Deforest City Blues: London will never be a cargo hub

[“... The massive concrete building is largely empty and has netted little business, the early predictions of a booming shipping terminal with 150 workers having fallen flat.” Oct. 15, London Free Press]

All cities chase dreams.

They want to be on the map, create a buzz, and be known for something significant.

They want to maintain a vibrant economy, keep their young people, provide a comfortable home, and “be a somebody.”

London, Ontario is no different. It dreams.

Two years ago the city dreamt of becoming a center for foreign trade, a distributor of cargo.


["Don't anchor your future on shipping stuff. Buy a scooter." GH, circa 1969]

A recent news report provides an update.

Headline - Cargo hub one pricey garage

Built by taxpayers at a cost of $11 million, London’s new airport cargo terminal has housed maintenance equipment, personal vehicles for airport executives and even a stag-and-doe party.

But in the year or more since the place was built - a project to help grow London’s economy and create jobs - it hasn’t attracted much new business, critics charge. (Oct. 15, London Free Press)

When I first heard about the cargo hub idea, two years ago, I penned a few thoughts about it for The Londoner, London’s community newspaper.

Shortly after it appeared I received a phone call from a hard-working city councillor who disagreed with my views, ones that questioned, for example, pinning a city’s hopes on shipping goods from here to there when we face a future of rising fuel prices.

At the time, though I felt I handled the criticism pretty well (32 years as an elementary school teacher helps in this regard), I was most proud of being able to express some of views succinctly in one of my favourite all-time lines, i.e., “we’re backing the wrong nag in this race, Pal.”

At the conclusion of our phone conversation, we simply agreed to disagree, and to this day, I still believe the cargo hub was a very poor idea.

Wrong nag, wrong era.

***

Please click here to read about disagreements I have with other recent articles.

Also, stay tuned to read my columns about the cargo hub from 2009.

.

It Strikes Me Funny: Are we like the grasshopper or the ant?

[ “One summer day a grasshopper was singing and chirping and hopping about.  He was having a wonderful time.  He saw an ant who was busy gathering and storing grain for the winter...” The Ant and the Grasshopper, an Aesop Fable retold by Rose Owens]

Big, tough questions have been on my mind lately. I see big, tough times coming in the next 10, 20, 30 years (the rest of my life, I guess) and beyond, and many North Americans easily squander now what will be precious in the future.


One example: Though fuel prices are near record highs, road trips are at the top of many holiday lists. Staycations are at the bottom.

Big, tough questions: Are we more like the grasshopper or the ant?

And, who survived the winter?

***

Please click here to read thoughts related to staycations.

.

Series of Significance: We know that all bubbles burst

[The following four posts were published separately on earlier dates. Now they are posted together for your convenience. No extra charge.]

It’s not like we don’t know PT 1: Bubbles burst

We know - we have for quite some time - US national debt is going North. It will surpass $15 Trillion this year.


["US debt grows by leaps and bounds"]

We know Canadian debt is going North. It will surpass $600 Billion this year or early next.

We know personal debt in Canada is going North. It is now at $150 debt per $100 income for the first time in human history.

All these things we know. What we don’t know is what to do about it.

We know the days of $15 oil (price per barrel), as in the early 1980s, are over. We know oil prices have increased four-fold in the last ten years alone.


We know global oil consumption has grown steadily since 1984. We know global oil consumption, as from 1996 - 2006, cannot be sustained.

1996 - 71,669,000 barrels, a 2.19% rise over 1995
2006 - 84,977,000 barrels, a 1.16% rise over 2005
(Source: United States Energy Information Administration)

We know the oil bubble will burst, that it may have an unstoppable leak already.


These things we know. What we don’t know is what to do about it.

I’d recommend, just off the top of my head, long distance training.

***

It’s not like we don’t know PT 2: Food prices will rise steadily

We know US debt, Canada's debt and personal debt will eventually back many families into a corner from which they will only escape with a smaller lifestyle.

We know oil prices have quadrupled since 2000, global oil consumption has grown steadily since 1984 and the cheap oil bubble will soon burst. What we don’t know is what to do about these things.


Personally, I think long distance training is in order.

For example, if personal debt is like an ever-tightening noose, a person or family should seek assistance from a bank or financial advisor, strictly monitor credit card use or cut them up, begin keeping a detailed budget, reduce spending on non-essential or frivolous items, develop the habit of living - for the long-term - under one’s means. That's for starters.

As many know, long distance runners work hard for weeks, months and years to train for fast marathon times. Success doesn’t come easy.

