:) Google & Open Office, Etc.!

Google: Open Office!

I started blogging for “fun” and my “green purposes”. I intend for my blogs try to make you think critically about “green” ( an undefined marketing term ) and my “green perspectives” on “government inaction on the good green stuff”. Some of it is controversial. I feel that certain environmental issues need to be acted upon, not advertised.

I feel it is important to innovate and profit while providing solid revenue streams for investments. The Green Economy is growing quickly and I feel our governments need to rethink the term investment.

Green Energy is the new gold? I assert yes. It is a tangible asset, unlike gold that was linked to currency in days gone by. Green energy investments should accomplish two things: reduce operating costs and provide a long term revenue stream. If a tax incentive exists now, what is holding progress back?

These “green” innovations can also represent a direct cost savings or a “leaner cleaner” company for honest marketing ( if there is such a thing? ).

Myself, as an independent designer find this is a tough business. On top of doing the work, marketing is always a challenge. Networking is the challenge... never enough time and it is expensive.

Of course my marketing is controversial, but, it illustrates my “ability as a designer to deconstruct a complex issue and identify solutions that add direct green value to all products”.

My value is Green Innovations: Strategies, Designs, Intellectual Property and Green Cost Reduction.

I always think it is important to thank those that help my small business.

I would like to thank Google and Open Office! Oh, free "stuff"! You simply rock!

All the tools I use for marketing are free! I use Open Office for my documents, design spreadsheets and presentation stuff.

Thanks Open Office :)

Google provides the platform for my blog. It is seamless with my iGoogle homepage. There I have my Gmail account, Google Chrome Browser. Chrome is fast and has a clean configurable interface. Snazzy!

Just when I thought I was in “free land bliss”: I got Google Analytics. This is a powerful and simple tool. I use it to measure my blog traffic. These are powerful tools for a small company. I can track the numbers and visitors and reports are easy to make. The “cut and paste approach” has finally caught up with my philosophy : “Cut and Paste your way to success!”

It is a simple tool for me. Gives me some cool reports on my blog stuff. I collect numbers of visits and use Google Analytics to see where this traffic is coming from. I installed it for fun, but, I am keeping it!

I track traffic locations: where in the world is my visitors are from, how many blogs they read in a row. I now have an alert for anyone that reads more than 8 blogs in a row, 6 is the current record! Thanks to who ever that was! Hope you learned at least one nugget of knowledge.

I have learned many important facts about my blog using this tool. The drag and drop rule sets are excellent compared to other marketing software I have seen. Nice job. Thanks Google!

So, thanks all you freebies out there! You understand that a great lost leader benefits everyone!

Oh, I also added the free newspaper below this blog. It does have some advertising, but, for the content it has, I thought it was fun thing. Just do not look at the advertising ;)

Regards,

Graham :)

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. All the products used to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection, just Google Analytics. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

>:( Smart Car?

“Smart Car” or is it “Sm-rt Car”, you decide!

"Over the past 100 years, there has been a steady progression of innovations that enhance the driving experience, in particular the continuing trend toward automating more driving tasks. "Human Factors for Limited–Ability Autonomous Driving Systems," an Exploratory Advanced Research (EAR) Program project, aims to investigate driver engagement through the development of limited–ability autonomous driving systems. Part of the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) long–term strategy in understanding autonomous systems, the 3–year study is being conducted by General Motors Corporation and Delphi Corporation (Delphi Electronics and Safety and Delphi Steering)."

It is interesting to see the new technologies that car companies are using to improve their products. Being a product designer, seeing "the new products" gives me “clues as to what car companies are using to market themselves” and distinguish their products from their competition.

Two such innovations are the new “Green Car" technology and “Smart Car” electronics. I will not discuss “green car” technology here.

Having “voluntarily bailed” from the auto industry over seven years ago, I like to think I demonstrated some business foresight. I knew that the products "they" were building and how they "did it" just would not “cut it”, so I left Michigan and returned to Ontario to focus on "green design".

I honestly thought that GM was going to go out of business. Ford, on the other hand, I felt had a better chance. Thanks to “free markets” GM is still alive, but, not well. I blamed all this on the “forward thinking” business types that were more interested in bonuses than their products. Most of my assertions came true. Smart? I assert yes. I wonder if the USA is "too big to fail".

Another aside, in 2003: I thought that GM would get scooped by Toyota in 2013. Interesting how fast things changed for the worse after George W. Bush was in office. Even I could not predict that. Karl Rove certainly raised the bar on lowering morality. I have since recalibrated my “Nostradamus Algorithms” in my brain. Good thing, when the banks crashed in the USA we all found out that the banks can blackmail President, for cash, with threats of “the whole system” crashing "over the weekend". Those republicans sure can get their way and their loot bags! I digress.

Lately, I “see” more “Smart” innovation: collision detection and prevention systems for cars. I think that the premise is sincere: help drivers avoid crashing. Many in the auto industry have dreamed of the “autonomous highways” where the driver can “switch off” and enjoy the ride. Well, we are still far from that ideal, but, is “switching off” a "healthy thing" whilst in a moving vehicle? The pure scientist would tell you it is possible. Still waiting to see the tax bill for “retooling” the highways, roads and cars in Canada and the USA. Would it be a “Smart investment”?

For the interim, we have Smart Car technology “beginnings”: various collision detection systems and “automatic emergency braking”. Many scientific papers have been written about the “human factors engineering” and the act of driving.

In my opinion, the “harder it is to operate” something, the “more the human brain is engaged” in that activity. As soon as these "complex functions" are replaced with a technology, does our brain become less active with the activity? I assert yes.

At first “blush”, I see the benefit of such systems: safer cars and more protection for drivers. This is what is being used to market the “safety package options” for these cars. Of course, some people go “Wow!” and buy the car, thinking they are “smart” too? Not sure, I do not know.

These safety systems differ from the “autonomous autodrive driver technologies”. A few companies have already tried the “fully automatic driverless systems” ( for example: long haul trucking or highway driving in Caravan-style ). The current systems are added features for the driver, not, fully automatic systems.

What they did find, with “fully automatic systems” is that there is a high percentage of “disengaged drivers” (falling asleep at the wheel, not paying enough attention to the road). This is not a new finding, pilots have the same challenges with “fly by wire” technology: a non-alert pilot. Lazy brains = poor performance results?

