Environmentalism in the Electronic Age

I came across a news release about the International BoatBuilders Exposition & Conference (IBEX) trade show in Louisville being promoted as a “paperless trade show”. The Kentucky Exposition Center (KEC), Mayor Jerry Abramson and the company that created the solution, Viridistor LLC, are out to prove that “paperless” is better for the environment. They claimed it would eliminate “40 tons of paper and save 1,000 trees” and reduce huge amounts of trash. The CEO of Viridistor, Terry Mullin, proudly proclaimed, “That’s a powerful statement about greenhouse gas reduction and efforts by both the IBEX Show and the City of Louisville to reduce the municipal carbon footprint,”

Replacing all trade show literature is accomplished by issuing each attendee a plastic USB micro-memory chip (memory stick) made by Kingston, a $4 billion California memory/storage device maker. So instead of picking up a brochure at every exhibitor’s booth, the attendee inserts the memory drive into a “Green Box” at the exhibitor booth and downloads their literature PDFs. Later back in the office, they could print the files IF they wanted. To obtain the 40 tons of paper saved, the company calculated that of the approximately 5300 attendees each one would have collected 15 pounds of paper. As Mr. Mullin pronounced, “The best part is, event attendees no longer have to lug around hundreds of pounds of paper at an event.”

And sometime after the show, the attendee can erase the USB memory drive to use for other projects or discard it. What a win/win!
Not exactly walking on water, but probably next on their list.

But I wondered what materials are used to manufacture a USB drive?
AND where it was made?
And how long do you stand in line to accomplish that electronic transfer? What happens if the transfer fails? Is it be possible that some attendees do not wait and never download the info at all? And how many attendees actually “lug around hundreds of pounds of paper”?

More importantly, I wondered if anyone considered the following facts?

On average, it takes approximately 550 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity to produce the amount of paper each of us consumes in a year (about 440 pounds). That same amount of electricity will power a single computer for only 5 months.

Or this fact:
Of all discarded electronic devices, only 18% are currently recycled. Nearly 2 million tons were dumped in 2006 and it is estimated that 30-40 million PCs will be discarded over the next few years. Electronic waste is now our single largest toxic waste export. In contrast, nearly 60% of all paper is recycled AND more than 63% of the fiber used to manufacture new paper is from recycled sources.

To manufacture paper, the primary materials are all renewable. The paper and forest products industry replenishes more resources than it uses by planting 1.7 million trees every day-more than three times what it is harvested.
To manufacture computers typically requires mining and refining dozens of minerals and metals including gold, silver and palladium. Also it requires the extensive use of plastics and hydrocarbon solvents. A computer’s life span is relatively short- 4 to 5 years and electronics have become the world’s fastest growing waste stream.

Factoid: An individual who reads a daily printed newspaper uses 20% less carbon dioxide per year than a person reading web based news for 30 minutes.
And: In the U.S., less than 10% of power comes from renewable resources while in the pulp/paper industry it is over 60%.

Lastly: In the U.S. alone, idle computers that remain on overnight cost an estimated $2.8 billion of energy per year. On a carbon dioxide (CO2) basis, that’s 20 million tons or the equivalent of 4 million cars on the road.

While the PR release about the paperless trade show sounds like an big environmental plus, with closer examination, the puffery is revealed as far more devastating for the environment. It will cause greater carbon dioxide emissions and create thousands of never-degradable chemical time bombs. Oh, and one other thing, the USB drives are manufactured in China.
Since this new paperless program will eliminate many paper manufacturing, graphic design, printing, trucking and maintenance jobs, I wonder what is the Mayor’s stance on that?


Sources: Alliance to Save Energy, PC Energy Report 2009; Swedish Royal Institute for Technology; Institute for Supply Management (formerly NAPM); American Forest and Paper Association; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; International Energy Agency; Rochester Institute of Technology, Print in the Mix; Direct Marketing Association; Greenbiz.com; Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI); Forest Stewardship Council (FSC); World Business Council for Sustainable Development

Where Would You Go?

We all like to think that we are risk takers, love freedom, believe in free enterprise and can roll with the punches. We can handle life and whatever lemons we get, we make into lemonade.

Here is a question with the answer revealing much about you.

“If you were dropped off in any Country in the World today and you had no idea what you would be or do when you arrived, where would you choose to go?”