Individuals and families must train themselves too, over the long term again, to steadily decrease debt and then to accumulate savings.

Thanks to recent news, we now know the cheap food bubble will soon burst, if it has not done so already.


Canadians and Americans have enjoyed cheap food for many, many years. It has been reported that Canadians on average spend 10% of disposable income on food, Americans - 13%, while in China the average is 39%, even higher (45%) in Indonesia. (Feb. 14, London Free Press)

A senior market analyst predicted that “food prices will likely increase 5% to 10% over the next year or so.”

Already much complaining has started.

One subheading in the recent news article declared, “Record high prices blamed for political unrest.”

While that is definitely true, the reverse is also true, that political unrest will also soon be blamed for record high prices because unrest, e.g., in Libya, will jack up the already rising oil prices.

There are several other factors affecting rising grocery prices, but so far no one has suggested that long distance training will help ease the pain.

I for one think it will.

***

It’s not like we don’t know PT 3: Potato chips out. Apples in.

There are many things we know concerning national debt, oil prices per barrel and subsequent gas prices at the pump.

(Hint: They're going North.)

As well, we know the cheap food bubble will burst and the days when the average Canadian can spend only 10% of disposable income on food will be gone.

According to the Feb. 14 issue of The London Free Press, a senior market analyst predicts that “food prices will likely increase 5% to 10% over the next year or so.”

There are several factors affecting rising grocery prices, but so far no one has suggested that long distance training will help ease the pain.

I do so now.

For many years I trained my body to cover approximately 1,000 miles over 6-month periods (including dozens of hill workouts for strength, speed workouts for faster times, 20 - 25 mile long runs to increase stamina) in order to prepare for one shot at a 26.2 mile race on a specific date, e.g., The Forest City Marathon right here in London, Ontario.

Increased strength, speed and stamina helped me prepare for the next marathon (and other distances, e.g., 10 km., 21.1 km., 30 km. races), and the one after that, and the one after that, etc., for 10 years.

I learned over the course of my racing decade that long distance training principles (e.g., “a marathon starts with one step”) can be applied to other matters.

For example, the effort made to put a little bit of savings away each week produced something substantial at the end of one year, more at the end of two, and so on.

The pain associated with putting aside a little bit of savings might hurt at first, but then the pocketbook and mind and heart gets used to it, and the items that were reduced (e.g., restaurant meals, movies) to provide the savings are forgotten.

Related to our rising food bills: I bet there are 40 - 50 food items in homes across Canada and the US that most people can quite easily do without. (Rising body weights suggest I might be onto something!)

Turning back the tide of rising prices will be impossible, I’m afraid. It will be easier to trim the fat on grocery lists and in kitchen pantries.

I suggest we get into the long-term habit of cutting one non-essential food item off our grocery list every two or four weeks and choose to eat more fruit or vegetables in its place.

Twinkies out. Locally grown carrots in.

Potato chips out. Apples in.

Soda pop out. Diluted fresh juice in.

I recall the first time I tried to eat my homemade oatmeal without two spoonfuls of brown sugar. Yuck. It was as appetizing as a hill workout on Gibbons Hills during the early stages of marathon training. My body just wasn’t used to it.

However, after a few weeks, I stopped missing the sugar and was enjoying the taste of the mixture of oats, Red River cereal and bran, sweetened with a few diced cranberries, currants and raisins.

I don’t drink pop anymore. It’s far too sweet. I drink cooled juice from the pot after steaming vegetables. Or I drink diluted apple juice, or grape juice. Or water. Good old tap water. (And you know I drink the occasional beer. Yummy. And too much tea and coffee by some standards).


["One cold Guinness please. I can have two? Make it two!": GH 2004, London]

[Special note: It has been said that if you want to see what you're going to look like in 20 years, look at a photo of yourself crossing the finish line of a marathon. The photo above shows how I'll look at age 74. I'll be ordering Guinness! Good one! Sorry, I digress.]

Our bodies have been bombarded with too much sugar and high-fructose corn syrup and salt for years. It’s hard to buy breads or bagels anymore that don’t have 3 - 6 sugars listed under ‘main ingredients.’ Even salt and bottled lemon juice now contain sugar.

As grocery prices rise by 5 - 10%, I am confident that many Canadians will be able to make substantial savings by trimming nonsense foods from the weekly grocery list and train the body to accept the less exciting (aka sugary, fatty, salty) taste of real and healthier food.

Sure, some people will have to learn to cook, but isn’t that what TV is for? (The mindset of the long distance runner will help along the way).