So, if we look at the demographics of drivers, I am concerned that "certain demographics" will consciously or sub-consciously become "less aware of what is on the road". Think of this as a “lazy brain” tool. Some may feel that the “Smart Car” will allow them to be less focused on the road. We have seen the effects of distracted drivers: cellphones and the laws now being written to "keep drivers mentally engaged on the road". Of course, some still think they are "smarter than the professional psychologists that know how brains work".

It is also interesting that the Canadian Government does not study these technologies, independantly, before they let the car companies introduce their products. Governments have given product control to the companies, because they are the “experts”, just like the "free markets" are #1 too.

Is this safe thinking? Are the insurance companies ready for the lawsuits? I wonder if insurance companies prefer poor drivers or good drivers? As long as customers pay, I think the insurance companies have no preference. Is disaster capitalism a great model for the insurance companies? I am not sure.

I could turn this into a ten page blog, easy. But, I want to wrap this up, to do some real "green design work". I enjoy designing green stuff, so, its not really work :)

Lets look at one “extreme” example: auto-braking technology. Looks and sounds cool! But, what about the car behind you, on the road, if they cannot stop “as fast”, will you be rear-ended? I assert yes. This car also has a "Pedestrian Collision System"? Do we need more technology to "not hit people". At least someone might be spared from the "lipstick-tweeking and cellphone-engaged shopping monsters". Sound overboard? I have seen it recently. Too engaged in "social systems" while the focus should be on the "mechanical system" of not "hurt others". Wake up, please.

I would also like to point out that adding all these electronic systems, that will be thrown away in the 8 year lifecycle of a car, is a waste and is toxic. Planned obsolesence will add much more e-waste to our environment. Radars, cameras, sensors, computers all added for "safety" while hurting our planet. Yes. Blood minerals? Perhaps.

My definition of a “Smart Car”: An "emissions-free", "green material constructed" and highly energy efficient car, modestly sized, with the ability to be easily maintained, by the owner, that would last more than 8 years. Its a start.

Is polluting our environment “Smart”? I am looking forward to the day that the old business practices are replaced by the “free markets” of consumers wanting a "healthy planet first".

Maybe we need “auto-braking technology” for our “incapable and immoral governments and corporations” that are ignoring my planets' "challenges".

Enjoy!

P.S. - Did you notice in the Volvo video that the driver is drinking a coffee. Mmmm Coffee.

P.S.S. - What will they think of next: Brain



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

:) Green 2011!

Green 2011

“2010 Science” blew me away! Many of “my product ideas of the past 15 years” are finally coming into “reality”. A few: advanced research in the biology and genetics of bacteria/microbes and “other little thingies”, Brain “neurocognition adaptation”, Organic computing and heck even Twitter. It was also interesting to see Richard Dawkins bring attention to the “quality of science” in America.

My blogs are supposed to be fun.... dealing with “some very hard truths” about all our challenges ahead. I even wrote a metalanguage program that would be a “WikiScience” repository and forum for natural sciences. MIT opened another “green program” in the Economics of Sustainable Materials. Smart!

As much as I criticize “the system” for not being “green enough”, I see many new technologies that will deliver a green economy and prosperous green future. Seems the only roadblocks are: “the justice systems” impeding aggressive “green adoption”, the corporations that are “put at risk” by a “global green evolution”.

I am a green product designer and green advisor. In product design, our field looks forward. How we construct the next “great gadget” is “life or death” for companies. Apple is a great example. Google is another. Wikipedia is another great product (open source).

I had a “free course” a few years ago in “touch screen stuff”. Having watched 20 years of touch screen technology knowledge ( out of pure interest in computers etc and human factors engineering ), I sat down to watch the “pitchmen” for this technology. It enabled Apple to provide its system today. In summary, I see what is coming “down the pipe” as far as products. I like to share this in a “green way”.

Now, being a “green designer”, I typically will not engage in electronics design. I have rules. Rule #1. Do not design things that will pollute my planet. I have worked on systems that can spit out a V-10 truck engine block and cylinder head every 12 seconds. I still feel guilty. At least I did some work on the Clean Diesel Engines for the “big boy” trucks.

The one innovation I have not seen, so far, in electronics or auto is rethinking planned obsolescence.

I want to work on, or share my insight, with green projects. I have written some harsh blogs on many topics, since November 2, 2010. My write them for “green awareness”: people need to focus on the realities of our planets future. I am not saving endangered species or a plant, just the planet, for now. I see a lot of greenwash out there too. I will be starting to focus on this more in 2011, in my blogs.

I like to explore the technology “they use”, plan to use and how they use it. Introducing new technology is a tricky game indeed. This is why I feel that we are starting “green” in the wrong context. With all that debate climate science ( the “good parts” and the exploited “ugly parts”: funded by corporations ) all I am saying is we are still polluting our planet. Lets think about this.

John Baird, Canadian Environment Minister, has been “stalling” Canadas leadership in “green”. Now, he has irresponsibly thrown out a “target”. He asserts that a 2 Celsius increase in temperature is a “danger point”. Of course, anyone versed in complex mathematics would tell you this is the “wrong thinking” to start with. Nice job John, now you will make the debate based on your “2 Degree” obfuscation? Our planet is getting more and more polluted each day. Start with that John: Would “Grandfather Claus” be mad at how dirty this place is?

But, aside from the challenges ahead of societies “reprogramming” in consumerism psychology, science just keeps innovating. All the work being done now is breath taking!

In 2011, I look forward to more innovation in science! Keep it coming!

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

>:( Tarsand

Tar + Sand = Tarsand = Pollution

It is interesting to see the "political games" politicians play before elections. Promises and “innovation talk” fabricated to provide glossy new "political platforms" to “preach from”.

The “new kid on the block”, John Baird, has a tough challenge to provide the CPC with a “credible image” with regards to the environment and the tarsands. By using “big words” and “big promises”, we see another “promise”. The promise to monitor pollution by the companies extracting oil and to monitor water. Do we need to “check” these “knowns”, again?

