http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/category_rss/smartenergy Waste not, want not.  Pee- the most abundant waste on Earth.Urine-Powered Cars: The Pros and Cons Bradford Plumer October 23, 2009 | 12:39 pm For reasons explained before [1], we'll likely all be driving electric cars long before we ever see mass-market vehicles powered by hydrogen fuel cells, which was once the great clean-car hope. Still, the fuel-cell approach is obviously worth researching, and now researchers have lit upon [2] a particularly promising fuel source. Oh yes, urine: Using hydrogen to power cars has become an increasingly attractive transportation fuel, as the only emission produced is water - but a major stumbling block is the lack of a cheap, renewable source of the fuel. Gerardine Botte of Ohio University may now have found the answer, using an electrolytic approach to produce hydrogen from urine—the most abundant waste on Earth—at a fraction of the cost of producing hydrogen from water. Urine's major constituent is urea, which incorporates four hydrogen atoms per molecule—importantly, less tightly bonded than the hydrogen atoms in water molecules. Botte used electrolysis to break the molecule apart, developing an inexpensive new nickel-based electrode to selectively and efficiently oxidise the urea. To break the molecule down, a voltage of 0.37V needs to be applied across the cell—much less than the 1.23V needed to split water. Good to know! Meanwhile, there's an opposing school of thought that, while piss-powered cars are awfully promising, we should really be conserving our urine for other, more important ecological purposes: However, Logan does feel that it would be a good idea to start saving up our urine—although not for the hydrogen. 'You have to remember about the P [phosphorus] in pee—globally we need to start thinking about conserving phosphorus for fertiliser, because, just like oil, one day the deposits are all going to run out and we need to start building phosphorus recycling into our infrastructure,' he says. More on peak phosphorous here [3]. NY Times http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRD http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRD/commentary#comments Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:13:20 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRD Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 1 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZRD/ Actually, we don't have enough and never will.  Conservation, conservation, conservation.  Solar, solar and more solar.  The earth is not disposable and we have nowhere else to go. Depending on the cooling technology utilized, the water requirements for a nuclear power station can vary between 20 to 83 per cent more than for other power stations. Denver Water Consumption Denver's 1.1 Million customers use 211 gallons per person per day for a daily total of 232.1 Million gallons per day .  One nuclear reactor's makeup water per day,  15 million gallons.   When both reactors at the Susquehanna nuclear plant in Pennsylvania operate in summer,  nearly 30 million gallons of makeup water per day (or nearly 21,000 gallons per minute) are needed from the river to compensate for cooling tower drift. Colorado Electricity Consumption 44,236 MW = About 37 nuclear reactors = 550 Million gallons of water per day = Over twice the daily consumption of water in Denver.  Cost of one reactor = $6 to $9 Billion = cost of 37 reactors =  $333 Billion @ $9 Billion each.  $333 Billion = 41,625,000 rooftop water heaters @ $8000 each.  Hot water for bathing, etc. accounts for 13% of household energy consumption = 5,750 MW = 4.8 nuclear reactors = $43.2 Billion = 5.4 Million rooftop water heaters. Is nuclear power renewable energy? Nuclear energy uses Uranium as fuel, which is a scarce resource. The supply of Uranium is expected to last only for the next 30 to 60 years (depending on the actual demand). Therefore nuclear energy is not a renewable energy. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZnh http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZnh/commentary#comments Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:04:57 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZnh Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZnh/ Major bummer NY Times September 30, 2009 Alternative Energy Projects Stumble on a Need for Water By TODD WOODY AMARGOSA VALLEY, Nev. — In a rural corner of Nevada reeling from the recession, a bit of salvation seemed to arrive last year. A German developer, Solar Millennium, announced plans to build two large solar farms here that would harness the sun to generate electricity, creating hundreds of jobs. But then things got messy. The company revealed that its preferred method of cooling the power plants would consume 1.3 billion gallons of water a year, about 20 percent of this desert valley’s available water. NY Times http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSm http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSm/commentary#comments Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:54:06 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSm Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZSm/ US firms quit Chamber of Commerce over climate change position Nike and Johnson & Johnson among corporations resigning from business organisation in protest over chamber's resistance to 'cap-and-trade' legislation The US Chamber of Commerce has been accused by Pacific Gas & Electric of 'extreme rhetoric and obstructionist tactics' for its opposition to action on climate change. The largest American business federation, the US Chamber of Commerce, has suffered a rash of high-profile walkouts as multinational companies become uncomfortable with the organisation's hard-line opposition to measures tackling climate change. Continued: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/sep/29/us-chamber-commerce-climate-change http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSk http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSk/commentary#comments Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:50:49 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSk Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 1 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZSk/ .....on another thread where I mentioned annual gasoline consumption in Colorado. 