It’s not like we didn’t know this was coming.

More to follow. (You knew that too!)

***

It’s not like we don’t know PT 4: Food Freedom Day? WTHeck?

Here in Canada and the US we know debt and oil cost$ are going North.

We know food cost$ are going North and one day we’ll have to cook more meals to save $$$.

Meanwhile back at the ranch, where snow-covered Canadians have time to calculate which day our grocery bills will be paid off, some of us know that Feb. 12 was Food Freedom Day 2011, “the date by which the average Canadian has earned enough money to pay for groceries for the entire year.” (Feb. 14, London Free Press)


["Long-term training needed to live under our means"]

Right now there are a few factors that are keeping that date from being pushed quickly into March.

According to economists, they are the following:

The high Canadian dollar

the high proportion of food costs unrelated to crop prices such as marketing and transportation

intense retail competition

However, crop prices will eventually buffet Food Freedom Day.

Here’s why:

North American crop prices - for corn , wheat and soybeans - are surging.

A high percentage of foods contain corn, corn syrup, corn starch, wheat and soy.

Our meat stocks - beef, pork and poultry - get stuffed to the eyeballs with corn and soy.

So, as you already likely know, Food Freedom Day won’t likely be celebrated on Feb. 12 in 2012.

It strikes me funny that many North Americans pay any attention to such odd conventions, i.e., Food Freedom Day, Tax Free Day (the date by which we have earned enough to pay off our taxes), Mortgage Free Day, Christmas Bills Free Day, Golf Membership Free Day, Cable Bill Free Day, etc.

It’s funny (funny “odd”, not funny “haha”) because those dates are more about willing deception than whimsical convention.

How can we say to ourselves that we’ve earned enough to pay off our groceries when some payments are made by credit card and personal debt is going through the roof? How can we be free from taxes when national debt is higher than it’s ever been (in Canada and the US) in human history? How can anyone celebrate Mortgage Free Day when their line of credit is growing faster than the mortgage is declining?

Some of us are such maroons.

These things we know, and long-term training is needed to get many North Americans even close to living under their means.

***

Please click here to read a series related to US debt.

.

Bits and Pieces: So, if I owned a pellet gun...

I’d be half way to a pot of Brunswick or Squirrel Stew.

I’ve never tasted squirrel (I hear it tastes like rabbit. I enjoyed rabbit many times as a kid.) but, because several squirrels have formed a commando group and continually raid my bird feeders, I’m motivated to try.


[“Squirrel meat on sale in England. Yummy?”: photo link]

Because of the trend toward higher energy prices (related to oil, gas and coal costs), perhaps we should expand our tastes to include local squirrel meat.


[“Tasty Squirrel Pie”: photo link]

Would you try it?


[“Is it leaner than bison? It looks good.”: photo link]

What if beef prices double? Would you be more interested to try it once?

***

Rising oil costs have us over a barrel.

How far away are higher food costs and a taste of Squirrel Pie?

.

Oil Barrel: Climate change and oil consumption concerns

In an earlier Oil Barrel post I mentioned the following lines from an online article:

“We are on the path to climate chaos, Big Oil has admitted.

“Both BP and Exxon have conceded that progress on climate change is totally insufficient to stabilize CO2 emissions.”

Though Big Oil is aware of climate chaos ahead, don’t expect members of the Big Oil league to work too hard toward climate change solutions. They’re busy.


And of course, in an oil-based, consumption-centered world (“Bigger is better, ain’t it?”), one shouldn’t expect progress related to climate change and carbon emissions until oil consumptions declines.

Currently, however, our global record on that front appears to be set in concrete.

Since 1984 (after a few years of decline), global consumption of oil has grown steadily each year for which I was able to find records, or for over two decades and until 2006.

E.g., Year 1984
Oil consumption, thousands of barrels per day - 57186.54 (or 57.2 million barrels)
Increase from previous year - 1.96 %

2005
Consumption - 84002.86 thousand or 84 million barrels
Increase - 1.94 % (The jump from 1984 to 2005 is huge!)

2006
Consumption - 84977.35 thousand or 84 million barrels
Increase - 1.16 %

[Source: United States Energy Information Administration]

I assume the growth has continued since 2006, along with carbon emissions and climate change concerns.

Though I'm not proud to say it, Canada - my home country -and the US are front and center when consumption records are considered.

According to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, “The United States is the largest energy consumer in terms of total use, using 100 quadrillion BTUs (105 exajoules, or 29 PWh) in 2005.

