Like him or leave him, I can easily understand why people want to, and don't want to, vote for Barack Obama. Wherever you stand, I would hope that you wouldn't deny that what Barack (and admittedly, likely a stable or writers) put together and vocally delivered at Independence Hall today puts him both in the middle of America and all its foibles, as well as above the fray in his natural eloquence. This blurb from today is my take-away:
"We have a choice in this country . . .," Obama said. "We can tackle race only as spectacle – as we did in the OJ trial – or in the wake of tragedy . . . We can play Reverend Wright’s sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she’s playing the race card . . .Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, “Not this time."
Who knows what will happen down the road, but this guy works pretty well for me. Well enough in fact, that I believe the intellect, empathy, and just the overall individual reflected in this speech has what I'm looking for inmy next president. That said, I also understand why there are those that don't share those ideas.
March 18, 2008
March 13, 2008
Watching renewable energy pass us by...
I sure wish the businesses/lobbyists/government coalition/antagonists would stop getting in each others way, virtually insuring an outside-looking-in scenario regarding the forefront of what-is-next. My educated guess is that it ain't fossil fuel (although, lifting from the global warming vernacular to extend a metaphor, I think any true exit from fossil fuel will happen at a glacial pace).
Right now China is one of the high-fullutin' pollutin'-ist, raw coal burning placed in the world. No doubt. However, what incremental small steps are they taking to change that so they can achieve at least what we have here?...
In one city in China, they have a Solar cell making factory that manufactures more photovoltaic panels than is made in all of the U.S. And, 90% of it is exported to the U.S., U.K., Spain, and France. The handwriting is on the wall... they're looking to jump the chasm that we - in essence - are in. We're in it scratching to get to the other side.
Scary part is that while we bemoan the idea of relying on the Middle East for oil, we'll end up relying on outside sources for the tools for renewable energy, until we get up and running again. Heck, we invented PV cells, I just want to lead in the industry too.
Some info (with some stuff in bold; notice the growth of the solar industry and the U.S.'s businesses investment in it are couter-intuitively - and tragically - inversely proportional)...
January 10, 2008 Volume 15, No. 1
http://www.manufacturingnews.com/news/08/0110/art1.html
U.S. Is Virtually A Non-Player In The Solar Power Production Business
BY RICHARD A. McCORMACK editor@manufacturingnews.com
The United States invented photovoltaics -- the direct conversion of sunlight to electricity -- but its industry is falling far behind the rest of the world in production and in installations, according to the Earth Policy Institute. In 2006, U.S. producers manufactured only 154 megawatts of PV systems, or 8 percent of total world production of 2,521 megawatts. That percentage is expected to decrease in 2007, as production throughout the world, especially in China, surged by more than 50 percent to 3,800 megawatts.
"Recent growth in China is astonishing," says the Earth Policy Institute. "After almost tripling its PV production in 2006, it is believed to have more than doubled output in 2007. With more than 400 PV companies, China's market share has exploded from 1 percent in 2003 to over 18 percent today. Having eclipsed Germany in 2007 to take the number two spot, China is now on track to become the number one PV producer in 2008. The United States, which gave the world the solar cell, has dropped from third to fifth place as a solar cell manufacturer since 2005, overtaken by China in 2006 and Taiwan in 2007."
The global market for PV systems is expected to be worth $12.9 billion in 2007, according to a market study from BCC Research. That should increase to more than $32 billion by 2012, a compound average annual growth rate of 15 percent. Shipments of PV systems should total 13,724 megawatts by 2013, says BCC.
China will export more than 90 percent of its production in 2007. It will install only 25 megawatts of PV, but it is planning to build a 100-megawatt-photovoltaics farm in Dunhaung City, "which would have five times the capacity of the largest PV power plant in the world today," says Earth Policy Institute.
Germany lays claim to being the world's largest market for installations, despite its cloudy skies. The country added 1,050 megawatts of capacity in 2006, becoming the first country in the world to install more than one gigawatt of solar power in one year. "Driven by a feed-in tariff that guarantees the price a utility must pay homeowners or private firms for PV-generated electricity, annual installations in Germany alone have exceeded those in all other countries combined since 2004," according to Earth Policy Institute. There are now more than 300,000 buildings in Germany with PV systems, triple the German government's goal of its 100,000 Roofs Program launched in 1998.