49,635,000 barrels or 2,084,670,000 gallons (2.084 billion gallons) Texas consumes 256,552,000 barrels of gasoline per year. A whopping 10.775 billion gallons. They are the number one state in the union for gasoline consumption, number two is Florida at 181 million barrels or 7.602 billion gallons. Sounds like Texas has too many cornfield Cadillacs. California uses less gasoline than Colorado coming in at 35 million barrels or 1.478 billion gallons. The population of California exceeds Texas by 12 million or two and half Colorados. Sounds like we need to Californicate Colorado. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSv http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSv/commentary#comments Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:58:42 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSv Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 3 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZSv/ A follow up to the "Real Men Tax Gas" Governor Ritter ran on a platform that very much included energy conservation. Reducing the speed limit to 55 mph in the metro area and increasing the gasoline tax would reduce consuption by 20%(a sin tax if ever there was one) Republicans have never seen a highway project they didn't like or for that matter an increase in Defense spending, with an increase of $1 in addition to the paltry 20 cents collected now would go a long way toward sustainable infrastructure as well as funding the CANG and CNG. The interstate highway system is for national defense, is it not? Much ado was made recently regarding the discovery of over three billion barrels of oil by BP in the Gulf, a whopping six month US supply. We ARE running out of US oil, sooner rather than later and our consumption of foreign oil is a huge problem and a national security issue. As far as the governors political will to do the right thing, may I use a recent quote by Governor Ritter regarding politically unpopular decisions. But, "that's just part of the life you live when you're in leadership," the governor said. 49,635,000 barrels of gasoline annual consumption in Colorado (49.635 million barrels 42 gallons per barrel) 2,084,670,000 gallons (2.084 billion gallons) $416,934,000 gasoline revenue @ $.20 per gallon $2,501,604,000 gasoline revenue@ $1.20 per gallon $500,320,800 reduction of revenue with 20% reduction in consumption if the governor reduces the speed limit to 55 mph in the metro area and people start using more fuel efficient automobiles. $2,001,283,200 ($2.001 billion) Projected total annual revenue $822,320,629 (2006 Transportation Budget) $1,178,962,571 (Transportation Surplus) ($1.178 billion) $6,200,000,000 (FasTracks Total Budget) ($6.2 billion) http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSW http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSW/commentary#comments Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:19:59 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSW Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZSW/ September 20, 2009 Op-Ed Columnist Real Men Tax Gas By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN Do we owe the French and other Europeans a second look when it comes to their willingness to exercise power in today’s world? Was it really fair for some to call the French and other Europeans “cheese-eating surrender monkeys?” Is it time to restore the French in “French fries” at the Congressional dining room, and stop calling them “Freedom Fries?” Why do I ask these profound questions? Because we are once again having one of those big troop debates: Do we send more forces to Afghanistan, and are we ready to do what it takes to “win” there? This argument will be framed in many ways, but you can set your watch on these chest-thumpers: “toughness,” “grit,” “fortitude,” “willingness to do whatever it takes to realize big stakes” — all the qualities we tend to see in ourselves, with some justification, but not in Europeans. But are we really that tough? If the metric is a willingness to send troops to Iraq and Afghanistan and consider the use of force against Iran, the answer is yes. And we should be eternally grateful to the Americans willing to go off and fight those fights. But in another way — when it comes to doing things that would actually weaken the people we are sending our boys and girls to fight — we are total wimps. We are, in fact, the wimps of the world. We are, in fact, so wimpy our politicians are afraid to even talk about how wimpy we are. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSZ http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSZ/commentary#comments Sun, 20 Sep 2009 17:49:18 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSZ Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZSZ/ "We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people" Martin Luther King, Jr. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSN http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSN/commentary#comments Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:59:05 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSN Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZSN/ Religious Leaders Urge Action on Climate Change, Clean Energy Jobs As leaders from Colorado’s faith communities, we call for dramatic action to avert the most drastic effects of global climate change as one of the dominant moral imperatives of our time. The earth, our home, is a gift—we did not create it or earn it, and we do not own it, but we do have a sacred responsibility to be good stewards of that gift. The earth's resources are finite, and with our technological prowess we have the ability to upset the ecological balance which supports our life on this earth. We must be attentive to the impacts of our activity on the environment, and not foolishly pretend that we are immune from those impacts. We believe that our planet is in great peril from the threat of climate change. We believe it is real, and that it is to a significant extent human-induced. We accept the vast body of scientific evidence which forecasts severe consequences for the Earth and all its inhabitants—including rising sea levels, increased drought and desertification, more frequent and more severe extreme weather events, ocean acidification, new disease epidemics, massive population relocation and attendant conflicts-- if we fail to act. Our thirst to consume the earth's natural resources, and our reliance on old energy sources which emit greenhouse gases, has led us to a both a spiritual and environmental crisis. In view of this, for us as spiritual leaders to remain silent would be an abdication of our responsibilities. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/nbock6552/CZSJ http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/nbock6552/CZSJ/commentary#comments Tue, 15 Sep 2009 17:49:18 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/nbock6552/CZSJ Nelson Bock http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/4b519578d91f18752b_efm6b4e7n.jpg Nelson Bock 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZSJ/ Sign me up, I'm a "Liberal" If your elected Democrat doesn't talk and think like this, you have a problem and perhaps you should encourage that "Centrist" to switch parties. I certainly wouldn't contribute my money or time to a person just because they use a "D" by their name. People who pretend to be liberal can get elected in Colorado, e.g. Ken Salazar, a liberal Hispanic, Bill Ritter, a liberal, law and order, Catholic kind of guy ("Law and Order" types scare me, they usually consider "prison building" a solution). Ben NightHorse Campbell, a liberal Native American. Liberals can get elected in Colorado, even if they are DINOs. MC "What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label 'Liberal'? If by 'Liberal' they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer’s dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of 'Liberal'. But if by a 'Liberal' they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a 'Liberal', then I’m proud to say I’m a 'Liberal'." John F. Kennedy Wikipedia http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSM http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSM/commentary#comments Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:04:19 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSM Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZSM/ Ben Nelson, Max Baucus, et al., all DINOs. Anti-tax, anti-prosperity and anti-justice for all is anti-American. Look no further than the peamble of the US Constitution or the beauty of the concept, "E pluribus unum" "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. " NY Times September 9, 2009 Op-Ed Columnist Our One-Party Democracy By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN Watching both the health care and climate/energy debates in Congress, it is hard not to draw the following conclusion: There is only one thing worse than one-party autocracy, and that is one-party democracy, which is what we have in America today....................................... ...........................The G.O.P. used to be the party of business. Well, to compete and win in a globalized world, no one needs the burden of health insurance shifted from business to government more than American business. No one needs immigration reform — so the world’s best brainpower can come here without restrictions — more than American business. No one needs a push for clean-tech — the world’s next great global manufacturing industry — more than American business. Yet the G.O.P. today resists national health care, immigration reform and wants to just drill, baby, drill. “Globalization has neutered the Republican Party, leaving it to represent not the have-nots of the recession but the have-nots of globalized America, the people who have been left behind either in reality or in their fears,” said Edward Goldberg, a global trade consultant who teaches at Baruch College. “The need to compete in a globalized world has forced the meritocracy, the multinational corporate manager, the eastern financier and the technology entrepreneur to reconsider what the Republican Party has to offer. In principle, they have left the party, leaving behind not a pragmatic coalition but a group of ideological naysayers.......................” Continued at the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/opinion/09friedman.html http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSx http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSx/commentary#comments Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:01:04 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZSx Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZSx/ It seems the Supreme Court is poised to rule that corporations are truly “people” under the law and as such, are protected by the First Amendment’s right to free speech. This will overturn over one hundred years of legal precedent and create a political imbalance of seismic proportions. The current ability of large corporate interests to influence legislators through their lobbyists will pale in comparison to the ability to directly participate in partisan politics that a Supreme Court ruling would allow. Literally billions of dollars could flow into efforts to defeat legislators who do not toe their line, thus drastically changing our nation’s political landscape. The voices of average citizens, non-profits and even labor unions would be buried under an avalanche of corporate cash. If the Supreme Court decides that a corporation has First Amendment rights, protected by the Constitution the same as a natural born person, then it follows that a corporation should be extended all other rights a person has under the Constitution. This should include the right to vote in local, state and federal elections, in addition to the individual voting rights of the officers and stockholders of the corporation. If and when the Supreme Court issues the expected ruling, a sympathetic corporation should attempt to register as a voter and when registration is denied, file a federal lawsuit. A creative mind could imagine many more rights that personhood would bestow upon corporations. Such actions would be viewed as frivolous by Federal Courts but would be newsworthy and serve to draw attention to the issue and hopefully spur an expanded debate. The time has come for a Constitutional Amendment that would redefine the status of corporations. A campaign to advance such an amendment would have the advantage of the simple sound bites and simple mantras that every voter could understand. After our near financial collapse caused partly by corporate greed, now may be the perfect time to introduce such a measure. Support may never be this high again. Something must be done quickly. Such a ruling would effectively usurp the current moderate, liberal, progressive voting majority in this country and replace it with a permanent right wing majority in Congress and a permanent “lock” on the White House…beginning as soon as 2010 and 2012... all bought and paid for by major corporate interests. The establishment of a corporate state was a central tenant of our enemies in WWII. The threat to our Representative Democracy should be apparent to all. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/DarrylEskin/CZNR http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/DarrylEskin/CZNR/commentary#comments Fri, 11 Sep 2009 21:00:29 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/DarrylEskin/CZNR Darryl Eskin http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/078fe461d1d51def72_wwnmv2yq7.jpg Darryl Eskin 1 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZNR/ Those damned liberal intellectual elitists are at it again. Don't they know ignorance is bliss? If God didn't want us to rape the planet He wouldn't have given us dominion. ".....and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth." con·ser·va·tive 1. reluctant to accept change: in favor of preserving the status quo and traditional values and customs, and against abrupt change MC NY Times September 4, 2009 Global Warming Could Forestall Ice Age By ANDREW C. REVKIN The human-driven buildup of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere appears to have ended a slide, many millenniums in the making, toward cooler summer temperatures in the Arctic, the authors of a new study report. Scientists familiar with the work, to be published Friday in the journal Science, said it provided fresh evidence that human activity is not only warming the globe, particularly the Arctic, but could also even fend off what had been presumed to be an inevitable descent into a new ice age over the next few dozen millenniums. The reversal of the slow cooling trend in the Arctic, recorded in samples of layered lakebed mud, glacial ice and tree rings from Alaska to Siberia, has been swift and pronounced, the team writes. Continued NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/science/earth/04arctic.html?hpw http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZ5s http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZ5s/commentary#comments Fri, 04 Sep 2009 23:41:49 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZ5s Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZ5s/ FYI, the discovery is over Three Billion barrels, a whopping six month US supply :-((. You can bet this is not a serious article, but a paid advertisement. All is well, we found some more oil. Next thing you know we'll be declaring war on Belize or fill in the blank, over oil rights. LOL MC BP Discovers ‘Giant’ Oil Field in Gulf of Mexico ".......Further appraisal will be required to ascertain the volumes of oil present, BP said, but a spokesman said the find could be bigger than its Kaskida discovery, which had more than three billion barrels of oil........" NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/03/business/global/03oil.html?