“This is three times the consumption by the United States in 1950.

“The U.S. ranks seventh in energy consumption per-capita after Canada and a number of small countries.”


["Rising oil prices will affect our consumption habit"]

I wasn’t aware that US energy consumption tripled in the last 55 years but I predict that it won’t triple again in the next 55 years or by 2060. Canada’s growth record is likely much the same, but because of the trend toward significantly higher oil prices in the last ten years, I think that during the next ten we’ll see a significant change in our consumption habits.

Perhaps then we can begin to hope for a future with less climate change chaos.

***

More information at the Oil Barrel here.

.

Climate Change Concerns: Our growth has limits - Conclusion

Times are tough all over.

Individuals and countries are burdened with growing debt and the expectation to keep growing and spending or driving the economy to save themselves.

Because our philosophies related to lifestyles and economic matters have unsustainable growth factors attached, tougher times are coming.

Why? Growth in fact has limits.

The last post concluded with this statement from an essay entitled ‘A Letter to My Boys’ by H. Murray -Philipson and found in the book ‘Moral Ground.’

“We stand at the fork in the road when we must choose between sustainability and catastrophe.”

And I asked, will we stand at the fork alone?

In the following brief history lesson from Murray -Philipson’s essay, I think we find out answer.

“On current trends we may have ten years before we cross the point of no return on climate change. Our generation bears a unique responsibility to those who come after - unique, because this set of circumstances has never existed before.”


Now, about that history lesson. The writer continues:

re 1900 -

“The pace of change in one hundred years has been extraordinary.

“In 1900, the Wright brothers had not yet flown and the world’s population was 1.5 billion.

“The impact of man on the natural world was limited, and it still made sense to convert natural capital into manufacturing and financial capital to improve the human condition.”

re 1950 -

“Half a century later... the foundations (were laid) of the modern global economy.

“At that time, there was no mention of “sustainability” or “the environment.”

“The assumption was that nature could be taken for granted.

“There were plenty of warning signs, even then, that unrestricted exploitation of nature had unfortunate side effects - the near-extinction of the North American bison, the pollution of the Great Lakes, the smogs in London - but the notion of climate change was unheard-of, and the bounty of the planet was still considered unlimited.”

re 2000

“Global population quadrupled to 6 billion in the twentieth century, and the relationship between man and nature has been turned upside down in the process.

“Economic growth was achieved through burning fossil fuels... atmospheric levels of CO2 have risen from preindustrial levels of 280 parts per million (ppm) to 387 ppm. Despite increasing scientific alarm, they continue to rise by 3 ppm per year.

“The economic model off which the world is working came from an Age of Innocence and is not fit for our purpose in the twenty-first century - the Age of Consequences. The rules for 1 billion people cannot be the same for 6 billion...”

- re 2010 [population 6.7 billion]

“There has to be a global agreement on global sustainability... we are all in the same business, the business of survival. There is no point pursuing wealth for its own sake.”

And now, back to that fork in the road “when we must choose between sustainability and catastrophe.”

Will we stand alone?

No. All 6.7 billion people are crowded shoulder to shoulder in the same spot.


But, there appears to be no one to lead us toward sustainability.

If the recent Climate Change Conference in Cancun is any indication, major governments worldwide still stress economic growth at an unsustainable pace.

So, though we stand at the forks along with everyone else, we are without proper leadership and therefore stand as if alone.

How did I begin this set of posts several days ago?

“You’re on your own. If you want climate change concerns to be addressed in your lifetime you’ll have to address them by yourself.”

Sad but true?

I think so.

***

Please read Our growth has limits PT 1 for more context.

Please read Our growth has limits PT 2 for more context.

Please read Our growth has limits PT 3 for more context.

Please read Our growth has limits PT 4 for more context.

Please read Our growth has limits PT 5 for more context.

Please read Our growth has limits PT 6 for more context.

.

Live Small PT 2: Hydro bills will rise for 20 years

I could be wrong but, because of a variety of factors, our hydro bills will likely rise for another 20 years.

Then we’ll get a short break - because the first Smart Meter program will be paid off - before more rising costs.


["Chop down the turbines and your hydro bill will still rise"]

By most Ontarians, our province’s hydro rates (predicted to rise by 46% over the next 5 years) are likely considered to be...

fully shocking,

fully expected,

or somewhere in between.

I’m somewhere in between because I sense Ontario’s energy demands will continue to rise for the next 20 years.

Even if rates stay the same from today onward (which they won’t) most business and residential bills will increase.