I know this is general so here are a few guidelines:
-your education, background, financial status are not part of the dropping off process
-you can only select the country, not the city or region
-your situation when you arrive is totally random. You might be a Banker, Teacher, Janitor, Bus Driver, etc.
-You have no control other than you may choose the Country.

Would you pick the United States, England, China, Russia, India, Norway or??

Most people chose France. Why? Because their society is level; not too poor, not too rich. There would be a very small risk that you would be much worse off and certainly not too great a chance that you would be better off. Likewise for Sweden, Finland, Norway; all countries that have adopted socialist policies.

Now if I gave you the opportunity to be dropped off in any country with your current knowledge and financial status but the year is 1906, which country would you chose then? I think we all know that you’d pick the U.S. and immediately head for Texas or perhaps invest in a railroad or two, or maybe in the telephone or electric light bulb. Of course, you’d have to learn to actually write because there’d be no computers.

The Anti-Incumbent Message?

So now, we have some old timers and “Washington Establishment” types that are suffering because the voters are in an “anti-incumbent” mood. I never thought of Americans as “moody” voters. Foolish, careless, lazy or uninformed, but not moody. I wonder if the Tea Party participants consider themselves ‘moody”?

While most of us must surf on this “spinning wave” of public relations blather from the White House and supported by CMW (Conventional Media Wisdom), it is instructive to examine the commonalities of those being up-ended by this new “mood”. In the big picture, simple analysis tends to be the most accurate explanation.

The Big Thread is that every member of Congress that suffered defeat, rejection or an ignominious tie had one thing in common: Each either supported the Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda and/or voted for the Healthcare bill. This “mood” of anti-incumbent, anti-establishment is, in fact, anti-Democrat/Socialist. Americans generally prefer freedom of choice and want many choices available.

If you doubt that statement, the next time you visit a pharmacy or retailer, take a walk down the women’s hair care aisle or the pain-reliever aisle or cold/flu medications or vitamin/supplement aisle. Let me know how many choices you see there.

No, the “mood” is the reaction to the “We know what is best for you and we are going to give that to you” policies and actions of this President and the Democrat (socialist) leaders in the House and Senate. The average American wants the freedom to make choices, make good decisions or poor ones. Essentially, most the voters want to be able to say: “I am where I am because I got there through my brains, effort and a little help from others.” None of us want to say, “Well, I tried to do X, but the Program does not allow it. We got put into Program Z because our facilitator said it would be the best he could do.”

Forget about the governmental, financial and income ramifications of this new Democrat Socialism. Let’s not even think about how the government can take money from one demographic group and give it to another all because they believe that makes things “fair”. Just consider this: When the government decides what is best for you, it is only a matter of time before you are “given” the pale khaki slacks in a size small when you are actually a medium and you hate tan.

One size fits all.

President Enough

Our President gave a speech April 28th (I know this was awhile ago, but I’m just part time here) in Quincy, Illinois. The subject was financial reform and he proclaimed he did not “begrudge success”. But using his “street tone” voice, he then said, “I do think, at a certain point, you’ve made enough money.”
The speech was not covered much and not examined in any depth in the media. Many people think that there is an amount of money that is enough. At least, enough money for them. Their reasoning is: if enough for me, why not everyone?

So, really, when is enough money, Enough?
Perhaps you’d say $1 million or $20 million or maybe $50 million.
What are the specific criteria for Enough? I couldn’t find the Bureau of Enough in the government website so I prayed, but God couldn’t give me an answer either. He did whisper something about “free will” though.
As I muddled through our President’s position, I began to ask myself:
“Who should decide when you reached that ‘certain point’?”
Maybe President Obama should decide. But he’s probably too busy to review each case. How about a Bi-Partisan “Blue Ribbon Panel” appointed by the President?

Whoever has the responsibility to decide “What is Enough”, what do we do if they come back with a number that is more or less than each of us thinks the number should be? If you believe that $10 Million is enough; I mean, anyone should be happy, comfortable, and safe and satisfied with $10 million per year, right? Wait! this just in- news stream on the internet:
The Panel said: “$35 million, anything over that no one needs.”