The United States is almost bereft of companies that produce photovoltaic panels. Only one of the top 10 companies worldwide in PV production is American owned: First Solar, which ranks in eighth place globally, with 61 megawatts of production during the first six months of 2007. First Solar's output of PV cells was about one-quarter of the production from world leader Sharp of Japan (225 megawatts). The other top 10 producers for the first half of 2007 were Q-Cells of Germany (160 megawatts) in second place; Suntech of China (145 megawatts); Kyocera of Japan (108 megawatts); Sanyo of Japan (87 megawatts); Motech of Taiwan (85 megawatts) Deutsche Solar/Shell of Germany (66 megawatts), Mitsubishi of Japan (55 megawatts) and, in tenth place, SunPower of the Philippines (54 megawatts).
[Silver lining alert] First Solar is capitalizing on the global shortage of silicon, which is used in both the making of PV panels and in semiconductor chips. First Solar is using cadmium telluride thin films for its PV panels, allowing it to "leap" into the top 10 list of global PV producers, says Earth Policy Institute. It is the fastest growing PV manufacturing company in the world.
"The average price for a PV module, excluding installation and other system costs, has dropped from almost $100 per watt in 1975 to less than $4 per watt at the end of 2006," says the Earth Policy Institute. "With expanding polysilicon supplies, average PV prices are projected to drop to $2 per watt in 2010. For thin-film PV, production costs are expected to reach $1 per watt in 2010, at which point, solar PV will become competitive with coal-fired electricity.
____________________________________
Germany is a heavily cloudy country and they are on top of solar...Japan, China,... something's wrong with this picture...
Right now China is one of the high-fullutin' pollutin'-ist, raw coal burning placed in the world. No doubt. However, what incremental small steps are they taking to change that so they can achieve at least what we have here?...
In one city in China, they have a Solar cell making factory that manufactures more photovoltaic panels than is made in all of the U.S. And, 90% of it is exported to the U.S., U.K., Spain, and France. The handwriting is on the wall... they're looking to jump the chasm that we - in essence - are in. We're in it scratching to get to the other side.
Scary part is that while we bemoan the idea of relying on the Middle East for oil, we'll end up relying on outside sources for the tools for renewable energy, until we get up and running again. Heck, we invented PV cells, I just want to lead in the industry too.
Some info (with some stuff in bold; notice the growth of the solar industry and the U.S.'s businesses investment in it are couter-intuitively - and tragically - inversely proportional)...
January 10, 2008 Volume 15, No. 1
http://www.manufacturingnews.com/news/08/0110/art1.html
U.S. Is Virtually A Non-Player In The Solar Power Production Business
BY RICHARD A. McCORMACK editor@manufacturingnews.com
The United States invented photovoltaics -- the direct conversion of sunlight to electricity -- but its industry is falling far behind the rest of the world in production and in installations, according to the Earth Policy Institute. In 2006, U.S. producers manufactured only 154 megawatts of PV systems, or 8 percent of total world production of 2,521 megawatts. That percentage is expected to decrease in 2007, as production throughout the world, especially in China, surged by more than 50 percent to 3,800 megawatts.
"Recent growth in China is astonishing," says the Earth Policy Institute. "After almost tripling its PV production in 2006, it is believed to have more than doubled output in 2007. With more than 400 PV companies, China's market share has exploded from 1 percent in 2003 to over 18 percent today. Having eclipsed Germany in 2007 to take the number two spot, China is now on track to become the number one PV producer in 2008. The United States, which gave the world the solar cell, has dropped from third to fifth place as a solar cell manufacturer since 2005, overtaken by China in 2006 and Taiwan in 2007."
The global market for PV systems is expected to be worth $12.9 billion in 2007, according to a market study from BCC Research. That should increase to more than $32 billion by 2012, a compound average annual growth rate of 15 percent. Shipments of PV systems should total 13,724 megawatts by 2013, says BCC.
