbon footprint and ours!

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

GREEN BLOG :) Green! Green?

Green! Green?

“Little” factoid for your brain today:

Did you know that the chemicals in colour dyes are bad for our environment?

Did you know that the colour green is typically the worst colour of our “consumer spectrum”? I am sure there are many different types of green dyes, but, on average, green is the worst offender.

Think! Is green “Green”? Next time you buy a “Green product” check the packaging. Is it green? Are the dyes all natural? If not, are you helping the environment, or hurting it? If they cannot think about the impacts of using green dyes, is the product any greener for the environment?

If packaging people are talking like this (#nailedya) what is inside? Read it. What you learn is that you need to teach yourself more about Green than packaging, by law, does not have to say.

Critical thinking: Do it!

Enjoy!

P.S. - I have other Blogs, for you, to spur your “critical thinking about Green”!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

GREEN BLOG :) Geothermal: Quickie & Slowly

Geothermal, Quickie & Slowly.

Let's talk just green power (no emissions: no corn-diesel).

Wind and solar generation only work when there is wind and sun; they are an Intermittent power source.

From Wiki: "Using larger amounts of intermittent power may require upgrades or even a redesign of the grid infrastructure.". Sounds like Hydro One is planning ahead to suck more taxes from Ontario? I am sure they are thinking of more ways to get tax money than resolve our energy problems in Ontario.

Geothermal energy is baseload, meaning “24/7” and constant output (except scheduled maintenance and no massive earthquakes). Add enough geothermal capacity, and we can also eliminate some peaking plants. 

Load balancing is what stabilizes our electrical grid “energy” from intermittent sources. When wind and solar are operating, they also need to run traditional loads (coal & gas) to balance them out, load-following. Geothermal is baseload, like traditional generation plants. This is why wind and solar are not that great for direct transmission into the grid, far from communities.

Wind and solar are great for distributed generation, meaning, feeding a small group of loads (homes &  arcades) that are already grid connected. Why? Because of transmission losses. Transmitting energy through the transmission lines incurs a loss. You can ballpark it at ~30% loss, just on our wires. Distributed generation, using intermittent sources, is better than Intermittent sources feeding directly to the grid.

So when deciding on government grants for renewable energy: we should be choosing geothermal first. Why? With solar and wind, you need to run dirty energy to balance their loads ( plus transmission losses! ). Geothermal does not need load balancing since it is baseload generation ( okay, power engineers, I do not want to bore my audience too much, so, keep it to yourself, okay? )

So the next time someone installs a big wind or big solar array, look at it first. Can Geothermal do a greener job? Yes, because of the compound benefit we get with each geothermal installation. Intermittent loads complicate this balancing of "black magic" that Hydro One does. That is why the executives there make huge cash, right?. I see they are really thinking ahead too, thinking more profits and budgets as they have to modify the grid to accommodate a growing number of intermittent power sources across the province.

And that was your geothermal quickie, Bye-bye!

Want to go deeper on geothermal?  Read on.

Transmission losses can be thought of as “just the losses in the transmission lines”, but, I assert that we need to use science to get a better picture. This will become important when you think of investing in solar power, wind, passive solar, geothermal, and yes you geeks: compost, hydro, gas digester, etc. ( I included losses in heat, so, insulate those pipes!)

The losses are also based on what types of equipment we use and where you are “located”. I say “located”, because you want to be “as close” (meaning not only distance but, number of “transformations” of energy that happen between, say, your toaster versus your electric car) as possible. Items that hold a charge are less efficient versus items with an electrical cord, but even chorded items can have losses, like electronic device such as your  PVR, whew) to the “generator” that is actually powering your device. Plus, charged items have dirty batteries!

