35 mph standards in American auto industry

I will step aside from the normal saber rattling of my political party to support the increase in fuels standards of American automobiles stated by President Obama this week. Personal responsibility and preference notwithstanding, (we Americans love our muscle cars), I have long stated that if not a conspiracy, certainly a collusion exists in this country that has long kept fuel economy lagging behind European and Asian markets.

I simply do not agree that in the end we will be driving Yugo size smart cars, tiny clown type vehicles that are the current laughing stock of pop culture. In order to achieve these new standards, an average of 35 mpg, higher in cars, lower in trucks/suv's, there will not need to be complete overhauls to vehicle forms.

Vehicles will need to weigh less accomplished using stronger, lighter polymers for the body and frames. Some accessories will be need to run off rechargeable batteries like air conditioning and radios. This is not a monumental feat. Its a rewiring of the vehicle. Obviously engines will take the brunt of this new standard and unfortunately the only truly effective way to increase fuel economy is less horsepower, ergo smaller motors.

The President picked the right political moment for his new strategy. The auto industry is beholden to congress for it's very life. Like it or not, it's adapt or die. I think they have the means to accomplish the fuel measures by the deadline of 2016. And that brings us to the rest of the plan.

I have not drank all the kool aid put out with this news. I like the fuel standards but think tying this to lowering current carbon emmissions by a third is overstepping. Concerted efforts have been in place for a decade to lower the emmissions of all automobiles and long strides have been made. New cars are dramatically more friendly to the environment in this regard. To dimiss all the work that has been done so far and reset the bar one-thrid from today I think is the one aspect that I think was I think it is incredibly naive to state part of this concept. I think it more appropriate to discuss emission standards based on what has already been accomplished.

The Presidnet stated that his goal is to reduce not only our dependence on foriegn oil but will not allow drilling in our own country. Nor will his administration look to nuclear power as a means to reduce oil and coal for heating. His own party, led by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) has tried to stop wind power stations for no other reason than they are a blight when sailing. So when I hear from the current administration and his colleagues that a stated goal is to reduced dependancy on foriegn oil, excuse me while I disbelieve.


I do not believe this was a good time to push this agenda, nor do I think that the attached propaganda of

Taxed per mile driven

The latest 'lead balloon' (ba-dum-dum) floated by government to recapture lost gasoline taxes is to tax drivers per mile driven. A GPS chip in your car and sync'd to a reciever located all gas stations would record who you are, what you drive, (plus probably 100 other significant details of your life) and how far you have driven since the last fill up.

My first thought honestly wasn't, "How could they!!", but, "Will they repeal all the federal and state taxes on each gallon of gas drivers already pay?" The answer I am almost willing to bet is 'No'.

Now with the increase in fuel efficient vehicles and the changes in drivers patterns, the government is not getting its cheese and needs to find more creative and intrusive ways to tax the masses. This is the slippery slope that government has gotten itself into with taxing consumables like gas and you can lump cigarettes into that. Throughout the 80's and 90's and into the new century, federal and state governments placed such heavy tax burdens on a gallon of gas, that the government actually received more profit on gas than the oil companies themselves.

I am a proponent of user type taxes or more appropriately consumption taxes but only if the past tax structures it is replacing are repelled. In almost every state, if you look, you will find a tax that was created to pay for road construction that would last twenty years only and yet has not been taken off the books. Government is not apt to take taxes off the books and so there is layers and layers of taxes on Americans that simply don't need to be there except that its a revenue stream that the public has become desensitized too.

Perhaps it is Orwellian to have GPS recievers in every car and pay a taxes for drive miles at the pump. Maybe usage taxes are a good way to go. Lets take some taxes away as well.

Parks, energy and stimulus

Anyone who thinks putting money into the National Parks System through the 2009 Stimulus Package and that is going to revitalize the national economy is, quite frankly, high on their patchouli oil. There is certainly localized income generated by gateway cities to National Parks but the billions being put into infrastructure and programs is a waste that will ultimately be harmful through this venue as opposed to a separate vote. But that is not how politics works.

I love our national parks and I love the state parks surrounding my house, especially Lost Dutchman State Park. However, the amount of bureaucracy and all the hands that hold the money before the Park Service or even the Forestry Service get to implement necessary plans is too great. Only fractions will actually be used by the boots on the ground to improve trails, facilities and workers areas. If the money could go straight to the services themselves, there would not need to be as much spent or nearly as many fingers needed to touch it.

$1.7 billion is dedicated to the National Parks and Forestry Service. The issue touched on by radio conservatives is the amount of money being placed in Washington DC for projects around the Mall area. which is really pennies of this whole package. I don't begrudge those accusations that the money is excessive for sodding the area. What spent in government is not excessive to some extent?

People who take even a moment to notice our parks system know that there is a severe backlog of maintenance issues that need to be funded and completed and for that I am happy that money will come into these areas. of need. Bridges, trails, signage, roads, all have been in disrepair for years. Usage in parks are up but the infrastructure has not met demand. Every park that needs them has bear proof this and that, but not enough restrooms. Not enough proper housing for staff that often live far away from comfort.

