Unless you are living on another planet, or don’t own a television set, you probably heard the big cry from the Republican National Conference in response to Sarah Palin’s rant about drilling in Alaska, and drilling in general.  “Drill, baby drill” was the chant from the audience, and I have to admit it brought home to me the focus the GOP has on big oil.  I pay little attention to the rumors about McCain’s big contributions from the oil business in this country – in fact, I care little about all the political pandering and snarky remarks.  I have my own reservations about Sarah Palin, but this is not the place to air them.  My concerns are the damage done to this planet by fossil fuels and this country’s dependence on foreign oil.

Being a go green kind of guy, I subscribe to the Earth Day Network newsletter.  I can always glean a little good information from them, and I like the alerts they send me about happenings in this country regarding the ecology.  They are good people.  Today, I received the newsletter as I do, and the article game me excuse to fire up the word processor and get the news out.

We all know that Congress has a big habit of tacking “earmarks” onto bills that are proposed, oft times with nothing to do with the proposal.  Call it earmarks, call it pork barrel politics, call it what you will.  The fact remains that this is how legislation is snuck through that benefits states or districts.  Currently in Congress there has been a renewable energy bill that needs passing.  It promotes jobs for much needed work that will benefit the environment, speaks to the environment in terms of solar and wind power, and is a beginning to what many feel must be done, including T. Boone Pickens.  Although I think Pickens has the bottom line in mind with his proposals from what I have read, his viewpoint is strong.  I believe he has seen the handwriting on the wall.  I think that we should be very mindful of the fact that some day in our lifetime that this old world may just run out of oil.  The indicators are there.

This brings me to this subject.  If, worst case scenario, we run out of oil reserves in the immediate future, what is our plan?  Do we simply wring our hands and bemoan our fate?   Do we allow the emissions of CO2 to continue, choking our planet with green house gases?  Or do we say, as Palin does, that global warming is not the fault of mankind?  Why is it that we cannot see, when all the indicators are there, that this planet is dying, regardless of whose fault it is? 

Congress does not want to renew the tax credits for renewable energy.  Senate Republicans want to insure that off shore drilling is a reality, so are fighting this legislation tooth and nail.  If this is not added to the bill in House, then the legislation is doomed for failure.  At stake are not only 115,000 new jobs, which this country surely needs. 

This country needs to end its addiction to oil.  Bottom line.  We cannot keep going further and further in debt to power our SUV’s and lack of responsibility.  We currently borrow money from China to feed our oil addiction.  This has to come to an end, or we will see true disaster.  Not only financially, but in terms of being held hostage by those that control the oil of this world. I, for one, will continue to fight this addiction to fossil fuels, and even though I am old, I realize I have grandchildren that will thank me.  It is time we all took up this fight.  The time is now…

What would be your reaction if I told you that you could fuel up the car for 0.87 per gallon in comparison to the painful experience of paying upwards of $4.00?  Would you be interested?  If I told you that you could reduce CO2 emissions by 20%, would that catch your eye? 

If so, just talk to the good folk in Utah.  There is a very real movement on in that state.  Smart folks in Utah fuel their automobiles now with natural gas, and the numbers are rising. 

This of course is not without its own frustrations.  Utahans are so obsessed with natural gas-driven vehicles that they are scouring the Internet and buying up everything in the country that will run on natural gas.  The demand for these vehicles is so strong that people are beginning to flip these cars as people flip real estate.  Used car lots around the state are being filled with Honda Civic GX’s as fast as dealers can find them, and they are being snatched up as soon as they hit the lot. 

Utah is lucky in the fact that Questar Gas, the public utility, has opened compressed gas stations around the state.  The only frustrations seen at the pumps is when demand is high – as it usually is – and the compressors needed to drive the stations run low, stopping the dispensing of natural gas.  Some drivers are getting to the stations in the wee hours just to insure that they have a good supply. 

In my last post, The Problems Facing Wind Power, I told about T. Boone Pickens and his plan to bring natural gas as an alternative fuel to the fore.  Natural gas is a good alternative, although it should not be a permanent solution.  I think Pickens sees a lot of opportunity here, which is okay.  He is, after all, a businessman.  Driving this solution, however, is like all good things – it comes with its own unique set of problems.