Equipment that transforms power between  AC and DC always incurs a loss. Step transformers (that step up/down voltage) also have losses. Those are the laws of the universe folks until we have super-cheap superconductors. The loss can be thought of mostly as heat. Sometimes a fan is needed for cooling them. Your microprocessor also has a fan, same idea. Items that use induction charging are even worse for losses, if the device is not in direct contact with the charger pad, again heat losses. Charge a battery, heat. Come to think of it: Car exhaust = heat, Truck brakes = heat. Heat losses at your home. All called waste heat, because its a waste. Could this be another factor in climate change too? ;)

So, once you add up all the transformation losses, you can look at the total efficiency of your energy transmission. A solar panel connected to a LED: super efficient transmission. A cordless drill, charged with grid power, way out in the " sticks", much much less efficient transmission. A DC Drill connected to a larger solar panel + sunlight: super efficient transmission (“they” do not sell DC products: A DC refrigerator would help, think about it). Electric car charging with grid power, way out in the sticks, much much less efficient transmission. If you installed a solar panel at your house in the sticks, you would need batteries and a transformer and rectifier. More losses. But, it will be "less loss" than the energy from the grid. Gets complex sometimes. That is why you have to break it down and understand how you use electricity.

Whew, Geothermal. Most people whine about geothermal being location dependent. I agree. You have to be on earth to get it. It's down deep. Its called deep geothermal. It's potentially dangerous until we figure this beast out. Does Canada have the resources to design a deep geothermal system? Think of each deep geothermal system being in the 100 – 200  MW class. Of course, there is nasty toxic chemicals and heavy metals, that is what earth is made of. Again, we have to use bacteria and metal capturing systems to keep it Green. We have a big country, plus, these stations can replace current systems, on location (no need to explode old coal stations! I talk about dirty coal trying to look clean. In the end, I provide a  green migration path of older coal systems to deep geothermal. Reduce and repurpose old coal and NG with Green deep geothermal systems. No emissions, no fuel, no worries ( maybe ).

Canada also possesses “Best of Class” mining ( drilling ) technology. Deep geothermal is deep. Most would complain that it costs a lot to go “deep”. It is if you do not innovate drilling techniques. This is why I assert that we must use hydrogen drilling. It is fast, and there is “no wear” versus drill bits that need replacing at ~$30,000 a pop. These “water channels” that need to be drilled have to be big. Hydrogen drilling is the best method that I have seen so far to meet that challenge. You could probably drill holes that are a meter in diameter, with depth rates that will blow your mind.

A team in France has already started, not with the “hydrogen drilling”, but they have 50MW deep geothermal working. Baseload. No emissions, but they still have the toxic problems.

Innovation is important to Canada. We need to leverage our knowledge and think up new strategies on green power. We need political leadership to bring these people together and start making big money, big jobs, clean our environment, and define world-class systems for export. Sound like a dream? It is my dream for now.

Our politicians do not risk, thus no reward for us or other countries needing innovation. 

Politicians would hate to lose one vote, even if it is at the expense of Canadas and our planet's future.

Enjoy!

P.S. - I am not a power engineer! What I say may have some errors, but, I want to highlight the benefits of geothermal. Hope most of it "makes sense" to everyone!

I Love Bulk Barn!

This is a wake up call! Just kidding, no fear here.

Giving credit is important and I would like to thank Bulk Barn ( and all bulk food stores ). I have spent the last few years evolving my “green being”. This has led me to reduce the number of processed foods I buy and buying things that offer me the best quality and “greenest” packaging.

People need to be aware that our food has the largest carbon footprint on the planet ( don't tell the US military this, they think they have the largest carbon footprint ). Consuming greenly is the single biggest action you can make on our environment. I always eat everything I cook and try not to let food spoil ( “crisper?”, they should call it “the rotter!” – some comedian ). These things help when you consider our world population.

Back to Bulk Barn. Making more meals from scratch, I find that Bulk Barn has most of the ingredients I need. They offer more organic items. Did I mention price? Price is good. But, my favourite thing is the packaging. Yes, it is plastic bags ( I would like to see them move to green plastic – crinkle crinkle ), but when you add up all your purchases versus “brand name” packaging, you have 1/3 the volume, nice! What does that mean? My experience shows that given a similar group of items bought at Bulk Barn versus a grocery store, I use one green-bag for Bulk Barn and three green-bags at the grocery store. Warning! That one Bulk Barn green-bag is heavy ( okay, a little fear ).