Alberta has a long history of oil industry and other industrial pollution. The natural gas and refining industries have long been given carte blanche. Many people have long been exposed to the pollution, the results of poor government regulation of this industry and the influence the corporations have on our government offices. I see a history of inaction.

With water becoming a political "hot potato", is John just delivering the next "white wash"?

Poor air quality and toxic emissions have long been ignored, not just in Alberta. “Grandfather” clauses protecting some industries legal right to pollute. Industry using the “fear of economic losses and competition” to stall environmental responsibility.

Now I see John Baird making “bold new" "decisions".

Scientists and naturalists have long known that the tarsands creates pollution. Mr. Baird is providing a “fresh look” at an old problem? No, just more inaction. Just like the inaction on climate change and bill C-311 on climate science.

Is “looking at a problem” a solution? No. Monitoring pollution will not help the environment. It is simply a stall tactic to delay the industry from actually doing anything about the pollution created in the past and the future pollution waiting to happen.

Creating a "new spin" is what the CPC provides Canada. Much like bill C-311, no action, no innovation. John Baird chose the “classic” “well lets see what the others do”. The tarsands is now a “lets see what the pollution is” issue? John, perhaps a drink of that water will give you the answer. No? Have another glass, please.

Both C-311 ( climate change science ) and the tarsands are examples of government inaction enabling corporate inaction. Both solutions provide "no solution", just more “talk”. In the case of the tarsands, monitoring.

Alberta has long suffered the health effects of the oil industry. Old greedy practises, “Tobacco Industry”-style lawyers: fighting each "penny spent" to protect the environment and the people "downwind of their activity". Same with the coal industry, etc. No innovation, just talk and court time, to avoid investing in a healthier environment for all living things: Court cases settled “out of the spot light” to reduce “corporate image challenges”.

This is classic political dishonesty: appear to provide an honest and progressive plan to “gain support” and give people the illusion that the government is protecting Canada and its citizens.

John Baird is reading out of his “Karl Rove 101” handbook again? Personally, I think Karl Rove is a war criminal, but, that is my opinion. Carl is a genius at politics: the politics of deception and inactivity to let companies get away with “it”.

How long have scientists known about all the environmental issues with all industry? Well, Mr. Baird, thank you for reinventing the wheel again. Just what we need the wheel, again and again.

We need action to be taken with hard environmental standards that industry must target, regardless of “economic times”, “competitiveness” and corporate “responsibility”. Maybe Canada can eliminate oil subsidy and invest in environmental subsidy? I am not sure.

Inaction is damaging Canadians' health and our global environment. Your inaction, Mr. Baird, is classic politics. We need less politics and more action. The only “smaller government” I would like is the one that can eliminate political stalling on known issues and let the scientists start cleaning up Alberta, and Canada.

How many times must the Canadian taxpayer pay for the “wheel to be invented” by each new environment minister. It is time to act morally and eliminate political games that are slowly killing Canadian citizens and destroying our natural ecosystems. Those are facts. Just look at the aboriginal people and how long they have been concerned with most industrial practises. They had no “science laboratory” or “special monitoring systems”. You do not have to be an expert to see the negative effects of toxic pollution and irresponsible business practises, you just have to look “outside”.

John is only giving us “a shiny new pamphlet” and hoping we forget just long enough to get the CPC reelected. That is want politicians do.

If the political system does not work, the science and technology really never mattered in the first place. Mr. Baird, you will repeat this again.

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

>:( Green Fur Campaign?

Green Fur.

I recently saw a billboard. “Fur is Green”

I have long thought about this. Here is an “all natural resource”, used for over ~150,000 years to keep us warm and snuggly. Evolution gave us skills.

Then we have some clothing that is made of “toxic chemicals” and also natural fibres like bamboo or cotton.

What the heck is green here?

Green is the process of bringing sustainable materials to customers at the lowest risk-based cost. This means from the start, of each different material and process, to the finish. Add up the processes and presto, you can investigate the “green”! Naturally, the least number of “steps” the greener. I picked up a grasshopper and had it for a snack, that would be green? Only if it was an organic grasshopper.

Currently, most fur industry “processes” are unregulated and dirty. Processing hides requires chemicals? Transportation costs, manufacturing, marketing of luxury, etc.

An Ogibway kid told me, many years ago now, his mom uses moose brains to treat hides. All natural. I am sure there are some other steps too, but, this kid had some cool knowledge, for me. I think I also remember him telling me the "Ogibway word" for “dirty” is “Gagoosh”? I hope I am not saying “white guy”.

So, why does this industry not “innovate its processes” to “bioengineered naturally safe enzymes”? I am sure some is working on this. This process may take a little longer, when you take into consideration the typical “MBA philosophy” with regards to our environment. Would a few “extras”, here and there, to benefit our environment help? Yes.

Off topic, MIT just started its newest program for green materials. Am I ahead of my time? No, it makes economic sense to go green. It reduces costs and “minimizes risk” to our environment. It also, by nature, saves money. Smart? Yes. This is how I like to design my stuff too!

Canada is behind in "green". That is why I blog so much! I see this as "lost money for all". Green Products are superior in environmental and economic terms. Period. Its math.

What does nature already have at its disposal to innovate this “green fur”? Until we know, fur is dirty. The people that hunt and prepare their hides are green ( as long as they do not use an ATV ). Will I ever stop? No.

This fur site goes on to say that its process is natural and looks at the ways they have innovated "green". I like "green" innovation! But, is this a “regulated and periodically” inspected system? Is it 100% accountable, or is it like the Meat Industry in Ontario. I do not know. That is not the focus of this discussion.

I do take exception to the animals they are "farming for fur": Beavers, Minks, Foxes, etc.

Some take exception to:

Italy, France, Denmark, Greece, Belgium and Australia ban the import of cat and dog fur but the sale is still legal

I think we need to “step back and look at our human activity” and decide what animal products are “green”.

If we think of the food industry, we can get “free” resources (hides) from animals. Leathers and skins from: cows, sheep, salmon, chickens, ostrich, eel, crocodile and alligator, etc. If these operations are humane and green, we should use them. If we can make the “processes” greener, I think we need to rethink the industry and streamline it for Green.

Lets take care of our wild animals and their homes and not create “bubble populations” for “human fur luxury”.