China will export more than 90 percent of its production in 2007. It will install only 25 megawatts of PV, but it is planning to build a 100-megawatt-photovoltaics farm in Dunhaung City, "which would have five times the capacity of the largest PV power plant in the world today," says Earth Policy Institute.
Germany lays claim to being the world's largest market for installations, despite its cloudy skies. The country added 1,050 megawatts of capacity in 2006, becoming the first country in the world to install more than one gigawatt of solar power in one year. "Driven by a feed-in tariff that guarantees the price a utility must pay homeowners or private firms for PV-generated electricity, annual installations in Germany alone have exceeded those in all other countries combined since 2004," according to Earth Policy Institute. There are now more than 300,000 buildings in Germany with PV systems, triple the German government's goal of its 100,000 Roofs Program launched in 1998.
The United States is almost bereft of companies that produce photovoltaic panels. Only one of the top 10 companies worldwide in PV production is American owned: First Solar, which ranks in eighth place globally, with 61 megawatts of production during the first six months of 2007. First Solar's output of PV cells was about one-quarter of the production from world leader Sharp of Japan (225 megawatts). The other top 10 producers for the first half of 2007 were Q-Cells of Germany (160 megawatts) in second place; Suntech of China (145 megawatts); Kyocera of Japan (108 megawatts); Sanyo of Japan (87 megawatts); Motech of Taiwan (85 megawatts) Deutsche Solar/Shell of Germany (66 megawatts), Mitsubishi of Japan (55 megawatts) and, in tenth place, SunPower of the Philippines (54 megawatts).
[Silver lining alert] First Solar is capitalizing on the global shortage of silicon, which is used in both the making of PV panels and in semiconductor chips. First Solar is using cadmium telluride thin films for its PV panels, allowing it to "leap" into the top 10 list of global PV producers, says Earth Policy Institute. It is the fastest growing PV manufacturing company in the world.
"The average price for a PV module, excluding installation and other system costs, has dropped from almost $100 per watt in 1975 to less than $4 per watt at the end of 2006," says the Earth Policy Institute. "With expanding polysilicon supplies, average PV prices are projected to drop to $2 per watt in 2010. For thin-film PV, production costs are expected to reach $1 per watt in 2010, at which point, solar PV will become competitive with coal-fired electricity.
____________________________________
Germany is a heavily cloudy country and they are on top of solar...Japan, China,... something's wrong with this picture...
February 19, 2008
The first winner this year is....
Blu-Ray DVD players!! With Warner and NetFlix both pledging their respective allegiance to Blu-Ray, it's over in a landslide. Toshiba has pulled the plug on HD DVD (just too many letters for a good name anyway), and you can go out and spend that impending economic stimulus check from the government on Blu-Ray -- safe in the knowledge that there won't be any new formats for the foreseeable future (likely a minor victory, since, in my limited understanding of technobabble these days, the foreseeable future amounts to just over 1.3 years). Don't think Toshiba -- along with everyone else -- isn't behind the scenes funding an even higher high definition DVD platform. I'm holding out until they can do 3D without the glasses.
February 15, 2008
Why Congress has to be involved in the steroid controversy
I think Congress has to be in on the steroids issue, because all major sports operate under the good graces of Congress, which has given them anti-trust exemptions. Anti-trust exemption is all but unheard of as a general rule; it's like a Willie Wonka ticket -- if whatever business gets this anti-trust exemption executes their trade correctly, it's like your own monetary printing press. It guarantees you rights that have been essentially outlawed in the U.S to protect against monopolies and the graft that can ensue. When a sport - in these cases businesses that has been given a green light to run their businesses unchecked by any competition in their category - looks to be unable to self-rule, it falls upon Congress to slap them around.
All pro sports could learn a lesson from Stan 'the Man' Lee's Spider-man -- With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility.
All pro sports could learn a lesson from Stan 'the Man' Lee's Spider-man -- With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility.
February 14, 2008
Camelot? Maybe... and then some....
It's great to see not everyone falls in line with what Obama is doing & saying. A buddy of mine said everyone is drinking the Kool-Aid.