Wait, wait, wait, someone will surely say. We have the Smart Meters and they’ll help us smarten up and the bills will go down.

No, they won’t.

First, we’ll have to pay for the Smart Meter program for quite awhile. Those meters don’t come cheap. Wash your clothes on weekends only for the next ten years to save money, if you like (and I hope you will), but the cost of the program will still be on our bills. That’s a debt that will keep on giving for quite some time.

Second, the Smart Meter program is likely the precursor to the Smart Meter 2 program. Better meters. More information for the suppliers and the users. Old meters out. New meters in. More machines. More paperwork. More costs.

Third, conserve as you will (and I hope you will), your savings from your hard work will likely be swallowed up my the next rate increase and the one after that. As weel, the windows of opportunity to use the cheapest rates will close here and there, the time periods with higher rates will be extended. (You thought life was fair? I’m shocked).

Fourth, conserve as you will, the majority of major users and home owners will not. We’ve enjoyed 65 years of growing bigger and better and we aren’t likely to change. The Smart Meter might one day come with vocal chords but the majority will pay it no heed.

“Why can’t you do your work during non-peak hours?” the Smart Meter may yell.

“How many appliances and lights do you actually need?”


[Courtesy of Mojo]

“Can’t you exercise outside rather than run on a treadmill?”

“Try clotheslines. Grind the coffee by hand. Open that can of beans with one of those non-electric whatjamacallits. Don’t plug in the E-car. Walk to work fer cryin’ out loud.”

Just by listening to the Smart Meter’s frantic cries you can tell it really isn’t all that smart.

Even if a future government (let’s call it right wing and really concerned about reducing every cost known to man, especially taxes) chops down the windmills and turns up production of cheap black juice (coal-fired energy), associated costs will rise.

Likely for twenty years.

***

Live Small Pt 1: Are hydro rates shocking or expected?

Does my economic plan spell r-e-l-i-e-f?

.

Live Small PT 1: Are hydro rates shocking or expected?

Or are Ontario’s rising hydro rates (predicted to rise by 46% - likely a lowball figure - over the next 5 years) somewhere in between shocking and expected?

E.g., kind of in “I can see part of the reason but not all of it” territory.

Truth be told, right now, I’m not completely shocked.


["You can't easily surprise this kid!": GH circa 1955]

Reasons:

Our energy demands continue to rise, for one thing

Many people and politicians realize coal isn’t so cheap in the long run, so, want off ‘black juice’ as I like to call it

Infrastructure for nuclear plants is expensive

Maintaining water-driven hydro plants is expensive

And start-up fees for supplemental solar and wind programs are not cheap and we’re coming late to that table.

Taken together, these factors (there are others) add up to a hefty and growing bill.

No wonder people are complaining. My neighbours have taken to hiding their mailbox when hydro bills are delivered.

Opposition parties are complaining. Hydro bills could be a big election issue soon.

And the party in power is feeling so much heat they’re going to preside over a $6.4 billion Ontario Clean Energy Benefit to cushion the blow to some ratepayers, at the same time hoping taxpayers will not understand their part in paying off the $6.4 billion cost. (Hint: Ratepayers and taxpayers know each other quite well).

However, in spite of the loud complaints I’m not fully shocked by increasing rates.

Are you?

***

More to follow.

Read more Live Small posts here.

.

It Strikes Me Funny: Is wind energy a sham?

Not in my opinion.

Not even after scanning the article that a local reader suggested I read.

MT wrote:

Hi Gord,

With reference to your article on wind energy, please have a look at this article which conveys a clearer view on the industry and the sham related to it.

Regards, MT

Sure, burning coal is cheap in some ways. Building coal-fired energy plants may be cheaper than building turbines and turbine-building plants.


["What are the costs related to smog?"]

However, many costs related to coal are not up front. The costs to the healthcare system and to society in general for burning coal and producing foul air cannot be easily tabulated. It’s easier to sweep "associated costs" under the carpet.


["What are the costs related to climate change?"]

But most turbine costs are up front. We can learn how much one costs, how much power it generates and how long it will take to pay it off before it produces hydro without a mortgage attached.

In Ontario, we know that in the future we’ll have a part to play in building our own turbines (a sustainable industry of sorts) and selling clean renewable energy back to ourselves. No coughing or hacking or respiratory illnesses will be involved.

***

Does coal sound like a good investment to you?

I’d rather get small (conserve) than get low (go under ground).

.

It Strikes Me Funny: Can we survive heat waves and our stupidity?

