Thursday, July 17, 2008

I swore I would never forgive Al Gore for his claim to have invented the Internet. But today, I do forgive him completely. Not because he in fact invented the Internet, a ridiculous claim, but because of his speech today titled: A Generational Challenge to Repower America.

For the first time today, I heard an address that encapsulates my point of view on carbon-based energy. Briefly Al Gore calls for America to switch to an electricity based energy strategy where the electricity is generated from non-carbon-based sources. It recognises that demand for oil is rising much faster than supply. It recognises the political and economic risk of continued dependence on carbon-based fuel. And it calls for a NASA (or Manhattan Project if you prefer) style strategic investment to free ourselves from carbon fuel dependence within 10 years!.

It is bold. It is compellingly articulated. It’s profoundly simple to understand.

I’ve included his short, readable, articulate address in the “rest of the story” below. 

Click here for the rest of the story ...

Posted by Digital Quixote in • Politics
(0) Comments • Permalink

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

What if the framers of the Constitution could step into a time machine, set 2008 Washington DC as their destination, and take a crack at a new Constitution? Would they set down the same rights and privileges as they did in 1787? Somehow, I doubt it.

Because the context of the country is different than it was in 1787 (or 1791 when the Bill of Rights was adopted), I think we would end up with different rights. Some rights identified then, make no sense in today’s context. Some rights we would insist on today would have seemed ridiculous in the 18th century.

Take the right to bear arms, for example. In 1787, the country was primitive. You could literally be eaten by the wildlife. A settler could be attacked and killed by Indians. Parts of the continent were colonized by different nations whose colonists sometimes attacked neighboring colonies. Law enforcement was far from a ubiquitous presence throughout the country. The “right” to bear arms and more generally the necessity of a well regulated militia made complete sense.

Today, the American context is entirely different in every important respect. I’m reasonably sure “the framers” would skip the Second Amendment!

In 1787, we had no telephone service (we barely had mail), a primitive banking system, and a fledgling criminal justice system. There were no computers to keep records and data. There was no internet with which to commit data theft. If you wanted to be a private person, you simply didn’t tell anyone about yourself and your privacy was all but assured. Consequently, there was no notion of the “right” to privacy.

Today, the American context is entirely different in every important aspect. I’m sure “the framers” would go well beyond the Fourth Amendment and insist on including the “right” to privacy in the Constitution for the new Century.

I’m not suggesting that Washington, Hamilton, Franklin, Madison (et. al. or their 21st century counter parts) rewrite our constitution. It has been perfected by 221 years of amendment and interpretation and works pretty well for us.

But it gives me pause when I think about the US trying to impose an American-style constitution on Iraq. It gives me pause when I observe America trying to impose an American-style democracy on Iraq.

If we believe in democracy, maybe the Iraqis should be free to develop a Constitution that is relevant to our times. Maybe the flavor of democracy they choose should be relevant to their context. Maybe we should let them experiment with a 21st Century implementation of a free and democratic state and stay the hell out of their way.

Maybe we would learn something … important … in the process.

Posted by Digital Quixote in • Politics
(3) Comments • Permalink

Saturday, May 24, 2008

I recently received a letter in the postal mail. It was from the Republican National Committee soliciting a donation. It started out asking if I had abandoned the Republican Party. It struck me as a thoughtful question, so I wrote a letter back to the RNC with my thoughtful response. Here’s my letter. Consider it an open letter to the RNC:

Tim Morgan
RNC Treasurer
310 First Street, S.E.
Washington, DC 20003
Dear Tim,

In your recent solicitation you asked, “Have you abandoned the Republican Party … Have you given up?” It was a thoughtful question and deserves a thoughtful response.

And my thoughtful answer, right now, is that I’m not sure, but possibly. The more important question for me, right now, is has the Republican Party given up on me?

By way of context, I have been a lifelong republican. My father was a lifelong republican and served in Montana’s legislature as a Senator. I have held fiscally conservative views and values for as long as I can remember. It is clear to me that the Party has given up on fiscal conservatism, at least when judged by its actions.

As a businessman, I have held pro-business views and values for as long as I can remember.  While it may not have given up on this, the Party has proven ineffective at developing the kind of bi-partisan collaboration that will preserve a pro-business environment in the US.