For too long the parks have relied on volunteers and park time workers to band aid issues that need professional help. Any movement to improve systems in parks and forestry with dedicated construction companies and knowledgeable architects is a good thing.

The earmarks for pet projects like condoms and locating global warming habitats is frustrating to wade through. What has truly amazed me is how little this package covers renewable energy. Our new president has promised 5 million 'green sector' jobs yet with this package there is barely a mention green projects that the government can control like say renewable energy sources.

$18.5 billion is dedicated to the Department of Energy but the way in which that money is to be distributed is impossibly unclear as opposed to how say money for the Parks Service is being used. In all 1,588 pages there is not one mention of the word, 'nuclear' and solar and wind capacities are coached into vague paragraphs only describing the need for infrastructure.

My two cents on this whole thing. Make it simple. Our economy is based on the income of the common family and the purchases they make. The largest being a home mortgage for their primary residence. Every family owning a home in America on January 1, 2009 gets their entire mortgage paid for and they keep the title to the house. Second homes and rentals do not qualify, primary residences only. The amount of money being passed in this bill, almost one trillion dollars would easily do that.

The the average family can take that money and reinvest in our economy through starting a business, having a savings (which is an investment in the future), invest in the market, pay off debt which allows other businesses to profit and grow, buy a new car. The possibilities are endless and much better than what this stimulus package is trying to achieve.

Media remorse, yeah right

During the holiday season of 2008, it was almost impossible to not hear the clarion call of the media, "Buy, buy, buy! Our economy is in shambles. Stores will close, jobless rates will go up. These are the best prices ever on flat screen televisions, game consoles and electronic devices of all kinds."

Today, the first day of the first business week of 2009, the clarion bell has become an annoying alarm. The media is now reporting, "Beware buyer. Do you know how much power your new flat screen will draw? Do you know how many watts your game console uses when it's being played? Your purchases have accelerated Global Warming, (excuse me, 'Global Climate Change')."

This is ridiculous. The average Joe and Jane stretched their spending budget to afford a luxury item they could not normally afford for their family; not only because prices were finally dropped to a level within their means but because the media kept saying the economy was a mess and their spending was needed to stop a total collapse.

For your efforts, today you get to be lectured to that your contribution are going to harm the environment. The energy you use to power your new electronics may cause a need to force manufactures to comply with carbon neutral standards. What you did, in the end, was a bad thing.

Shame on you. Now could you adjust the screen settings on your 60" flat screen, my character in Gears of War is looking a bit small.

Travel tax?

The state of Oregon has floated a trail balloon regarding a mileage tax. You see the recent gas price issues and the 3 card monte game that is hybrid vehicles (you get better mileage but it takes 13 years to recoup the investment) has lowered the taxable income expectations of states like Oregon.

Their mileage tax program would put a GPS system in every citizens car and then at the end of the year if a resident didn't drive far enough to cover the states expectations on how much gas they should have bought that year, because Oregon has a large tax on a gallon of gas, then they send you a bill.

We are all forced to choke down on the bit of hybrid vehicles and I admit my own instance that vehicles today should be able to run at 40mpg, hybrid or not, however I can not abide by my sense of conservaton or ability to 'save money' with a gas effiecent vehicle no penalizes me in the state of Oregon.

What if my car breaks down and I decide to take the city transit system instead of fixing it? Or if I decide to ride my bike to work twice a week instead of driving? In both cases, am I not becoming a better steward of my energy expediture? Lowering my energy footprint? Hasn't the point of "driving less" been drilled into my consciousness this year?

The politicians promise that these GPS units wouldn't be used as a locator device so that the government would know where you were at in any given moment but can you really believe that? Heck no. How often have we seen this slippery slope of already captured information being used for alternative purposes?

Let the farce begin with light rail in Phoenix

The light rail system in Phoenix is going to officially open for business this week. A few days prior to this city altering event citizens are allowed to ride the rails for free. This started three days ago to much fanfare and praise from local news channels. One live remote showed a long line with waits, they reported, of two or three hours.

This morning it was reported that 150,000 people rode for free during the first two days of free use. In a city of five million people that equals 1.5% of the population each day. Now what comes to mind is this; the city estimated a usage level of between one and five percent of the population on a regular basis. That being the case, why is there a wait longer than twenty minutes, if a train arrives at each terminal every ten minutes? Who is going to wait more than that when its 110 degrees outside and the stations provide little shade and no air conditioning in the summer?

No one. And this is when its free.

Some other useful knowledge that has come to light is that the tickets are purchased on a 'honor system'. Tickets are bought at a kiosk, there is no turn still to board and no ticket taker at the door. An employee will randomly verify tickets when they are on the train. You are also not allowed to lay down. You are also not allowed to eat on the train. No picking up a cup of coffee and bagel at the Starbucks and eating breakfast on the way into work. The trains will stop running at 11pm seven days week. So if you were expecting to use the train to get to and from the bars on the weekend, tough luck, unless you want to leave before the band shows up.

