GDP Insanity

I've been starting to see an increasing number of articles that are pondering the question of whether this current economic crisis is the beginning of the shift in our society away from the insatiable quest for excess through consumerism. I would hope that consumerism has reached its logical conclusion but it certainly appears as though the world governments are determined to keep it on life support for as long as possible by installing economic policies that intent to get us back on the same track that created this crisis in the first place.

It really disturbs me that the main focus, of what appears to be the majority, of the world's economists is to increase GDP at any cost. I could write for hours of why this is such a flawed strategy, and others have, but my basic argument against this strategy is that GDP has become a very poor indicator of progress and increased standard of living. Raising GDP at all costs creates some interesting accounting of what is 'good' for society. The theory states that a rise in GDP correlates to an increase in our standard of living and if that is true then the Exxon Valdez spilling its contents on the Alaskan shoreline was 'better' for us as a society than if it had sold its contents for use on the open market. The funny (and by funny I mean insane) part of GDP accounting is that nothing subtracts from raising it. A riot in an inner city that destroys property and causes untold amounts of chaos results in a greater increase than funding schools and other social programs aimed at helping the impoverishedd in that area. 'Funny, isn't it'.

Changing GDP accounting would have a huge environmental impact as well. I don't think many rational people would agree that degrading air and water quality is beneficial to society or raises our standard of living in any way. Unfortunately, doing those very things results in an increase to GDP.

Crisis provides an opportunity to examine those things that simply are not working and are at the root of it all. I think we're at a point in history where accountants and economists can change the world.

Common Sense

I really enjoy reading stuff like this. To me it is common sense to take advantage of all the small and relatively simple ways to increase efficiency. Getting a 3 to 5% increase in efficiency with moveable winglets would quickly add up to a very significant fuel savings (and operating cost reduction) for the airlines.  

Along the same lines of this is the research I saw about adding 'skirts' to the trailers of transport trucks which greatly improved their fuel efficiency as well.  Compared to redesigning engines, drive-lines, and fuels, this is a very simple and effective modification that could quickly pay for itself. 

New head of the EPA

I've been reading up on Lisa P. Jackson after watching the coverage of her Senate Confirmation hearing yesterday and so far I'm quite pleased. Ms. Jackson won my support when in her opening remarks stated that “Science must be the backbone of what E.P.A. does” and I couldn't agree more with that.

As a scientist I get infuriated when the doctrine of an administration creates policy that not only disregards science and is contrary to what years of research has shown to be valid.  I am also an environmental advocate which means I'll continue pushing for environmental protection but it is very comforting to know that the science supporting my cause will have another strong voice on the public stage.  

What?

And now from the "are you f***ing kidding me" file.

One link before turning in for the night. I haven't checked into this Aviation Biofuel but I'm always a little hesitant to jump on the biofuel bandwagon simply due to the immense volumes of biomass required to satiate our hunger for fuel. 

My general feel is that if consumption isn't addressed first, the reality of ever being able to grow enough fuel is a total pipe dream and will result not only in an ecological disaster but will also create a massive security issue. If you think terrorists controlling energy supplies is a security nightmare, imagine the security issues raised when the nations energy source could be wiped out by insects. Don't think it's possible? Google - Mountain Pine Beetle and tell me what you find. 

Back from hiatus

Totally neglected this little page for far too long. During my hiatus I left a job, started my own business, completed a very interesting research project, completed a degree, made an international move, and am now in the final stages of planning a wedding with my fiancee. If that's not a decent excuse to neglect my small corner of the internet, I don't know what is ;o)

Was thinking of writing a little bit on what the outgoing Bush Administration is doing to dismantle existing environmental legislation but there have been plenty of people commenting on that so rather than contribute to the blogging echo-chamber I'll pull some notes and ideas together over the coming days about the incoming administration. Who knows, I may even contribute an original thought or two. 

Hydrogen Powered Cars

I was at one time a huge proponent of the development of hydrogen technologies (fuel cells and elemental gas) for use in vehicles but that all changed after some in-depth research I did as part of an Environmental Economics course I was taking. The costs of producing hydrogen is prohibitive, even if using cheaper GHG emitting technologies; the cost of transporting the gas in a super-cooled state is outrageous; and, the cost of building all the infrastructure needed to support a nation of hydrogen burning cars is no small investment. My concerns about the viability of hydrogen continued to grow (including the hydrological impact of the widespread application of this technology), but so did the funding pouring into the development of this technology.

Well, it seems that the pipe dream may finally be dead. This article in the Wall Street Journal caught my attention and validates what many environmental advocates and economists have been saying for quite some time; hydrogen technology will not be affordable in time to make a significant impact on the reduction of GHGs. The technology for electric and hybrid-electric cars however is readily available, affordable, and in demand. 

The exciting part about this to me is that battery technology and hybrid systems are really starting to see some big advances (I'll have a few examples to back this statement to post up later) and the future is definitely brighter for emission, or near emission free private transportation. 

Melting North

I had a rather lengthy commentary planned for today but decided to post a quick link to a story about the shrinking glaciers on Baffin Island. As a former resident of the extreme northern part of the island, having spent years observing the changing climate and listening to the traditional knowledge of the Inuit hunters about the extreme changes they've observed, stories like this don't surprise me one bit.

I think part of the reason this story really caught my attention is due to my personal connection with it. I've known these observed changes to be true long before scientific data confirmed the fact and the Inuit have known this to be true for decades longer. Anyone that works on or with the land, or even spends a great deal of time away from urban areas, intuitively knows that things are changing at an alarming rate and feel it on a personal level. I believe it to be true in stating that people will become motivated to act on an issue that impacts them on a personal level. As the effects of the changing climate continue to become more encompassing,  we're also seeing more individuals personally affected and wanting action. 

When I started writing on environmental issues I promised myself that I wouldn't focus on the doom and gloom of the matter or resort to the overused tactic akin to yelling fire in a crowded theater in order to draw attention to the issues. I want people to be personally motivated to act for change. The tens of thousands of reasons I can give a person to act for change are trivial in comparison to the affect one personal reason an individual has to act.  

Nanosolar flew in right under my radar.

I like to keep on top of news and advancements in energy production and conservation but over the last several months my focus has shifted towards investing in the publicly traded companies that I like rather than scouring my news feeds for interesting science.

My attention as of late has been focused on First Solar and MEMC Electronic Materials and really had myself convinced that they were the two best bets for making solar power more affordable. Well, add Nanosolar to the list as well.

This was a pleasant surprise to find out that I had totally missed this company and really showed me that I need to keep on top of the news because this company hasn't exactly been hiding in the shadows. There has been plenty of coverage about their incredible manufacturing process and high profile investors; unfortunately I've been a little too focused on researching companies traded on the NYSE, NASDAQ, and TSX. The headline that drew my attention to this company, and is now the subject of numerous blog posts, states that this solar technology is now producing energy cheaper than coal. This is something I believed would not happen for several more years at the very least.

News like this is a nice way to start the day.

Introduction

There's so much information and misinformation circulating out there on the web and in media that it's hard to sift through it all and figure out what's important, what's real, and what we should be paying attention to. The addition of my voice to the melee offers a different perspective on environmental issues.

I'll post links to websites, news stories, and commentary that intrigue me and that I think are important to consider. I'm not a fan of presenting information in an overly sensational fashion or using scare tactics to grab the attention of people; I believe that in the long run it has no greater impact than yelling fire in a crowded theater over and over again.

I can be rather candid with my opinions and I enjoy hearing feedback and rebuttals.