While I am still convinced that no on prop 7 is the right way, I am still looking for why I should say no!
Tags:
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Proposition 7 - California - November 4, 2008
While I am still convinced that no on prop 7 is the right way, I am still looking for why I should say no!
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Project 10, From Google! Be Good To Ourselves
Happy Birthday Google!
Got an idea how to help another? Please visit Google's Project 10 tell what your idea is!
Tags:
Friday, September 26, 2008
Google Earth Team Will Train Pioneers At Bioneers Conference.
Bioneers Conference that is slated to be held in San Rafael, CA from Oct 16 to 20th, was a place I am planing to be. It focuses on Social and scientific innovations that naturally come to us as human beings. These people, these visionaries are already have been working on working our world better place.I think it is a good place of knowledge for all of us. But I was elated today to find out at the Google Lat Long blog that the Google Earth Outreach team will be providing a whole day of hands on training Google Earth and Google Maps. Most of these non profit already integrating maps into the strategies, as most project span the whole world and the this knowledge will provide greatly necessary source of support.
Google Earth Day 08 is one of the good examples of Google's interest in such endevours.
As with everything there are limitations, Space is limited so REGISTER NOW! For more information and registering click here.
Google LatLong: Google Earth Team trains 'non-profiteers' at Bioneers
Tags:
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Google Takes Frog Out Of The Pot With Clean Energy.
If you ever hear the phrase ""A frog in water doesn't feel it boil in time. Dude, we are that frog."" regarding climate change, good you are on our side. Otherwise you can visit grist.org and educate yourself a little more.
But Google and its green initiative has taken another step to take us, frogs out of the pot that might boil in time. Google has already done some work regarding going green and staying green.
But the new initiative is to generate one Gigawatt of electricity, renewable energy, cheaper than burning coal. The project is known as RE>C.
Even though engineers are the core of this research an development, Google also sees the need to promote the technology through government initiatives and by advancing a policy agenda to stimulate clean energy projects.
Google is also putting money where the mouth is and have already spent closer to $45 Million towards solar thermal, advanced wind, and enhanced geothermal technologies through google.org.
So even if Google does not pull us all out of the pot, it might teach us how to jump out it.
You will find more information at;
Official Google Blog: Building a future that's clean and green
But Google and its green initiative has taken another step to take us, frogs out of the pot that might boil in time. Google has already done some work regarding going green and staying green.
But the new initiative is to generate one Gigawatt of electricity, renewable energy, cheaper than burning coal. The project is known as RE>C.
Even though engineers are the core of this research an development, Google also sees the need to promote the technology through government initiatives and by advancing a policy agenda to stimulate clean energy projects.
Google is also putting money where the mouth is and have already spent closer to $45 Million towards solar thermal, advanced wind, and enhanced geothermal technologies through google.org.
So even if Google does not pull us all out of the pot, it might teach us how to jump out it.
You will find more information at;
Official Google Blog: Building a future that's clean and green
Tags:
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Berkeley FIRST (Financing Initiative for Renewable and Solar Technology) Approved.
The City Of Berkeley yesterday voted yes to a program providing financing to retrofit Berkeley homes with Solar Power. The program is designed to reimburse property owners for the costs of putting in solar power systems. In turn the property owners would pay the city back over 20 years, including interest, in a form of property tax. Only property owners taking advantage of the program would see the extra charges on their tax bills.According to New York Times, The city’s mayor, Tom Bates, said in an interview shortly before the vote, “I think this is probably the most important contribution Berkeley can make toward taking on global warming,” and reducing greenhouse gases.
He added, “I think the idea is going to go like wildfire” through other city governments. Already, he said, nearly two dozen cities, from San Francisco to Annapolis and Seattle to Cambridge, Mass., have called indicating they want to follow suit.
Special tax districts to fund public projects is not new and has been used to finance many projects all over the country. But it is the first time this technique has been use to finance solar powering private properties. The city in November claimed to be the first to approve the creation of a Solar Power Financing program using property taxes to front the costs of residential and commercial solar projects.
Also the city waive the building permit fees for solar installation on single homes. I for one hail Berkeley's initiative and cities like Santa Cruz County in California and the city of Boulder in Colorado are on their way to make their own programs based on Berkeley's initiative.