The biggest problem facing the use of natural gas is of course infrastructure.  Gas companies are unwilling to spend the needed dollars to set up stations that will provide natural gas fillips.  The range of a vehicle powered by natural gas is much shorter than one propelled by gasoline – about half.  Car manufacturers are hesitant on building natural gas vehicles until the problem of infrastructure is corrected.  And of course, the lack of natural gas powered vehicles will be felt across the country because of this Catch 22 situation. 

States like California, Arizona and Oklahoma are taking the lead in the natural gas alternative.  California has a proposal on the ballot this fall to raise $5 billion in bonds to pay rebates to consumers who buy a natural gas vehicle. 

If you think this is just a flash in the pan, remember that in the early 90’s, Congress mandated a fleet of cars that had the capability to run on alternative fuels for governmental vehicles.  Questar reports a 204% increase in sales of natural gas from its 21 filling stations around the state of Utah. 

A struggle for alternative fuels is expected.  A lot of the success will depend on the cooperation of not only the government, but car manufacturers and oil companies.  If these differences and infrastructure problems are solved, we will see a major contribution to stopping our dependence on foreign oil.  And that, boys and girls, is where it is at.

T. Boone Pickens and Al Gore are right – we need self sustaining and renewable energy sources that do not harm the environment.  Pickens is doing something about it with a wind farm that is in Pampa, Texas.  He advocates strongly for wind power, and has proven that it is both viable and economically sound.

Therein lays the problem.  The wind corridor in the United States runs from the Canadian border at the Dakotas and runs down into Texas and beyond, giving a great source of renewable energy to the middle portion of the United States.  It is a great resource – if you happen to live in that area.  The problem with this plan is that it does not inform you about the difficulties of getting this source of power to the end user.  The infrastructure of the American power grid is a concept 100 years old in most areas of the country, and is not designed to move large amounts of energy from faraway places.  It is also not nationalized in the sense that each state and even the state counties regulate the energy for each specific area.  The power grid was originally designed to allow utility companies to share power to insure no blackouts or lack of energy to rural areas of the country.

Wind turbines are an exciting and realistic idea.  Areas of the country that have large wind farms, such as in Texas and the Maple Ridge wind farm in upstate New York have the capability of producing enough energy to power many of today’s large cities.  Selling excess energy back to the power grid would be a lucrative solution for parts of the country that have little less than a lot of wind.  The lessened dependence on imported oil could help ease the $700 billion dollars that are leaving American coffers and going abroad.  But with the current infrastructure, the dreams of producing wind energy are not a large reality for America.  The New York Times reports that there are 200,000 miles of transmission lines in the US, and they are owned by 500 companies.  Getting all of these companies to the table to agree on what to do is an almost insurmountable task. 

It is not as if Congress is refusing to look at this issue.  In 2005, they passed a bill that would allow the government to step in to make changes if states refused to act.  But like everything else, it met opposition from 14 Senators who felt the move was too aggressive.  In whatever light you look at this, it is going to be a struggle that I feel will be put on the back burner and not addressed.  Too bad for the American public…

The Pickens Plan is not without its detractors.  If you are ever concerned about environmental issues, you only need to go to Treehugger and get the latest dope on what is happening.  In research for this article I found that many comments on the Pickens Plan spoke to what commenting people felt was at issue.   A commenter named OSUPatriot said that Pickens is of course interested in the money angle, as any good business man would be.  Pickens wants to rent farm land in the Texas area to place his wind turbines, and OSUPatriot claims that along with land rental, Pickens would reserve mineral and oil rights to the property in question.  This commenter also states that Pickens is in the process of attempting to tap into the Ogallala aquifer and send this water source to Dallas at a hefty profit.  The area includes Southwest Kansas, the Oklahoma Panhandle, and the Texas panhandle.  Getting mineral rights to the proposed 140,000 acres for his wind farm puts Pickens in a very good position indeed.  Remember, boys and girls, that these are unsubstantiated comments from Treehugger users, and should be taken with a grain of salt.  You have to wonder though, why these comments have a ring of truth to them.  Is it just my paranoia, or do these people have information that is not entirely in the public eye?