Enjoy!

P.S. - did you know that salmon, chicken, ostrich, eel, crocodile and alligator leathers are considered “luxury”?




All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

>:( Hudak Attacks!

Hudak Attacks!

Another example of irresponsible behaviour: Governments that want to “scrap” progressive “work”.

Instead of innovating and improving, is the intent to just “discredit the other political parties” (politics 101)?

Does Mr. Hudak, of the Ontario CPC, feel that electronics are healthy for our environment? Does he trust corporations with the health of Ontario residents? Does he understand that electronics are poisonous and that recycling them is a potential revenue stream that helps corporations and citizen health?

Talk about wasting taxes, Mr. Hudak. Are you incapable of generating new business opportunity?

What is the total taxpayer cost: administration + “government time” + studies and the private costs associated with passing legislation then initiating them, just to “scrap it”. What is your “return on government”? Are you obsolete?

In my business, we “scrap” nothing. Everything is “tweaked”, with science, to optimize profits. If it is a viable business opportunity, seems like all sides of government need to make it work. Improve it. Make it more “profitable for companies” and “cost less”, in taxes. Something our current government is incapable of? If “it” is not built for innovation, is “it” just “managing the “least of progress” without jeopardizing re-election” at any cost? The cost of your “integrity and wisdom”, Mr Hudak?

Sounds like the only “stimulus on this” is another “jolt” for the “legal industry” in Toronto? All the “expensive lawyers”, salivating at any “big or small change made by government”. Taxes consumed by “circular paperwork”. Much like the "big plastic swirl in my oceans": not helping my environment.

Mr. Hudak, science has done the homework for you, already.

Sorry, you cannot reinvent “this wheel”, I call science and math. If you feel up to it, try. Please sit down Mr. Hudak. You are incapable, now.

Disaster capitalism is a “no brainer”: Make “them” “make it”, then “you” “break it”. I wonder if the same lawyers could “work both sides of this street”? Well, actually, they are working all 3 sides of the street, because taxpayers pay for it all. What a “competitive market”?

Maybe Naomi Klein should have called it “Disaster Democracy”? Seems like governments better evolve quickly to the same technologies and communications, that business uses, to remain viable.

Is Hudak not smart enough to “make improvements” AND make it “lower in tax cost” for us? You have admitted failure by proposed cuts to the “e-tax”. I guess you are incapable of progress and reducing government costs? Wait, progress and reducing taxes are “your song”. Oh yes, this is politics, not science.

Tim Hudak will scrap the “Eco Tax on Electronics”? This program was designed to collect tax dollars on electronics devices, that people buy, to lessen the impact of electronics consumption on our environment. Tim thinks people will not be able to afford a TV if it is another $26.25? Is Dalton operating this system to the best it can be? Probably not. Politics does not use "math to determine method".

If that is “the deal breaker”, on a TV, I guess Tim is asserting that “low savings customers” should be using credit cards. Are rates going up? I am not sure, I guess yes!

Am I stupid? Perhaps, but, “the only rule I use for my analysis” is that “corporations force Canadian politicians to keep product prices cheap”, regardless of “total environmental cost”, so more people can buy them.

I know, this is bold thinking, I would rather be designing a 1 GW Geothermal Plant, a couple blocks from my house, next week. Can I buy the parts and services, and have them delivered? I wonder if I could do the whole project from home? Probably not. I do not want to be the “President of the Universe”*.

Politicians that can help corporations to exploit new revenue streams are “positive leaders”?

Politicians that “scramble to shore the sinking Canadian tax revenues” ( Tony Clement: iPod tax vs. Internet tax ) by resorting to exploiting “captive monopolies” are “butt puppets of corporations”?

Politicians that innovate to resolve real issues, make corporations work “for their keep”. But, as we all know, corporations are defined as “antisocial-psychopathic”. This is simple social science?

Politicians that provide the space to innovate, reap downstream tax revenues and “healthy companies” ( Blackberry ). These innovations can then be leveraged for foreign trade ( Blackberry ). These innovations also help Canadian business ( Blackberry ). Maybe even help politicians with their jobs ( Blackberry ). I wonder if this idea of innovating Canadian science on climate change could do the same? I assert yes.

But, the corporate model does not include the “entire lifecycle of any process”, well except for “monitary gains” and the lifecycles of Canadian citizens: currently maximized “actual cost of living” with “winky promises of lowered taxes”. Well, except military spending, it seems lately.

The medical system seems to exploit peoples life savings, when they need "the most help from their governments". Keeping some "alive to ensure maximum profits for a profit modelled healthcare system"? Sounds "sick" to me.

Look at our population demographics, I am sure a “first year economics student” would see the potential in a “large uncompetitive captive market”. But, would that student find it moral? If they have no conscious, I guess that market is simply a “no brainer” opportunity.

So, Mr. Hudak, what are the potential downstream revenues are you “throwing away”? Did you calculate them and find them unviable? Can I see your calculations, please?

I have an idea for you to innovate! I call it“#LIEDAR”, science has the technologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facial_recognition_system . It is much like photo radar, but, it is a camera installed in all levels of public government. Everytime a politician lies, or acts or refutes, without viable proof, they pay a fine of $1500 from their pension. A lie tax for government.

This would stimulate our economy quickly: add a "new tax revenue stream" for all levels of government, and “zap useless politicians” that negatively impact "high downstream tax costs for Canada".

Would you be the first “guinea pig”?

Enjoy!

P.S. - I sure hope “you guys” are paperless by now. Most companies are. Are you? Do you care?



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

>:( Quality of Plastic

Quality of Plastic.

Being a designer, I choose materials for my designs (sometimes). Metals is a big market: Steels, Aluminum Alloys, Casting materials (steel, aluminum, plastics, resins, etc.). So many choices!

What is important in the choice? Performance quality, weight, processing costs, and of course the quality of the material.

In some designs, I have to choose an “exotic metal”. Because of the design demands, I need to know the Mechanical Properties. This lets me explore strength and durability issues. This data for the material is critical (space shuttle o-ring + management incompetence, etc.). The data specification I get from the manufacturer is key in helping me with the engineering of the component.