So if I get this right, you won't be stopped if you ride without a ticket, there is no accountability there, but if your laying down hungover at 10:30 pm, then your getting the boot sight seen? I suppose with the political clout the light rail commission has exuded, they will ask that private businesses close their bars at 10pm instead of the trains running later. They are already asking tax payers to cover the $9 difference in ticket price and operating cost and the system is brand new.I can just pay my state taxes in gum removers and graffiti covering paint now?

Power Hour

I have a five year old son who thinks that when the sun goes down early, it must be Christmas. So in the middle of October, yes almost a month ago, he and I strung about 500 Christmas lights up on the house. I stood my ground on putting up more strands or the yard displays and tree arrangements. We will do that this weekend.

He was so excited to stand on the ladder and wrap strands around nails. He stayed by me the entire time, pointing, holding, giving directions. He promised me we would do this together every year. Every night he comes home to see his 'pretty lights' glowing.

I on the other hand worried my neighbors would think I was an idiot for putting up Christmas lights before Columbus Day. However in defense, how often is it that our children get so excited to do something with their parents. I know that maybe as soon as next year, that stringing lights will be my solitary job once again.

Christmas lights don't take up a tremendous amount of power but be smart about their usage. Turn your lights on within about 15 minutes before your family usually drives up to the house at night. If your kids are in the house before it gets dark then I'd suggest just turning them on before you get home, so you can see your handy work. Unless your having a competition with your neighbors I see no reason to keep them on past 10pm or midnight. Right now my outdoor lights are on for one hour for when the family gets home and then a few sightings as my boy runs from downstairs to upstairs.

Timers are a blessing for this task. Get a timer for the outdoor lights and one for the indoor lights and Christmas tree. There is no reason to increase your power bill with useless light comumption when no one will appreciate it.

The Sarah Palin Connection

The new vice-president nominee for the republicans, Sarah Palin, has just exploded onto the scene over the last week. I am not going to discourse her narrative, you can look that up yourself. However as a blog that is concerned about being a Green Conservative I think I want to touch on her credentials as a fighter for energy issues.

Palin is the republican governor of Alaska. Prior to that she was the chair for the states Oil commission and a two term mayor. Her husband works in the oil industry as a laborer. Palin broke a monopoly in oil and energy management by large oil companies. She increased the taxes on state oil industrys from 22.5% to 25%, which means the oil companies paid the state more money which was one method she used to create a surplus budget. This put $1,200 back into every residents pocket in the state.

While the democratic ticket can speak of their energy plan, Palin has been enacting a plan for years and been successful in getting it to work. Palin created an energy plan for Alaska that put them on a path to be the first energy independent state. It incorporates all forms of energy that is viable for them to use, not just oil. With all the debate on 1002 Area and ANWR, Palin is the only person on either ticket to have actually been to that area.

I think that when this country looks to the future for an energy plan that uses our resources and creates stable, economic alternative, Sarah Palin as VPOTUS bodes well for this country.

Obama ain't Right

Stepping off the conservation platform for a moment to speak my piece on Barrack Obama. I don't believe this country could make a worse choice for President of the United States. This may be hard to believe but I don't think Obama is bad guy, not like Liberals hate (underscore, underscore) George W. Bush. I just think he is incredibly naive, self absorbed, and woefully underqualified for the highest office in the land.

Compared to not just to McCain but any presidential party candidate in the last fifty years, the Democratic candidate may very well be the most under qualified leader elected to the White House. Obama spent seven years as state congressman for Illinois, then 143 days as a senator before officially running for President. John McCain spent 23 years as a Naval officer, seven in captivity in the Hanoi Hilton, and then another 23 years as senator of Arizona. Where is the experience weighted?

Its hard to discern from written posts, so I encourage readers to find videos of the candidates. You will find that Obama without a teleprompter is completely inept at putting sentences together. Its not a weighting of words, but a waiting for words between the ums, uhs and ahs. Republican will concede Bush is not eloquent but he is does know his mind. Something Obama does not. Obama does not have the propre foundation of international or even national experience to competantly express his position. He is further hindered by not being able to articulately defend his extremely liberal, nay socialist, actions as a member of the state house.

John McCain has spent decades working with both parties to affect change in this country. He has solid conservative beliefs but is known as a 'Maverick' because he will not toe the party line. Obama is considered one of the most liberal senators currently serving office.

The whole concept of Obama is 'Change'. His entire campaign through this date has been platitudes without action. Slogans over new ideas. An Obama presendancy will set this country back thirty years because those are the numbers he touts when it comes to raising taxes on every American. Those making less than $14,000 a year currently pay no taxes under the 'terrible' Bush tax plan, (really its just coming back to you when you file) but even these people will people will lose that benefit under Obama.