Truth is, I feel like I poured and stirred the Kool-Aid. I've been making the call for him as the Dem candidate since our first threads went out (when Hillary was the presumptive favorite). Methinks Republicans prefer the Hill for two resaons: 1. As I've mentioned, she will galvinize Republicans to get out the vote against her,... 2. She voted for the Iraq invasion (and I'm not here to quibble/debate that one, just my guess). Besides those two points the two are Platform-wise almost identical. Except for two things... 1. Hill wants Universal health care, while Obama wants to make it affordable enough that anyone can do it 2. Say what you want for how he'll do it, but if your gut doesn't tell you that given the exact same agenda, Barack won't get things done faster, than that's a genuine surprise.
I do not think experience counts for much in the presidency... I just don't. I think that fallacy is perpetrated by the man behind the curtain. Reagan was a governor (no nat'l office), Clinton was a governor (no nat'l office); Barack is a one-term Senator. Those congressmen in yesterday's Clemens fun only supported that idea. I wouldn't trust some of them to mow my lawn. I think it takes hard work, common sense, and the ability to build a consensus from a divergent audience to get 85% of the presidency done well. That last 15% is what makes stars or makes Nixons (although, even that is not totally fair, given his excellent foreign policy abilities that will forever be overshadowed by his later exploits).
Some have said that Barack is formulating the new Camelot. This is potentially better - and more real - than any Arthurian legend. I think Barack is bigger than Camelot, because there was no way near the amount of scrutiny then that there is now -- to that point, something could come to light eventually that dispels some of the O Myth, but even that is unlikely. JFK overcame being Catholic... oh, and his dad Joe may have bought him the nomination at the Dem Convention. Barack is where he is, despite the following obstacles:
- He's biracial
- His name sounds similar to the worst terrorist known in the U.S.
- His dad was Muslim - see above
- He has three years in nat'l office
- He is pitted against a modern political family dynasty - the Clintons
- If nominated, he'll face a war hero, (who he's currently polling better than)
- He has admitted not only to smoking pot... but inhaling
- What he's hoping to do has never been done
To most other candidates any one of those points would make it tough to win in states from every corner of the country -- he has 'em all and he's won in everywhere.
Crazy point? If you were 20 years old today, you've been voting for two years and the only last name for any president in your lifetime has been either Clinton or Bush. And whether that's happenstance or true laziness within each party, I'm happy rebooting the electoral process.
Truth is, I feel like I poured and stirred the Kool-Aid. I've been making the call for him as the Dem candidate since our first threads went out (when Hillary was the presumptive favorite). Methinks Republicans prefer the Hill for two resaons: 1. As I've mentioned, she will galvinize Republicans to get out the vote against her,... 2. She voted for the Iraq invasion (and I'm not here to quibble/debate that one, just my guess). Besides those two points the two are Platform-wise almost identical. Except for two things... 1. Hill wants Universal health care, while Obama wants to make it affordable enough that anyone can do it 2. Say what you want for how he'll do it, but if your gut doesn't tell you that given the exact same agenda, Barack won't get things done faster, than that's a genuine surprise.
I do not think experience counts for much in the presidency... I just don't. I think that fallacy is perpetrated by the man behind the curtain. Reagan was a governor (no nat'l office), Clinton was a governor (no nat'l office); Barack is a one-term Senator. Those congressmen in yesterday's Clemens fun only supported that idea. I wouldn't trust some of them to mow my lawn. I think it takes hard work, common sense, and the ability to build a consensus from a divergent audience to get 85% of the presidency done well. That last 15% is what makes stars or makes Nixons (although, even that is not totally fair, given his excellent foreign policy abilities that will forever be overshadowed by his later exploits).
Some have said that Barack is formulating the new Camelot. This is potentially better - and more real - than any Arthurian legend. I think Barack is bigger than Camelot, because there was no way near the amount of scrutiny then that there is now -- to that point, something could come to light eventually that dispels some of the O Myth, but even that is unlikely. JFK overcame being Catholic... oh, and his dad Joe may have bought him the nomination at the Dem Convention. Barack is where he is, despite the following obstacles:
- He's biracial
- His name sounds similar to the worst terrorist known in the U.S.