Thanks bulk food stores of the world!

P.S. - I am now demanding you use green plastic! Help me out here.

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Electrify GO?

Follow @deepgreendesign

If you enjoy this blog, please share or leave a comment!

Let's electrify GO ?!? Going green in public transit is a greenwash game, with so many politicians getting their “information” from "experts", some information is good and some is bad. This information results in the extraction of your tax dollars. Seems our system can't tell the difference between a lobbyist and an expert? With gentlemen like Rob Ford in charge we need them to make the wise decisions. 

Recently, I saw a proposal to Electrify the corridor for GO Trains. Currently, they are run with diesel engines. In green Toronto, most folks are "hip to the scene" and see diesel as dirty — "Yucky" some might even say. Electric is cleaner.

The cost of third-rail electrification has huge upfront costs, a ~$10 Billion investment, but promises energy savings, thus future operation costs, and improvements in commute times. Compared to diesel it does seem third-rail has an advantage but is it the greenest choice for green rail?

What they do not tell you are the challenges with the operation of electrified tracks. I worked with an Amtrak designer, they spoke highly of the headaches from shopping carts breaking the electric connection from the train to track. They wasted lots of money in improvements, added safety, etc. The companies that performed maintenance cashed in on the taxpayer dime. Sure they have challenges, all design does but, I would rather focus on how “green” dedicated electrified rails are. Extra maintenance isn't green or cost effective.

What most forget about electricity is that there is typically a 30% loss in power in transmission. Let's quantify those carbon emissions! A majority of the corridor will be electrified by nuclear energy. Is nuclear energy as clean as they say it is?

So for efficiency, starting at 70% is an estimate. Transmitting power also requires lots of materials, safety design and plenty of maintenance to “light up” the third electrified rail, that does not even include the "installation fees". This loss of efficiency plus the capital costs and maintenance add up fastest for the taxpayer. Imagine the construction-delay mitigation costs in Toronto. 

Plus, most of this "green-train-idea" would use Ontario dirty coal, or nuclear generation. Good thing we sold the nukes? When we move electricity from one place to another, there is a loss. Add up all the losses of the train combined with the losses from inefficient generation and the bill gets bigger. How much are we spending to reduce emissions? Is there a better design solution? I know there is, but seems private companies would rather work on ten billion dollar projects, not one billion dollar ones.

There is such a thing as a clean diesel hybrid ( I think I have seen it in cars ). Canada had a company: Railpower Technologies. Of course, it was gobbled up by a US company. What they do with the technology, I have not followed for many years. Clean technology that the Canadian taxpayer funded and then sold to a foreign company ( don't get me started ). The benefits of the system are searchable on Wikipedia. What I am getting at is that the technology exists for a greener solution than electrifying rails.

I am sure that the "GO folks" know about this stuff, not my point, but we should be critical of these infrastructure proposals and pick the greenest solution. Don't get me started on the corruption involved with a $10 Billion dollar budget (it smells like $20 Billion already).

Solution: A clean-diesel electric hybrid car that runs on the existing rails. Simple. I am sure Bombardier could whip one up in short order. Might just create some more Canadian jobs!

Hey! That is something I could design for Toronto! With help from a few friends of course!

Enjoy!

No Greenwash Christmas!

I'm fearing another Greenwash Christmas ( ... to the tune of “I'm dreaming of a white christmas" ).

Is there anything worse than a greenwash? Marketing firms schlepping the same old junk with a green facade. With “mega consumption day” , December 25th , on its way, many are out "to make a difference" by purchasing “green products”. People are somehow trapped into the social phenomenon that “what I buy for others” reflects on my person and charity. Even the notion that gift giving is an accepted means to express ones emotion, further demonstrates gift giving as a culture of consumption. As such, people are out there gobbling up “green products” in an effort to demonstrate how much they care about a person and the environment. Two emotions with one stone? No, give the gift of a healthy planet!