Obama has no energy plan. He won't let us use our own oil resources and wants to sell off our strategic reserve. The only reason it will take ten years to gather newly drilled oil is because thats how long it takes to get through the lawsuits. Unstick those and with todays technology new oil production can be on the streets within five years, maybe three. In fact Obama is not even interested in letting already existing and drilled wells to be uncapped in the midwest for new oil. These existing rigs were capped in the 1990's because it wasn't profitable to use them when oil was $9 a barrel. Now it is profitable to uncap these wells, but he has said he will not allow it. His big idea is to recommend filling our tires with proper air and getting tune ups. Tune ups?

By the way, McCain will conserve more acres than Obama and his adminstration will be better stewards of the environment because they understand that to have a thriving, living forest you need to clear away the brush choking the bases of trees which spreads wildfires like a virus. McCain has said he wants to build over forty nuclear power reacters. I say, how about just one. Seeing as we haven't built a new one in thirty years and have even shut a couple down, lets not be greedy.

Notice I have not yet mentioned the attack ads. To numerous. To weak. Not worth mentioning by item.

I will mention that in his mid-fortys Obama is not very spry. Sure he looks good on a basketball court but has taken vastly more 'rest' days on the campaign trail than his nearly thirty years older opponent. McCain at 71, has the vip and vigor of a much younger man. Sure he can't lift his arms, how do you age gracefully after surviving a combat crash in enemy territory after busting both sholders and one knee then being bayoneted in the arm and groin and thrown in a torture camp for seven years. I still crike in my neck from sleeping on a plane last week.

You can hate Bush. You can say what you will about McCain. Face the facts. You know Obama hasn't got the experience to run this country. You know that compared to McCain, who you may hate for no reason other than he's a Republican, he can't hold McCains jock strap. He doesn't have the time spent in government, he does not have international connections needed on the global stage like McCain does have. Which by the way, when Obama was a simple state congressman in 2003, McCain was in the country of Georgia immersing himself in the geo-socio-politico culture and infrastructure that is now being attacked by our cold war enemy Russia. But you don't want to hear that, "Lalalalala, but Obamas better."

Don't vote on emotion, vote for experience. Don't vote for change for change sake, vote for what will make you wealthier and safer in this global economy.

Vote McCain.

Energy, energy and not a drop to use

The presidential campaign and the price of oil have really sparked debate, or more aptly, conversation, on what the future track of this countries energy policy should be. Especially in the last month.

Republican candidate John McCain has stated he wants to run the whole gamut of energy use. Specifically he wants to build 45 new nuclear power plants. Hell, lets just build one. This country has not built any in thirty years.

Democrat candidate Barrack Obama has told American automakers that if elected he will demand cars with higher gas mileage, which I think is great. Overall though he follows the same failed liberal track of demand cut backs on personal use and invest in alternative energy, wholly ignoring the gap between now and then.

In a previous post I spoke about coal shale and just recently it was found that we have more coal shale within our borders than all the available oil in Saudi Arabia. Put congress won't less us bring it up. Nor will congress allow us to drill in the 1002 Area of ANWAR, off the Pacific coast, off the Atlantic coast, off the gulf coast or in the most of the landlocked areas of the country.

I heard an interesting segment on the radio regarding oil drilling in the midwest. Most of these companies are small, private firms that drill a few dozen to a few hundred rigs at most. There were most active rigs in the late 1980's and early 1990's but when oil was only costing $10 dollars a barrel, it was not cost effective to pull up the oil and hundreds of rigs were capped shut. Congress will not allow these small firms to open these capped wells and begin pulling the crude up again, knowing that these are established sites and no wildcatting is necessary.

Why not open up oil rigs that can produce results today?

Of all the plans I have heard, the ones that make the most sense are the ones that set up incentives for a diversificaiton of all energy sources not simply focused on one or two that may bear fruit down the road. Also ones that make sense. The current trend for fuels tends to be ethanol, yet when it costs about $1.29 for $1.00 of ethanol fuel, that makes no sense.

Whatever road this country travels towards energy indepedence or foriegn energy marginalization, it must do so with realistic, un-hyped means. Solar, wind, keneitc, biofuels, coal shale, oil, nuclear, recycling, grain based, hydrogen; all need to be looked at for their true potential and allowed immediate clearance to market, the regulations are there to protect us but right now they hamper us in this cause.

ANWAR vs. Solar

I got to thinking last night. Enviro-wonks counter the drilling in ANWR as too little oil, to long to wait. It will take ten years to get a drop into the pumps. In my opinion it may take ten years if the business of building the project is stalled with lawsuits and threats. I doubt there will be anyone chaining themselves to the landscape in a barren area like that.

However, I am constantly reminded that I could decrease my carbon footprint if I switched over to solar power for my house. If I generated a surplus I could even sell it back to the grid! I live in Phoenix and figured with as much sun as we get year round that it would be fairly cost effective.