- His dad was Muslim - see above
- He has three years in nat'l office
- He is pitted against a modern political family dynasty - the Clintons
- If nominated, he'll face a war hero, (who he's currently polling better than)
- He has admitted not only to smoking pot... but inhaling
- What he's hoping to do has never been done
To most other candidates any one of those points would make it tough to win in states from every corner of the country -- he has 'em all and he's won in everywhere.
Crazy point? If you were 20 years old today, you've been voting for two years and the only last name for any president in your lifetime has been either Clinton or Bush. And whether that's happenstance or true laziness within each party, I'm happy rebooting the electoral process.
Winners, losers, losers, and losers
Focus should be on president, but it still is -- for good or bad, we're a multi-tasking society that places as much emphasis on our advocations as our vocations. All the sports with all the examples they place out there to kids - warranted or not - should answer to a higher authority. However, we do need a Kenesaw Mountain Landis in baseball (granted, I think he screwed Shoeless Joe, but there is not enough fear within the players right now). Selig is a toothless Paper Tiger for the owners -- word is starting to spread that he knew about steroids well before he has said he did; if Massachusetts' Dan Lynch stepped into that role tomorrow, he'd be more up to date and carry a heavier hand within a fortnight.
Biggest winners - Dan Lynch, John Tierney, Waxman, & Cummings - they brought new things to the table (Lynch's MRI or Clems butt), were diligent in questioning both men; tierney broke thru the Clem stonewall on never talking to Mac about HGH; Waxman was impartial and reverent to both men, and Cummings thought on his feet - asking relevant Follow Up questions, upon Roger's answers.
Biggest loser yesterday was Clemens; baseball will go on as it always has through ups and downs, there will be other spectacles and bumps in the road. Eevryone knew at this point of Mac's crappy rep -- if anything, he practically redeemed himself through his admissions of guilt throughout (I did say practically).
Seond biggest loser (or tie for first) was the American public, but not because of anything that has to do with Clemens or the 'roids, but because a majority (thank God, not all) of congressmen and women yesterday were shining examples of the dumbest people pretending to do what they are paid to do by their constituents. This wasn't a hearing that just popped up on them, this was something they could have had their pages and interns prepare them for. The lack or preparedness - or even impartiality - scared the living crap out of me that these are the same people who represent this country every day as they work on our domestic and foreign policies, programs, and law-making. Lobbyists must laugh their ass to the bank everyday they meet with some of these pudding-like mental midgets. We always joke about politicians, but then to actually see person after person either ask the same irrelevant question, or make comments/questions like "What uniform are you going to wear in the HOF?" blew me away. there are way too many gaffs and misreads to detail, but how about Clemens always saying how hard he works out, and some of the congresspeople taking that as proof he didn't cheat? PEOPLE! After taking steroids, you have to work out to realize its benefits. The lack of preparedness on the knowledge associated with what was at hand in this hearing underlined, italicized, and put in great big bold letters that these people - that share the driver's seat of our very country - are the dumbest people on earth.
Third biggest losers - The scores of people Roger blamed beside himself for his predicament:
Pettitte - 'misremembered'
Mrs. Pettitte - also... misremembered
Hendricks Agents - never told him what the Report said
Selig - should have tracked him down re: the Report (which he couldn't, in fact, do - he had to go thru the Player's Union)
The Players Union/Gene Orza - didn't tell him what the Mitchell Report said
McNamee - told the truth on everyone else but him, somehow
Debbie Clemens - never even talked to him prior to having McNamee inject her derriere
_________________
News flash - Osama bin Laden was supposedly caught & brought behind a closed door U.S. Congressional hearing recently, but unfortunately, while the entire room stood slack-jawed/open mouthed during the time Dan Burton was praising bin Laden for being a 'Titan of the Middle East', Osama was able to slip away.
Biggest winners - Dan Lynch, John Tierney, Waxman, & Cummings - they brought new things to the table (Lynch's MRI or Clems butt), were diligent in questioning both men; tierney broke thru the Clem stonewall on never talking to Mac about HGH; Waxman was impartial and reverent to both men, and Cummings thought on his feet - asking relevant Follow Up questions, upon Roger's answers.
Biggest loser yesterday was Clemens; baseball will go on as it always has through ups and downs, there will be other spectacles and bumps in the road. Eevryone knew at this point of Mac's crappy rep -- if anything, he practically redeemed himself through his admissions of guilt throughout (I did say practically).
Seond biggest loser (or tie for first) was the American public, but not because of anything that has to do with Clemens or the 'roids, but because a majority (thank God, not all) of congressmen and women yesterday were shining examples of the dumbest people pretending to do what they are paid to do by their constituents. This wasn't a hearing that just popped up on them, this was something they could have had their pages and interns prepare them for. The lack or preparedness - or even impartiality - scared the living crap out of me that these are the same people who represent this country every day as they work on our domestic and foreign policies, programs, and law-making. Lobbyists must laugh their ass to the bank everyday they meet with some of these pudding-like mental midgets. We always joke about politicians, but then to actually see person after person either ask the same irrelevant question, or make comments/questions like "What uniform are you going to wear in the HOF?" blew me away. there are way too many gaffs and misreads to detail, but how about Clemens always saying how hard he works out, and some of the congresspeople taking that as proof he didn't cheat? PEOPLE! After taking steroids, you have to work out to realize its benefits. The lack of preparedness on the knowledge associated with what was at hand in this hearing underlined, italicized, and put in great big bold letters that these people - that share the driver's seat of our very country - are the dumbest people on earth.
Third biggest losers - The scores of people Roger blamed beside himself for his predicament:
Pettitte - 'misremembered'
Mrs. Pettitte - also... misremembered
Hendricks Agents - never told him what the Report said
Selig - should have tracked him down re: the Report (which he couldn't, in fact, do - he had to go thru the Player's Union)
The Players Union/Gene Orza - didn't tell him what the Mitchell Report said
McNamee - told the truth on everyone else but him, somehow
Debbie Clemens - never even talked to him prior to having McNamee inject her derriere
_________________
News flash - Osama bin Laden was supposedly caught & brought behind a closed door U.S. Congressional hearing recently, but unfortunately, while the entire room stood slack-jawed/open mouthed during the time Dan Burton was praising bin Laden for being a 'Titan of the Middle East', Osama was able to slip away.
February 13, 2008
Rolling, rolling, rolling down the river
Obama rolling along -- in a strategic move, Hillary didn't push too hard in the MD, VA, D.C., Primary trifecta, pushing harder in TX & OH, where she holds leads (and which have high delegate counts. The catch with that is that the 'O' Man has now won 20 states to her 8 (his catch of course, is that the states she has won had many delegates), and has won the last seven consecutive states. (Other catch is that TX has both a primary & a caucus format, which could still funnel many delegates to Obama, whether he wins outright or not.)
Does no one find it telling that the Obama/Clinton race is the close, yet, it was Obama who annihilated his opponent, while Huckabee gave McCain a run for his money?
Small or not, Hill's traction in every voter base is becoming less & less by the day. With numerous geographically diverse wins in ME, CT, WA, NE, & MO, & MT, among others, showing a nationwide push for the Barack, Hillary is no longer even looking for a geographic mandate to lead. She's just trying to cobble together the largest states as is possible for a delegate win.
My prediction is that Clinton will lose Ohio and not win enough of Texas to take away Obama's lead, or his eventual nomination.
Does no one find it telling that the Obama/Clinton race is the close, yet, it was Obama who annihilated his opponent, while Huckabee gave McCain a run for his money?
Small or not, Hill's traction in every voter base is becoming less & less by the day. With numerous geographically diverse wins in ME, CT, WA, NE, & MO, & MT, among others, showing a nationwide push for the Barack, Hillary is no longer even looking for a geographic mandate to lead. She's just trying to cobble together the largest states as is possible for a delegate win.
My prediction is that Clinton will lose Ohio and not win enough of Texas to take away Obama's lead, or his eventual nomination.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