All of these materials come in different grades ( meaning how “close” it is to the original “recipe on the “box” ). Sometimes the component does not need a special material. These days, seems plastic is the way to go. The markets for plastics is equally humongous. Again, different grades of plastic( ie. Medical , Food, Performance, weight). Again, some components can use the cheapest plastics for most jobs.

When we get into the cheap plastic markets, there are questionable suppliers. Same with metal markets: questionable suppliers. Some suppliers are certified to deliver quality, some are not.

I had to design a large cast iron “machine base”. These are big ( over 2000KG ), and they have to be rigid and not deform. These castings had to be of a certain quality. This component was outsourced to China. When it returned, “fully finished”, it was installed and tested. It failed. It deformed or “stretched”. It now was a scrap part. Wasted energy.

Our company was interested in seeing why it did fail. With a “scope” we checked the cast material and found catastrophic structural issues. A welder “blasted through” the 3” steel for a “sample”. What did the team find? “Semi-Unmelted bolts” in the casting material. This made it deform. This supplier used cheap casting material, not what was specified on the engineering documentation. We had to make another, fast.

Of course, this was bad, since they usually take 1 month to make: pattern, casting, blocking, machining, finishing and CMM verification process and then quality assessments without overtime. And these things are heavy .

The point I am trying to make is that without proper standards and checking them, the customer is at a disadvantage. That cast material was not to standard. It failed. Being able to demonstrate quality is important in our increasingly complex manufacturing logistics. “Parts” from “all over the world” come “together” for a design. Having high initial quality makes it “easier to hit” projected budgets and profit margins. These are competitive bids, remember.

China has made many advancements since. I have seen the designs they are developing. Impressive. I still have some issues with some products from China. Plastic. What quality are we getting? Did you know that some manufacturers put lead in plastic ( PVC ) to make it more flexible? All flexible plastics from China can be trusted? You decide, because our government thinks that is not important.

Plastic is a messy material. It uses oil, it pollutes soils and water. But some plastics are high grade. At least you know what you are getting. Plastics are in everything. Some even have polymer coatings for finishes ( the stuff that wears off or scratches ). These plastics are well defined in countries with standards systems. They have to provide “scientific safety” of each material, its mechanical properties, etc. Some cases for legal support of a design. Other cases for health risks in dealing with that material.

Cheap plastics, like the ones used in: consumer products, tools, computers, etc , have grades as well. But, some have very little regulatory laws and reliable inspectors to ensure standards ( in China ).

You keep seeing warnings about plastics. When plastic first started flooding from China, I knew that if they could not maintain an “industry standard for engineering”, how would I know there is “no lead in the paint”. I used to joke to everyone that there is probably lead in it. Well, there is.

See with a “loose regulation” system, material manufacturers use fillers ( pet food, steel, paint and plastic, etc ) in their products. Saves them money. Just like the old “sawdust in hamburger” trick.

Did you know that the plastics in most hospital equipment is found to be “toxic”? Did you know that children “plastic playgrounds” plastic is found to be “toxic”? The more we understand about the impacts of “outside hormones” on our bodies, we are finding that they disrupt natural processes.

This year I have seen stories and reports on lead in many plastic items and non plastic items: christmas lights, toys, cheap food bowls, etc.

But these are the items people have complained about. What about all the “hidden” plastics in products? The ones inside? What is in them? Does our systems check? No.

So next time you look at "the label" can they prove it is correct? Check the quality stamp? Some are stamped green. How green is plastic?

CFL's have a green stamp. They contain mercury, electronics and plastic. New LED lights should make the CFL obsolete.

Sorry Walmart in China making billions of these things. I wonder how much mercury they "go through" in one day? Is the workers health protected by law?

Walmart will continue to produce CFL bulbs. They have to. They need to get economies of scale to get a profit from their captial investment. Do you trust Walmart in China?

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

:) SCIENCE 101

Had seen some of these free animation toys before, so I gave it a shot!

I made this funny cartoon for Stephen Harper so he can observe a scientific discussion.

Cartoon animation #1: The Science of Positive Psychology



Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

>:( Dear John Baird

Dear John, ( my first letter to you )

Thanks for speaking. It is always good to hear a “CPC” speak. It confirms, for me, what is wrong with the CPC.

But first, some fun:

I was speaking with a university-conservative group this morning. They remind me of the GOP parrots in the USA. Chirp, chirp. Are they reading from the “Rove” binder again? Just insert he topic in the yellow text blocks? You would think these “whipper snappers” would have some innovation to support CPC policies.

Here is our “short” “discussion” ( I know these kids are only in university, but, look at the critical thinking they are asserting on CPC policies. Do they defend their leaders action? Or just go for the “personal attack”? ). I think it basically reflects your positions, use of “talking points” and your “leaders'” positions. Either you are “with us or against us”. Yes / No. “Good for people, bad for people”. Sounds familiar? Here are “your” “future lemmings”, in training: ( I did not correct their spelling, I don't have the "goodest" english either ).


From a comment (CUConservatives):

RT @DeanTester: RT @timhudak Ontario families continue to pay for Dalton McGuinty's of waste http://bit.ly/hjq01p #cdnpoli1

@CUConservatives I suppose you fully endorse @pmharper and his wasting our environment and tax dollars of planned F-35 fighters? #cdnpoli

@deepgreendesign why do you hate our military? @pmharper fights for the best for our soliders and it would be nice if you supported them

@CUConservativs #pmharper You are misinformed. Again. I support our military, not our "leader". Learn before you spew. #iearth1st
 
@CUConservatives Still waiting for you response. Or is this your "cut 'n run"? I will write you an open letter. Maybe you will learn.

@deepgreendesign Busy actually working, not worrying about dellusional environmental activists. Best of luck!

@CUConservatives Let me know when you have time to be educated about toxic pollution. I feel it is important. Do you?

@CUConservatives You think toxic pollution is delusional thought? Would you like to debate that statement in a public forum?

Nice work conservative youth! Your future looks "dirty and expensive". Like it is in the USA. I seem to always get this "conclusion" in discussion. They disappear, without support assertions with science.

Anyways, John, lets get back to this. Nice tie. Did you know that the colour green is the most toxic colour, perfect. More PR damage control? I digress.

I saw your defence of your party policy on the environment: "Eye of the beholder", Three Fossil awards.