City will need to finance the initial pilot project of about 50 homes that is estimated to cost about $1.5 million. According to city, about 100 people have shown interest. According to San Francisco Chronicle, for a typical solar energy system costing about $22,000, residents would pay about $180 a month, based on a 6.75 interest rate, after state and federal rebates are issued.
This might lead to electricity bill surpassing the solar tax, as energy costs continue to climb. Once the initial wave is completed, there might be other entities stepping into the slate. Already companies such as SunRun, pay for the costs of installing and operating solar power systems in exchange for a one-time payment to defray the initial cost and a long-term electricity contract with each residential customer, who doesn't own the system. I think and hope the Berkeley FIRST will be successful.
Way to Go Berkeley, F.I.R.S.T!
Tags:
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
YES - NO Prop 7
YES - NO Prop 7. My post about Prop Seven brought a few commenters whom I noticed today. It seems that they are all Yes on Prop 7 people. First of all thank you for reading the badly written article. I know I can't write for toffees but that will not stop me from writing!
I am still on "NO on 7" side unless some one comes forth and convince me of otherwise.
First of all I learned that California Law requires to attach the original law in an amendment through the comments. One learns everyday. There were four comments and four people. I will introduce them below!;
Mary
Pointed out (nicely) where I may have erred and yes I did have a question about PG&E and Edison being there. Trust me I am not a fan of PG&E nor Edison. But still they are Californian companies. But I did read a bunch regarding their association and some questions got cleared. I also read a buch of yes on 7 sites but none told me what the interest of billionaires from out of state got to do with California Energy. So I am following my mothers advise, when in doubt say NO! Anyway I will look further but you did not help me to change my mind. But I thank you.
Red E Fine (re.de.fine),
Actually you gave me a bunch of really good information. I visited them all and will read more after I finish this. I am very happy that people like Red are there to oppose nicely. Who knows if the facts are right. Thank you so much for the visit and your effort.
He/She gave me some information that I should share;
1) Alternative media article to the SF chronicle:
2)NRDC representative blog post AND factual point by point response:
3) www.yeson7.net
4) non biased and non partisan informational website for ballot initiatives and the likes: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_7_%282008%29
Thanks Re.de.fine. (links will be clickable once I am convinced! )
Alec,
Thanks Alec you too were a very nice and as I said I did not know about the law requiring Original Law text needing to be there with ammendments! Thank you for visiting.
Fswxscream even asked me not to give up my day job thinking I not smart :`( . But smarts are not on your side buddy. (It is cheaper to register domains here in USA, than Germany, I usually pay less than half of what you or your associates paid to register solarandcleanenergy.org (which gets forwarded to yeson7.net which is actually registered at Godaddy from Arizona, whom I also use for domain needs.). So a side that pays Minimum of $13.50(with maximum discounts) for a domain that could be had for $1.99 in 2007 October tells me I am not smart! Go figure!! Other than that you did not tell much about the cause. I have been to yeson7.net before. Thanks you for making me smile!
Tags:
I am still on "NO on 7" side unless some one comes forth and convince me of otherwise.
First of all I learned that California Law requires to attach the original law in an amendment through the comments. One learns everyday. There were four comments and four people. I will introduce them below!;
Mary
Pointed out (nicely) where I may have erred and yes I did have a question about PG&E and Edison being there. Trust me I am not a fan of PG&E nor Edison. But still they are Californian companies. But I did read a bunch regarding their association and some questions got cleared. I also read a buch of yes on 7 sites but none told me what the interest of billionaires from out of state got to do with California Energy. So I am following my mothers advise, when in doubt say NO! Anyway I will look further but you did not help me to change my mind. But I thank you.
Red E Fine (re.de.fine),
Actually you gave me a bunch of really good information. I visited them all and will read more after I finish this. I am very happy that people like Red are there to oppose nicely. Who knows if the facts are right. Thank you so much for the visit and your effort.
He/She gave me some information that I should share;
1) Alternative media article to the SF chronicle:
2)NRDC representative blog post AND factual point by point response:
3) www.yeson7.net
4) non biased and non partisan informational website for ballot initiatives and the likes: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_7_%282008%29
Thanks Re.de.fine. (links will be clickable once I am convinced! )
Alec,
Thanks Alec you too were a very nice and as I said I did not know about the law requiring Original Law text needing to be there with ammendments! Thank you for visiting.