The fact is that very few products are green. Being a product designer, I can tell you that majority of these products are far from green. Using a few green materials on a device that will end up in a landfill, in short order, is not that of green. No improvements in lifecycle. No tangible benefit on the environment.

I saw one product, some tiny headphones, that uses wood ( that is “happy-farmed” ) to make it “green”. The same old headphones, but a tiny chunk of “green” wood. Seems, in my experience, that headphones break easily because of the tiny fragile wires that connect the “ear buds” to the playback device. In my youth, I can remember repairing these tiny headphones numerous times to fix them, but more importantly because they were expensive and I was “cheap” ( still am ). Yet, consumers seem to think that green products help the environment. The greenest thing is not to consume. Why not give “no gift” for the environment ( wow, people will think you are cheap ). My family has evolved ( but not completely ) to give more gifts that make great memories ( making a nice dinner, a few days visit to a cool place, a train ticket for a visit ). Still, I do get a plastic toy, from China, from my mom ( yes, I am over 40 ). I tell people: no gifts thanks, give me something more! Slowly, people are “getting it” after many years of me telling them “do not buy landfill-junk for an environmentalist Bright for christmas”. Okay, books are good, yummy food treats: yes. I think you get my point.

This christmas, break free from the lemming mentality and be original. Give a gift of experience. From my experience, people enjoy them more and they are friendlier on the planet.

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Green Buildings: How Green?

Living in Ontario, I have seen the manufacturing sector die. I have been watching: the results of “smart business decisions” decay Canadas economy, “smart political decisions” supporting the “free market” schemes cooked up in the Chicago schools ,the decreased standard of living for most Canadian families, the failure to invest and innovate using Canadian technology. Canadas revenues from taxes is down year after year. Privatization and more dependency on the private sector for a better Canada? How are things going so far?

The “next quarter” philosophy of economics is short sighted and needs to be questioned, but, its results are evident already. The markets have evolved to maximize operations for profit using the least investment. That is the sizzle in free markets. The economy is optimized according the laws they operate under and ROI ( return on investment ) plays an important role in accessing loans ( and grants ). The result: most companies ( and governments ) do not own the building the operate from.

Wow, where was I? Okay. So what concerns me is “Green money” or “Green economics” and greenwashing.

One example of “Green Economics” is the idea that companies become more “sustainable”. Some companies have adopted the notion that relocation to a “Green Building” is part of that effort. Selling this idea, relocation to a “Green Building” means: lower energy consumption, “eco-friendly” materials, government incentives, credibility of “green” operations, and the almighty marketing potential.

Sounds valiant and the right thing to do. Is it? From my observations, many industrial parks are becoming vacant. Developers tend to prefer new land ( especially flat farmland ) since development cost does not include demolition expenses. I have seen some larger facilities ( primarily those with high recyclable value: manufacturing type real estate ) razed for new “Green Building” space ( some being Big Box retailers ). Those that I have seen are rich in structural steel and machine systems ( mostly steel, copper, aluminum ). Don't misunderstand, recycling metals is a must.

The big picture here is the entire process ( of having a good place for companies to work in ). We build new buildings and leave old buildings for the market to transform ( raze or repurpose ). It is wasteful compared to repurposing buildings. People seem to forget how consumptive this is. Concrete production is responsible for ~10% of global emissions. When you think of humans and consuming, it makes sense. Look around, what do you see? Concrete folks. So when a new “Green Building” is going up, think of the emissions. Not only the emissions from making new concrete, but the emissions generated by each new item that building will contain ( green product or not ). Materials such as: glass, aluminum, steel, stone, copper, wood, cotton, paint, and the biggie:plastic.

Repurposing a building has environmental impacts as well. But, if we save the bones of a building ( and in some cases modifying them ), new standards of LEED can be utilized to repurpose. The benefit of repurposing is also a wise choice since existing infrastructure is conserved ( electrical grid connections, water mains and roads do not need to be constructed to service the new “Green Building”).

