"anti-wind groups in Canada...publish...debunked claims, and the...media publishes it."
"By oppressing reality, one can enable ideology."
"Our Great Lakes are more polluted by plastic than our oceans."
"Investing in dead horses won't win this race."
"The total cost of failure isn't an option."
If you enjoy this blog, please share or leave a comment!
When it comes to failure in government, perhaps the easiest metric is poverty. When it comes to extreme failure, just think of failure and put it in a more remote location, or check for people scavenging a dump for food.
Is being hungry in Toronto a better place than Canada's arctic?
Recent news regarding people scavenging arctic dumps for food demonstrates our failure to understand and manage the challenges others have in remote locations. Places where there aren't a million people to ask for help, or visit a food bank, or get affordable products.
Upon first inspection, seems any arctic dump may just provide better results than our current leadership in Ottawa. Seems some MP's are more interested in reading the newspaper than leading.
Perhaps the only thing more futile than a Harper Government addressing such issues is expecting any successful plan to come from the same dysfunctional government. As such, we must learn to be creative and adapt to take care of business. Every idea helps!
I share with you an idea that arctic folks may employ to help feed people with organic and fresh food. It is a solution that can help provide what is healthy and simple for the arctic community, now. Food prices in Canada's north reflect the time and energy to get the product there, and also operate a profitable business selling products the community needs. $25 cheese, $30 coffee, $15 milk adds up quickly. If we do the math, we see that the free market can't deliver the cheapest or the best product.
When we look at what actions one can do, now, we have to keep the solution simple, meaning low capital equipment costs. What is capital equipment cost? The cost of investment required to produce a product. Also, the more simple the solution, the more people that can do it.
Since we are talking about the cost of food, what if northern communities and individuals, could farm their own food? There is no farming in winter, but, there can be! No, no heated and lighted greenhouses growing 2 tomatoes plants in -70C. When we look at traditional farming, we see the problems quickly. There is not enough sunlight for farming. There is no soil for planting. Food takes time to grow and some need pollinators. How much is fertilizer at the store? More than the $25 cheese? These traditional farming approaches are high in capital equipment costs.
When we think of extreme locations to live, space gives us a few clues; less is more. Sending anything into space is very expensive. The capital equipment cost is very high, rockets and special equipment aren't cheap, so, travelling lightly and doing more with less is a constant struggle. Just think, with a smart design strategy, perhaps three experiments can travel to the ISS, instead of just two.
During one of my random life experiments, I survived on growing my own sprouts. Yes, I'm radical. I had watched a documentary on growing sprouts and the medical doctor was explaining the nutritious properties of young plant sprouts. During the first days of a plant sprouts, each species can contain a different spectrum of nutrients not found in the adult, or mature, plant or vegetable. Sprouts can contain rare enzymes, proteins and vitamins. Enough so, they said a person could survive on them, so I tried it. Well, I'm alive to talk about it, so I think it works!
It's called a living diet, because sprouts are alive when you eat them, and until Canada passes law protecting all living things, it's healthy and pretty cheap. I used a about ten different sprout types; several bean types, onion, wheat grass, broccoli*, alfalfa and radish. For two months, the seeds cost me around $40, and I had extra broccoli* seeds left over.
The beauty of sprouts is they don't need soil, or sunlight. They can be better grown at chilly temperatures, above freezing. I grew them in my fridge to reduce bacterial growth. Sprouts only need a little water and some recycled containers to live in. Some sprouts are ready to eat in only 2-3 days. Of course, you should wash them before you eat, but I ate them raw. I was living dangerously! Of course it is always smart to test a few sprouts first and see if you live. Good luck!
In my extreme case, I feel confident that with a basic setup, one adult can survive on $300** of sprout seeds per year, or $25**/month. With bulk community purchasing, perhaps my $300** of seeds won't cost $1,000,000 in the arctic.
In realistic terms, and joking aside, sprouts could add some healthy new elements to an arctic diet. There is no reason why young children cannot farm this food after being taught. I grew my first bean seed when I was 4 years old. Now, I wonder why the next lesson was not eating that same bean sprout?
Happy sprouting and bon appetit!
P.S. - Wheat grass sprouts taste like watermelon during a short phase of their sprouting. Blew my mind! Very tasty in a salad.
P.S.S. - Wash your sprouts well. If you have weakened health, or are feeding to young children, consider a salt/sugar bath to soak in, thus helping reduce bacteria. Yes, rinse after. Some physicians say that we don't consume enough “dirty” food. I agree, but, be careful.
P.S.S.S – You don't have to be in the arctic to enjoy sprouts. Make sure when ordering bulk seed that you choose organic or chemically untreated seeds.
* - Yuck, but I ate them. Visit the Wikipedia Broccoli Sprouts page!
** - “Toronto dollars”
"this is a book that makes the risks of sea level rise easy to understand"
Brita® Product Analysis:
Water Pitcher Design : Space Saver® w/ Calendar Minder® Indicator
Last year I promised to deliver some product design perspectives on a single product. Excuse my dilatoriness. I selected a "random" product that relates to something I am "radical" about: healthy drinking water.
How would you evaluate a product? What can we do to make things “Greener”? Am I picking on Brita®, no, I picked Brita® and you will discover why.
I have seen many bright companies start with a great product then forgot what got them where there: selling great products. I am sure you can think of a few. Some companies that I feel would benefit from some innovation are: RIM, Ford, Google*. I think companies have to rediscover their product and prove they deserve the customers they so proudly serve! It sure beats the taxpayer having to sustain operations. Talk about risk. I say let poor management die, but, back to the product, not the administration.
Before I start, remember to ask yourself what green means. If a product says it's “Green” and ends up in the landfill "before its time", is it Greenwash?
Being a designer, one must objectively criticize designs. The object is to deliver what your customer asked for, even better if it crushes their competition. Capitalism loves a winner, it is good for business. If a product can be both green and profitable then: “Muahahaha!”, the designer may say.
If my customer does not know what they “want”, I query them on their intent: “what is the goal of your product?” After squishing this data around, I provide an opinion and demonstrate the pros and cons of the design to the company. If everyone is happy then presto, a new product is born. Smile?
Seems many products are being "born". For the economics of scale, companies make long term commitments to manufacturing the same product-family* many times. This lowers the per unit cost until operations are profitable ( break even point or ROI time-frame ). Another way to say this is capital investment in serial production. This is a risk for corporations, since they do so before they produce any revenues or profits on the product.
Most of the time new products are born in the “Military” and eventually “trickle down” into the consumer markets: Cell Phones, Computers, Smart “products”, nanotechnology, security systems for the home and even water filtration. After the military is done playing you can have the “whats next” because they have "something better".
As with all great products, all eventually break. This is reality. Seems many products cannot endure the long-term structural failures of plastic: it gets weaker and breaks. Eventually even my old Brita® succumbed to the lifecycle of plastic: failure.
So Brita® is, what I think, a product that helps reduce bottled water. The DIY water system. I have had Brita® products for many years. Simple, functional, efficient. Thanks! Replacing filters is easy. I trust their brand. Am I wrong about this?
So, my old Brita® broke. Trusting the Brita® brand, I went to the store and assumed they could replace my old broken Brita® . Boom Brita® done? I bought a new Brita®. Have a nice day. I took my new Brita® home! Smile?
Being a designer I broke my first rule: never assume a product meets the design criteria: a happy and hydrated customer. I feel ashamed, yet, I must go on. After “weeks of fury” dealing with my brilliant Brita® "choice”, I smiled and knew what to write for my late product review!