I guess the implication is if you can make more than that, or God forbid, you actually want more, well then, you are just plain Greedy. And that condition is definitely a BAD thing especially in the “holier than thou” arena in which our President plays. Keep in mind that President Obama spent much of his time organizing in the streets of Chicago and attending Reverend Wright’s church. What do you think he witnessed on the walks and talks through the streets? The poor, the minimum wage earners, perhaps some middle class, but ALL were “sshtruggling” as Mrs. Obama so aptly described their status while implying the rest of America does not.

In the President’s Message to the country at his inauguration he said the following:

“And millions of Americans are unsure about the future-if their job will be there tomorrow, if their children will be able to go to college, and if their grand children will be able to realize the full promise of America.”

I wonder what is the “full promise of America”? Is the promise that you have no “sshtruggles”, you always have a job, you go to college, you have a home, a dog, two cars, a vacation every summer? Or is it that by being in America, you get a chance to have those things? No guarantee, just an opportunity that could become reality depending on your education, planning, work, people skills and some luck.

For me, I want as much as possible-if I could win $100 million in the lottery, I know of a church that needs a new roof and a full time child education director. A high school that needs basketball uniforms, a children’s shelter that needs more cribs, a college student that needs help with tuition payments and about a dozen other groups that would benefit significantly from my wealth. Sure, I’d pay all my debts and spend on myself too. But my real number is much less than the $100 million and that money would create a very large ripple in my community’s pond. Which is precisely the point-everyone has their own number and beyond that, most put the overage to work to benefit others by donations, starting a new business, building a new theatre, museum, and park or offering scholarships. And let’s not forget the attorneys and accountants I’d need to handle all my business affairs.

President Obama again has revealed his core belief that while he does not “begrudge success”; he clearly knows how much success you should be able to have. And he plans to make sure that your success will be confiscated to benefit those who continue to “sshtruggle”. You will not be allowed to choose, the government will decide what is best. With his pathetic arrogance, the President is manufacturing a foundation for a socialist society in America. And his supporters cannot see the train wrecks around the bend of the failed European models he seeks to emulate.

The Cat is out of the Bag..and running down the road

A few days ago, “Public Sector Workers” in France went on strike upset about recommended Sarkozy government spending reforms and reductions. The group included teachers, government workers, transportation employees and others. It seems they were upset about changes to the retirement age, work hours, pensions and benefits. Francois Chereque, head of the CFDT union, said the changes were a "bad sign about the government's social commitment.” Meanwhile, Eric Woerth, former Budget Minister and new Labor Minister, said: "We must maintain the goal which is that of reform. The nation needs to be competitive, to (create) the jobs of tomorrow”. The strike shut down about a third of the country’s transportation capacity for a day, but did demonstrate once again, that strikes are the norm for life in France.

Farther east, Greece is near bankruptcy because of over spending by their government. They can no longer continue to spend as before so to convince other EU members that Greece could manage its money and repay its debt, it proposed reductions. But the “Public Sector Workers” went on strike due to these proposed cuts. Both countries’ situations were created by overspending, yet none of the “public sector workers” can see a connection between their employment, benefits, pensions and health care costs with the disastrous financial condition of their respective countries. All seem more concerned with the “social commitment” over financial responsibility and stability.

Meanwhile, U.S. Senator Max Baucus says the Health Care bill is really a way to take money from the wealthy and give it to those who are not. The “income gap” between the richest and the poorest is too great; the richest are just getting too rich. And the poor are not keeping up with this upward trend so government must step in to “adjust the situation”. Any parallels here?

I think it is time that everyone acknowledges reality: Democrats are Socialists.
A party born of the “little guy”, they have become the party of Government as Referee in their quest to make everything fair. So they pass a health care bill to transfer money so the government can make it “fair”. And yes, they will need to hire many more government employees to manage all this new fairness.

To avoid the financial problems of Greece or France, the U.S. has the best tool available. It is called capitalism-it permits people to provide private solutions to address any problem, and if correctly implemented, creates jobs and profits for their efforts. But competition is needed, otherwise, the one horse show will become complacent, stagnant and unresponsive. The strongest solution providers will be chosen by those customers willing to participate because of options, cost, efficiency and service.

The faulty logic in the health care debacle is that government should be the entity to “reinvent the wheel” of health care insurance. The legislation addresses symptoms while adding many convoluted taxes which combined with mythical cuts give the appearance of financial viability. If this legislation is as significant to the country as Social Security and Medicare, let’s fast forward 15 years.
What will be the percentage increase in taxes to fund it? And where will the Socialists propose to build the new Health Care Administration facility?
Perhaps they should begin looking near the cherry tree lined pond surrounding the Jefferson Memorial.