John, the green market is growing. That means it is an economic opportunity. What is my big fuss? Lowering operating costs, innovation opportunity and reducing energy consumption. These things let corporations "give you" more taxes? Is that good? You answer that.

"Greasy O'Leary" talks about his "$60 barrel of oil". That is the market price. The total cost is not reflected in the market price.

The Cato Institute, a libertarian think-thank, did a study on the subject. What they found is simply mind-boggling. They calculated that the US spent between $30 to $60 billion (with a 'b') a year safeguarding oil supplies in the Middle East during the 1990s, even though its imports from that region totaled only about $10 billion a year during that period. A more comprehensive study that includes the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and other oil protection services (the coast guard is clearing shipping lanes and doing navigational support to oil tankers, etc) shows that actual subsidies to Big Oil are between $78 to $158 billion (again, with a 'b') per year.

So, in the US a barrel of oil costs a minimum of about: $450. This reflects the market price, taxes and the taxes spent to "get the oil". These are called "Free Markets", John, seems too high? Yes, best stick to the "market cost". You seem to be thinking "market" and not "environment".

Of course Kevin O'Leary thinks that "Free Markets" work best. I hope he felt like me, letting the big banks fail first. I am not sure. I believe in making clean money. Lots of it. As an aside, he is investing in AE. Some of it is terrible, but, maybe he will find a winner ( after many losses ). Looks like Kevin needs a course in complex math. I was laughing at his "investments" in "new technology". Looks like Kevin got screwed out his money on a few "new ideas". Thanks for the laughs, Kevin. Keep it up?

You have to look at the "total costs" of things. The "environment cost" does not see "Free Markets" as a definition of value. The environment is the tangible asset we share. The environmental costs are complex in nature, not a line graph.

Your weak stance of "stepping back", in retreat, and waiting for an "international agreement" ( which you will not accept, regardless?) is another cowardly move. Your party lacks leadership and "balls".

I see no progressive CPC plan. I see no proof ( the scientific kind ) that you ignore the environment. You need to get that information from your "advisers" ( would be cool to only have leaders that are experts, like in China, but really, how well is China doing? They use science, but, not human rights and in GOP talk "DO YOU HATE HUMAN RIGHTS?" ;). But, you should listen to what the scientists have to report ( as in a scientific reports) not "your" truthiness.

But John, I know the science is "this and that". Have scientists observed "acceleration" in genetic mutation from climate change? Many physical examples exist, yet you "stall" and cower. Inaction.

So, where is your science John? Is it peer reviewed? Is it internationally accepted?

Anyways, John, lets move on. Did you know that some European A.E. Companies have "backlogs" for their equipment? That is called equity, or "money in the bank". You can tax that stuff! Called "tax revenues".

I know the tarsands have a backlog. But, what about all the pollution and water consumption in the prairies now? This is acceptable to "your model environment"? What is the total "environmental cost" of tarsands oil versus a the total "environmental costs" of geothermal energy? Please, break it down for me! I already have and I want to check my assumptions. I want to see you demonstrate real mathematics, not "O'Leary" math.

Regardless of the "total environmental costs", lets move forward.

Our government has a dirty secret. It is called toxic pollution. Mountains of science showing that we need to have "greener" solutions: solutions that create less toxic waste.

I know you are "focused" on climate change now, but, what are you doing to control toxic pollution from Canada's energy, industrial and residential processes? Oh yes, and some toxic commodities coming in from foreign producers with no legal health standards. Seems like China is innovating and improving its "toxic accountability". Why? To make more money? "Innovation = money"?. Money for the corporation, and "tax money" for government, through "taxes".

Do you endorse the use of CFL's ? Those are toxic .

What about the sale of AECL? Will the new owners clean up the mess, or will Canadians "flip the bill" (can we make a side bet)? Why are people allowed to "block" AE installations with failed "science"?

You seem to be focused on climate change, so, lets start there. How can you prove that your actions will not impact negatively on our environment and our "Free Markets"? Are you moral enough to be "steering the car" now, John?

You regress from progress, waiting for other nations to lead? Canada was a leader, now "we" are "a joke", because your party cannot lead. Are you afraid of making money( GOP:101 lemming-parroting)?

How will "your stance" impact the image of Canadian "climate expertise" and their "global business models"? I can tell you from experience, negatively. You are hurting companies and damaging reputations: to endorse "your big tar-patch bonanza". Your "yes/no" arguments rarely include innovation. Why is that? Do you think Canadian experts cannot figure out these problems? They, in most cases, already have.

By cowering from the challenge, we all face, you make us look "weak and ignorant", internationally (I guess someone did go to the "Bush motivational" sessions? Did you get the GWB bobblehead and the new Rove "How to" pamphlet?).

You are afraid to lead. Leadership means innovation, here are some innovations by Canadians. Innovations brought on by opportunity and profit. Let me know if you find anything that has made lots of money ( except the Polo Vaccine, Salk gave it "free", to help people. What a man!) Did you know that Canada helped with that too? Here is a more detailed list.

Enjoy!

P.S. - Do you use a Blackberry? By using one, are you demonstrating "innovation brings increased efficiency to all"?

P.S.S. - will you deliver me quality?



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

>:( N.I.M.F.Y. ( or Ontario horizons either )

Not in my front/back yard or so I can see it.

One of the hurdles, in big wind farms, seems to be our systems of administration. The administration costs: Federal and Provincial. Now, I see, there is some resistance building against wind farms. The zero value added political "fresh meat" lawmakers drool over.

I can understand people fighting dumps ( Stop Dumpsite 41 (worked!): Tiny rocks! ), fracking, coal fired generation plants, lead water mains, particulates, air pollution in Ontario, high volume traffic, nuclear waste (Hey Tony Clement, nice anti-spam laws), the list goes on. Check out this site, emitter, shows pollution in your area.

Man, this summer I wanted to start a petition on "Elephant Grass" or Pampas Grass. Whats up with this? They cut the grass along roads and let this stuff thrive? I would rather see wildflowers than grass, plus, tall weeds slow down cars a little bit more ;) This stuff is invading and taking over. What is being done?