On this note, I would prefer Canada only provide “Green Money” to development projects that encompass this repurposing paradigm. Corporations that change buildings every few years for marketing image and lower tax regimes is having a destructive impact on our cities, our remaining greenspaces and most importantly, Canada farmlands.

I think it is time to have government regulate development that is scientifically-demonstrated as environmentally responsible.

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

US Midterms & The War on Green

Watching the Republican results, I am concerned that Americas quest for change is over. Republicans will stall any progress made and delve back into the "anything but Obama" routine.

Americans were not impressed with Obamas performance over two years? I guess they did not read the fine print. Americans need to be more involved and aware of what Obama has accomplished.

The Teabaggers, formed 30 somedays after Obama took control of the "smoking heap of crap" left by the neocon puppetmasters, only goal is control. Stupid people bought to fight the Democrats and anything progressive that may lead to change.

Funded by Kock Industries and like-minded goon corporations funded the Tea Party(s).

wiki - "From 2005 to 2008, Koch industries donated $5.7 million on political campaigns and $37 million on direct lobbying to support fossil fuel industries.[citation needed] Greenpeace says that Koch Industries donated nearly $48m to climate opposition groups between 1997-2008.[40] According to Greenpeace, Koch Industries is the major source of funds of what Greenpeace calls "climate denial".[41] Koch Industries and its subsidiaries spent more than $20 million on lobbying in 2008 and $12.3 million in 2009, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research group"

Obama must win the next election? Yes. Will he? Maybe....America had its chance and failed. What is at stake? Science, evolution and of course climate change.

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Consume Greenly

I am a long time environmentalist. I have always been fascinated with the complexity of nature and the complexity of life. My scientific lifestyle started early and I have been exposed to some pretty amazing science. I have been an advocate for change for quite a while now and it is refreshing to see my concerns about the environment being a conscious revolution in human culture. Awareness is great, but only action results in our future. As such, I migrated my lifestyle to match my convictions in both my personal and professional career. I have been doing this for 5 years now and it has its ups and downs. Being passionate about the future of our planet and being involved in the day to day business of green is a challenge. I approached companies years ago to propose green portfolios and was turned down. Many of these companies, since, have changed and gone “green”. Well, It is a start and I am glad that market pressure is now behind the green message and challenge. This is a big positive for our environment.

What changes have I made to increase my “greenness”? I have been working in a home office for 5 years ( paperless ). I do not use a cellphone for business ( as they represent e-waste and planned obsolescence, in my business philosophy). I do not own a car: I ride my bike, use the INTERNET for business communications and “rent” transportation as required ( trains, carpool for trips to the cottage ). I do not purchase highly-processed foods. I do not have any gas-hobbies ( motorbiking, helicopters, racing cars ). I do not travel by plane. I repair items and buy things I need, not want. I have simplified my wardrobe to natural materials and some fleece ( leather, cotton etc. ). I have looked at each of my “processes” and tried to make the best "green" choice, a choice that makes a positive impact on our environment. Making these changes gives me a pretty good perspective on going green. It is a balance of consumption and existence. I can improve and get green still. We all can.

Of course the new market is filled with "snake oil". The same marketing companies that sold its market the "lifestyle of consumption" and greed is now switching gears to promote a “green” twist, at any cost ( Rolls Royce builds its cars in a green sustainable factory - but is buying a Roll Royce a benifit to our planet? ). I look at a lot of “Top 100 Green Company Lists” and see the same companies that brought us to this level of consumption, waste and pollution to being with. Banks, Car Companies, Chemical Companies, Computer Companies, Consumer Product Companies. Banks that fund damaging companies. Car companies that thought bigger was better and branded luxury as social status. Electronics/Computer companies that sell products that are obsoleted quicker resulting in e-waste. Consumer Products that claim to be "green". On these lists, on occasion, we actually see an innovative company making a difference. A technology company or alternative energy company. The sources of solutions, not the problems. Sometimes these companies that are making a difference are bought by bigger competing companies and do not use the technology.