We may not be as durable a species as we think.

As I said in an earlier post, “nearly 700 people died per day, i.e., 50% higher than norms,” during a recent, intense heat wave in Russia

I admit, we are durable in many ways.

We often fend off viruses and recessions and wars and bounce back.

TV audiences have put up with American Idol for more years than I thought humanly possible. Gilligan’s Island reruns seem only to make us stronger.


["Is this technology more advanced than an a/c unit?": link to photo and blog]

And we’re ingenious, aren’t we? Technologically advanced even?

Why, here in North America, when the going gets hot we just turn on or crank up the old air-conditioning unit and laugh as the mercury rises.

Methinks I spot some irony in that all-too-common situation.

According to undeniable laws of physics, in the process of replacing some warm air in a room with cooler air, we create much more heat, and with the use of fans we transfer it to the outdoors.

We burn more hydro during heat waves and burn more coal in many areas of the country in order to do so.

We might survive the next heat wave, but will we survive our own stupidity?

***

Is running through the sprinkler a cheaper, healthier alternative to the a/c unit?

Can we cool inside air in natural ways?

Do many of our home construction styles prevent us from doing so?

.

Live Small and Prosper Pt 1: The more solar projects the better

Don’t ask me how it works (I don’t have a mind for business and I can prove it), but the more widgets you sell, the more efficiencies you develop (don’t even ask me what an ‘efficiency’ is), the cheaper you can sell an individual widget, and that’s a good thing, especially for those who what to add to their collection of cheap widgets.

They’d likely even be cheaper by the dozen. (I think that’s why the ‘baker’s dozen’ was invented years ago by a guy who baked more buns than he could eat in a week).

The above sounds good in theory but looks even better in practice.

And that’s likely why the Ontario government offers solar- and wind-energy producers a really good price (50 - 80 cents) for 20-year contracts for every kilowatt-hour they produce for the province’s electric-power grid.


["The sun works for me": link to photo]

And where do the widgets and magic theory (sell more, it gets cheaper) come in, as far as Ontario is concerned?

Here: The more solar projects on the books, the more jobs are created, the cleaner the energy, the better for future generations.

There’s more to it than that, of course.

Recurrent Energy, a California-based company, has 19 solar projects on their books for Ontario that are expected to produce about 150 megawatts of solar power, enough to power 21,000 homes.

By receiving 50 - 80 cents per kwh, Recurrent may turn a good profit after expenses.

Too good? I’ll let the business minds figure that one out. But our hydro rates will likely be affected (we pay less than 10 cents per kwh for juice at the moment, but if the province is paying 50 - 80 cents to produce it, someone will have to pay for the difference.

My thought: Ontarians will soon pay more for energy in order to establish green-energy production for future generations to use. Future generations may even pay a more reasonable price for hydro than the present one after the 20-year contracts have expired.

How do I feel about that?

Not bad, actually. The present generation is passing on a lot of debt (record amounts right now both provincially and nationally) so our grandchildren ought to have their hands full with the financial mess we’re leaving them - along with a lot more messes I must say.

There’s more to it than that too, of course.

Stay tuned.

***

I don’t mind turbines. They work for me.

I don’t mind solar panels and higher energy bills. (It’s a matter of fairness, I suppose).

Have I had too much sun?

.

Wind Turbines: On a hazy day they don’t obscure the view

Four photos tell a story.


You may love wind turbines, you may hate them, you may say they are beautiful or you may say they obscure the view.


The photos say (the first three taken Sunday, west of Port Burwell, just across Lake Erie from Ohio Valley), if it’s a hazy day they don’t obscure the view at all.


On many days the haze obscures the view.

And what causes the haze?

I’d say this: In part, the haze is produced by coal-fired energy plants in the Ohio Valley and oil refineries in Toledo.


["Can you spot 30 - 40 turbines east of Port Bruce?": photos 2010 GH]

The more fossil fuels we burn, the more wind turbines look like a great idea.

***

If you say turbines obscure the view you are not alone.

In the long-term, however, are turbines one of the healthiest and cheapest ways to produce energy to meet our growing demands?

.

Letter to the Editor: “I’ll happily look out at a few wind turbines”

I guess I’m not alone. Someone else - a cottager in this case - has something to say in favour of wind turbines.

Bruce K. writes: “For anyone complaining about their spoiled view or reduced property value from wind turbines, I urge you to visit the London Health respiratory clinic. Pay attention to the crying...”