_r=1&hp http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZ5d http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZ5d/commentary#comments Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:47:18 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZ5d Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZ5d/ IMO, I don't find wind turbines as unsightly as telephone poles, power transmission towers and cables, roof top TV antennas, TV broadcast antennas, etc.. As a matter of fact it would look something like energy independence ought to look. There was a time, back 100 years or so, chimneys sprouted from every roof and spewed black coal smoke, some went out back to get water from the well, take a dump in an out house, dump edible garbage in a hog pen, dump the rest somewhere out of sight and lit houses with oil lamps and candles. Question is are we ready to evolve? MC NY Times August 28, 2009, 8:17 am Standards for Small-Scale Wind Power By Colin Miner The Associated Press Standards are afoot for small turbines aimed at individual homeowners and small businesses. The American Wind Energy Association is developing a series of standards that will measure the safety, reliability and performance of small wind turbines. The standards, which the organization hopes to have in place by the end of the year, come amid increased interest in small-scale and rooftop wind power — typically designed for individual homes, farms and small businesses, and producing 100 kilowatts of electricity or less. “We are charged with hearing from all materially affected persons as part of the process,” said John Dunlop, a senior project engineer at the association, which was tapped by the American National Standards Institute, which oversees the creation of thousands of standards for things as varied as bottled water and swimming pools, to steer the process for small wind standards. The new codes, which are still being completed, would compel manufacturers to put their turbines through a variety of tests that might, for example, demonstrate their reliability by having them operate continuously for 2,500 hours (including 25 hours when the wind speed is in excess of 33 miles an hour). Other tests might be used to ensure that turbines don’t exceed a certain decibel level while operating, or are capable of shutting down in extremely high winds, which can be dangerous. Mr. Dunlop cautions that while a standard, which would be administered by the newly formed Small Wind Certification Corporation, would help the industry gain credibility, there are several things it won’t do. “It’s not going to make turbines more efficient,” he said. “If someone puts a highly efficient turbine in a low-wind location, it’s still not going to produce any energy. We want to create standards that will allow consumers to know what they’re getting.” John Breshears of Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects, which is responsible for an experimental rooftop turbine project in Portland, Ore., said that standards would be a boon for consumers by forcing manufacturers to be honest. “Right now manufacturers can make any claim they want,” Mr. Breshears said, “and they do.” NY Times http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/28/standards-for-small-scale-wind-power/?hp http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZ5c http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZ5c/commentary#comments Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:35:40 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZ5c Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZ5c/ Can you hear me now? Howard Dean threw the gloves off, you should too. Starting with the economic advisors in the WH, I would start finding real liberals to help run the show. If he continues to surround himself with wimps (Democratic Party retreads) his administration is doomed, they wouldn't know an original thought if it bit them in the ass. Lots of really pissed off LIBERAL women like Rep. Jan Schakowsky (IL-9) can help turn it around. This ain't politics, this is WAR against corporate America, the greatest villains in the history of the world. MC "While the Obama administration offers kind words to unions, reform to ensure workers' rights to organize is not one of its priorities. Too many other liberal interest groups have become Beltway operations, packaged and polite affairs disconnected from the real grass roots." Rage the Left Should Use By Robert Kuttner Tuesday, August 18, 2009 Where are the liberal protesters? Wall Street and the abuses of corporate America crashed the economy, leaving regular people anxious and financially insecure. Yet the far right, not the reformist left, is getting the political windfall. Something is severely off when economically stressed Americans confront members of Congress about "death panels" in the Obama health plan. The rumors, fanned by talk radio with a little help from Republicans, are false and even delusional. Yet the anger, if misdirected, is genuine. People should be plenty angry about their jobs and their mortgages and their health insurance. With health care, however, virtually all of the fears attributed to the Obama health reform efforts more accurately describe the existing private system. Continued: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/17/AR2009081702363.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRr http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRr/commentary#comments Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:35:13 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRr Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZRr/ Another small window of opportunity for a congressional debate and vote on the single payer bill (HR 676) will open next month. In response to Rep. Anthony Wiener's (D-NY) proposed amendment for HR 676 in the House Energy & Commerce Committee, Speaker Pelosi agreed to have a debate and a vote on the single payer bill on the House floor after Congress reconvenes in the Fall. Please urge your representatives to support the single payer proposal - more suggested talking points below. The "public option" has been diluted from its original intent - see piece below. Fearmongering around "government-controlled" health care has been used to distract from our Wall-St. controlled health care. See  The Tyranny of Wall St.