Brita®: Greenwash vs. Green? You decide!
Brita® Product Analysis: Non-destructive Compliance Testing.
Purpose: Identify Brita® product improvements.
Customer: Me
Summary Results: This product is a fail!
Summary of Issues: Brita® : Requires Product Redesign /
Performance Observations of Brita® :
1.) Normal Operation,
2.) Refilling &
3.) Pouring Water
1.) Normal Operation:
a.) During normal operation, product should not have sub-assemblies that disengage or “fly off” the product under normal dynamic circumstances. Due to sub-assembly failure, water is then free for spectacular ejection onto floors, hot oil, electronics, significant others, electrical sockets, inside the freaking refrigerator and on my freaking kitchen mat and a little on the dog, simultaneously. Grrrrr.
2.) During Refilling: ( okay lets make this sound more serious and professional )
b.) Thumb or other finger can disengage lid sub-assembly. If lid falls into a potentially contaminated environment, direct contact of critical exposed surfaces may contaminate the upper water chamber. This risk then forces the customer to sanitize the lid for safe and healthy performance. See issue a).
c.) While refilling, the thumb or finger, used to activate the refilling access hatch to the upper water chamber, can torque the lid sub-assembly off the product ( from level “steady” position ). This results in issue a).
d.) The refilling assess hatch does not remain open when thumb is removed. Is this desired operation? But look, no issue a)!
e.) If the water input exceeds capacity of the upper water chamber ( without lid sub-assembly in place ) excess water exits over handle and enters the product via 2 part construction of handle cavity ( this typically occurs after observations a, b & c while the lid subassembly is being sanitized ). Once filled, this “gem of a design feature” leaks water for about 30-40 seconds. This forces customer to wait until the cavity gravity drains of all water. Don't forget the pleasant remaining drips on the base of the product which further spreads water on surfaces.
3.) During Pouring of Water:
f.) While pouring water, the lid sub-assembly can disengage from the product. See issue a).
g.) If the upper water chamber is full (water has yet to be filtered or full water capacity is reached), the refilling access hatch will be forced open due to hydro-dynamic force and the open orientation of the access hatch opening orientation. This open state then allows unfiltered water to run freely down the outside, and possibly contaminated, surface and into the customers glass. If the potential of the hydro-dynamic force is close to maximum, this will result in my personal favorite moment: issue a)!
Recommendation : Please contact @deepgreendesign for further details!
So, there is a quick and fun analysis of a product that did not meet my expectations. So?
This will force the customer to accept and adapt to the poor design, or this Brita® water jug will hit the landfill. Remember I spoke of products that have the "Green" intent but actually just end up hurting the environment? Will Brita® tweet me?
Well, it is my opinion that Brita® can improve their product. Thats a win – win for me & Brita®!
It is comical to see what business has to say about success in business. If you check their list “of issues” seems the product never mattered to begin with.
That is the failure. What did banks and auto manufacturers sell? Faulty products to its customers. Talk about anti-capitalism.
Enjoy®!
* - oh, chill out.
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!
I think it is clear to Canadians that Stephen Harper is ^NOT here for the Environment.
We have seen “his” government operate: cloaked in secrecy. There have been many “lists” circulated about the reasons that we need to oust the CPC government and the environment is always near the top.
Some think I am an alarmist, but globally, Harper has given Canada a “tar-eye” on the environment and human rights.
It is comforting to see so many concerned with the fate of our home, earth. It is discomforting to see some CPC supporters show blatant contempt for it. During a “tour de tweets”, I saw an overtly disgruntled individual exclaim that they would turn on all the lights for Earth Hour and waste more energy than usual. How Canadian? No, how ignorant. But, seems there are rotten apples in every bushel. It is time we vote them out of Canada?
The primary reason for my complete disdain for the conservatives is their secrecy and their desire to privatize anything that is not nailed down. Let me explain:
With the environment, you cannot write off losses, losses are real. In economics, you can write of losses. This difference, in “reality”, leads to some corporations wasting resources with little regard. A seasoned accountant can turn a loss into something manageable in the “shell game” of economics. There are no games in reality, what is done is done. Ignoring this fact is a huge risk for any leadership.
Of course there are the corporations that pollute the planet and the governments that let them. It is amazing to see how little the “actual” cost to clean up operations or a "process" is. Corporations will have a "cash tantrum" if they have to spend that extra bit. Makes you wonder if it is really an economic thing or a power-ego trip? I am going to side-step these knowns and continue.
We do understand that in our environment, losing a species, a tract of natural ecosystem or polluting an ecosystem is a irreversible process. This is a scientific term, not an economic term. An irreversible process simply means what is done is done and you cannot go back and change it. Sure an ecosystem can heal and recover, but, you cannot rewrite history like in economics.
So, yes, the economic system needs to adapt to the realities of an over-crowded and over-consuming population. This won't change quickly, systems need to evolve, but, to do that our leadership must recognize the challenge and champion it. I think this is well understood.
Canada used to be respected globally for its "champion qualities" in the environment ( and human rights ). A Canadian helped write the Kyoto accord. Our leadership is dishonest: they won't negotiate or find a way to address the realities of pollution and climate change. They just cut challenges, they do not adapt or improve them: make them work. The old “SEP” : Someone else's problem. Well, can this continue?
Seems corporations will find an excuse to not adapt. Is this smart?
Most say no, and so do I. Forcing change forces innovation, science and technology. Forcing change provides growth in stagnating service-based economies. Forcing change provides jobs and opportunities. Imagine a government that tries to suppress science and innovation? Well, imagine no more, Stephen Harper is reality! Many examples in history exist for this.
We need to focus on the challenge and not lose global leadership. Leadership in common good is one of those sparks of Canadian pride. People respect Canada for it and Stephen Harper has tarnished that reputation with real and negative economic impacts: Green Energy & Jobs.
Green Energy and Green Products is the fastest growing market. Imagine if past Canadian leadership ignored science and innovation? Seems an “economics” major would react accordingly. Dishonest.
Enjoy and exercise this democracy, provided by past generations, and vote this "hamster" out!
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!
Is water important to you? If you are Canadian, you might be swimming in it, but, like it or not private business wants your pool and charge you to swim in it.
The conservatives put nothing into the 2011 budget with regards to water, one of lifes most important commodities. It is interesting that water gets so little attention, or is that the plan?
Do Canadians think that a Harper government is protecting our environment? Do Canadians think that a Harper government is protecting our public water systems or water resources? Do I need to ask these silly questions?
I read recently that ~73% of Canadians want clean water and sanitation to be a human right. In the past few years, the story of water, has always been in the “top 10” of most under-reported stories. In business, it is best not to arouse suspicion when dealing with critical resources, best to keep it under the radar. After the deals are inked, then all issues are resolved in the courts.
Canadians are flush with water, I can see why most are not concerned about this natural resource. I guess if any Canadian went to a place with no access to clean drinking water, their opinions would be instantly rebranded to this topic. Canadians are so resource rich, seems we rarely reflect and protect our Canadian natural bounty. Seems that our “resource spoiled” attitude clouds our perception of the current business interests in Canada: water and oil. Apathy is a given when we assume that our government is looking after our best interests. Seems the conservatives' best interest is selling anything that is not nailed down.
If we look at the bottled water deals, made in Canada, we can see the ethics involved: "unlimited" water for corporations. Studies show that water tables are falling fast: when you do the math—how could they not?