Fswxscream even asked me not to give up my day job thinking I not smart :`( . But smarts are not on your side buddy. (It is cheaper to register domains here in USA, than Germany, I usually pay less than half of what you or your associates paid to register solarandcleanenergy.org (which gets forwarded to yeson7.net which is actually registered at Godaddy from Arizona, whom I also use for domain needs.). So a side that pays Minimum of $13.50(with maximum discounts) for a domain that could be had for $1.99 in 2007 October tells me I am not smart! Go figure!! Other than that you did not tell much about the cause. I have been to yeson7.net before. Thanks you for making me smile!
Tags:
Monday, September 15, 2008
Dream Car 123, It Is Not A Dream.
When ancient Egyptians built pyramids, I doubt that they thought that the design will give way to an energy efficient transport medium in the future. But that is exactly what Sugar Cove, Illinois inventor Greg Zanis did.
Here are the specifications from the web site;
Specifications:
Curb Weight - 8,000 pounds
Speed - up to 200 mph
Miles per charge - 300 and up
Passenger - one or two depending upon size of occupants
City Car Model - $21,000 After rebates the cost is $14,000*
Standard Model - $24,000 After rebates the cost is $16,000*
* Cost does not include delivery or taxes
So if you are looking to travel like an Egyptian, here is the link to find more information.
Tags:
Monday, September 08, 2008
Prop 7!, The Solar and Clean Energy Act of 2008,
I am Voting No!
You may have seen TV ads in opposition and support of Prop 7, Solar and Clean Energy Act of 2008, But I went of my own fact finding trip and came back with the decision that I would vote NO. Why, very simple, because it is unclear what they wanted to and intend to do with prop 7. One thing is it is too big and after spending enough time at voter guide at California General Election site. You don't need huge 70 page proposition making it too and harder to understand. Unless that was what proponents intended.
The pro Prop 7 did not convince me.
One of the best description I read on the Preop 7 at San Francisco Chronicle, the article has a lot to say but one paragraph rang a bell for me;
"If you're going to legislate at the ballot box, keep it simple, don't write 70 pages," he added. "Our objection isn't to their good intentions, but to their bad initiative." said Ralph Cavanaugh of the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Biggest question is what has an out of state billionaire got to do with California's energy. First thing jumped to my mind was Enron! These energy marketeers make messes out of simple things. The other thing is the opposition. How often do you see Republicans, Democrats, energy companies, environmentalists, renewable energy associations, Scientists and simple folks like me on one side.
So I will direct you to the sites that helped me to decide.
California Voter Guide.
San Francisco Chronicle article.
Renewable Energy world, opinion (PDF)
Should two Arizona billionaires tell California, arguably the nation’s greenest state, how to run its electricity business? Los Angeles Times Article.
Why you should vote no on Prop 7
The California Voter guide has a link for Pro Prop 7 site.
You may have seen TV ads in opposition and support of Prop 7, Solar and Clean Energy Act of 2008, But I went of my own fact finding trip and came back with the decision that I would vote NO. Why, very simple, because it is unclear what they wanted to and intend to do with prop 7. One thing is it is too big and after spending enough time at voter guide at California General Election site. You don't need huge 70 page proposition making it too and harder to understand. Unless that was what proponents intended.
The pro Prop 7 did not convince me.
One of the best description I read on the Preop 7 at San Francisco Chronicle, the article has a lot to say but one paragraph rang a bell for me;
"If you're going to legislate at the ballot box, keep it simple, don't write 70 pages," he added. "Our objection isn't to their good intentions, but to their bad initiative." said Ralph Cavanaugh of the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Biggest question is what has an out of state billionaire got to do with California's energy. First thing jumped to my mind was Enron! These energy marketeers make messes out of simple things. The other thing is the opposition. How often do you see Republicans, Democrats, energy companies, environmentalists, renewable energy associations, Scientists and simple folks like me on one side.
So I will direct you to the sites that helped me to decide.
California Voter Guide.
San Francisco Chronicle article.
Renewable Energy world, opinion (PDF)
Should two Arizona billionaires tell California, arguably the nation’s greenest state, how to run its electricity business? Los Angeles Times Article.
Why you should vote no on Prop 7
The California Voter guide has a link for Pro Prop 7 site.
Tags:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)