-Run Health Care: No CEO Left Behind .  Genesis of the Public Option & Its Dilution The "public option" has been diluted – testament to the influence of the monied lobbies. It is a rule of negotiation not to start with compromise, and, instead to make the best case for reform upfront. The best case for comprehensive coverage and cost containment is a single public payer model with full free choice of private providers -- from that position, compromise would at least be a stronger "public option." The Public Option feature of health care reform was conceived by political science professor Jacob Hacker, whose most recent iteration in 2007 is named the "Health Care for America Plan." Hacker envisioned it as a "Medicare-like" program that would sell health insurance to the non-elderly in competition with the 1,000 to 1,500 health insurance companies that sell insurance today. Kip Sullivan, member of Minnesota Physicians for a National Health Program, recently evaluated the "public option" features of House and Senate Democratic proposals, and concluded that they are faint shadows of Hacker’s original proposal. Read the full piece about the genesis of the public option & its dilution. The  5 original criteria that Hacker and the Lewin Group (which evaluated it) said are critical to the success of the "public option": •• The Public Option had to be pre-populated with tens of millions of people, that is, it had to begin like Medicare did representing a large pool of people the day it commenced operations (Hacker proposed shifting all or most uninsured people as well as Medicaid and SCHIP enrollees into his public program); •• Subsidies to individuals to buy insurance would be substantial, and only Public Option enrollees could get subsidies (people who chose to buy insurance from insurance companies could not get subsidies); •• The Public Option and its subsidies had to be available to all nonelderly Americans (not just the uninsured and employees of small employers); •• The Public Option had to be given authority to use Medicare’s provider reimbursement rates; and •• The insurance industry had to be required to offer the same minimum level of benefits the Public Option had to offer. Concluded Sullivan, of Hacker’s five criteria, only one is met by the Democrats’ proposed bills – i.e., both proposals require the insurance industry to cover the same benefits the "public option" must cover. None of the other four criteria are met . As Robert Kuttner writes ( Faint Praise ): "...the likelihood is that whatever finally makes it through this session of Congress will reinforce and further bloat the current disaster of a health insurance system rather than fundamentally changing it. And if the decent elements of the plan are blocked, Obama should have the courage to pull the bill and take his case to the people....The satisfaction of a Rose Garden signing ceremony is not worth it, if the plan is more thorn than rose." Talking Points to take to Legislators Legislators need to hear from constituents in order to counter the $1.4 million/day spent by insurance, PHRMA & other special interests steering the health care reform debate to benefit their bottom lines. Some things we might tell our senators/represenatives: Eliminate For-Profit Insurances – The U.S. is the only country that continues to build its health insurance system around for-profit insurances. Most other industrialized nations prohibit for-profit insurance for primary health care; private insurance is reserved for supplemental coverage (e.g., private hospital room with TV, cosmetic surgeries, etc.). Underwriting should be eliminated, and true universal coverage provided. Extend Medicare to All – As Dr. Marcia Angel says, the simplest way to expand health coverage to all (even in stages) is to expand Medicare coverage to all. It can be expanded by decade - lower the qualifying age to 50, then 40, etc. The infrastructure for Medicare billing, etc. is in place; it only needs to be improved, e.g., to permit negotiation of bulk drug and medical equipment costs; and the more costly privatized Medicare plans eliminated. Support the amendment offered by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), which would effectively replace the entire existing health plan with the text of H.R. 676, Rep. John Conyers' single-payer legislation. Speaker Pelosi has agreed to permit debate and a vote on Weiner's Single Payer Amendment sometime after the House reconvenes in September . A True Public Option – must include the 5 main criteria listed by Hacker above. The "Public Option" won’t save much money, but it may provide the competition to keep private insurances "more honest." CBO Report of Single Payer Savings – The Congressional Budget Office should report the cost savings of the single-payer proposals (HR676 & SB703) side-by-side with the cost analysis of every other proposal. Over 20 federal and state studies since 1990 show considerable cost savings with the single-payer model. If the Blue Dog Democrats are serious about cost containment, they should demand the full CBO Report – see Blue Dogs Should Demand CBO Report of Single Payer Savings Means-testing for subsidies adds a high "non-benefit" cost. It is less costly to simply cover everyone (like Medicare) instead of making folks jump through hoops to prove eligibility (for subsidies, etc). Read the comments of Merton C. Bernstein , leading health insurance expert and law professor emeritus at Washington University, who notes that private health insurance non-benefit costs range from about 12% to as much as 30% of outlays – compared to Medicare overhead of 3%. Kucinich Amendment in Support of State Single Payer – Urge our senators and representatives to assure that the Kucinich Amendment is part of any health bill that passes, to help states pass single payer reform without federal ERISA challenges. At least 10 states have written single payer proposals thus far. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/micheleswenson/CZRt http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/micheleswenson/CZRt/commentary#comments Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:03:56 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/micheleswenson/CZRt Michele S Michele S 4 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZRt/ Colorado has a House power ratio of .016 (7 members of 435) a Senate power ratio of .04, equal to all the other 49 states. Seemingly insignificant unless you look at Wyoming's House power ratio of .002. Getting rid of the filibuster might be a giant step in the right direction. If majority rule works in the house, surely it should be applied in the senate. "Add the rise of the filibuster and the fact that small-state senators tend to stick around longer, gaining powerful chairmanships under the seniority system, and you've got today's change-resistant Senate." MC The Gangs of D.C. In the Senate, Small States Wield Outsize Power. Is This What the Founders Had in Mind? By Alec MacGillis Sunday, August 9, 2009 Wonder why President Obama is having a hard time enacting his agenda after sweeping to victory and with large congressional majorities on his side? Look to the Senate, the chamber designed to thwart popular will. There is much grousing on the left about the filibuster, the threat of which has taken such hold that routine bills now need 60 votes. Getting less attention is the undemocratic character of the Senate itself. Why, for example, have even Democratic senators been resistant on health-care reform? It might be because so many of the key players represent so few of the voters who carried Obama to victory -- and so few of the nation's uninsured. The Senate Finance Committee's "Gang of Six" that is drafting health-care legislation that may shape the final deal -- without a public insurance option -- represents six states that are among the least populous in the country: Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, Maine, New Mexico and Iowa. Between them, those six states hold 8.4 million people -- less than New Jersey -- and represent 3 percent of the U.S. population. North Dakota and Wyoming each have fewer than 80,000 uninsured people, in a country where about 47 million lack insurance. In the House, those six states have 13 seats out of 435, 3 percent of the whole. In the Senate, those six members are crafting what may well be the blueprint for reform. More at the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080702045.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRS http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRS/commentary#comments Sun, 09 Aug 2009 11:30:35 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRS Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZRS/ Salon: http://www.salon.com/wires/ap/business/2009/08/06/D99TLNR80_us_cash_for_clunkers_top_10s/index.html Aug 6th, 2009 | Here are the top 10 most popular vehicles purchased and traded under the government's "cash-for-clunkers" program as of Aug. 5: TOP 10 NEW VEHICLES PURCHASED 1. Toyota Corolla 2. Ford Focus FWD 3. Honda Civic 4. Toyota Prius 5. Toyota Camry 6. Hyundai Elantra 7. Ford Escape FWD 8. Dodge Caliber 9. Honda Fit 10. Chevrolet Cobalt TOP 10 TRADE-IN VEHICLES 1. Ford Explorer 4WD 2. Ford F150 Pickup 2WD 3. Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD 4. Jeep Cherokee 4WD 5. Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 2WD 6. Ford Explorer 2WD 7. Chevrolet Blazer 4WD 8. Ford F150 Pickup 4WD 9. Chevrolet C1500 Pickup 2WD 10. Ford Windstar FWD Van http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRg http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRg/commentary#comments Thu, 06 Aug 2009 19:55:54 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRg Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZRg/ $700 Billion right now for the banks, no discussion, no debate. A paltry $1 Billion to stimulate car sales, improve mileage, etc. and the wingnuts are outraged. It's a mind over matter thing, Republicans don't mind and you (the little people) don't matter. MC "And when it came out that some of those same corporate welfare titans would still be giving each other bonuses, former Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani rode to the rescue. Bonuses, he argued, trickle down to waiters, limo drivers, cafes that sell donuts to cops — cash for dunkers." http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRC http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRC/commentary#comments Thu, 06 Aug 2009 19:13:43 EDT http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/michaelcollins/CZRC Mike Collins http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/profile_picture/bcdcfd97be4d93f8d2_izvrmv8p8.jpg Mike Collins 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/CZRC/