“The Ont. Ministry of the Environment said in a 2005 report that 5,800 Ont. deaths were caused by smog due in arge part to coal-fired electrical generating stations.”


“I’ll happily look out at a few wind turbines and feel proud that Ontario is doing something to lives.” (Aug. 23 issue of the London Free Press)

As I said earlier, turbines - in the long-term - may be one of the cheapest and healthiest forms of producing hydro.

Pay now or pay later.

Please click here to read Wind Turbines Pt 3

.

Climate Change Concerns: A wind from the east blows good...

... For neither man nor beast.

And it won’t be long before the wind blowing from China comes bearing more coal soot than you can shake a stick at.


China’s economy is now the second biggest in the world.

Also, according to the International Energy Agency, “China is now the world’s biggest consumer of energy and burns about half of the world’s total coal production.” (Gwynne Dyer, Aug. 21, London Free Press)

China also now makes “makes more cars than any other country in the world. Indeed, it makes as many as Japan and the US together.”

So, add more than a titch of greasy smog to the soot soon to be coming our way.

And, if you didn’t know already, “as long ago as 2007, China became the world’s biggest emitter of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.”

Soot, greasy smog, greenhouse gases. The triple whammy.


["The cheapest, healthiest source of energy?": photos GH]

Recommendation: If you don’t like the sound and smell of the winds from the east, then get off the cheap-goods-from-China consumption habit.

Stay out of Wal-Mart and The Dollar Store and any other that is supplied chiefly by China and cheap labour.

Slow down the big coal and big oil engine and save money for the future at the same time.

***

If we want good news stories related to climate change, I think we’ll have to write them ourselves.

Please click here to read more Climate Change Concerns.

.

Recommendation: If it’s the summer of your discontent

I’ve been thinking and writing about a special report in our local paper entitled ‘The summer of discontent.’


["So, I walked the beach in Pt. Bruce": photos GH]

If you feel life is just getting too darn expensive and it’s all the government’s fault and you’d be better off moving to Mexico I recommend the following:


Find a quiet spot, with no distractions, and walk and think and try to figure out why our taxes (like the HST, a consumption tax) and fuel and energy bills (e.g., hydro) are rising, rising, rising - along with the temperature.


Is it the summer of your discontent? Pt 1


Is it the summer of your discontent? Pt 2

Climate Change Concerns


You might come to realize there are others at fault, other factors to consider, besides the government.

***

“Dang revenuers! They dun blew up my still!”

Who said that?

.

Climate Change Concerns: Geo-engineering needed or a longer recession

Whenever an article by Gwynne Dyer (an independent journalist based in London, England) appears in the local paper of my home city (the other London) I read it closely.

His most recent (‘Point of no return: No hope for US climate action,’ July 31, London Free Press) pins our ears back.

Mr. Dyer quotes Ben Lieberman, an energy expert at a Washington think-tank, who says, “It’s pretty clear that no post-Kyoto treaty is in the making - certainly not in Cancun, and maybe not ever.”


Looks like Big Coal and Big Oil will win again.

Dyer comments, “...With every year that passes, the cuts we would need to make to hold the temperature below that level (i.e., the point of no return; two C degrees higher average global temperature) become deeper. Eventually, in practice, they become impossible to achieve.”

When he next said the following, i.e., “Before the current recession, global emissions of greenhouse gases were growing at almost 3% a year, and they will certainly return to that level when the recession ends,” I realized anew my oft-shared advice - to reduce spending, pay down debt, save money for tough times ahead (because a hard rain’s a-gonna fall) - is spot on.


We can change the rate of warming by keeping our cold hard cash tucked inside our wallets and purses. A purposeful retreat from over-consumption or a meaningful recession would have a big payoff as the warming engines of coal and oil are kept turned-down-low for a longer period of time.

If the fact we are experiencing the hottest year (so far in 2010) on record since 1880 isn’t motivation enough, read Dyer’s article closely.

He doesn’t pull punches. He pins our ears back.

***

We are a society based on consumption, often over-consumption is the appropriate term.

Consequences are afoot.


["Want clear sailing? Reduce spending, save money for tough times": photo GH]

The word ‘retreat’ may seem to have a negative sound, but a purposeful retreat is a positive term.

Please click here for more Climate Change Concerns.

.

Climate Change Concerns: Will 2010 be the hottest year ever?

My first reaction yesterday, once I was entirely covered with sweat and heavy drops were falling from the end of my nose and onto the driveway, was to run inside and change all my clothes.

My t-shirt, after an hour of edging the front lawn, weighed over 10 pounds.