Some feel that being "green" means doing things greener. I do not. It would be refreshing to see the “green” label used for things that are green, not greener. Running a company that destroys our environment in a more sustainable manner should not be considered, but, when companies can charge money for a "rubber green" stamp of approval, "green" is lost in consumerism.

People hold the power of choice. The buying decisions of the public and consumption habits of each of us have the largest impact on our environment. What we buy, what we do not. So, when you are making a purchase, think of all the factors behind what you are buying and what the product is. It is our future, so, make some changes in your life and get activated on improving our environment. I have made my choices and I feel comfortable in my science behind my decisions.

I think that this is important for my business as it gives me tools to understand any company and show them how to be green. I have turned down “green” jobs: greener cellphones and a myriad of useless “landfill” plastic products that will not last. Items that hurt our environment. I think it is responsible and I like to lead by example. I feel it is the only credible way and honest approach to what I believe in.

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Green Military?

"A kinder softer, greener military?"

Stopping all wars is the greenest way! And I can prove it, using science!

Why are the governments forcing the consumer to "go green" when they are to blame?

I have seen that the US military has been looking into equipment that uses less energy. Of course, "greening" military equipment makes sense, less resources to transport, less logistics, less cost. Spare me! The US military is the largest energy consumer aka polluter.

Being a career designer, I know that the basic “traditional” design philosophy is “cheaper”. Use less materials, remove cost and reduce operational costs. Same old.

I am sure most know that the US military is the most energy consumptive entity on earth. With those B-52 bombers flying with nukes 24/7 with a zero shot record, the return on environment (ROE) is terrible. I am not suggesting that each B-52 pop a nuke to make each mission worthwhile. No.

Greening war machines under the guise of “helping the environment” makes me sick. The nerve to slap a green message to killing machines takes the cake for my greenwashing list so far.

The US military is sending me the “lemming feed” for this one and I am not going to take that bite, thanks. On one hand, they want to sell this notion of saving a little gas is somehow going to improve my planet? Improving how?

The US military still uses depleted uranium rounds in many of its ordinance. Lets talk turkey (not the country).

Depleted uranium (DU) has been an issue for a while. Most say that DU is not “that” radioactive. Well, this is true, it is mildly radioactive, but, this is a talking point constructed to divert attention to the fact that DU is a toxic metal. Much like lead and other heavy metals, DU is classified as a toxic metal.

It is hard to find definitive studies showing that DU is outright nasty stuff. Most information leads to the typical “not 100% sure” scientific argument, or as I call it “the lawyers stamp of approval” to argue for its use in times of war.

The United Nations has a few studies and they do not endorse the use of DU.

DU is amazing, from the war profiteer perspective! DU is made from spent nuclear materials processing. Wow, talk about recycling! Instead of dealing with storage, the USA has learned that they can shoot it at their enemies. Lets face it, it is a war profiteers dream product: improved killing efficiency and nobody wants to store radioactive-toxic metal and the taxpayer flips the bills! The war profiteers clink the glasses over a juicey bonus for the quarter.

DU will eventually enter the water sources of all the places it has been used: Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan and the places that don't appear on the news. Iraq has already experienced DU's effects, but the US truthiness machine can quickly discredit any observations. I hesitate to post any findings, since most are not “scientific” according the GOP law experts that protect America.

What science does show us is that all life seems to be impacted by toxic metals. I have always held that toxic pollution is far more of an issue than climate change. Sure climate change is important and can devastate the human population, but, what else are we expecting to happen? Toxic pollution impacts all lifecycles on this planet. I am sure that chemical companies are happy that everyone is concerned about carbon emissions and not the poisons they are producing in the environment we all share.

I started this blog with the military trying to save a few percentage points of fuel in an effort to help this planet ( http://tinyurl.com/ydjj4hb ). This is such a complete joke. The audacity of the military to slap a green message on its products is outrageous!

Makes me angry that these suppliers are probably getting “Green Tax Dollars” to do this stuff. Makes me angry that the US voted to continue using DU. The UN vote was 122 to ban DU and 6 against (US, UK, France, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Israel).