I wrote a blog about water in January, since, this story has grown. I talked about my negotiations training, so, what kind of deals will our “leaders” cut for us? Another silly question.
Well, that time is upon us, and quietly, we see the stories start to emerge. Winnipeg's secret 30 year deal with French company, Veolia, for private operation of its water. The NAFTA agreement opens the door to private water interests. The proposed CETA agreement opens the door to private water systems.
Some people would argue, but, the results are best illustrated in other cities' experience. The company I mentioned above, Veolia, is currently being trounced from many cities in Europe. Paris, France, embarked on the Veolia "ride", years ago, and now free, after going through the expensive process of getting a public water system back.
What are the lessons of privatized systems: eventually the costs are raised and any changes, or complaints, to services requires expensive court time. It is also worth noting that opportunities for innovation are lost, since there is no incentive for the business to do so. Any innovations are paid by the customer and savings kept by the business. Surprise, thats business. Did your designer jeans drop in cost when they started making them in China?
If we look at most cities, especially Toronto, we see governments that have not properly funded and maintained water infrastructure. The long term plan for any crooked group is to let things fall into disrepair and sell it to your “friends” in business. If you are in big business, this is a huge opportunity to force cities to give up their public water systems. Of course private systems are inherently more expensive, but a shifty leadership and greedy water company can sell it to the people. Its business, big business. Look at the water costs of some US cities, what will seniors do in Canada?
With so many examples of cities privatizing services, only to fight for them to be reverted back to public systems, Canadians need to become aware that when you add it all up, the public system is the cheapest solution, not a cheap solution. Just like the "magic mortgages" in the US, the sticker price looks good, but, in due time, the true cost is revealed. The inital savings pale in comparison to the repair bill.
Politicians help sell these deals with promises. Look at the total mess with Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the water scandal with regards to his criminal former top aide, Bruce Carson.
The pamphlet may look glossy, but, the business is always the same: unethical with no intent to help, just profit at any cost: yours.
Enjoy!
Ezra Levant: The Golden Life on Shallow-Tailings Pond : For the Birds.
I have blogged a few times about lifecycle. Everyone has an understanding, but nobody can truly quantify what it is. By nature, it is complex. We all have a different perspective and ,by nature, the science and mathematics of lifecycle is a model or speculation. Why can we not fully understand nor predict natural systems? Ask the Weather Channel. In nature, there is no "yes" or "no", those are human constructs, symbols. All we actually have is reality.
We have models, like our theory of gravity. We are getting better at these complex models everyday. Just look at Watson, from IBM. That is complexity you can understand. It is not perfect, but, much better than 99.99% of what is out there. I hope you understand my perspective, so far. Watson did not provide a yes or no, Watson did some crazy computer stuff. I hope you can appreciate the math! I do!
Lifecycle can be applied to any natural system: the events of ones own life, the life of something like an Oak tree or the bird that lives in it. From an environmental perspective, lifecycle comparisons must also include the total ecosystem: meaning to mathematically equate two events, one must use science to demonstrate the total impact on the environment. The complexity of each system must also be understood. Which is lifecycle more complex? In nature, simplicity wins, it uses less energy.
On tailings pond: Here is the article that Ezra wrote.
Honestly trying to correlate “tarsand tailings pond victims” to “wind turbine bird victims” is environmentally unethical and mathematically ignorant, especially when showing a numerical resultant without the supporting calculations, nor numerical analysis.
Looking at any “singular event”, and excluding the “total impact, as a whole” is unethical in science. An ethical professional scientist would not endorse “a dishonest study”, since it would knowingly fail peer review, by scientists. If you get a group of unethical scientists or ones you can easily fool, maybe you can start consulting tomorrow for Stephen Harper, just like Ezra.
Ezra, in Koch damage control, it teeing up the next volley of truthiness about wind turbines. A scientist understands the risks that wind turbines pose on the environment. Things that hit the turbines can get injured. Birds that land in tailings ponds also get injured. Darwin taught us some lessons in this. Ezra comparing the ethics of wind versus the ethics of tarsand is a funded enterprise. Darwin taught us some lessons in survival. Ezra lives on “Golden Pond”.
The total environmental impact of tarsands exploitation versus the wind industry is a simple analysis for smart people. Why? Because an honest comparison is laughable, just like Ezra. Ezra trashing wind to justify the ethics of tarsand is classical Koch Law, and Ezra excels at dishonest discourse, it is his job.
For demonstration purposes, lets take a quick look at the mathematical complexity of both. This is not scientific, but quickly demonstrates why the ethics of wind is superior to that of oil. It also demonstrates that Ezras' argument is just another for profit exercise for his slick masters.
Quick Wind Risk Lifecycle:
The rotors spin around and generate electricity when there is wind. Energy required to manufacture and transport and erect the turbine. Energy required to maintain the system. Animal risks: hitting the blades = not good. Operation provides clean power.
Quick Tarsand Risk Lifecycle:
On tailings pond, the birds are not the lone victims. The tailings pond is just part of the total tarsand system. One must also include the physical landscape that is striped for bitumen ( destroying the ecosystem of plants, trees, watersheds and digging up the homes of animals, insects, microrganisms, bacteria and lets not forget the invertebrates). Look at the capital investments in the “total machinery used” ( that consumes oil and energy ) to destroy ( using energy ) the ecosystem to expose the bitumen product. Then the product is transported ( using energy & perhaps squashing a black footed ferret en route ) to the processing facility ( think of the resources and energy to build the facilities: very expensive to maintain and operate and waste heat energy and produced pollution) where the toxic mess is processed, using more energy and large volumes of local clean water resources that release toxic and GHG emissions, resulting in the crude oil product. This oil is then transported, again, and sold to be further processed, then transported, again, to customers. This oil is then consumed as gas, plastic and other nasty and some useful stuff.
So, when we look at the total lifecycle, we must add up the facilities. But, I am not done yet, it never finishes. If we look at the total extraction of tarsands from Alberta and Saskatchewan and the disruption over the total lifecycle of the entire project you will finally come to the conclusion that Ezra Levant is being paid to lie and spin the facts. Surprised? Of course not.
The anti-wind conservatives have been nailing wind in Ontario hard. So much so, they got offshore wind projects delayed. The groups are well organized and I have blogged about their distaste for offshore wind. This same theme is being played out in the USA and the UK. Rich people that think looking at a wind turbine destroys the beauty of nature. It also serves the purpose of maintaining dirty energy and scare people into believing that wind is dangerous.
The anti-wind groups have published their “findings” which are re-purposed faulty science studies used in the US to fight environmental progress. What is most interesting is that if one looks at the fine print on these anti-wind sites, they tell you that they do not endorse the science. That would make them liable, something any lawyer will tell you is a bad thing, much like what Ezra is doing.
Saying that wind turbines kills 445 times more birds than the oilsands is a weak statement. The city of Toronto, alone, has over 1,000,000 bird fatalities per year from striking buildings.
You do the math. If you believe Ezra, then you should enroll in some math courses and learn that Ezra is a liar and a dishonest person.
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!
Earth Hour :It is coming again. Is it even useful? One hour. So what?
Perhaps we can get the Egyptians to run Earth Hour? Lets fire this puppy up bigger in 2011!
What things can “one hour” spark in your life? I assert more than what you started with!
Have you ever day dreamed for one hour? Did you know that free thought is powerful?
So, to those that think Earth Hour is a "waste of time", turn off all your lights and invite some friends to join in a “dark conversation of change”. What the heck.