Making any argument, against investment in “green”, seems baffling. Energy Independence, for me, means green-energy Canada, then sitting on a big stack of oil. Think of it as Canadas “savings account”. All these “councils meetings”, green energy awareness programs are cute, but, why not dump the cash into infrastructure that generates "green" energy.

The ROI on these wind systems, located in our lakes, is great. We can put the “big mamas” out "there". Hopefully some 4MW action! I also think we should support the guys in Peterborough at GE. The company has been there for ~100 years. They make electrical motors. Buy local? Hmmmm. I am not a fan of all GE divisions, but these guys are "somewhat cool". Very specialized stuff. Talented people. Ontario innovation.

But, what about the wind-haters? Clearly, subsonics are present in wind operations. But, these folks must also understand that the blade designs, currently available, are not optimized, yet.

Many advancements are being made using natural systems designs (modelled after a whale fluke, with bumps to optimize stall characteristics and hopefully reduce noise (lost energy)). I am sure someone is working on a subsonic damping system? Who knows! The technology is still young. Once the towers are installed, they can upgrade systems, providing a founded economic benefit.

So, the planning starts then screech! NIMBY/NIMFY or I can see them! Oh no!

In Ontario, there are about 40 or so “local community” groups that have assembled to oppose new development in wind energy. Do you know who funds the groups? Not sure. ;)

Its members even pull the "carte de terror" on: “bat beatings”, “bird blenders” and subsonic “waves of death”. I wonder if the “waves of death” study is reliable? Are these environmental “talking points” based on false or flimsy science? And these complaints get heard even though some of these studies have been disproven already.

By having a “1st Annual Symposium” in Picton, Ontario (was held October 29-31, 2010): does not provide credibility to their intent to stall wind development. This group tells you in the disclaimer, that this is “new stuff” and they are not responsible. We need to all make changes, in how "we do this".

I understand that Prince Edward County is a gem, but, what about the health concerns of: irradiated areas, lower income areas around industrial sites, schools and living beside big highways, living near a coalgen station? What about the health concerns about the toxicity in Hamilton, etc.?

Some see the wind turbine as an imposition on natural beauty, but, one can also think of it in terms of progress and working with nature to help nature. I have been under some "big gigs" and "small gigs". There is noise, yes. There is subsonics, sure. I read some the "startling health effects" stated on this site: lost sleep? I also wonder what percentage of the population does not find wind turbines offensive. Maybe some people are supersensitive? I am not sure. Perhaps they can move to Hamilton?

Coal fire plants, other sources of atmospheric particulates and chemical pollution are my present concerns.

Its funny to see a "no smoking sign" outside the entrance to a building, in downtown Toronto, turn around and traffic is spewing "its stuff". If Ontario dreams of “Electric Cars” it better clean up the coal emmissions. Car in genergal, poisons all of the environment. Even Picton, Ontario. Is the government using diversion tactics? Second hand smoke? Go sit beside a campfire.

I have seen many documentaries on wind opposition, etc. People saying how off shore “utilization” ( wind, wave energy, etc. ) somehow destroys “the natural beauty” or “decreases property resale value” ( would their taxes go down or something? ). I guess this is "their" “sacred chunk of the planet”.

Would "be fun to float one of these $20,000,000 family" “cottages” out to the middle of the pacific garbage patch and let them set up shop. All that excess “surface area” breeds tons of unnatural bateria. Must stink! Poor turtles, fish, birds, sharks and Larry from Hawaii, with air matress in tow.

"They" paid for "their" "nature spot". I guess me complaining about mega-mansions as an eye sore and over consumption, would not get far in court.

Our planet is carved with: superhighways, new urban “California-Style Shopping Experiences”, widening country roads giving way to heavy traffic. Urban sprawl chewing up natural spaces. I was always kind of sad to see those quaint country drives turned into through traffic.

Our cities have dirty air, our beaches are strewn with decaying plastic ( which “they” say “may” be “health-impacting” “sometimes” under “specific unknown circumstances” ), wetlands turned into parking lots. Complaints from the Picton on this stuff?

But, not in my back yard. “Windmills are ugly”. Funny, I do not see the symposium talking about oil spills, or dead animals or sick children. This opposition is global, some are so rich they have enough legal power to “try to put out the sun with a garden hose and make NASA do it”.

Not in my back yard! Did they start the "1st Annual Meeting" to complain about: Nestle Waters, sue the American Plastics lobby, or fight against "big oil" incompetence?

Check out their website. If they only mentioned the health effects I would look closer, but when they “slap” up the other talking points, it really discredits them. Most of them have been disproven already. Light pollution in cities kills more that some wind turbines. Ever see a bird hit a tree? Some die from turbines, but, how many die from pollution?

Please people, its not strip mining Alberta, its some windmills, chill out. After a while, you will might find them pretty. Some folks say they are hypnotic when they are driving. Please.

Do they find: magestic highways, endless powelines, colourfully polluted water, smog alerts, sunset “enhancements” acceptable?

Funny how some see positive changes as negative. Can you do your part and "rethink what is important" for your “beautiful view” of our planet?

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

:) Reformat Me!

Reformat Me!

Technology is "crack", it seems. When the Beatles released their “new stuff” on iTunes, I shook my head, again.

Technology is based upon planned obsolescence: designed to last a few years, to be replaced by the next "shiny gotta-have-it-gadget". Seems like most line up for the new toys. "Got to be first, so I can be different, like all the other different people".

Wish they lined up to vote or help save the planet, like that. Perhaps the GOP will give a “free” “Shiney9000” preloaded with Conservapedia for each "smart" Palin voter in 2012? Maybe that is against the law, so , will they have to stick to just "corporate funded lies" again?

I have designed many systems: some corporations would "joke around" and ask to make it “kinda breakable" or "moderately robust" so it goes "bust" when it hits the ground. Oops, did I say that? I have a book on it (Making Technology Happen). Lots of charts and math to "maximize innovation". This book discusses high technology, mostly.

Most technology breaks when it hits the ground. Designers plan it like that, that is their instruction from the "product marketing experts". When a cellphone is dropped or dropped in the toilet, it is designed to fail. Why? So you buy it again. The cost of repair is “prohibitive”. That is why we have $500 "throw away" phones. People love “the next one” more. I have seen girls that pray their phones break, so they can upgrade to the new "pink" one. Even more entertaining are vegans with cellphones.