Wrong. Even with rebates and tax incentives, out of pocket costs run well over ten thousand dollars. When I compared the various bids with my three year average energy bill, it would take me between ten and twelve years before I recouped that money. With the housing and oil market being what it is and portends to be there is no way I will do this.

Its not cost effective. To put another way, its well known that if you want a pool in this town, you buy a house with one already installed. You don't put one in yourself. The investment does not increase the value of home.

Lets start ramping up oil production that we can get to inside our walls. Lets start putting solar panels on new houses like England has done for several years. Lets build nuclear reacters and wind farms. Lets do it all. But lets do it now because when it comes to being green, you need to have green. And the future still ain't all that rosy for the pocketbook.

3 Ways to Lower Gas Prices

I am one of the lucky Americans driving an American made car that gets over 20 mpg. And its a sedan, not some clown car. Even so paying $4.25 a gallon takes its toll, especially in a car/van household. The government is deadlocked, unable to move in any direction except that which continues to provide them lucarative taxation on every gallon that is pumped. The lunacy of this was seen recently when heads of American based oil company's were brought before the senate to be held accountable for thier 10% profit on their commodity Never acknowleding that the government taxes on that commodity far exceed the money made in profit by the company themselves.

Here is my three ways to lower gas prices. America must begin mining its assets on land and sea. It must build more refineries. It must streamline the blends of gas being made.

It is a misnomer that we will drill in ANWAR. Its an expedient description however the debated area is actually called the 1002 Area. This land was created in conjunction with ANWAR in 1980 to be used specifically for research and testing for oil and wildlife needs. This site, twenty five year ago, was known to be rich in oil and gas reserves and benefit for our needs. There is much debate by environmentalists regarding its proximtiy to the migration path of the porcupine caribou almost two months per year, however the Governor, senators and most natives all comment that the area is a wasteland. A barren area of land. The oil drilled from this area would decrease our dependence barrel for barrel against middle east oil, equaling an estimated 8 billion barrels.

One of the reasons the global price of oil has risen is the modernization and consumerism of China. Every year China increases its oil consumption and energy needs. As such it is very focused on securing oil rights around the world and doing so with great ease with leftist countries in North and South America. In 2006 China and Cuba began a joint operation to drill oil right off the coast of Florida. It is believed that this reserve could hold as much oil as the 1002 Area of ANWAR. With the advent of slant drilling which allows a wide area of drilling from a very small platform, China could tap estbablished American oil fields off our own coast. "I drink your milkshake"

Other areas of concern are known oil reserves along South America that China is working towards. With their finger on Cuba, their foot on the Panama Canal and their mouth in the ear of every leftist organization to our southern border, oil could very well be the impetus of the Monroe Doctrine 2.0

If the USA fails to secure its own oil interests other countries will surely secure them for themselves. It is logical to assume they will do so without the environmental concern shown by this country.

We may finally be getting a new refinery after a thriry year wait. Don't hold your breath until its open. By having more refineries available it serves many interestes. It strengthens our counter-terrorism abilities. We have seen the affects of just one refinery off line for a few days or weeks due to repair, imagine if deliberate steps were taken by our enemys to true damage our capacity. It will lower the costs of transporting fuel to states.

On the same track of refineries, the last nuclear reactor came on line in over a decade ago. Nuclear energy is a completely different animal than weapons manufacturing. It is cheap and by far the cleanest power produced for mass consumption.

Right now there are around 50 different 'blends' of gas used around the country. Twice a year all the refineries have to stop or decrease production to switch over to summer blends or winter blends, which were created federally or locally as an off shoot of the Clean Air Act of 1990 to reduce smog. Not all cities or states have blend gas, but those that do feel the pinch in the pocket every spring and fall. By eliminating blend gas, oil compnies would decrease their costs and that should, hopefully trigger a lowering of gas prices.

Its valid to watch the environmental concerns of business and hold them accountable to their actions. but let them act. The notation that companies after thirty years have not improved the technology and processes needed to provide our country with the life blood of the economy is riduculus. The vast majority of Americans want to have trees and parks in their neighborhood and know that its countries beauty is protected but it also doesn't want to be forced to take public transportation with their kids or have to pay exorbitant energy costs in the winter.

The Dune Buggy Fund

I have always wanted a Dune Buggy like the one in the picutre below. A friend had one in high school and college and we had a blast driving it around. That was a long time ago but the feeling never left me. Now with Mighty Mo getting to the age where it might not be such a risk for him to ride with me and he might actually enjoy it, I decided to finally act on the thought instead of just dream about it.

Now what the heck does this have to do with conservation? Simple. I am going to buy it by recycling aluminum cans. Mightly Mo and I call this, "Our Dune Buggy Fund". It is going to take about one hundred and fifty thousand cans, close to three tons of aluminum. Minimum.