Our COMCASTIC provider!!!

Dear Local Comcast Team,


I recently received the mailer “Here’s Our Best Price for Our Best Customers”.
I was anxious to open it! I thought: what a great deal, Comcast is recognizing their loyal customer base!

Unfortunately, it was a big disappointment. I think you are seriously missing the trend here. Most people are dropping their landlines because everyone has or is moving to cell phones (yes, I know about the 911 issue). All I want is reliable internet (not down or 502 bad gateway) and HD television.

So in spite of the great offer of “Less than $21 more than you pay now”, I have no use for it. In fact, I was hoping for a reduction -you know, a Best Deal for our Best Customers. Or perhaps, an opportunity to pay for the channels I want instead of a bundle that is only 40% worth having. By the way, does anybody there know we are in a depression? The economy stinks and people are trying to cut back; not achieve some goofy offer of “Less than $21 more than you pay now”- And since you are into these backwards phrases, here’s my favorite:
“You sure look a lot more like you do now than you used to.”

Unfortunately, your marketing efforts seem focused on reminding me of Comcast’s weaknesses. Here’s an example: After notifying me that my converter box rental fee would be increased $24/year due to “higher costs”, I then receive about 45 days later, a mailing announcing I would be given a “free” converter which would bring me all digital programming as part of another great upgrade. Well, when I connected that converter to my HDTV, I lost access to the HD channels that were already available. And I now find out that as of August 1, my package will not be available without the converter. Actually, it is nothing more than your filter to prevent my HDTV from receiving any HD channels already available.

So, it looks like I will be forced to go to satellite. I want to pay less than I do now and Comcast has no package that fits my needs. Because you will be blocking the HD on cable now, I’ll be required to pay for 2 HD boxes which will increase my monthly costs about 20%. Wow, that’s Comcastic!!!

As the single cable provider, you have too much power. But my guess is this letter will have absolutely no effect; as the saying goes, “Losing one monkey won’t stop the Circus”.

Good Luck,
One of Your Best Customers

Barbara announces historic moment?

The Academy Awards are over and most have forgotten much of the hoopla.
However, each year I find it curious, or surprising, when a presenter or recipient claims that their award represents “an historic accomplishment” against some type of discrimination. This is followed by praise for those “who have come before”, or “on whose shoulders I stand” or some other such drivel. The latest slop was delivered and appropriately announced by Barbara “my career is over” Streisand, claiming that the glass ceiling was broken when Kathryn Bigelow received the award for Best Director. Cue music for an inspirational song about women.

The first woman to receive Best Director may be historic in Hollywood, but women all over the country have accomplished much and already broken the ceiling. What is amazing, however, is the realization that Hollywood, and the Academy in particular, must openly discriminate against women, gays, blacks, Native Americans and nearly every disadvantaged group you perceive.
If this were not the case, how is it possible to witness the “historic achievements?” The Academy selects the nominees and the winners in all categories. Because so few of these groups are ever selected, they must be purposely blocking recognition based on some type of discrimination. Perhaps if the public voted, we could gauge whether our country has failed to move past the old practice of exclusion based on a characteristic of a specific group.

When Oscar recipients claim their award is recognition and validation of positive attributes of the discriminated group, they are slamming their own colleagues. Or perhaps, they want “to stick it to the Man”. You know who He is- “The Man” who put up the money, took the risk so they could be hired and have the opportunity to “act” in a movie. Perhaps all this is just for show to generate more interest and money for the movie. Any publicity is good publicity. Yet, there is no denying that the Oscars are the most narcissistic of annual events.

To Ms. Bigelow’s credit, she completely dodged the “breaking the ceiling” issue, and instead focused on the troops in the war zone. While the movie was gritty, intense and intriguing, I wondered why the soldiers were not more aggressive in handling the on-lookers or those videoing their actions. In the case of the man with a bomb vest who changed his mind, I could not figure out why they didn’t leave him to explode. It seemed obvious he was trying to take as many soldiers as possible with him on his way to meet the virgins. (Good luck with that journey oh, but wait a second; I’ll map-quest it for you.) While I have heard from some who served in Iraq that the actual situations would never happen as shown, I believe the characters' jobs (disarming bombs) and attitudes were realistic. Forget what is happening around you or how you got there, here is an explosive device ready to detonate; how and what are going to do to resolve the situation? That action takes more mental strength and courage than breaking glass.

Messages on the bumper

Bumper stickers have been around a long time. I believe they came into being to show support of a candidate in elections. Being difficult to remove, your vehicle would be labeled with the winner or loser long after the excitement.
In the sixties the bumper sticker evolved to deliver a message or a political statement. "Imagine World Peace", "Coexist", "A Great day will be when our schools have all the money they need and the Pentagon has to have a bake sale to buy a bomber", or one of my favorites, "If You're Not OUTRAGED, You're NOT paying Attention". While these messages are just cute little comments that Macbeth would deem "...told by an idiot, signifying nothing", they do break up the monotony of my daily commute. A deeper examination of the message reveals quite shallow thinking and I always look to find out who this person is that believes it so important that it must be displayed for a good 4-5 years.

We appear to have reached a point where all political thought is a bumper sticker. A cute, one liner that sticks it to the opposition yet reveals a nasty self righteousness. Do we actually need more outrage? At the time that message blossomed, we saw huge marches in the streets for desegregation, civil rights and protests against the Vietnam War. Three major political leaders were assassinated, students were shot by their National Guard and universities, fearful of riots, were closing. The Democratic Convention in Chicago was a televised indictment of the "system" as political protest was met with unrestrained force. To think that our current situation can be compared to those times is ludicrous. But "Bush Lied and People Died", or perhaps "9/11 was an Inside Job" is closer to your reality. If so, you should broaden your news sources and do more reading.

Unfortunately, our media has failed miserably in debunking the crackpots; they actually elevate them and provide air time. Sometime after a significant event, the process of analysis and critique are combined with revisionism and accepted as "Truth". Challenging a crackpot generally results in being labeled a "tool" of special interests, or in the old language, "they sold out".

We have accepted the idea that simply because you have an opinion, it supposedly makes sense and must be heard. The media has lost its ability to discriminate between sensible understanding and extreme points of view. They foment the outrage to gain higher value for their specific bandwidth; their news/commentary has become a rapid-fire ideological rant like more cute bumper stickers strewn together to appear to form some cogent analysis. We need a filter for each news source: couldn’t any of them just give us the What, Who, When, Where and How? And then each of us figures it out.

For the average person trying to find some truth, this is a challenge requiring much reading, thought and analysis. It should be obvious why we can’t “Coexist” especially when there are others who want to destroy us, and fortunately, we do not have to have a bake sale to build a bomber. I wonder how many cookies or cupcakes we’d be eating to fund one.
The bumper sticker I like best, although old, puts the entire subject in perspective-

“Imagine Whirled Peas”.

Everyone has seen Avatar?

Watch the movie in 3D-it is much better and while odd at first, your senses adjust and the depth appears very natural. Special effects are excellent and do not seem like "special effects" or detract from the movie. The dayglo jungle is a wonderous place and the natives (the Na'vi) live in harmony with it. They compliment and apologize to animals they must kill for food.

Avatar means to "cross over" and avatars are beings that Hindu gods would employ to assist or help the people. Each Hindu deity had many different avatars and they were magical, powerful beings with the combined attributes of different animals (lion/elephant). The plot is a sci-fi entertainment bonanza! Unfortunately, the bad guys are the tired old human race trying to get something that will cause the Na'vi great hardship and possibly destruction.

The material the humans want is named UN-OB-TANE-E-UM, obviously a slam on humans who apparently always want what they cannot have. In contrast, the Na'vi have evolved (or figured out) that every being is connected to every other being-a kind of cosmic consciousness deal; Sort of a "Does your skin connect you to everything or separate you from it?" The humans have no such understanding, knowledge of the "higher plane" or sensitivity to the concept. They are greedy, selfish and bad. The Na'vi have what they want and they are going to get it either the nice way or, if necessary, the hard way. It wouldn't be much of a movie if the humans obtained the Unbotanium the nice way. It all ends happily though; yes, good and bad people die, the good guys win and we wonder what will happen in the sequel. And the music is very good too. Hollywood wins again!

After watching this technological achievment, 3D has matured and arrived-all that needs to happen is to find a way to show 3D without the glasses.