Makes you wonder about that "old hardcore" Beatles fan: They bought: the original vinyl records, the 8 tracks, the cassettes, the CD's, the MP3s, now the iTunes. Amazing "free market" business model!

See, markets are leveraged on overconsumption and this “planned obsolescence” to “stay in the black” for next quarter. Being able to repair electronics is a no-no. They need all “the lemmings” to go and by the next “bleeding edge” of technology. Is this “sustainable”? Some marketing firms tell you that Apple is “sustainable”. How their operations are sustainable and their products are recyclable. What about the resources to make them? Are they sustainable? Now, I see "green" cellphones: 30% recycled plastic. Wow! But what about the electronics? That is where the energy is burned, the most.

Is it "sustainable": what does that mean, exactly? Is it "green"? There is no standard definition, something the marketing firms use for "schlep-ization".

Poor Willie Lowman, if only he had planned obsolescence and a website!

When you buy your music, by law, you own the rights to play the song? You cannot copy it or copy to sell it. Okay, that sounds fair. So, why do people have to buy "the same songs six times"? It makes the corporations tons of money using forced innovation. Why create new stuff when you can innovate the format and sell it all again? Better yet, get the music industry and electronic industry together to form a "mutually beneficial partnership". All you need is an MBA and no conscience for our planet.

Same with televisions: CRT, plasma, projection, LCD, HD and now 3D TV. Keep innovating in small steps and let the consumer gobble up the new shiny stuff. Some buyers are very keen to do it. Cannot wait to watch Dr. Strangelove in 3D! "Ridem' cowboy"! Or even this!

I remember living in Windsor, Ont. The CBC channel sucked, when I was there. I did not buy cable, all I had was TVO / CBC and Fox News. It was fun to contrast the three, for quality. TVO: loaded with information. CBC: all fuzzy and vacant. Fox News: I called it "the murder channel". I could watch the Fox “news”, which was a "fear-based murder role call for the day" and maybe a "cute Christian puppy story" for that "ounce of hope".

My “rabbit ears” system, on my TV, was totally ghosted. I would watch a hockey game, not a sports fan anymore, and I saw two pucks. Irritating? Kind of, for a few minutes. Our brains adapt to the visual, we take in, then the image is corrected in our minds. Our "imaginations take over". After 2 or 3 minutes, I would “forget” that there were 2 pucks and my brain fixed it. Amazing! After you are watching an HD image, same thing. Wow, at first, then our brains interpret the story, not the quality of the image. Our imaginations are in “4D-Ultra Non-Linear Picture Quality”**** and they can "guess the next scenes".

Our consumption habits need to be upgraded to “Reality 1.1”? Yes.

So, really, do we need all this reformatting? Filling the landfills with the “passe” and passing our cash over for the “Next Thing 1.1”.

If you are a "product channel executive", at an electronics company, talk to me. Our company used to design military laptops that could drop 25 feet onto concrete, waterproof and could have components upgraded, quickly. See, in battle, they need reliable equipment, so thats what the government regulated, quality. "They" were the customer, and with "tax dollars in hand", no expense was spared. The old “if it saves just one life” bit? Do we have the choice?

Do you think the government would define regulations, that would benefit “Joe the Consumer”, the way they regulate the "quality standards of military equipment"? Would they improve product requirements to help protect our investments in products and our environment? They do it for military, why not us? Because “regulations hurt the economy”. Interesting? Not really. "Same 'ole", for me.

Wake up, make changes and say no! Say “I will not keep buying this stuff to support the destruction of our environment”. I dream of the day Apple comes out with the iNewspaper 1.0 and consumers boycott buying on the launch date, by 3 months. Apple would be "kaput", out of business. Can humans possibly resist such new toys? No. When Hannah Montana is schilling the next “Disney Pop-Culture Upgrade”, the teen girls feed on it. Do the boys look and say “I need that to attract girls”? Not sure. Not going to get into “product peer pressure” psychology. Its actually a science for maximizing consumption habits.

I love music. I bought a reasonable stereo with very high quality sound (Class A Amplifier, an old military specification) and incredible speakers made in Canada ( Energy Connoisseur Series: A “monitor” speaker). My CD player is a bit junky. Never buy a NAD CD player. I could buy another, but, it does the job.

My Amp is only 35Watts, but high current. It weighs a lot, heavy. Loaded with transformers and high power solid state electronics. No treble, bass, nothing. Just a switch and a volume knob, and of course a channel selections switch. Simple quality.

35 Watts sounds wimpy, but it can deliver ~450 Watt “Dynamic Bursts” due to its high current. Compare this to you standard IC amplifier ( “the chip amp” in all electronics ). My system always puts them to shame. But, even "my kinda" equipment attracts the super-over consumer ( 1000W Mono-block Class A amplifier usually starts at $80,000 to $160,000 a pop, and you need two of them, one for each speaker) don't forget your $30,000 8 foot speaker cables. Would not want "the guys to laugh at you".

Of course, this is completely unnecessary, but, remember, buying quality items that perform well and last, is less harmful to our environment. My stereo is now over 10 years old. Spent $1,200 bucks for a complete 35 Watt system. Works great! I am happy. It has lasted. Music, for me, is listening to what the artists recorded. No signal processing to pretend I am “in a cave” or “in the concert hall”. Just an honest representation of what the “mixing dude” put with the artist.

So, look at your next purchases. How long will they last? How well do they perform? How does cheap equipment stack up to buying quality? In the long run, you will thank yourself for thinking it through. Consume smarter!

Glenn Gould never sounded better! Thats what I wanted! Thats what I got! Some people think I am a music snob, but, in reality, I just want my simple music. I have loaded my "Glenn Collection" on my computer, but, it sounds terrible. I have heard the sound quality on iPods, same thing. That is my opinion. Some audiophiles shutter at the quality of CD's, but, they last longer than "Master Vinyl" records at $100 a pop.

Enjoy!

P.S. - Genius is curiosity? Genius is sharing ? Makes you wonder why Glenn “disliked people”.

**** - December 7th Brain News! More self validation! Thanks Duke University! You guys are sma-rt!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!