I already pick up litter when I am out, now I am making it work for me. Every day I come home with at least three cans. On a good day its fifty or more. I easily got past the ick factor of reaching my hand into garbage cans and yes I do leave cans that are filthy. Since I have started the Dune Buggy Fund, I have picked up at least three cans every time I go for a run and trying to find a way to carry them other than in my hands. I got an idea...

I realize that I'd like to get the buggy within the next year and the amount of cans I need it huge, so I may have to recruit my coin jug. As long as I am patient I can make a good buy. I don't think I will stop collecting cans after I get it so whatever I have to invest personally will be recouped eventually.

When you think about it, each can is worth between three and four cents. That seems so inconsequencal but when brought together, well its going to buy us a dune buggy. Think about all the diet soda, energy drink and beer cans that end up in the trash when they really can be a long term, low yeild savings account while being a good steward of the environment. Plus at over 35 miles a gallon, I would save around $100 a month driving it a few times a week.

I may at some point get organized and start reaching out instead of being self supported. Right now this is just the beginning.

Finding another Target

Now that the current administration has listed the Polar Bear as an endangered species, even though their numbers have been going up and not down, its time for the Marxist environmental movement to find a new victim. Introducing the Walrus.

Now that the cute and cuddly Polar Bear whose identity has been co-opted by Coke commercials at Christmas, (I hate to say it but Polar Bears and Penguins do not exist together) and fluffy toys have been given it the stasis of hate crime victim amongst the soccer mom crowd, its time to turn the tide on the Walrus.

The Walrus has always been shown with vigorous honesty unlike the false advertising of Polar Bear. The Walrus is ugly, fat, has big teeth looking tusks, their lazy (hey I have some friends that look like this). The Walrus has always been the goofy 3rd tier comic relief side kick of any documentary in cold water climes.

Plus the baby seal is sooooo 1970.

The whale is so 1980.

Soon enough you will see the typical fear mongers decry the plight of this affable bumpkin, the southern redneck of the polar caps. Putting a human face on the poor misunderstood Walrus. Guys will be told to relate to the bushy whiskers and large guts and how they attract their mate. The women drawn to their nurturing instincts. Some top of the fold article will admire it for being the only mammal with a two foot long bone inside its penis. The Walrus oosik is a very prized item amongst Alaskans and at auction for its uniqueness.

The Polar Bear is so 2000.

The decade of 2010 is all about the Walrus.

Not wasting time

Canyon lake has been opened with good weather for only a few weeks and already there is trash all around my swimming hole. It frustrates me, especially sense most of the trash is easily identifiable as coming from Mexican stores. I picked up several beer cans but as I did not have my trash picker-upper (I am sure thats the technical term) I am not touching the rest strewn about. The next time I head up there I will collect what I can with it.

I decided this year to collect and sell all the aluminum cans that I find. I have heard its going for a buck a pound at the recyclers. Of course I will go crazy if I don't figure out just how many crushed cans equal a pound but thats a simple thing to do one night.

I have always been of the opinion of "Do good deed and keep them to yourself." I think for special stuff that is still good advice but this year I am going to let people know how much trash I collect on a weekly basis out there and in other places in Tonto National Park and let the park service know about it. Not to rub their face in it, they work hard out there; but to let them know there is need for a trash container in that area and that there are people like me who are doing what they can to keep the area beautiful.

Being Green

The real crux of Compass Points Right is to focus on being Green and being a Conservative. It's been hard to go between the 'cut', 'paste', 'link' format and putting my own thought and observations I have had for years, finally to keyboard.

The nice part of this process now is that instead of having to collate all these thoughts of mine, other much more prominent thinkers are doing it and for the big theory or green conservation I can leave to better men and women.

Newt Gingrich is a lightening rod for controversy, but none deny he is a visionary thinker of the conservative party. He listed these values in 2007 as a way to introduce or reinvent how conservative should view and discuss the advancement of being 'green'.

Values of Green Conservatism

1. Green conservatism favors clean air and clean water.
2. Green conservatism favors maximum biodiversity as a positive good.
3. Green conservatism favors minimizing carbon loading in the atmosphere as a positive public value.
4. Green conservatism is pro-science, pro-technology, and pro-innovation.
5. Green conservatism believes that green prosperity and green development are integral to the successful future of the human race.
6. Green conservatism believes that economic growth and environmental health are compatible in both the developed and developing world.
7. Green conservatism believes that we can realize more positive environmental outcomes faster by shifting tax code incentives and shifting market behavior than is possible from litigation and regulation.

Much of this is a top down mentality. This is a policy shift meant for the right wing party as a whole which is really where Newt is best suited. Conservatives, Republicans are the party of Theodore Roosevelt. The party that created the EPA and the clean water act and the clean air act. It seems that in the last thirty years the right has done everything possible to separate itself from environmental concerns and the left has done nothing but use scare tactics and fear to co-op new recruits. But somewhere in between the businessman and the Sierra Club is the rest of us wanting to do the best we can for the future.

Pick your battles.