The reality of the situation is this – the Dakotas alone can produce enough wind power to generate half the nation’s electricity from turbines.  Getting it to market is another whole new ball game.  If we are to become more energy efficient within the next ten years, as environmentalists and concerned citizens feel we must do, then sweeping reform is needed.  Let’s hope that the government makes this a reality, and also in the process a priority.

I think that one of the most daunting tasks facing this nation is finding an alternative to foreign oil.  Nothing makes more sense – we are sending the wealth of this nation to other countries, and they in turn hold us hostage at their whim.  This hostage situation not only drains our internal resources, but is not self sustaining and gives us no assurance that it will last.  Yet we keep on this same destructive path, and are reaching a point of desperation.

I have read a great deal about our nation’s efforts to become self sustaining.  It leaves me feeling frustrated, because I see alternatives that are not being explored, or are at least not noteworthy enough to get good press.  Yesterday, while researching today’s post, I ran across an article at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change website.  The article, which focuses on Brazil, and its use of gasohol, intrigued me.  Brazil imports no foreign oil, instead relying on sugar cane production to produce Anhydrous, which is blended with automotive gasoline, and Hydrous, which is used as a neat fuel in vehicles or blended with gasoline. 

Cars capable of running on alcohol are nothing new.  We need only look to the Ford Model T to realize that the capability is there.  The Model T was designed so that carburetor settings could be changed to allow the engine to run on either alcohol or gasoline, thus creating the first “flex fuel” vehicle in the United States.  The Model T with this capability was produced from 1908 to 1927, proving that it was not just another flash in the pan.  Henry Ford was a big advocate of ethanol, especially during Prohibition.  The reason that it was not carried on through the ages of the automobile?  Gas and oil were a cheaper alternative.  Now, we reach a point where this is not true any longer.

The study of Brazil’s ethanol plan is a must read for anyone interested in figures.  It is mandatory in Brazil that 20% ethanol must be blended with gasoline.  Fifty percent of sugar cane production is used in the making of ethanol.  This sounds like a lot – it isn’t.  Brazil only uses 10% of arable land for this sugar cane production.  The detritus from the production of ethanol, called bagesse, which is also of great value to the industry.  Bagesse is used as a fuel in co-generation systems, which produces electricity and thermal energy.  The excess from the industry is sold to the public grid, some 600 MW at the time of the writing of the report.

I can hear the arguments.  We do not produce a lot of sugar cane in this country.  For one thing, it must not be subjected to freezing temperatures.  It can only be grown once in a season here, while in Brazil it can be almost continually grown.  The focus here in the US has been on corn as an alternative fuel.  The figures show us that the energy output/energy input level for corn is a mere 1.8 at its highest level.  Sugar cane, on the other hand, has a ratio of 8.3.   The argument will then go that if sugar cane cannot be grown several times in a year, and can only be grown in states like Louisiana and Texas, then it is not a viable source. 

That is a valid concern.  There is an answer to this for the US, but I don’t see a lot of research on it, at least compared to corn as the fuel of choice.  I’m talking about switchgrass.   Many years ago, switchgrass was abundant on the Plains before man decided that it needed to be plowed under, paved over, and built upon.  It is a perennial that is hardy, and produces about 5 times more energy than is required to grow it, making it about 20 times better a fuel resource than corn.

I believe that using corn as an alternative fuel is a poor choice.  For one thing, it takes away from the family dinner table in more ways than one.  The price of corn has been driven up to a high price per bushel, and it is a food source – something that in a planet that has people who are malnourished and dying of starvation need.  We can’t eat switchgrass, but we can surely make a ton of fuel out of it.  If Brazil can make do with sugar cane, then why are we not making an effort to use switchgrass for a fuel alternative?  Enquiring minds want to know…

To my way of thinking, this has to be one of the most dysfunctional ways of approaching things - that is, unless you are a major oil company.  We see record earnings of companies like Exxon-Mobil, yet even though taken to task by Congress, are allowed to easily slide off the hook.  In a government run by an oil man, I think you can hardly expect anything else.