Looking at the list of countries, I can understand why they want to use DU: they are countries, whose citizens are burdened with government military control by war profiteers.

Hybrid tanks, fuel cell powered UAV's, maybe even solar powered nuclear weapons sites? They are on the drawing boards, trust me. It is the natural process of “innovation”. Good technology exploited for war... expect to see more of this greenwashing... just look at nanotechnology.

Here are some links:

“Green” army vehicles :

UN report on DU:

Wikipedia Ad-Free

2001 report on DU ( thanks lawyers! )

Report on disposing of DU in USA ( why not dump it on Iraq! )

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Green Risk = Greener Rewards

Resetting the priorities of the “old” economy and the business of “not-that-much-eco-value” industry is a must.

As "research" and "innovation" matures, it culminates into a stuffy business model that includes private companies and academia feeding on government funds ( military research and military innovation, that is). It evolves into its own self-sustaining entity. Spending on antiquated programs seems only to support the tired old industry which, in this case, focuses on a small, highly specialized and technology expensive industry, that could not catch Bin Laden. The investments made in the Canadian Space Program reflects, in some part, this idea versus taking on the environmental challenges Canada has. Challenges I think Canada would succeed in.

Canada is involved in space and the spending is about $300 million a year. This excludes the staffing costs and pensions we pay for the government overhead to keep Canadas “toe in the pool” for expensive small splash projects in zero-gravity. The technology is interesting but services a small niche market. Now, a lot of pride is included in this field of experts and we are looking at some of the brightest minds in the industry. Being involved in space is important, but, how Canada is involved is the important key to understanding my point.

MDA is a satellite company in Canada. They are indeed one of the leaders in image technology and if we compare the potential of MDA to the Canadian Space Programs ( Moon visits, checking out Mars and space arms ) we see that MDA has technology that is applicable to the environmental issues we all face now. That being said, Canada was willing to sell MDA, a few years ago, to the “Bushy Empire” for a song, to be used for military applications. Not sure if Stephen Harpers lusty privateers were involved to look away, but, Peggy Nash, currently the President of the NDP, blocked the sale. She saw the value. She saw the value in the jobs and the technology. Thanks Peggy.

I think that a mission to Mars and the funds invested to say “we did it” is careless when the potential to advance and expand MDA beyond commercial satellite communications to environmental mapping for scientists, farmers, researchers, etc. has a huge potential in todays market for “Earth Info”. Imagine if an 12 year old wanted to see progress of rainforest depletion in Canada? ( I hope that made you think )

I see the adventure in exploration, but, I think we have bigger "fish to fry" here on Earth, first. I would like to see many government programs die and those funds used to focus on the future markets that are large and profitable for Canada. Of course we lack bold leadership in Canada. I don't see any potential candidates willing to risk their smug necks on bold innovation.

Canada has already slept through the start of the new green economy and I feel that the current system is far too entrenched in “old model economics” and restrained by the red tape of private interests for this new industry to innovate and prosper. Now they are playing catch up by dumping cash on “greenwashing”-type efforts with majority of the cash being used to reinvent the green wheel and churn up some “needed” public education spending.

Canada needs action and direct investment without the same old expensive and administration-heavy government process. Most of the technology is available now and new technology needs to be at the top of the priority list. Time to cut the deadwood and start nurturing the growing green markets with a process that maximizes the investment into tangible green assets and large market innovations, not trivial green awareness and poorly planned “low-return on environment” cash give-aways.

Enjoy!




All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Green Luxury Products?

BMW announces a CO2 reduction on its M series?

Pirelli announces a greener high performance tire?

Luxury SUV's that are hybrid?

Giant mansions with solar panels?

Perhaps luxury brands should be taxed just a little extra. If people are keen on feeding their egos, let them share in the over consumption that harms our planet.

All of these products are Ego-Green: the labelling of a wasteful ego-brands as green aka - Greenwash.

Please, give me a break. Luxury is so far from green, the two can rarely be combined, well except with "bold, smart" marketing ( the same folks that made over consumption beautiful ).

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!