I got at letter from someone who works at the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. I actually know two people who work at that department and think they are really good men. I the email from someone else in that department sort of set me off.

Can you recommend to me a contact to install recycle bins for plastic water bottles? I was appalled at the number of recyclable plastic water bottles that are being thrown out as trash. Pure Fitness centers should have the image of being environmentally responsible.

Primary Club: xxxxxxxx

Greetings Marita,

You can use me as a contact. I know that you are a member from our North Tempe location so I know that unlike many of the similar emails I receive regarding being a more ‘green’ company you have actually been inside our locations. I will preface the remainder of this email by saying that first, I am open to dialogue. I respect the department you work for because you have some good people there; second, in 2007 this company was inundated with ‘seminar’ e-mails from people accusing us, a fitness center, of polluting the planet with the empty water bottles generated at our locations. Many of these people I found were told to do these bulk emails by seminar instructors after watching Inconvenient Truth; apparently health clubs rank up there with chemical manufacturers for destruction of the environment.

Also I think ‘appalled’ is a very harsh term for you to use in your e-mail considering the overall lack of environmental footprint a fitness center generates compared to thousands of other businesses in the valley. You are not making a gesture of cooperation by insulting my company.

Now let’s get on the same page Marita. I am open to discussion on this matter but want you to understand my position and what is involved in it being a success. First Pure Fitness has spent years developing a strategy of cleaning our equipment and our facilities with products that are hypo-allergenic and environmentally friendly. Our a/c filters scrub pollutants and are changed quarterly. Our air fresheners are of a quality to not harm members with scent sensitivity. Our products used to clean our equipment are environmentally safe. Our janitorial service is on board with our desire to maintain a healthy environment with the equipment they use. All our clubs installed anti-bacterial foam dispensers that decrease water usage and hopefully keep our members from transmitting illness. Our newer clubs have water filtration systems built in so that members can bring their own water bottles and fill them up with water they will drink, unlike the tap water produced in this valley that while suitable for use, has a filthy taste compared to other major metropolitan cities. Coming from Seattle I had never used bottled water until I moved to Phoenix; I had always used the tap. If your department is able to solve that one issue, bottle water usage will decrease in this city significantly.

I have spoken with Phil Denee, also a member at North Tempe and works in your department. At one point the North Tempe location did have blue recycling bins inside the club for recycling however there was no support from the city and honestly not a lot of buy in from the staff. Two large blue recycling bins would become full in two days and then sit over filled waiting for the garbage truck to come by several days later. The city, as far as I understand, would not or could not set up a ‘recycle only’ container large enough to accommodate our area of complex shared by at least two other businesses. Or the garbage truck would not take the recycling in the blue containers. It was, as I understood it, one hand not communicating with the other.

There is blame on this club for the program not working as well. The manager and Mr. Denee were involved but the rest of the staff was not. The staff did not care about the program and felt there was added responsibility in maintaining the overflowing containers in the gym. Ultimately the bins were removed from the front area of the club when they became a detriment to the aesthetics of the club and not a bonus for our members. No one wants to look at overflowing garbage bins regardless of size or designation. The members would fill the blue containers but the club had no place to empty them. Currently the two blue containers are behind our club by the main garbage bin and the three primary businesses that use that area are putting their recyclables in it. If the city is picking this up for recycling or if the garbage truck is clearing these and taking them to the dump with the other refuse, I don’t know.

The bottom line Marita is that this company has been accused harshly for not doing enough for the environment when we generate no power and manufacture no product. No one with ability or authority has come to us with a sustainable plan for our business. God bless Mr. Denee for the individualized effort he puts into this facility by collecting recyclables on his own. I submit to you that regardless of what size footprint my eleven clubs generates in a year regarding plastic water bottles, aluminum cans and assorted paper, one week of baseball games at Chase Stadium is worse for our environment if you allow a direct comparison of usage. One Cardinals football game with 70,000 people tailgating and eating and drinking over one day will create more empty bottles, cans and paper that gets thrown away inappropriately. So please let’s move forward under the premise of objectivity.

I want you to further understand my personal position on all this. I am not a tree hugging, save the whales, Inconvenient Truth is law person (and neither are most of my partners and key executives), however I am an avid anti liter campaigner, wildlife and woodland conservationist. I believe in green campaigns that are not based on fringe political agendas. Last year I was recognized by Tonto National Park as someone who personally picked up and disposed of over 500 pounds of liter around Canyon Lake. I carry large trash bags and equipment in my car to do so. I was part of the AMP energy drink experiment at the Super Bowl last week. I spent 12 hours of my time riding a bike with a thousand other people over four days generating power on special bike trainers that converted our energy to electricity and supplied direct power the entire stadium for their 30 minute sponsorship of the pre game show. It is a first of its kind experience and may end up in the Guinness Book of World Records for the most amount of human power generated in four days. I am a sponsor of Liberty Wildlife animal rehabilitation. I have first hand experience with the Exxon Valdez spill. I have spent weeks if not months of my overall life working to rehabilitate trails and create hiking paths for people to use in our back country. I also write online articles on being green from a conservative point of view.