In the brief history of the US, our country has stood for what’s right. Through our role in the world wars and subsequent rebuilding, we have earned the respect of the world. With our steadfast support of inalienable human rights, we have refrained from bullying the world, and increased the world’s respect for us. With our focus on innovation and invention, we have led the world in creating a vibrant and entrepreneurial economy second to none, engendering incredible respect. The Party has squandered the currency of world respect with its bullying, and torture and democratic imperialism.

In the past, the country held to a steadfast foreign policy. Other nations of the world could count on our steadfast behavior. And while we might disagree, our positions were well reasoned, consistently applied, and the country was reassuringly predictable. The Party has failed this tradition and can’t seem to get out of its own way anymore. The country has become dangerously inconsistent, which understandably causes other nations to fear our bi-polar behavior, fear the potential for retribution, fear the inconstancy of our support, fear they will become the object of American bullying.

Our country was founded on the premise of religious freedom; freedom for all to pursue the religious traditions of their choice. The following words are engraved on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial in Washington DC:

“No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship or ministry or shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief. But all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion.”
The Party has failed to live up to these ideals. Worse, the Party has acted to countervene these principles and has become a political advocate for the Christian right.

It is the role of government, and thereby the role of its elected members to secure the safety and freedom of the country. George W. Bush, as our President, is the representative of the Republican Party. He and the Party, because of the failings above, have left this nation less safe, less secure, and certainly less peaceful than the country they inherited nearly eight years ago. The Party has failed to live up to its stewardship responsibility to leave the country in better shape than when they received it.

Perhaps unreasonably, I expect the Party to take the long view when it comes to issues which threaten the country. The Party has become dangerously short sighted. For example, possibly the most significant issue facing us is energy independence. The US must find a way to reduce to near zero our reliance on carbon-based fuels. We must make the investments required to invent and commercialize renewable energy sources – solar, wind, tidal and hydrogen. And in the interim, we must make a very substantial 50-year commitment to nuclear – to give invention and commercialization time to work. The Party is focusing too little attention on this issue. The cost of this failure will be $40 / gallon gasoline and World War with China before 2050!

I believe our government, at least its Executive and Legislative branches, have failed in the most profound way to seek what’s best for this country. The Party has failed miserably but they have not failed alone. So too has the Democratic Party failed in this manner. The Party has failed twice, spending the currency of cooperation with and respect for their Democratic colleagues.

Just to be clear, when I refer to the Party, I am referring specifically to George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, members of the Cabinet, Party leaders in Congress, and Party Senators and Representatives who are failing to represent me. I voted for George W. Bush, twice. He and his government are an embarrassment, to me personally.

You asked if I had given up on the Party. I have certainly given up what might have been considered blind faith in the Party.

The Party has an opportunity to regain my respect, and even my support. Let Senator McCain’s candidacy show us how the Party will atone for these failures. Let it show us that the behavior of a possible future government will restore America’s credibility in the world. Let it give us confidence it will face the big issues the country faces with an open, honest face and an objective respect for the facts. Let it show me a plan to regain the world’s respect. Let it demonstrate that America can be safer and more at peace in four years, and in eight.

It is not only the Republican Party that has this opportunity. So too does the Democratic Party and whichever of its two leading presidential candidates might prevail during the primaries. The candidacy of Senators Obama and Clinton preach a litany of hope in a Democratic presidency and are generating high expectations for change. But Democrats and their candidate should take caution. If a Democrat is elected and if he or she fails to live up to these now-higher expectations for positive change – the backlash will be incredible. It will constitute a political tsunami which will sweep Republicans back into government for decades. 

Respectfully,

Feel free to use any or all of this, in a letter to the candidate (or party) of your choice. In fact feel free to send this to anyone you wish as a link or via copy and past.

Posted by Digital Quixote in • Politics
(1) Comments • Permalink

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

We all know electricity is made up of flowing electrons. Spin a rotor inside a magnetic field and electrons take off at light speed down a convenient wire. At the other end of the wire, they run the clock in your microwave oven, and then return home to roost. What you may not have known is that not all electrons are created equal.