Not only is the country struggling with the pain at the pump, but many families are in a world of hurt because they cannot afford gasoline for getting back and forth to work, let alone a family vacation.  It often seems like there just isn’t any end to this situation, and people are resigned to the high cost of gasoline.

There isn’t a need for this to be happening.  The time has come for change, and a leader who will make it happen.  I have read a lot about Al Gore, and his commitment to the ecology.   Where I come from, they say if you talk the talk, then you had better walk the walk.  Mr. Gore seems a bit lacking in this area, and though the things I read about are minor, they should not be happening with an advocate for the environment.  Case in point - at the wedding for his daughter, the menu includes Chilean Sea Bass, which is an endangered species.   Chilean sea Bass is a fancy name made up by the advertising agencies for the Patagonian Toothfish.  Mr. Gore also has a home that definitely is not friendly to the environment, and all this just kills his credibility to me.  On the internet, where I make my living and spend more time than anywhere else, I know that image is everything.  Would someone tell this to Mr. Gore, please?

So where, then, do we turn?  I haven’t a clue, to be very honest.  But I have been watching T. Boone Pickens, and the Pickens Plan.  If nothing else, he helps raise awareness, showing that we import 70% of our fossil fuels from foreign sources.  The Unites States use 25% of all oil exported in the world.  Facts show that 750 out of 1,000 people own an automobile, and to feed that thirst for oil is catastrophic to this country.  If we spend $700 billion dollars a year on foreign oil, then consider this - in 10 years we will have spent $7 trillion dollars.  And that is dependent on the factor that oil prices will not raise in the next 10 years.  What are the chances of that?

I have a problem with an oil man advocating for renewable energy, just because of the nature of the beast.  We have come to have a distinct distrust of all things oil related, and for a man who has made a fortune in oil to step to the forefront gives me pause.  I am not saying his plan is a bad one - he advocates for air and solar power, and the use of natural gas to fuel the automobiles of this country.  It is a resource we have plenty of.  Mr. Pickens has invested a lot of money in Texas to build a wind farm, and the entire middle portion of the United States from North Dakota to Texas is one huge airstream.  Wind power is a reality, as is solar energy.  Where the rest of this will fall into place remains to be seen.  I hope Mr. Pickens has good luck with this project.  I respect him for taking this stand, and have no issue with what he is attempting.  Let’s hope that in the near future, people that make these decisions will listen to Mr. Pickens, and start to lead this country away from our dependence on foreign oil.  It is way past time…

Which leads me to this post.  I read a lot of news, and try to at least keep up with things on the NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams.  I see further proof on an almost daily basis on people who are not only feeling the pinch of the current economic downturn, but are finally beginning to realize that a lot of clothing - especially of the feminine variety - is not only ridiculously priced but are oft-times worn only a few times until the fall out of favor with the trendy set.  They are then relegated to the back of the closet - or better still, taken to a local consignment shop for redistribution.

I met my wife 12 years ago when she was a rehab counselor and I was in a world of hurt.  She was always nicely dressed in fashionable clothing, and you seldom saw her wearing the same thing twice.  I marveled at that when I found she did the bulk of her shopping at an upper end consignment shop in Lansing.  She wore no K-Mart or Wal-Mart brands, either - they were all designer labels.  Here was this woman, able to shop wherever she pleased, buying clothing in a consignment shop and forever getting compliments on how she looked.  It was a joked-filled secret between us because we knew where her clothing came from.

Rosie and I moved on, and we set up a successful clothing business on eBay.  Soon, one room of our home was stacked to the ceiling with clothing she had gathered from everywhere in the state.  We did very well on eBay, and even though the huge pile of clothing never seemed to go down in the spare bedroom, we made a decent amount of cash that was a blessing to us.  Rosie is very good at picking the latest trends and has the savvy of a fashionista, so there was little left over that did not sell.