So you see, while I am frustrated with the general tone of the ‘green’/ environmentally responsible movement, I practice what I preach and am open to suggestions that are not burdens on our company for your specific charge. I don’t believe that a company has to proclaim it is environmentally friendly or put a sticker on its door or a logo in its advertising to be a company that is invested in doing what it can for an environmentally secure future and I hope I have proven this with the information included in this letter. In the end remember this; our company’s main goal and sole purpose is to bring fitness to the masses, not have a neutral carbon footprint. If we can get our members into shape and increase the quality and quantity of their lives at a most affordable price, I will suffer the indignities of being deemed a business that is environmentally unfriendly because we don’t have an infrastructure for recycling.

Please come back to me with your feedback. What is your plan or idea for Pure Fitness to not only work towards putting recyclable material in proper containers but how that can be stored for reliable pick up from the city that does not ruin the look of the club interior? What are the costs associated with that? Once that hurdle can be addressed then I will work on a plan to create sustainability inside the club.

Regards,

Super Bowl: The Green Feed

I had my first energy drink evah, last night. Not bad. I've smelled it on enough breath to know what it would probably taste like. The last hour turned more into a spin class than anything else. Some great 70's and 80's music came up and people who weren't spinning were dancing. A bunch of ladies did a great Grease karaoke and a couple of people danced to Right Said Freds, I'm To Sexy song. Brave.

Here is the LINK to see what this is all about. Just click on the main box or the AMP energy event notice at the bottom.

I found that you can buy the trainers that generate the power. LINK Not a bad concept once I read up on it.

My thinking is that I could use this system, attached to a battery with an a/c connection to charge my cell phone, iPod, digicam battery's, sonic care toothbrush and electric shaver. I spend at least a couple hundred dollars on throw away batteries every year and could switch over to rechargeable NiMH batteries and recoup that money I think fairly quickly. The bonus being that they would be recharged by the energy I produced myself. They'd be totally off the grid.

Like all things 'Green' right now there is a cost offset. Meaning its more expensive than it probably needs to be but understand the originators are trying to make their money back on the investment and as the market becomes more competitive the prices will drop.

Super Bowl Event: The Feed

I had my first energy drink evah, last night. Not bad. I've smelled it on enough breath to know what it would probably taste like. The last hour turned more into a spin class than anything else. Some great 70's and 80's music came up and people who weren't spinning were dancing. A bunch of ladies did a great Grease karaoke and a couple of people danced to Right Said Freds, I'm To Sexy song. Brave.

Here is the LINK to see what this is all about. Just click on the main box or the AMP energy event notice at the bottom.

I found that you can buy the trainers that generate the power. LINK Not a bad concept once I read up on it.

Super Bowls Goes Green

I was able to take part in a Green campaign for the Super Bowl. AMP energy drink is doing a live marketing event that will generate power for their portion of the pre-game show. Ironic considering I have never drank this style of energy drink in my life. Yup. I've never drank a redbull, rockstar, monster, amp, redline, whatever else is out there. Nope. Not once.

The concept is that Trek beach cruiser type bikes, quite comfy, are hooked up to trainers which in turn have been turned into generators. The power generated by the cyclists goes into batteries which when piled up over the next few days.

I am usually a bit skeptical of these things, like does our actions power the DJ set up and the mikes and the lights while we ride? They did. In fact when we all stopped, the entire tent powered down to darkness. Cool. So theoretically the event is power positive in its offset for the goal.

Also, all the bikes and generator/trainer units are being sent to Haiti after this event and given to families so they can power their electric items in their house. Haiti obviously having a notorious habit of being shellacked by Hurricanes on a regular basis.

Among the group I was in for two hours were; my friend/training partner Andy, (Ironman), a Cat-3 cyclist who had already done 6 hours that day and two obvious cyclists behind us. We kept trying to see who could get the most amps out of our systems. (They had little digital displays that showed the amps generated by the pedaling). All of us got to eight amps, some a bit higher. We were told that our group for the two hours had the highest combined battery upload of any group that day.

What was kind of cool is that there was this massive bank of batteries in the bank and each group had a Red Digital Readout (RDR) that showed totals amps being uploaded. The more juice going in the brighter the green glow of the neon they put around the battery's. So we could constantly see our output compared to everyone else. And we were doubling the other groups.

In reality it wasn't a contest to see who could do the most. There was no smack talk or recriminations. In fact I was sweating my ass off staying in Zone 2, while most were just lazily moving the pedals, reading a book, texting, etc. To stay in my zone I had to generate about 3.5 amps and was told in general most people were just doing 2.0 amps.

It's a first of a kind event put on by GMR marketing using live subjects at big public events. All the participants are being paid for their time at $20 per hour in two hour shifts. I took a total of four shifts.

I also won a hat when I answered one of their 'Green' questions correctly.