[“Last month was the warmest June ever recorded, according to the national Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). What’s more, it followed three months of record-shattering heat.” July 17, London Free Press]

My shorts, made from rugged cotton and suitable for workshop and yard chores, had turned from light to dark green and - due to the weight of my sweat - were about to fall.

[“In its monthly global snapshot, NOAA said March, April, May and June were all the warmest they’ve ever been.”]

My socks, great for long-distance running because of their ability to soak up and disperse sweat, were dispersing the excess to the soles of my feet. I felt like I was surfing.


[“June’s average temperature was about 0.68 C hotter than the 20th-century average for the month. The previous record was set in 2005.”]

My shoes were making a funny sloshing sound and leaving a wet imprint on the cement driveway.

[“According to NOAA, each of the 10 warmest average global temperatures recorded since 1880 have been in the past 15 years. So far, 2010 is on its way to being the warmest year ever.”]

An impulse grabbed me. Run inside - change your clothes. Survive.

[“If the heat continues to rise, 2010 will bet out 2005 for warmest year on record.”]

I said to myself, yes, but if I change, I’ll just soak more clothes and my laundry basket will weigh over 100 pounds.

So I resisted the urge to change and slowly carried edger trimmings to the backyard. With the help of popsicles, and a break to play hockey, I lived to face another day.

***

I don’t have a swimming pool.

I may set up the sprinkler, but not to water the lawn.

Am I too old to jump through a sprinkler?

What will the neighbours think?

Please click here to read other Climate Change Concerns.

.

Will Newfoundland escape a Gulf-sized oil disaster?

Last night I read that work will begin soon on a 2,600 meter deep offshore well on Canada’s east coast.

I know about the economic and environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico caused by a massive blowout that took place in black, frigid waters 1,600 meters below the surface. In that case, the final outcome of the battle between man and nature is still undecided but I’m certain it’s going to cost mankind and nature a bundle.

(Will the sale of fossil fuels make it all even out in the end?)

Though a Chevron spokesperson told news media that the company would be careful to prevent a spill like the one in the Gulf, I worry, that at 2,600 meters - the deepest offshore oil well in Canada’s history - we may be getting in over our heads.


Would money invested in oil exploration and drilling be better spent on alternative sources of energy and conservation measures?

Because of the costly drama unfolding in the Gulf, I lean toward alternative measures, including conservation, more and more.

***

Does “we’ll be careful” do it for you? Inspire you with confidence?

.

Who is winning the battle in the Gulf of Mexico?

So far, if the Gulf disaster was only science fiction, we could say the giant representing the Gulf is hammering the giant representing mankind.

In real life, however, though BP engineers are fighting valiantly, they have suffered setback after setback against the wily wiles of the Gulf’s frigid and inky depths.


["Man vs Nature - who will win?"]

The most recent setback - an operation to place a massive metal containment dome over the larger of the two leaks.

The result - BPs massive blowout continues to spill almost 1 million liters of crude per day into the Gulf.

BP Oil’s next plan:

“On the containment side, we’re working two options; one is a smaller dome - we call it the top hat - and the second is to try to find a way to tap into the riser, i.e., the piece of pipe the oil is flowing through,” BP chief operating officer told Reuters (press service).

So, mankind will pull out a top hat and a riser from its arsenal.

The Gulf's giant quietly waits, a mile down on the ocean floor, with frigid water and inky blackness on its side.

Who will win?

***

Already there have been losers, with more to follow, I imagine.

.

Is the Gulf of Mexico taking things personally, fighting back?

It’s interesting (not unusual) to watch the drama and conflict unfold in the Gulf of Mexico between man and nature.

When BP engineers recently used undersea robots to maneuver a gigantic metal chamber over a gushing oil well, their efforts were made to appear puny by the raw force of frigid temperatures and unpredictable challenges.

It’s as if two giants - one representing man, the other nature - are squaring off, waist deep in crude, and man is learning, perhaps too late, he has entered a battle of his own making woefully underprepared and ignorant of the shear power in the fists of his opponent.


If it was a science fiction story (unfortunately it's not), I’d say nature’s giant is fighting off a lesser opponent in order to protect what is rightfully his, or to proclaim he is not one to be domineered at a whim.

As easy-to-reach-oil disappears, man (consumed with desire to maintain his riches based on the power of fossil fuels) will venture forth into other gulfs and sea beds and difficult terrains.

In those places, will he meet other natural giants that wield powers beyond his understanding?


Hmm. Where’s the Green Hornet when you really need him?

.