A person I talked with, a "conservative oil apologist", told me that it conflicted with his hockey game. Of course his knowledge of Green was flimsy and defenceless, as conservative arguments so often are.
I stopped talking to him to avoid an further decrease in my Klout score.
So, what ideas do you have? I have plenty! Can you help me spread them?
My Earth Hour idea is to follow up with 10 tweets about Monsanto. These 10 Tweets will contain #EarthHour & #Monsanto & #GMO. Would you retweet them?
Can you come up with more "positive and scientific" Monsanto related information about our ecosystem?
Yes, saving electricity is important, but, also understanding your purchasing power with regards to GMO foods is also important.
Using twitter to spread a positive message that demonstrates leadership in ecological concerns is better awareness about GMO products and the issues they have.
After, I will construct a word cloud of the above hashtags, kind of like this one about my "rants" about Canada discussing the purchase of F-35 fighter planes.
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!
Radiocarbon Dating Markets: Carbon Copy Criminals Driving Ms. Daisey?
It is funny to see the Wall St. Crowd trying to catch a wave on the "green industry": Carbon Trading. The next big thing. The Y2K of earth: carbon. Sell it! Harder!
I am not buying into this carbon market. Either do you.
The entertaining thing about all this: I have a solution, not an opinion. I am action. Check my first blog, or read on.
Trading is an important asset to human behaviour, it "helps" both sides? Way back when, was trading the inspiration for currency? I am not sure. The thing I am sure about is the validity of markets: “kinda weaselly”
Look at our free market system: manipulated. The system is not regulated, thus, inefficient and uncompetitive globally. Will all the business people wait for carbon markets?
And, I have seen issues with some of these "adventures in market making". One example I will bring to this story is the rights of the indigenous people to harvest, naturally, their traditional lands.
Some of these people use nature to suppliment their incomes. Yes, some are over harvesting, but, access to nature should not be restricted: is that a human right? Access to water, shelter and food. I have seen a few documentaries on this and I think that everyone needs a wake up call.
People can manipulate the carbon market system. People can disseminate information illegally for market advantage. People can misrepresent assets. People can lie, cheat and steal: and they do. White collar crime is the place to be for any weasel looking for a dishonest buck.
And here we have some carbon credit theft: next to RFID theft, these are the two growing markets I see. Talk about free markets providing security of investment: what a joke. George is such a negative dude? Or is he using reverse psychology? Who cares! Lets move forward.
Some see alternative energy and protecting our planet as a business opportunity, and it is. But, the opportunity is only “real” if there is a net benefit to our ecosystem ( Return on Environment). Greenwash scams and government programs that do not add this “net benefit” are a waste of tax dollars.
The limits of our planet are tangible, unlike the human symbol : money.
It is funny, I have had my green investment chart at the top of this page for a long time. Maybe that image can explain what you already know: we need honest capitalism. Laugh now?.
Nice Pierre: "What is your suggestion". Yes. What is the Canadian solution for energy independence? I have an idea.
The Carbon market is the evolution of these two concepts “connecting”: “Money & Reality”. Do you trust traders and business people enough to save our planet? I do not, not with the current security controls on markets.
And what exactly are we going to get delivered? If there is a crisis, what is the risk with this "Carbon Market". These are all big questions. Watch the price of gas start to rise. The Wizard of Oz knows. How sensitive will Carbon Trading be?
How many overpaid executives need to make my easy decisions? None. Shak mat.
Lots of "business scum" "polishing up the next Vega"?
The "Carbon Market" future? The dream of the free markets: "people getting what they need". We can all see the issues.
I get into this discussion quite often: the effectiveness of markets. I think they are history, myself. Free markets will not be controlled. Did the middleman just get the shaft ? (***WARNING*** Advertising that I do not endorse, just find funny)
I will be submitting my “Eco-idea” to General Electric. Then you will see what I am talking about. I “donate this simple concept” to them to first show I have ideas and secondly, there is $100 million up for grabs. I came up with this concept in 1996, so it is 15 years now. Ahead of its time: of course.
This "shark" is too big for a CBC sitcom, sorry Kevin.
I do not need governments or markets for capitalism: I have the Internet. I am tired of the middlemen. I am tired of their heartless crimes against citizens and investors. Taking their money. It is not fair. And I am talking about the bad ones, I know there are many great investors out there. You can usually tell a good investor by : results.
It would be interesting to see the batting averages of some executives when it comes to actual job performance, but, even that is changing in the USA. I do not defend free markets: they are not free.
That is why I will design this system. I am sick of the greed with no results. I am tired of this behaviour. Businesses taking peoples futures and no returns. Taking their money then telling everyone to be careful in what they invest in: “meanwhile back at the offshore banks....”
Making a market is power. Market Makers make the market. They create the “dream” and the lemmings start running towards the dream. So, can I create a dream, an idea? Can I create my power? My power to empower? Sounds hot. I think it is.
Yes, I can. I am going to. I saw a tweet, and here I am with my next design experiment with actual tangible results. What is the worst that can happen? GE is a friendly company? Maybe they will send me an Email.
Some people may be thinking I am silly to let this easy design out of the bag, but, it is too big for a small fish like me. I can only do so much. GE can invest billions, and that would take forever, for me :)
I have seen many “green” companies over the past 15 years steal investors money: selling the dream.
Companies like Fuel Cell Energy (FCEL): executive pay packages that exceed revenues for years on end. Diluting share value with the annual yank of the “toilet paper roll of blank cheques”. Getting option packages that require on thing: breathing.
I pick on FCEL, because it is simple. Being a product designer I did a “my deep analysis” on the product and the market. Poor business case, but, because they are “green” people keep throwing money at them, and the execs keep buying those big cottages on Marthas Vineyard (you know who you are). What a gig! A hard days work.
As an aside, I predicted that most US manufactured alternative energy technology would be made in China: no US jobs for the taxes used to invest in the technology. This trend has already started. Of course all product designers understand that "we can trust the Chinese government with our Intellectual property".
Is IP obsolete as well? I am not sure. I guess it depends on your “bucket of lawyers”. (Colbert Vs. Wikipedia : Classic! )
If you look at some of the qualifications of the these "Board Members", of some of these "new energy upstarts", you will see a common theme : big degrees, pretty faces and no results.
I am not saying do not trust all companies, just be wise and do your homework. When it comes to stocks, I have read company reports since I was teen. I thought it was cool that you could buy a stock and make money by “doing nothing”.
I have watched mutual fund companies buy into "the FCEL's of the world" and get fleeced. A common trend. Green funds? Check please. And just like ABCP, everyone love a great story!
I have some great investment stories! But, for the common investor, if you cannot time the market, sometimes all those gains go poof! Makes me sad for all those people that invest parts of their retirement on some mutual funds and some stocks. Does the ordinary person have options?
Does the ordinary person have money to invest? Looks like Canada followed the “credit lifestyle” as seen on TV.
Carbon Markets: the next dream. Sizzley! Especially when we are "cooking the planet" and "blowing it up". How many wars are going on? What is the carbon footprint of the military corporations? I digress.
Carbon Markets : Obsolete? : That is all I am saying.
Unscrupulous CEO and Company Officers using the free market to basically steal money for the “dream”: an honest investor ( or mutual fund ) buying shares for future growth can get screwed. Not always, but, the risk is the Global Market.
With well timed wars, one can get extra-rich fast! I refused to invest in military stocks after 9/11. My hand picked up my phone and I was ready to buy my splash of stocks "I could depend on performance". No names, but, I am sure you can find them on Google.
I told a friend of mine to invest $10K in the Google IPO, I wonder how they are doing?
Can we trust "Free Markets" with the even more important task of creating a greener planet? No, I do not think that is efficent. Just my opinion. Sorry Charlie (stop eating tuna)
The idea is simple: invest in green energy correct? Incorrect!
The Wall St. gang of thugs is a well oiled process of taking your money and delivering nothing. Much like the Insurance industry and the Justice System: no access for the poor or needy. No access.
Governments are telling me that a private investment model is more efficient and costs less? This is incorrect: especially when government fails to innovate itself, and the “private system” "swoop in to save the day". I will explain this in my next blog. Lets progress.
Do you believe this? Well, I have a galaxy for sale: Cheap! Get in early! Think of all the energy you will own in stars! Buy now and get black hole insurance: operators are waiting for you "big happy" call!
The difference between symbols and tangible assets is a "material matter evidence factor thing". It is about holding that investment tool in your hands. The “economic wizards” in the USA think that gold is security. Gold is not security.
Energy is: “Energy is the new gold.” - me
Markets have been the "symbol" of "free trading" of "commodities" ever since the first farmers market. Society has held this trading and barter method ever since “I wanted that and they wanted this”. With communication comes opportunity.
Trading is the way to have what "you made" and some of what "they made". It is called market diversity. With no money or surcharges for service: It is called community.
Well, that is how "it" started. Now we can see how the markets work: you typically get ripped off: unless you are special in the eyes of the bankruptcy judge.
So, lets wrap this one up. Markets were developed to create a market. This is pretty basic. I do not need this. Why should I have to pay to go through anyone to get my booty? ( Explicit Lyrics )
Carbon markets: "#DGD : thumbs down".
Enjoy!
P.S. - I am a "GE Capitalist"?: “Captain of Industry”? No, just a simple designer. Will the idea I share make me a "General of Free Market Capitalism"?. Cool! #hohohojollygreengeneral ;)
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!
Canadian Water: Eh!
With the free trade agreements come “the good, the bad and the ugly”: Canadian Water Sovereignty?
So, what is Canadas future "happiness" with privatized water going to be?
I have been following "the water story in Canada" for a few years (~15). Just the occasional blurb here and there, more of an interest. I did notice that water stories are very low on the news "totem pole".
I watched the civil unrest in Bolivia and the "failed privatization schemes" with water. I watched how corporations operate: profits first, shareholders second and there is no third. It is also interesting to note that shareholders are getting screwed too these days.
I wonder if the Bolivian government still suggests that its citizens just steal the water? They will not prosecute violations of water theft, so, this leaves me to assert: is such chaos in a privatized model delivering the best quality service? Of course, no.
Insurance companies have clout with governments, but what about water companies? Will they have more clout? I assert yes. Quality is not required on captive markets. This is business 101 for the big boys: Refute at will, on your own time please.
Canadian "trade talks" politics is a joke? Here is the one of most resource rich countries in the world and we trade those resources away with little foresight to our own future or for what we get in return. I mean we, the Canadians. Not the new "tax funded legal adventure into the EU". Looks like Harper has no worries about "softwood 2.0" and how free trade benfits courts and corporations, not citizens. I think we have all that we need in Canada.
I took a "big shot" negotiations training course for the company I worked for. They offered any training I wanted and I took every opportunity they gave me. I loved that course. It was a very expensive: for "automotive executives and vice president types". I was the youngest in the class while most others were top* executives at GM, Ford and Chrysler and also their suppliers.
My Company made big things, some of our products were in the 500 million dollar range, negotiations were complex. Good thing I was not involved in that stuff. I just took the course for my "sprouting green company on the side". But, it did help me in dealing with all of my suppliers at the company. I guess we both benefited.
I took this course very seriously, seems like most took it to “get out of the office for a week and free lunches at the Dearborn Inn.” WWHFHFL :( What would Henry Ford have for lunch )?
I always scored very high in my negotiations "challenges". When others “inked a deal” for a fictitious $100,000, I would close it for $400,000. BOOYA! I scored the highest in most exercises. Why? Because I was stupid.
Although my deals were "worth" the most, they were also the most unrealistic: my customer would have gone out of business, but, man, my bonuses would have rocked!
I lacked experience, but, it was fun to put the “big numbers on the board" and get the feedback from the instructors wondering: who is this canuck anyways? Fun and I got paid to do it. It was also entertaining to see the look on the face of the dudes that shook my hand earlier, after the numbers were put up. Beating "the best" was fun, but, immature. I even skipped 3 lunches to work on strategy.
I learned a lot: mostly that “a pathetic executive that is looking forward to lunch” was my "easy breakfast snack".
Negotiations are a tough game. “Honest” negotiations are harder. When both sides benefit, that is the perfect “balance”. A strong customer benefits your business! It is called sharing? Yes. The more each side shares, the better and stronger the relationship. This is what experience has taught me, when inking contracts in the real world. You just have to make sure your product will make money: That is my captialism 101.
I have always tried to establish strong relationships with all my customers: not many left in Ontario. That is a fact. Most companies failed to innovate: too expensive "they" said, so they outsourced. Some would blame a McGuinty government, but, ownership and responsibility was directly in the hands of the business owners: they failed to invest and innovate.
What was more sad was visiting places that you knew would be out of business in short order. Such "smart" business models these people had. At least they had that fresh young look, so they could all get jobs at their next MBA-abomination. You know who you are. I wonder if they went to lunch at that new local food menu joint afterwards. I assert yes, because we did.
Sorry Kevin O'Leary, "your free markets crew" was too stupid to comprehend the future value of "being in business to make profits".
Innovation is money: Europe is innovation savvy, Canada is innovation impaired. Sorry Canada: that is a fact. Canadian executives and their cookie cutter mentality: look at the environment they were raised in: razed on. That is evolution folks. Funny how most good Canadian products are used elsewhere other than Canada. Why is that? Have any clues?
My "Canadian Dream" is a "healthy green Canada" not Kevins' "heartless profiteering". So, what is the risk in not investing in water Kevin, or, are you just reporting like "Cramer" and his Mad money? Maybe Kevins "little soldiers" do not have "to kill"?
As an aside, Kevin invested in some poor green energy "concept ideas". I was laughing at Kevin: Kevin is one stupid investor, but, a great marketer. Must give credit, just wish he changed fields. I guess our R&D tax credits make it all okay, Kevin gets "cash to investigate".
We should open Canada for Free Trade with the EU? What are the conditions. Will we ever know?
North American Free Trade is debatable, yes, seems more of a "law based economy of government protectionism" but these folks are our direct neighbors. I like local! But, does free trade help in a local sense?
Would Kevin be out of business in a Global Free Trade Market? Yes, he would be. That is a fact. I am sure Bay Street misses those Ontario companies that floated billion dollar cash flows and bloated bay street culture. I wonder if "they" will outsource "management of remaining pensions" to country "X", sure, and "they" will pocket the difference.
So, Canada, what do we get for "lots of oil", water and other "golden natural resources"?
The things that are destroying our planet! See, Canada is unique in that we will enable the “next level of consumerism”: the global resources to make the crap we do not need most of the time.
Maybe George was right? Regardless, I will stay on my green tact: that is a fact jack.
Must give Kevin O'Leary the warm and fuzzies to know that he might be able to invest in Toronto water? Oh wait ... no, all the "expert companies" are in Europe. Canadian companies will not have a chance. I am unaware of any in existence. I guess Kevin can always invest in the company that will screw him. That is what free markets operate on. I jest?
These water deals “they” do not tell “us” about. There is big** money and power behind water right now. Don't believe me? That is your choice.
I do know that filling your swimming pool will cost you a lot of money. And of course, the big companies will pay less than the taxpayers. That is economic innovation: taxpayer funded "welfare for corporations".
The reality is that cities, like Toronto, have ageing water systems. See, politicians have not invested in the water infrastructure. They kind of “forgot about that”, but, they are busy updating our garbage cans from "reliable stainless steel designs" to “ breakable-plastic, ever-so-cool-fashionista-designs” and the other “more important issues than drinking water”.
Did you know that the City of Toronto cannot afford to update its own water system? Why? They failed to invest in "important infrastructure", but, the 407 was pure business genius. So, this leads me to ask: did Toronto willingly let the water infrastructure "slowly fail"? I do not know. All I see is a huge “opportunity” for companies looking for "private water salvation" targets.
Perhaps Harper should have invested in water, instead of upgrading roads with more "oil products and GHG dirty concrete". Now you can see the difference between stimulus for corporations and stimulus for citizens?
All levels of government wants public water to fail? Do they have a choice? Has Rob Ford studied this issue extensively or is he secretly working on "highschool football" plays?
People are always saying that governments are unable to operate such entities: leave it to the private sector. I am sure Kevin O'Leary would agree. What I am concerned with is the realities and results of private water. Poor and disadvantaged Canadians already swimming in debt having to pay reconnection charges for water. Will this put some over "Niagara Falls"?
The reconnection charges in Bolivia were several months wages. Poor people suffered without water.
Do our government officials have "the balls to negotiate smart", or are they looking at the lunch menu?
Enjoy!
* the same “experts” that ruined GM, Ford and Chrysler.
** really big
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!
Opinion: “Smart Car” or is it “ Sm-rt Car", you decide!
"Over the past 100 years, there has been a steady progression of innovations that enhance the driving experience, in particular the continuing trend toward automating more driving tasks. "Human Factors for Limited–Ability Autonomous Driving Systems," an Exploratory Advanced Research (EAR) Program project, aims to investigate driver engagement through the development of limited–ability autonomous driving systems. Part of the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) long–term strategy in understanding autonomous systems, the 3–year study is being conducted by General Motors Corporation and Delphi Corporation (Delphi Electronics and Safety and Delphi Steering)."
It's interesting to see new technologies that car companies are using to improve their products. Being a product designer, seeing new products gives me clues as to what car companies are using to market themselves and distinguish their products from their competition. Two such innovations are Green & Smart Cars. I will not discuss “green" car technology here.
Having voluntarily "bailed" from the auto industry in the early 2000's, I like to think I demonstrated business foresight. I knew that the products they were building and how they did it just would not cut it, so I left Michigan and returned to Ontario to focus on green design.
I honestly thought that GM was going to go out of business. Ford, on the other hand, I felt had a better chance. Thanks to free markets GM is still alive, but, not well. I blamed all this on the forward thinking business types that were more interested in bonuses than their products. Most of my assertions came true. Smart? I assert yes. I wonder if the USA is too big to fail?
Another aside, in 2003: I thought that GM would get scooped by Toyota in 2013. Interesting how fast things changed for the worse after George W. Bush was in office. Even I could not predict that. Karl Rove certainly raised the bar on lowering morality. I have since recalibrated my “ Nostradamus Algorithms” in my brain . Good thing, when the banks crashed in the USA we all found out that the banks can blackmail a President, for cash, with threats of “the whole system” crashing " over the weekend". Those republicans sure can get their way and their loot bags ! I digressed.
Lately, I see more Smart innovation: collision detection and prevention systems for cars. I think that the premise is sincere: help drivers avoidcrashing . Many in the auto industry have dreamed of the autonomous highways where the driver can “switch off” and enjoy the ride. Well, we are still far from that ideal, but, is “ switching off” a "healthy thing" whilst in a moving vehicle? The pure scientist would tell you it is possible. Still waiting to see the tax bill for retooling” the highways, roads and cars in Canada and the USA. Would it be a smart investment? For the interim, we have Smart Car technology “beginnings”: various collision detection systems and “automatic emergency braking”. Many scientific papers have been written about the human factors engineering and the act of driving. In my opinion, the harder it is to operate something, the more the human brain is engaged in that activity. As soon as these complex functions are replaced with a technology, does our brain become less active with the activity? I assert yes.
At first blush, I see the benefit of such systems: safer cars and more protection for drivers. This is what is being used to market the safety package options for these cars. Of course, some people cheer, “Wow!”, and buy the car, thinking they are “smart” too?
These safety systems differ from the autonomous autodrive driver technologies. A few companies have already worked on driverless systems (ie- long-haul trucking or highway driving in Caravan-style ). The current systems are added features for the driver, not, fully automatic systems.
What they did find, with “fully automatic systems” is that there is a high percentage of “disengaged drivers” - falling asleep at the wheel, not paying enough attention to the road. This is not a new finding, pilots have the same challenges with fly by wire technology: a non-alert pilot. Do lazy brains = poor performance results?
So, if we look at the demographics of drivers, I am concerned that "certain demographics" will consciously or sub-consciously become "less aware of what is on the road". Think of this as a “lazy brain” tool. Some may feel that the “Smart Car” will allow them to be less focused on the road. We have seen the effects of distracted drivers: cell phones and the laws now being written to "keep drivers mentally engaged on the road". Of course, some still think they are "smarter than the professional psychologists that know how brains work".
It is also interesting that the Canadian Government does not study these technologies, independently,
before they let the car companies introduce their products
. Governments have given product control to the companies, because they are the “experts”, just like the "free markets" are #1 too.
Is this safe thinking? Are the insurance companies ready for the lawsuits? I wonder if insurance companies prefer poor drivers or good drivers? As long as customers pay, I think the insurance companies have no preference. Is disaster capitalism a great model for the insurance companies? I am not sure.
I could turn this into a ten-page blog, easy. But, I want to wrap this up, to do some real "green design work". I enjoy designing
, so, its not really work :)
Lets look at one “extreme” example:
. Looks and sounds cool! But, what about the car behind you, on the road, if they cannot stop “as fast”, will you be rear-ended? I assert yes. This car also has a "Pedestrian Collision System"? Do we need more technology to "not hit people". At least someone might be spared from the "lipstick-tweeking and cellphone-engaged shopping monsters". Sound overboard? I have seen it recently. Too engaged in "social systems" while the focus should be on the "mechanical system" of not "hurt others". Wake up, please.
I would also like to point out that adding all these electronic systems, that will be thrown away in the 8 year lifecycle of a car, is a waste and is toxic. Planned obsolesence will add much more e-waste to our environment. Radars, cameras, sensors, computers all added for "safety" while hurting our planet. Yes.
? Perhaps.
My definition of a “Smart Car”: An "emissions-free", "green material constructed" and highly energy efficient car, modestly sized, with the ability to be easily maintained, by the owner, that would last more than 8 years. Its a start.
Is polluting our environment “Smart”? I am looking forward to the day that the old business practices are replaced by the “free markets” of consumers wanting a "healthy planet first".
Maybe we need “auto-braking technology” for our “incapable and immoral governments and corporations” that are ignoring my planets' "challenges".
P.S. - Did you notice in the Volvo video that the driver is drinking a coffee.
.
P.S.S. -
:
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!
Paperli.PaperWidget.Show({ pid: 'deepgreendesign', width: 400, background: '#FB0000' })
var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-20416689-1']); _gaq.push(['_setDomainName', '.blogspot.com']); _gaq.push(['_trackPageview']); (function() { var ga = document.createElement('script'); ga.type = 'text/javascript'; ga.async = true; ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? 'https://ssl' : 'http://www') + '.google-analytics.com/ga.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();
“2010 Science” blew me away!
Many of “my product ideas of the past 15 years” are finally coming into “reality”. A few: advanced research in the biology and genetics of bacteria/microbes and other little thingies, Brain neurocognition adaptation, Organic computing and heck even Twitter. It was also interesting to see Richard Dawkins bring attention to the quality of science in America.
My blogs are supposed to be fun.... dealing with “some very hard truths” about all our challenges ahead. I even wrote a metalanguage program that would be a “WikiScience” repository and forum for natural sciences.
MIT opened another green program in the Economics of Sustainable Materials. Smart!
As much as I criticize “the system” for not being “green enough”, I see many new technologies that will deliver a green economy and prosperous green future. Seems the only roadblocks are: “the justice systems” impeding aggressive “green adoption”, the corporations that are “put at risk” by a “global green evolution”.
I am a green product designer and green advisor. In product design, our field looks forward. How we construct the next “great gadget” is “life or death” for companies. Apple is a great example. Google is another. Wikipedia is another great product (open source).
I had a “free course” a few years ago in “touch screen stuff”. Having watched 20 years of touch screen technology knowledge ( out of pure interest in computers etc and human factors engineering ), I sat down to watch the “pitchmen” for this technology. It enabled Apple to provide its system today. In summary, I see what is coming “down the pipe” as far as products. I like to share this in a “green way”.
Now, being a “green designer”, I typically will not engage in electronics design. I have rules. Rule #1. Do not design things that will pollute my planet. I have worked on systems that can spit out a V-10 truck engine block and cylinder head every 12 seconds. I still feel guilty. At least I did some work on the Clean Diesel Engines for the “big boy” trucks.
The one innovation I have not seen, so far, in electronics or auto is rethinking planned obsolescence.
I want to work on, or share my insight, with green projects. I have written some harsh blogs on many topics, since November 2, 2010. My write them for “green awareness”: people need to focus on the realities of our planets future. I am not saving endangered species or a plant, just the planet, for now. I see a lot of greenwash out there too. I will be starting to focus on this more in 2011, in my blogs.
I like to explore the technology “they use”, plan to use and how they use it. Introducing new technology is a tricky game indeed. This is why I feel that we are starting “green” in the wrong context. With all that debate climate science ( the “good parts” and the exploited “ugly parts”: funded by corporations ) all I am saying is we are still polluting our planet. Lets think about this.
John Baird, Canadian Environment Minister, has been “stalling” Canadas leadership in “green”. Now, he has irresponsibly thrown out a “target”. He asserts that a 2 Celsius increase in temperature is a “danger point”. Of course, anyone versed in complex mathematics would tell you this is the “wrong thinking” to start with. Nice job John, now you will make the debate based on your “2 Degree” obfuscation? Our planet is getting more and more polluted each day. Start with that John: Would “Grandfather Claus” be mad at how dirty this place is?
But, aside from the challenges ahead of societies “reprogramming” in consumerism psychology, science just keeps innovating. All the work being done now is breath taking!
In 2011, I look forward to more innovation in science! Keep it coming!
Tar + Sand = Tarsand = Pollution
It is interesting to see the "political games" politicians play before elections. Promises and “innovation talk” fabricated to provide glossy new "political platforms" to “preach from”.
The “new kid on the block”, John Baird, has a tough challenge to provide the CPC with a “credible image” with regards to the environment and the tarsands. By using “big words” and “big promises”, we see another “promise”. The promise to monitor pollution by the companies extracting oil and to monitor water. Do we need to “check” these “knowns”, again?
Alberta has a long history of oil industry and other industrial pollution. The natural gas and refining industries have long been given carte blanche. Many people have long been exposed to the pollution, the results of poor government regulation of this industry and the influence the corporations have on our government offices. I see a history of inaction.
With water becoming a political "hot potato", is John just delivering the next "white wash"?
Poor air quality and toxic emissions have long been ignored, not just in Alberta. “Grandfather” clauses protecting some industries legal right to pollute. Industry using the “fear of economic losses and competition” to stall environmental responsibility.
Now I see John Baird making “bold new" "decisions".
Scientists and naturalists have long known that the tarsands creates pollution. Mr. Baird is providing a “fresh look” at an old problem? No, just more inaction. Just like the inaction on climate change and bill C-311 on climate science.
Is “looking at a problem” a solution? No. Monitoring pollution will not help the environment. It is simply a stall tactic to delay the industry from actually doing anything about the pollution created in the past and the future pollution waiting to happen.
Creating a "new spin" is what the CPC provides Canada. Much like bill C-311, no action, no innovation. John Baird chose the “classic” “well lets see what the others do”. The tarsands is now a “lets see what the pollution is” issue? John, perhaps a drink of that water will give you the answer. No? Have another glass, please.
Both C-311 ( climate change science ) and the tarsands are examples of government inaction enabling corporate inaction. Both solutions provide "no solution", just more “talk”. In the case of the tarsands, monitoring.
Alberta has long suffered the health effects of the oil industry. Old greedy practises, “Tobacco Industry”-style lawyers: fighting each "penny spent" to protect the environment and the people "downwind of their activity". Same with the coal industry, etc. No innovation, just talk and court time, to avoid investing in a healthier environment for all living things: Court cases settled “out of the spot light” to reduce “corporate image challenges”.
This is classic political dishonesty: appear to provide an honest and progressive plan to “gain support” and give people the illusion that the government is protecting Canada and its citizens.
John Baird is reading out of his “Karl Rove 101” handbook again? Personally, I think Karl Rove is a war criminal, but, that is my opinion. Carl is a genius at politics: the politics of deception and inactivity to let companies get away with “it”.
How long have scientists known about all the environmental issues with all industry? Well, Mr. Baird, thank you for reinventing the wheel again. Just what we need the wheel, again and again.
We need action to be taken with hard environmental standards that industry must target, regardless of “economic times”, “competitiveness” and corporate “responsibility”. Maybe Canada can eliminate oil subsidy and invest in environmental subsidy? I am not sure.
Inaction is damaging Canadians' health and our global environment. Your inaction, Mr. Baird, is classic politics. We need less politics and more action. The only “smaller government” I would like is the one that can eliminate political stalling on known issues and let the scientists start cleaning up Alberta, and Canada.
How many times must the Canadian taxpayer pay for the “wheel to be invented” by each new environment minister. It is time to act morally and eliminate political games that are slowly killing Canadian citizens and destroying our natural ecosystems. Those are facts. Just look at the aboriginal people and how long they have been concerned with most industrial practises. They had no “science laboratory” or “special monitoring systems”. You do not have to be an expert to see the negative effects of toxic pollution and irresponsible business practises, you just have to look “outside”.
John is only giving us “a shiny new pamphlet” and hoping we forget just long enough to get the CPC reelected. That is want politicians do.
If the political system does not work, the science and technology really never mattered in the first place. Mr. Baird, you will repeat this again.
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 Fur.
I recently saw a billboard, “Fur is Green”
I have long thought about this. Here is an “all natural resource”, used for over ~150,000 years to keep us warm and snuggly. Evolution gave us skills.
Then we have some clothing that is made of “toxic chemicals” and also natural fibres like bamboo or cotton.
What's green here?
Green is the process of bringing sustainable materials to customers at the lowest risk-based cost. This means from the start, of each different material and process, to the finish. Add up the processes and presto, you can investigate the “green”! Naturally, the least number of “steps” the greener. I picked up a grasshopper and had it for a snack, that would be green? Only if it was an organic grasshopper.
Currently, most fur industry “processes” are unregulated and dirty. Processing hides requires chemicals? Transportation costs, manufacturing,
, etc.
An
kid told me, many years ago now, his mom uses moose brains to treat hides. All natural. I am sure there are some other steps too, but, this kid had some cool knowledge, for me. I think I also remember him telling me the "Ogibway word" for “dirty” is “Gagoosh”? I hope I am not saying “white guy”.
So, why does this industry not “innovate its processes” to “bioengineered naturally safe enzymes”? I am sure some is working on this. This process may take a little longer, when you take into consideration the typical “MBA philosophy” with regards to our environment. Would a few “extras”, here and there, to benefit our environment help? Yes.
Off topic,
just started its newest program for green materials. Am I ahead of my time?
No, it makes economic sense to go green
. It reduces costs and “minimizes risk” to our environment. It also, by nature, saves money. Smart? Yes. This is how I like to design my stuff too!
Canada is behind in "
". That is why I blog so much! I see this as "lost money for all". Green Products are superior in environmental and economic terms. Period. Its math.
What does nature already have at its disposal to innovate this “green fur”? Until we know, fur is dirty. The people that hunt and prepare their hides are green ( as long as they do not use an ATV ). Will I ever stop? No.
This
goes on to say that its process is natural and looks at the ways they have innovated "green". I like "green" innovation! But, is this a “regulated and periodically” inspected system? Is it 100% accountable, or is it like the
. I do not know. That is not the focus of this discussion.
I do take exception to the animals they are "farming for fur": Beavers, Minks, Foxes, etc.
Some take exception to:
Italy, France, Denmark, Greece, Belgium and Australia ban the import of cat and dog fur but the sale is still legal
I think we need to “step back and look at our human activity” and decide what animal products are “green”.
If we think of the food industry, we can get “free” resources (hides) from animals. Leathers and skins from: cows, sheep, salmon, chickens, ostrich, eel, crocodile and alligator, etc. If these operations are humane and green, we should use them. If we can make the “processes” greener, I think we need to rethink the industry and streamline it for Green.
Lets take care of our
and their homes and not create “bubble populations” for “human fur luxury”.
P.S. - did you know that salmon, chicken, ostrich, eel, crocodile and alligator leathers are considered “luxury”?
Quality of Plastic.
Being a designer, I choose materials for my designs (sometimes). Metals is a big market: Steels, Aluminum Alloys, Casting materials (steel, aluminum, plastics, resins, etc.). So many choices!
What is important in the choice? Performance quality, weight, processing costs, and of course the quality of the material.
In some designs, I have to choose an “exotic metal”. Because of the design demands, I need to know the Mechanical Properties. This lets me explore strength and durability issues. This data for the material is critical (space shuttle o-ring + management incompetence, etc.). The data specification I get from the manufacturer is key in helping me with the engineering of the component.
All of these materials come in different grades ( meaning how “close” it is to the original “recipe on the “box” ). Sometimes the component does not need a special material. These days, seems plastic is the way to go. The markets for plastics is equally humongous. Again, different grades of plastic( ie. Medical , Food, Performance, weight). Again, some components can use the cheapest plastics for most jobs.
When we get into the cheap plastic markets, there are questionable suppliers. Same with metal markets: questionable suppliers. Some suppliers are certified to deliver quality, some are not.
I had to design a large cast iron “machine base”. These are big ( over 2000KG ), and they have to be rigid and not deform. These castings had to be of a certain quality. This component was outsourced to China. When it returned, “fully finished”, it was installed and tested. It failed. It deformed or “stretched”. It now was a scrap part. Wasted energy.
Our company was interested in seeing why it did fail. With a “scope” we checked the cast material and found catastrophic structural issues. A welder “blasted through” the 3” steel for a “sample”. What did the team find? “Semi-Unmelted bolts” in the casting material. This made it deform. This supplier used cheap casting material, not what was specified on the engineering documentation. We had to make another, fast.
Of course, this was bad, since they usually take 1 month to make: pattern, casting, blocking, machining, finishing and CMM verification process and then quality assessments without overtime. And these things are heavy .
The point I am trying to make is that without proper standards and checking them, the customer is at a disadvantage. That cast material was not to standard. It failed. Being able to demonstrate quality is important in our increasingly complex manufacturing logistics. “Parts” from “all over the world” come “together” for a design. Having high initial quality makes it “easier to hit” projected budgets and profit margins. These are competitive bids, remember.
China has made many advancements since. I have seen the designs they are developing. Impressive. I still have some issues with some products from China. Plastic. What quality are we getting? Did you know that some manufacturers put lead in plastic ( PVC ) to make it more flexible? All flexible plastics from China can be trusted? You decide, because our government thinks that is not important.
Plastic is a messy material. It uses oil, it pollutes soils and water. But some plastics are high grade. At least you know what you are getting. Plastics are in everything. Some even have polymer coatings for finishes ( the stuff that wears off or scratches ). These plastics are well defined in countries with standards systems. They have to provide “scientific safety” of each material, its mechanical properties, etc. Some cases for legal support of a design. Other cases for health risks in dealing with that material.
Cheap plastics, like the ones used in: consumer products, tools, computers, etc , have grades as well. But, some have very little regulatory laws and reliable inspectors to ensure standards ( in China ).
You keep seeing warnings about plastics. When plastic first started flooding from China, I knew that if they could not maintain an “industry standard for engineering”, how would I know there is “no lead in the paint”. I used to joke to everyone that there is probably lead in it. Well, there is.
See with a “loose regulation” system, material manufacturers use fillers ( pet food, steel, paint and plastic, etc ) in their products. Saves them money. Just like the old “sawdust in hamburger” trick.
Did you know that the plastics in most hospital equipment is found to be “toxic”? Did you know that children “plastic playgrounds” plastic is found to be “toxic”? The more we understand about the impacts of “outside hormones” on our bodies, we are finding that they disrupt natural processes.
This year I have seen stories and reports on lead in many plastic items and non plastic items: christmas lights, toys, cheap food bowls, etc.
But these are the items people have complained about. What about all the “hidden” plastics in products? The ones inside? What is in them? Does our systems check? No.
So next time you look at "the label" can they prove it is correct? Check the quality stamp? Some are stamped green. How green is plastic?
CFL's have a green stamp. They contain mercury, electronics and plastic. New LED lights should make the CFL obsolete.
Sorry Walmart in China making billions of these things. I wonder how much mercury they "go through" in one day? Is the workers health protected by law?
Walmart will continue to produce CFL bulbs. They have to. They need to get economies of scale to get a profit from their captial investment. Do you trust Walmart in China?
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!
Had seen some of these free animation toys before, so I gave it a shot!
I made this funny cartoon for Stephen Harper so he can observe a scientific discussion.
Cartoon animation #1: The Science of Positive Psychology
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!