In 2006, after job changes and my early retirement, we purchased a building in Charlotte, MI.  We carried over our expertise with gently used clothing into a business that now supports us very well.  Bella Grande is a small shop - only 1,300 square feet, but it is a roaring success in this community, because her shop is the only one in the area that deals exclusively with plus size clothing, sizes 12 and up.  The building is 115 years old with a rich history, and above the store we have a large apartment that is both quaint and eclectic.  We drive on the average of about 200 miles per month.  Across the street are a grocery store, a bank, and two saloons where I now and then refresh myself on a hot August afternoon.  Our needs are simple, and a green lifestyle suits us.  We shop for vegetables at a local farmer’s market within walking distance, and have made a lot of attempts at doing the green thing.  Our most successful endeavor, however, is the small shop that saves the planet - one outfit at a time.

Peace,

Charlie~

I am all for the locavore movement.  The term locavore was even voted work of the year by the 2007 Oxford American Dictionary.   I do, however, have my own concerns about the movement.

There are locavores who are extremely strict about how they eat.  The entire movement is based loosely on the premise that you should not eat anything that is not grown locally.  Last I heard, they don’t grow much coffee in mid-Michigan, nor are there any salt mines close by.  Not too many sugar cane fields, either!   So I have to ask myself - do I forego coffee, salt, sugar, and all manner of things not grown within a 100 mile radius to support the movement?  I don’t think so.

It is common knowledge that most things seen on the supermarket shelves came for a 1,500 mile radius.  Some things come even further, such as goods shipped from other nations.  Coffee comes to mind, as spices like cinnamon and peppercorns.  Many of the vinegars come from elsewhere, also, but there are local producers who make a decent apple cider vinegar.

I have to ask myself if in this supercharged world of ours how many women are willing to stand over a hot stove for days on end to can local fruits and vegetables for the winter months.  When both spouses work outside the home, and if there are children, I find that a bit unrealistic.  That was fine when I was a kid growing up on a farm.  Mom canned religiously all summer to prepare us for winter.  Dad raised beef and pork for the table.  We had a huge garden that kept us kids busy all summer weeding, hoeing and harvesting.  We picked local blueberries and blackberries, peaches, apples, cherries and pears.  Our farm held several of these trees, and in the swales blueberries grew.  The forests around our neighborhood produced blackberries the size of your thumb.  .  Believe me when I say how hard this work was.  Just keeping food on the table in that era was a full time job.  And remember too, this was over 50 years ago, when local farm communities were plentiful.

I think today that the locavore movement can only survive if people work together.  In the small town in which I live, local farmers have a small farmer’s market on the courthouse square.  There are several organic and micro-farms in my area, but they specialize in things like mushrooms and some heritage vegetables.  If you don’t know a local farmer, getting a half beef or hog is hard to do.   I help supplement the family table by growing hydroponic tomatoes, cukes, peppers and herbs on the roof of our downtown building.  It still isn’t enough.

Without a local chapter of folks working together, the reality of a locavore and 10 mile diet is very hard to maintain.  My goal for this year is to raise awareness through a column in a local newspaper, and to organize a group that if nothing else can brainstorm a locavore movement hat is realistic.  Yes, I am concerned about our carbon footprint.  I love nothing better than fresh tomatoes and cukes.   But until a community comes together, it is almost an impossibility to easily maintain a locavore lifestyle.  And I think that what I suggest is something that needs to be addressed.   A goal for this blog will be to document for others how this will be done.  Wish me luck…

One of the largest automobile dealerships in the nation has declared that the rising cost of gasoline is a good thing.  I wish I had written down the dealership and CEO so that I could pass this information on.  The CEO stated that the high cost of fuel is a good thing because it makes people drive less, unload their gas guzzling SUV’s,  reduce greenhouse gases and promotes public transportation.

The sad thing is this - public transportation cannot meet he demand of a nation becoming more dependent on it.  Cuts have been made in destinations, bus stops and all the other advantages of public transportation that makes it good to use.  People are finding that it is very hard to find reliable public transportation to get to their destinations, and public utilities are cutting back on routes due to the high cost of fuel.   Elderly people wishing to use public transportation find themselves going out less because of the oft-times need to walk greater distances to access public transportation.

There is no easy solution.  As long as we are so dependent on foreign oil to meet our needs, we cannot focus on what is needed to be done here at home.  It is not a case of wanting to cure dependence on foreign oil, it is the actual NEED for this country to do so.  Until we accept that fact, the economy and everything it pertains to will suffer.  Wake up, America!