Imagine an electron created in a French nuclear reactor. Besides being French (including the charming accent, wearing a beret (male electrons) or short skirts and fishnet stockings (female electrons) and favoring mayonnaise on freedom fries instead of catchup) ... they are radioactive. In fact, they glow in the dark which is what makes light bulbs so popular.

Or imagine electrons fired out of a giant pasta generator in Italy; where male and female electrons are sent down the same wire at the same time (you know, AC/DC). Knowing the fiery Italian culture as I do, it’s not surprising that when the male and female electrons arrive at the oven in the neighborhood pizza joint, they often create more heat than light. The confrontations are vastly entertaining which explains the popularity of pizza.

Well I could go on, but thankfully I won’t.

Last fall I toured Hoover Dam and got to see firsthand electricity being made. The first photo below was taken inside the dam and you can almost hear the electrons sizzling like electric arcs around Frankenstein’s monster. What you may not realize is that American electrons are an endangered species.

First, in America there is a move afoot to bring down the dams, which store the water, that flows through the turbines, which spin the rotors, which incite the electrons to take off at light speed (oh, wait, this is where I came in) ... And second, in many places the water level of the lakes behind the dams is dropping precipitously. Witness Lake Mead, backed up behind Hoover Dam, which some say will be dry within a few years. Photo two shows how much the water level has already dropped.

Click on either image above to expand ...

Now Hoover Dam and Lake Mead are quite near to Las Vegas, Nevada. If ever there were a city in dire need of free electrons (both male and female) in large numbers, it’s Las Vegas. Since the demise of mechanical slots, you can’t go anywhere without bumping into crowds of electrons. Day or night. You’d think they never slept! So I say, lets band together to save Las Vegas. Lets organize. Have mass rallies. Spin up alternate energy sources ... wind, solar, nuclear, what have you. I hope it’s not too late.

BTW: Both these photos were taken w/ my iPhone. Not bad for a 2 MP camera with a fixed lens, huh? TGFP: Thank God (or at least Adobe) for Photoshop!

Posted by Digital Quixote in • Politics
(1) Comments • Permalink

Friday, June 15, 2007

I recently received an email from my congressman asking what I felt was our top national priority. Here’s my response:

I believe that investing in alternative energy sources is incredibly important. Since the 80’s the world has found less oil and gas energy reserves each year than we consume each year. With demand for carbon-based fuels (oil) beginning to increase dramatically in China and India, worldwide demand will certainly far exceed supply driving the prices to genuinely hurtful levels (not $4.00 per gallon but $40.00 or more). We can already see China and India beginning to act politically to secure greater and greater supply. I believe that unless we find, distribute, and use alternatives to carbon-based-mobile-fuels, we will fight a world war with China before the middle of the century … probably within our lifetime.

Since bio-fuels made from corn or other food crops produce barely more energy than that required to produce them, I do not believe they are the answer. Plus, they have the downside of diverting food from areas of the world that are desperate for food. This widens the spread between well fed nations and starving ones. If bio-fuels really take off, desperately poor and starving countries will become worse off and may resort to a greater degree of political terrorism. Who can blame them? They have no other weapons and few options.

So what’s the answer? 1) Renewable energy, especially solar, wind and tidal energy; 2) Nuclear (mostly as a 50 year stop gap) – but re-engineered to be safer, and with a re-engineered waste disposal cycle; 3) Hydrogen as the mobile-fuel of the future, using hydrogen-suspension technology which would let us use today’s petroleum distribution infrastructure rather than building a new hydrogen distribution infrastructure; and 4) Relentless, aggressive conservation measures including a) legislatively mandated gas mileage increases, b) legislatively mandated penalties for equipment that consumes energy in passive (or stand-by) mode (e.g. the clock on your microwave oven consumes more energy than that used to cook food) c) aggressive building code standards to reduce residential and commercial energy consumption.

People are all fired up about Global Warming. The trouble with this is that it’s politically polarizing. Whether man is the culpret or not ... whether it matters that the world is warming or not ... WE MUST SOLVE THE ENERGY SUPPLY/DEMAND PROBLEM.

Posted by Digital Quixote in • Politics
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink