Open Science Thread

This is about par for the course these days:

WaPo -- Bush administration officials, who raised similar objections in April, rejected the idea of setting mandatory emissions targets as well as language calling for G-8 nations to raise overall energy efficiencies by 20 percent by 2020.

Let’s take climate change completely out of the equation and put alternative energy on hold for a moment. Simply developing and utilizing existing energy efficient/conservation technologies would create a more competitive domestic automobile market, provide new, high-quality factory jobs, open up a new investment vector, and save US residents a ton of money on energy thus stimulating the economy as surely as any tax cut would. In addition, it would reduce our dependence on foreign oil which would deprive both third-world shit-hole regimes and their Jihadi pals of money and influence, and save us untold numbers of American lives and truckloads of money. What exactly is the downside here?

• Speaking of energy, Glenn Reynolds claims that his readers are way ahead of ours in the One Billion Light Bulbs energy saving plan. Sign up here to crush them! One thing I'll say for Glenn, he both appreciates and promotes science, unlike some of the fringe anti-science lunatics on the extreme right.
• The Search for Extraterrestrial Life will now proceed 24/7. President Bush went on record that any aliens discovered will be welcomed under a guest worker program which includes a path to citizenship.
• Via Tim at Balloon Juice -- which is incidentally hands down one of the best written and most rational conservative leaning blogs in the Universe -- Nobel Laureate Peter Agre M.D. is reportedly considering a run for the US Senate.

•  Ahh

  Saturday, three-day weekend, King of Days ...

  by DarkSyde on Sat May 26, 2007 at 03:57:24 AM PDT

•  I'd like to hear this...

  coming out of the mouths of candidates and legislators:

  Simply developing and utilizing existing energy efficient/conservation technologies would create a more competitive domestic automobile market, provide new, high-quality factory jobs, open up a new investment vector, and save US residents a ton of money on energy thus stimulating the economy as surely as any tax cut would.

  That's just damn sound policy.

  by VetGrl on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:01:35 AM PDT

  •  Couple things

    1.  Richardson is making this point (as well as Edwards).  See, for example, Energy Revolution.

    2.  And, of course, energy efficiency is a core element of Energize America, along with the economic / environmental benefits.

    Efficient use of energy is such a no-brainer with tremendous win-win-win potential. The problem is that there is just a small segment of the economy that finds efficiency truly anathema -- sadly, this is a very rich and powerful part of the economy (fossil fuel companies, some utilities, etc ...)

    by A Siegel on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:48:21 AM PDT

  •  I just love the idea of saving and more efficient

    ...use of energy for all the reasons ever given.  What I would like to see now though is some work on getting all those 'existing energy efficient/conservation technologies' to market and installed at a price that makes this technology of real benefit to individuals in the home.  From light bulbs to washer/dryers the initial cost for the high efficiency models is multiple times more than for the same low efficiency models.  I'm just paying up front for a supposed energy savings somewhere down the road where my Utilities are bumping up the rates each year.  Me and Mrs. Six-Pack are going to have to replace a supposed energy efficient water heater that came with the house 10 years ago.  Now I'm reading that my present water heater is not all that energy efficient and the 'energy efficient' water heaters are multiple times more expensive than I'm sure my present water heater cost.  You may recall that 30 mpg/37 mpg highway vehicle you bought some years back now and have given up on keeping track of the milage.  Now I'm not real sure how to figure my energy savings with these new home appliances and mechanicals but my guess is, given the extra up front cost and exaggerated claims of energy efficiency my cost per Kwh, mpg, BTU's is going to continue to rise and I have a real question as to whether we are saving/conserving any real energy.  

    by mrgardon on Sat May 26, 2007 at 07:16:48 AM PDT

    •  mpg

      The methodology used by the EPA since the '70s is flawed, and that's why most people report lower fuel economy than advertised. The new methodology will be going into effect for the 2008 model year, and will be a more accurate reflection of fuel economy. Reportedly, hybrids will lose some of their edge in the new ratings, so if you can't afford a hybrid (I can't), don't feel bad. Get a Toyota Matrix instead. Vehicles are a special case, since they are a constant, draining expense, and always depreciate.

      As for compact fluorescents, you don't have to break the bank. Anyone who pays an electric bill can afford to switch. If you switch, you will save money. Period.

      WRT major appliances, it's a life-cycle cost issue. It took energy to manufacture, so use it within its reasonable life expectancy. Don't replace a newer water heater just because it's less efficient, but if you know it is more than 15 years old, replace it before it leaks, and get the most efficient one you can afford. In most cases, it will pay off in the long run.

      Here is a refrigerator replacement cost calculator.

      by yaktx on Sat May 26, 2007 at 11:33:46 AM PDT

      •  To be honest your not at all encouraging.

        Look this is real simple: when your utilities cost is going up each month and the cost of 'energy efficient appliances/mechanicals' is going up by multiples your not saving any money.  All I'm asking of the 'green industry' is for them to quit lying to us.

        by mrgardon on Sat May 26, 2007 at 08:34:19 PM PDT

•  Has anyone seen ...

  a new article in the Washington Monthly? ... It basically claims that corporate America is leaving the Republicans behind because ... Republicans are not dealing with things like global warming .. and corporations have realized that global warming is a big problem ...

  http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/...

  by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:11:21 AM PDT

  •  Interesting article

    Has anyone seen ... a new article in the Washington Monthly?

    Interesting.  I notice this quote in particular

    last year, a Pew poll showed that only 45 percent of Americans now think the government needs to get smaller, down from 61 percent a decade ago.

    This might explain why big business is trying to get to the head of the parade.  It will be interesting to see which Democratic candidates they support.

    Not much gets done in American politics without either the active support or the strategic silence of major corporations, and while big business has been a remarkably consistent and aggressive foe of certain staples of progressivism (anything having to do with unions, for instance) it has also lent crucial support to some of the most significant expansions of the regulatory or welfare state.

    If there is money to be made (or saved) in healthcare reforms or in fighting global warming we can expect the big corporations to get on board. 

    by Fred in Vermont on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:27:35 AM PDT

•  I shouldn't laugh

  I really shouldn't laugh.

  This is just so wrong.

  But I'm laughing.  I'm sick.  I'm sorry.

  by Plutonium Page on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:16:22 AM PDT

  •  Hahahaha! n/t

    by DarkSyde on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:17:49 AM PDT

    •  What's worse...

      ... is that it somehow made me think of John Wayne Gacy's paintings.

      by Plutonium Page on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:25:02 AM PDT

  •  But is it really a joke?

    I really shouldn't laugh.

    

    The thing is it is not really a joke.  There are lots of people who seriously claim that the nuclear industry if pushing hard on global warming as a way to advance their industry.

    by Fred in Vermont on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:39:32 AM PDT

    •  I've heard people say

      that you are not serious about global warming unless you support nuclear.  I tell them you still have a huge waste problem and that I prefer cleaner and safer energy.

      by Unstable Isotope on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:42:35 AM PDT

      •  your comment

        is a perfect case for being able to give more than one "recommend" to a comment.

        by Plutonium Page on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:56:00 AM PDT

      •  Hillary and big nukes

        I've heard people say . . . that you are not serious about global warming unless you support nuclear.

        Take a look at the recent cover story in The Nation Hillary Inc. all about the people who are doing the polling and PR for Hillary Clinton and their record regarding anit-union and pro-nuclear efforts

        Penn recently told the Washington Post, in a largely flattering profile, that he'd been "cleared of all client responsibilities, except for Microsoft, for the duration of the campaign." Microsoft is a strange exception, given that it was the corporate entity the Clinton Administration challenged most directly. Moreover, Penn has no plans to take a formal leave from B-M. (Because B-M is a subsidiary of the WPP Group, a British company, it doesn't have to report its CEO's salary or ownership stake in the company.) . . .

        Yet occasionally the work of Penn's company spills onto Hillary's political terrain. Penn's polling firm has worked with the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition--a PR front group for the nuclear power industry--which purports to show "strong support among Americans for nuclear energy." Coincidentally, one of B-M's big projects is the Indian Point nuclear power plant, twenty-four miles north of Manhattan, dubbed by environmentalists "Chernobyl on the Hudson." The plant received the lowest safety rating from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2000, and after 9/11 there were widespread calls from environmentalists, consumer groups and elected officials to shut it down. It has had nine unplanned shutdowns since 2005.

        With the help of B-M, Indian Point's owner, Entergy Corporation, struck back with a multipronged ad campaign. Its post-9/11 slogan, "Safe, secure, vital," emphasized security, warning that if Indian Point were closed New York could face a California-style energy crisis. In 2003, after Westchester County legislators passed resolutions condemning Indian Point, B-M set up a classic astroturf group on Entergy's behalf, the Campaign for Affordable Energy, Environmental and Economic Justice, which targeted Democratic incumbents in low-income sections of Westchester who supported closing the plant. If Indian Point were shuttered, the bilingual campaign informed residents, electricity bills would increase, power to public transportation would be jeopardized and dirty power plants would go up in low-income and minority neighborhoods. At the same time, B-M unveiled another organization also bankrolled by Entergy that promoted Indian Point. Following the '06 elections, Entergy unveiled a new slogan, "Right for New York," citing Indian Point as an asset in the fight against global warming. Hillary has called for an "independent safety assessment" but has declined to join Governor Eliot Spitzer and twelve members of Congress in urging that the plant be shut down. Entergy, founded in Arkansas, was a major supporter of Bill Clinton in the 1990s and contributed generously to Hillary in 2000 and 2006.

         

        by Fred in Vermont on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:19:17 AM PDT

    •  Nope, not a joke

      It's serious, like you said.

      And don't get me started about the pro-nuke people, especially some (not all) of the ones at dKos.

      by Plutonium Page on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:54:59 AM PDT

•  GE is going big into alt energy

  They see a bright future and big profits in alt energy and products that conserve energy.

  by FishOutofWater on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:17:45 AM PDT

  •  There are already

    several companies making $$$ on reducing carbon and energy footprints.  Funny how making your processes cleaner and more energy efficient saves money.

    I can't stand these people who have been arguing against the occurrence of global warming for years and now are saying it's too late and too expensive to do anything about it.

    by Unstable Isotope on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:44:29 AM PDT

  •  The strange history of the former Zond Wind

    Having successively been owned by ENRON and GE.  The big boys know there's a bonanza in wind (why do you think Jerome a Paris's investors are putting big Euros into it?) but they have fingers in other power pots too that I think limits their willingness to use it.  Particularly since alternative energy comes loaded with political implications from more than a generation ago that they don't want to reawaken.

    by ActivistGuy on Sat May 26, 2007 at 10:57:12 AM PDT

•  third world shit-hole regimes & their jihadi pals

  just wanted to highlight that phrase.  loved it.

  by texas dem on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:19:04 AM PDT

•  When are people going to get it?

  The Bush Administration is only limited by their belief in what they can get away with. They will keep pushing that limit, as far as it can go.

  Let me repeat that:

  They are not concerned with what is fair.
  They are not concerned with what is legal.
  They are not concerned with what is right.
  They are not concerned with what is wise.

  They are not concerned with anything other than the interests of their constituency...and that isn't any of us.

  If they can get away with it, then they'll do it.

  The only thing that stands in their way is the Democratic Congress.

  The Democrats in Congress are not that interested in standing up to the Bush Administration.  They are interested in serving their constituency, which isn't Bush's, but it isn't us, either.

  Their recent actions on trade, lobbying reform and Bush's Iraq policy have made that last point very clear.

  The Democrats will talk a good game about doing what is right for us....but in the end, they will still serve  their real constituency, because they know that you don't have anywhere else to go. They'll take your money, take your votes and still do what they damn well please....because they can get away with it.  

  by xynz on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:26:23 AM PDT

  •  You are so right

    All they care about is power.  They don't care about religion and they don't care about science.  They only care about what will keep them in power.

    by Unstable Isotope on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:41:00 AM PDT

    •  And money....

      ...that is the common denominator of real constituencies for the Republican and Democratic Parties.

      Whether they are winning or losing elections, the Democratic leadership can always look forward to well paid positions with their real constituents.

      Mike McCurry is a case in point. The former spokesman for the Clinton Administration was hired to destroy the fundamentally democratic nature of the internet. That sure as hell didn't serve any of our interests.

      by xynz on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:14:50 AM PDT

      •  Holding out for a hero

        I find it very common that many people are holding out for a hero that will put our interests first.  Of course, I want that too but we need to stop waiting for someone else and start doing things for ourselves.

        I just moved away from Buffalo.  It's a dying region and the waiting for the "big project" that was going to revive downtown and revive the economy was so very common.  It seemed a bit like learned helplessness to me.  There are plenty of people with big ideas.  We need people to implement ideas, not just have ideas.

        by Unstable Isotope on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:25:37 AM PDT

        •  Sorry

          That comment turned a bit into one of my personal soapbox issues.

          by Unstable Isotope on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:26:15 AM PDT

•  I feel so inadequate

  P. Z. Meyers at Pharyngula yesterday posted this story about the winner of a Christian science fair.

  It's becoming a trend: Evangelical Christian institutions that try to do science inevitably demonstrate breathtaking inanity of their own. The latest victim is the Pawleys Island Christian Academy. Take a gander at the first place winner in biology.

     Brian Benson, an eighth-grade student who won first place in the Life Science/Biology category for his project "Creation Wins!!!," says he disproved part of the theory of evolution. Using a rolled-up paper towel suspended between two glasses of water with Epsom Salts, the paper towel formed stalactites. He states that the theory that they take millions of years to develop is incorrect.

     "Scientists say it takes millions of years to form stalactites," Benson said. "However, in only a couple of hours, I have formed stalactites just by using paper towel and Epsom Salts."

  This isn't just wrong, it's appallingly wrong. He's wrong on the facts, wrong on the interpretations, wrong on the understanding of how science works. If we're charitable and grant that a 14 year old has some reasonable excuse for ignorance, we can still indict his parents, his science teacher, and the judges at this fair on gross incompetence on multiple charges.

  It really caught my attention, as it did many other people, since P.Z. got a huge traffic spike from fundies defending this.

  I'm just amazed because I didn't realize I was such a bad scientist.  I have never done a single experiment that gives answers in chemistry, biology and geology at the same time!  I might have said the experiments shows you can grow crystals of epsom salt on paper towels by evaporation/sublimation.

  by Unstable Isotope on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:40:02 AM PDT

•  Bush is a success

  If you are interested in helping Exxon/Mobil, Halliburton, and Lockheed, Bush is doing all the right things.  Cutting oil consumption hurts the first two companies directly, and probably hurts Lockheed by lowering world tensions.  Also, the emirates would have less money to buy weapons.  No, Bush is a great success story for those that support him--just not for his country or for mankind.

  by melvynny on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:44:09 AM PDT

  •  I agree

    Bush has done exactly what his corporate backers wanted.  He successfully pushed off any sensible changes to our energy policy for 6+ years.

    by Unstable Isotope on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:45:31 AM PDT

    •  And in those six years,

      billions of dollars in profits were made by his corporate masters.

      But I cannot believe that they are so short-sighted that they cannot understand that wrecking the economy is very bad for business in the long term.  Even with large foreign markets for their products, a serious downturn in the US economy will ripple across the globe.

      I cannot believe it, but it sure looks like it's true.

      by Marc in KS on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:01:13 AM PDT

      •  you have to factor in religion

        If the world is ending soon, why worry about the future.  That's simplistic reasoning--yet I know of a Yale / Harvard B school grad that believes it.  Let's not forget the role of these ivies in the destruction of America and of the planet.

        by melvynny on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:10:32 AM PDT

      •  Business doesn't usually think long-term

        They should, of course.  They certainly make noises about positioning for the future.  Wall Street now only looks at quarterly results.  They don't give much credit to long-term plans, except they need to sound good (not actually be good).  CEO pay is tied to stock price (by option grants), so they benefit by doing what Wall Street wants, not necessarily what's best.  I believe this is a big part of the problem.

        by Unstable Isotope on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:20:43 AM PDT

        •  As the economist John Maynard Kenyes said,

          in the long run we'll all be dead. Unfortunately, our planet may be dead too.

          by blue jersey mom on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:26:52 AM PDT

        •  Exactly so.

          I wasn't thinking about that (and I've written on that!).

          Business is no longer thinking long-term.

          That, by itself, should scare the shit out of us.  When corporations as large as the multinationals are careening from short-term gain to short-term gain, that's going to be really really bad for people.

          by Marc in KS on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:40:23 AM PDT

        •  That's why I trust entreprenuers more

          We really need to do something to improve entrepreneurial initiative in America.

          That's where the solutions will come from and those are the people generally thinking beyond the next quarter.

          Bush has pretty much stamped it down with tax breaks for megacorporations.

          by Bush Bites on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:49:05 AM PDT

    •  There has never been a long-range energy plan

      in the US.

      It's fun to blame Bush, and I am happy to bash the two fossil fuel guys in the WH because they have been exceptionally stupid about energy--as is typical of the fossil fuel industry in general.

      But none of the previous administrations except Carter's really gave serious consideration to an energy plan.  And Carter's was a short-lived effort.

      Any realistic approach to reducing carbon emissions will have to include increased conservation in the private sector (industry already does a pretty good job, having found that you can save money by practicing conservation), strong R & D for battery technology that will take wind and solar options out of the 1% category, and elimination of the dirtiest electricity providers: coal-fired and diesel plants.

      Coal-fired plants, while providing half of our electricity, kill 24,000 Americans a year and give lung and heart disease to hundreds of thousands of others. Nuclear power is the biggest single displacer of greenhouse gases in the world.  Like coal it provides 24/7 electricity.  In the US there have been zero deaths as a result of reactors in nuclear plants.  When nuclear plants are shut down, they are replaced by coal-burning plants--not by wind and solar.  Why is this?  Because wind and solar always require back-up because they are weak and intermittent sources and can only supply meet a  fraction of the energy demand.

      As for nuclear waste, it is extremely small in volume and is being safely stored in our nation right now.  Spent nuclear fuel contains 98% of its energy and could be recycled.  And of course will be, as more nuclear plants go online.

      Full disclosure:  I am an environmentalist and I am horrified by the misconceptions that are preventing immediate action to address greenhouse gas emissions  on a large scale.  I have no stocks or investments in any energy companies.  

      by Plan9 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 07:06:51 AM PDT

      •  Is nuclear waste really recyclable?

        I understand France has come a long way in solving the waste problem by recycling somehow and are a net exporter of energy from nuclear plants.  Googled but couldn't find a site, perhaps someone here is up to date on this nuclear waste problem.  

        by mrgardon on Sat May 26, 2007 at 08:37:07 AM PDT

        •  Spent nuclear fuel is recyclable

          People tend to confuse waste from bomb building with spent fuel from nuclear power plants.

          Contaminated nuclear materials from bomb building during the arms race must be isolated in deep geologic disposal.  The massive cleanup of such sites has been going on for a couple of decades and is close to being finished.  Those sites are being remediated and returned as much as possible to their natural state.

          Spent nuclear fuel used to be reprocessed in the US, and it was assumed that fuel would just be repeatedly rejuvenated and cycled through reactors until the final residue was extremely small in volume and most of its radionuclides had been burned up.  The virtue of reprocessing is that it not only is by far the most efficient use of an energy-generating resource on the planet, it also reduces the opportunity for weapons production.

          You can learn more here.

          Although the US stopped reprocessing during the Carter administration, in recent years as part of arms limitation treaties, we have been converting highly enriched uranium from Soviet warheads into reactor fuel. Great to think that bombs are being turned into carbon-free electricity.

          by Plan9 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 09:06:32 AM PDT

•  Marine Life Series

  This week's was on the life cycle of the moon jellyfish.

  by Mark H on Sat May 26, 2007 at 04:50:00 AM PDT

•  I dunno about this

  Speaking of energy, Glenn Reynolds claims that his readers are way ahead of ours in the One Billion Light Bulbs energy saving plan.

  That sounds like a challenge.  I couldn't find anywhere that DKos is participating in this.

  Sponsor a Group

  Are you a student or teacher?  Do you run a website?  Consider sponsoring a OneBillionBulbs.com group.  When you sponsor a group, you'll get your very own page like this one.  As you recruit people to your group, we'll keep track of the aggregate savings and pollution reduction impact that are attributable to the group you sponsor.

  Maybe Markos could sponsor a DKos group there. I've changed 22 bulbs in NM.  It would be great if DKos could participate in this.

  by Shaniriver on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:12:43 AM PDT

  •  I just registered this week's 3 bulb changes...

    ... but I can't figure out how to associate my new account with dKos. Searching for Kos or DailyKos doesn't bring up any of their registered groups.

    I think we can show the Instapundit crowd what committed environmentalism looks like... if we can get our own act together on this one. Our Kos community is HUGE, and I'm sure that we're all making these bulb replacements anyway.

    Anyone have a clue as to how we can get "credit" for this community's actions?

    by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:08:29 AM PDT

    •  DailyKos is now a group!

      I just created the group... you should be able to find it now.

      Go to...
      http://onebillionbulbs.com/...

      ...nd register your CFL purchases

      by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:12:33 AM PDT

      •  Thanks Pat!

        Glenn brought this up the other day when he and I were talking about something else. Seemed kinda of fitting on Memorial Weekend to do anything to conserve energy given the present petro-strategic realities. Then I spaced and forgot I had to go in there and set it up.

        by DarkSyde on Sat May 26, 2007 at 08:01:21 AM PDT

        •  Got your back, DarkSyde!

          We're up and running. Last count - 96 Kossaks signed up, the equivalent of almost 7 cars removed from the roads.

          by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:45:05 PM PDT

      •  Pat208 - You need to write a diary on this

        to inform everyone at DKos that the challenge is on!  It's sure to land on the front page - maybe you could make an "update" series out of it to keep the info on the front page.

        by SueDe on Sat May 26, 2007 at 08:41:31 AM PDT

        •  Done!

          Check it out.

          by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:45:48 PM PDT

  •  Now you can register as a DailyKos member.

    

    Once you've gotten a free site registration, you can connect your individual membership to the DailyKos group.

    And as you can see from the screen grab above, we could use the members!

    by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:40:52 AM PDT

  •  Game on! Instapundit reads dKos!

    

    Glenn Reynolds noticed DarkSyde's mention of his challenge.

    He's expecting us Kossaks to "come on strong." So we need to show him what "strong" means.

    by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:53:16 AM PDT

    •  He better be shaking in his boots!

      We changed over every bulb in our house recently. (But for one antique lamp in the living room that doesn't fit the bulbs and one lamp in the kidster's room with a similar problem.) dKos is going to eat them up!

      -5.88, -6.82

      by Debby on Sat May 26, 2007 at 07:56:28 AM PDT

      •  I think "smug" is his middle name.

        He better be shaking in his boots!

        They had a 900 member head start. But give us some time, and we'll catch him/them.

        by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 09:22:21 AM PDT

        •  Started to sign up for OBB til I saw this

          Important Information for Members of One Billion Bulbs
          
          We are pleased to announce that One Billion Bulbs (OBB) is now a part of Pajamas Media (PJM) - an internet media company which will provide significant additional resources for the important work begun by One Billion Bulbs.
          In addition, Pajamas Media is embarking on a broader home energy initiative (lighting, appliances, heating/cooling, wind/solar, transportation) that will be rolling out over the next few months. As we integrate these two energy programs, we want to make the transition easy - so new OBB members, along with their data will be automatically registered in the our "new" energy program, under the terms of the PJM energy privacy policy that will be posted shortly. The creator of One Billion Bulbs, Symmetric Technologies, will be contacting existing OBB members over the next few weeks to see if they wish to be enrolled in the Pajamas Media energy program.

          From Pajamas Media About Us Page

          Who we are:
          Charles Johnson – CTO/Co-founder (name linked to littlegreenfootballs.com)
          Glenn Reynolds – Supervising Executive Editor (name linked to instapundit.com)

          I'm sure old Glenn would be thrilled if he could get everyone on Dkos to signup for his "new" energy program.
          

          Can we get a progressive alternative?
          Maybe One Billion and One Bulbs (OBOB)
          One Trillion Bulbs (OTB)
          
          FYI - have changed all bulbs to CFL's since 2004

          by exNYinTX on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:21:28 PM PDT

          •  Of course. And there's no problem with that!

            I'm sure old Glenn would be thrilled if he could get everyone on Dkos to signup for his "new" energy program.

            DarkSyde has even said so - he & Glenn have discussed this competition, apparently.

            So how is it a bad thing that they start a competition to do something that's actually good? Especially if we whip them at it?

            Pajamas Media does not benefit from our converting to CFLs and reporting this on a site they are affiliated with.

            If Fox News ran a show that featured Sam Seder or Rachel Maddow debating Sean Hannity, I'd be tuning in.

            by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:31:09 PM PDT

            •  I think converting to CFL is vital.

              The $ in energy savings alone was enough to convince me.

              And you may be right, the competition could be enough of a motivator to get some people to switch, which would be a good thing indeed.

              so new OBB members, along with their data will be automatically registered in the our "new" energy program, under the terms of the PJM energy privacy policy that will be posted shortly. The creator of One Billion Bulbs, Symmetric Technologies, will be contacting existing OBB members over the next few weeks to see if they wish to be enrolled in the Pajamas Media energy program. (emphasis mine)

              I guess I'd just rather see any potential benefits going to a progressive media organization.

              by exNYinTX on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:47:01 PM PDT

              •  I agree.

                I guess I'd just rather see any potential benefits going to a progressive media organization.

                But we'll play in their stadium for the time being, yes?

                by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:51:53 PM PDT

          •  Put another way...

            ... the Red Sox even deign to play games in Yankee Stadium from time to time.

            by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:36:34 PM PDT

            •  I think you meant to say

              the Yankees are gracious enough to let the Red Sox play in their stadium ;-)

              by exNYinTX on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:59:34 PM PDT

              •  Uh, no. Not even remotely! : )

                by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 01:01:13 PM PDT

    •  I'm in. nt

      by nu on Sat May 26, 2007 at 08:19:47 AM PDT

      •  Me too.

        I've gone ALL compact florescent about a year ago. I've had only one go bad on me thus far.

        by chrississippi on Sat May 26, 2007 at 10:37:25 AM PDT

  •  Well, it's not fair

    I replaced all the incandescents in my house something like five years ago.

    by grumpynerd on Sat May 26, 2007 at 09:13:29 AM PDT

    •  Report it anyway as part of the dKos group.

      I changed mine awhile back too . . . it doesn't have to be done today.  In fact, when you sign up there's a place for the date you made the changes and it's modifiable. I think you get credit from when you made the change, so it's IMPORTANT that green Kossacks get their CFLs reported on the site.

      Bring it, Instahack!

      by chrississippi on Sat May 26, 2007 at 10:39:05 AM PDT

      •  I changed all mine in 1999-2000

        It won't let me enter a date before 2006. I did, however, make a note in the comments box.

        by yaktx on Sat May 26, 2007 at 10:55:31 AM PDT

    •  I took a survey on DU a year or so back.

      It is lost to the annals of churn, unfortunately.  The results were that a large majority, somewhere around 70% to 80%  IIRC, of progressive folks had already swapped out their bulbs.

      by skids on Sun May 27, 2007 at 06:41:56 AM PDT

•  Cheney Knows

  Just as the tobacco industry knew about the dangers of smoking, I would be willing to bet that history will tell the story of oil company scientists who were ahead of the curve as far their knowledge regarding peak oil and global warming.  

  This administration is not motivated by ideology in its opposition to policies that would moderate co2 emissions and conserve fuel.  They are motivated by the maximization of profit.  The future is clear: at some point we will have no choice but to turn to alternative energy sources.  The administration's plan is to ensure that when that time comes big oil will be holding all of the chips.  And if the administration has its way, until that time comes there will be unending war because hey Haliburton has to live too.

  by 1world1life on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:22:18 AM PDT

•  One billion bulbs

  Awhile back I bought some cfls at Energy Federation, the place linked from Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth page. I'll have to go to One Billion Bulbs and sign up!

  Energy Federation has more than bulbs. Lots of gadgets and other good energy stuff.

  by OLinda on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:34:59 AM PDT

  •  Make sure to join the Kos group...

    I'll have to go to One Billion Bulbs and sign up!

    ...here, so that Instapundit's challenge tweak will get its appropriate response.

    by pat208 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 07:28:16 AM PDT

    •  Thanks!

      I didn't know we had one. I sure will.

      by OLinda on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:56:05 PM PDT

•  Drives me nuts: You guys should run for office

  It drives me nuts that the Democrats can never find candidates who can state problems, solutions and benefits as clearly and succinctly as the posters here.

  Let’s take climate change completely out of the equation and put alternative energy on hold for a moment. Simply developing and utilizing existing energy efficient/conservation technologies would create a more competitive domestic automobile market, provide new, high-quality factory jobs, open up a new investment vector, and save US residents a ton of money on energy thus stimulating the economy as surely as any tax cut would. In addition, it would reduce our dependence on foreign oil which would deprive both third-world shit-hole regimes and their Jihadi pals of money and influence, and save us untold numbers of American lives and truckloads of money.

  by Bush Bites on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:44:50 AM PDT

  •  Not

    only is any original content posted on DKos free use, we want politicians to use it. Free, no attribution needed, hell they can lie and call it their own if they want. I personally no doubt along with other bloggers here and elsewhere, have offered candidates, orgs, think-tanks, and sitting politicians to write soundbites, catch phrases, slogans, and submit them to this community for free analysis, tweaking, and market research. At No Charge. With no atttribution asked for, and all done off the record so they can take full credit if it works, but still blame it on us if  it backfires, and if it does work I can't so much as blurb it on my resume ...

    No response, nada, nothing. It's baffling.

    We have their attention now as far as a source of money and votes, and that's not a bad thing. We're starting to earn some respect as a source of campaign labor and grassroots activism. But when it comes to strategy, framing, etc., with a few notable exceptions, the political industry just doesn't see us as a huge reserve of free, untapped Intellectual Capital.

    And I can't imagine why that is. We've been dead right, campaign & fire tested, on our general strategy, tactics, and framing. The Harold Ford's For Senate and other GOP-Lite^tm operations have proven to be non starters. So it's incomprehensible to me why campaign advisors wouldn't go with the proven successful tactics.

    by DarkSyde on Sat May 26, 2007 at 11:44:32 AM PDT

•  c. meters

  If a Canadian says 12 c. meters of snow fell, how much would that be in feet. I tried googling, but am not sure what c. meters stands for - cubic, centi? Thanks from an ignorant American.

  I tried googling and found this!

  The C-Meter
  A version of the Scientology E-meter for use in the Freezone.

  by OLinda on Sat May 26, 2007 at 05:58:15 AM PDT

  •  Must be centimeters

    12 centimeters is 4.72 inches. There's a good US<->metric conversion utility here.

    by MyBrainWorks on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:23:47 AM PDT

    •  Thank you.

      That sounds reasonable - for snow. After I posted "feet" I thought, well I should have put inches!

      by OLinda on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:27:58 AM PDT

      •  It snows a lot in Canada

        but not all at once! :-)

        by MyBrainWorks on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:30:26 AM PDT

•  Evil Faith Power

  I don't know why people bother spending so much time and energy figuring out the reasons Bush is destroying the planet, in this case with antique car efficiencies. No one believes Bush looks for upside for anyone else but the oil corps, then other global megacorps when it doesn't hurt the oil corps, and then just general destruction when that doesn't hurt the global megacorps' next quarter.

  It's evil, and everyone knows it. The worthwhile inquiries are why millions of Americans still worship this antichrist and the Cheney devil behind him, or the host of hell's angels in the Republicy Party (and the stray/fallen ones in the Democratic Party).

  We want to fix America's power problems, we do indeed need to look beyond mechanical power and even political power. The power of America's faith in evil misleaders is the root problem we need to solve.

  by DocGonzo on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:04:44 AM PDT

•  Wahabi/Wasabi

  Darksyde, was it in one of your diaries that we learned that the optimal location for the placement of solar panels on earth would be Saudi Arabia!? So, speaking of Jihadi shitholes with tons of influence in the U.S. wouldn't that just suck to know that they will have the Europeans manufacture loads of solar panels from petroleum sources from their own cache', and then be the leading provider of solar power sometime soon in the 21st century?Ooh, that just creams my danish, I tell you.

  by behan on Sat May 26, 2007 at 06:45:57 AM PDT

  •  Saudis, first in irrigation, first in solar...

    I seem to remember that the Saudis did the same thing with food production and are now a net exporter of food stuffs.  Perhaps we can buy up some of that excess food they are producing and feed those going hungry in this country, huh?

    by mrgardon on Sat May 26, 2007 at 07:57:38 AM PDT

  •  Nope

    not me. Sounds more like something that might have come from the Energize America team.

    by DarkSyde on Sat May 26, 2007 at 11:09:44 AM PDT

•  Hurricane Season - Comprehensive Resource Link

  This is the link for all online resources for Hurricane Season: pdf tracking maps, forecasts, satellite links, National Hurricane Center, FEMA, information, etc. It is from today's Edition of the Miami Herald:  

  Hurricane Resource Link

  If you live in "Hurricane Alley" like me, this is a good bookmark for your computer desktop.

  by Trial Lawyer Richard on Sat May 26, 2007 at 07:23:39 AM PDT

•  Oxymoron

  >best written and most rational conservative leaning blogs

  I suppose a conservative-leaning blog can be well-written.  But to be rational implies not only that it follows a rational process, but that it reaches rational conclusions.  If your premises are lousy, the most logical process won't lead you to a rational conclusion.

  Hence, "rational conservative leaning blog" is an oxymoron.

  by Jay Gold on Sat May 26, 2007 at 08:23:14 AM PDT

•  NASA

  We could save a lot of money by stopping manned flights and let the robots do it all.  A former NASA employee recently told me the cost is between 5 and 10 percent to get the same work done.  At the very least we need a good cost/benefit analysis between manned and unmanned flights.  

  by kallen808 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 08:35:30 AM PDT

  •  There's also more potential

    for spinoff in a robotics based program, as we improve our national robotics capabilities.

    The biggest advantage of using robots is you can send more frequent, lower cost missions, learning as you go along from non-fatal mistakes.

    My opinion is that the cheapest path to a useful manned presence in Mars starts with a robotics program anyway.  Let the robots "die" testing out new technology and exploring the places you might need human presence.

    by grumpynerd on Sat May 26, 2007 at 09:12:21 AM PDT

•  Killing Windmills please help stop H.R. 2337

  Technically they aren't called windmills they're called Wind Turbines  Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV) has just introduced a bill (H.R. 2337) that essentially bans them without the moral equivalent of an environmental impact study done by the federal Government and introduces criminal penalties for non compliance even for small home/farm units.

  Industry Group Link to send a e-mail to stop this section of the Bill.
  http://capwiz.com/...

  Both Sides of the argument from two different California papers

  http://www.latimes.com/...

     But wind, the report notes, "is surprisingly controversial.... Not everyone considers [turbines] beautiful." The effect on wildlife could escalate as wind power grows, with bat and raptor populations especially at risk due to their slow reproductive rates. Wind farms should be located away from major migration flyways and from habitats that attract birds of prey. Projects should be reevaluated by government officials "at all states of planning and operation," said Paul Risser of the University of Oklahoma, chairman of the study group.

  http://www.sfgate.com/...

     A long-awaited federal report on the environmental impact of wind power suggests birds have far more to fear from high buildings, power lines and cats than they do from the swirling blades of wind generators at Altamont Pass and elsewhere.

  This just didn't seem to comply length wise with the rules about diaries.

  by JML9999 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 08:39:11 AM PDT

•  Asshat-in-Chief Makes Germany Rise Again !!

  BULLETIN: 1200 GMT November 7 2009
  Now entering his second year as former President, Geo.W.Bush remains "under guard" at the White House pending a new G-8 mandated 'CO2-ceasefire' summit, with Germany acting unilaterally, raising tensions with our former enemy turned ally.

  From an upstairs window, Bush could be heard shouting, "I will not negotiate with eco-terrorists."

  Despite another whuppin' under the guidelines of HR666, New Online Elections ('NOE', for short) held again this year, ex-President Geo.W.Bush refuses to leave the White House on rumors that ex-Vice President Dick Cheney has put him under house arrest.

  When reporters asked BlackGuard White House West Gate Monitor 'Sam Usa' why Cheney will not let Bush leave office, he promptly stamped his right foot and saluted, shouting, "Go f**k yourself."

  Causing another uproar today after his 'liquid lunch infusion,' Cheney Spokesman Tony Snow insisted that "Cheney's remains are still at his undisclosed location under Mount St.Helens."[sic]

  For over an hour at his midday presser today, Snow corrected his language and debated the use of the possessive as used in 'Cheney's.' Snow said "When I said 'Cheney's' I meant THE Cheneys, as in the Cheney Family."

  Reporter Marcy Wheeler remarked, "That would have called for the use of the posessive pronoun, 'their,' and your use of the pronoun 'his' contradicts your new assertion. The question is 'Where in the world is the ex-Vice President now?"

  Off-duty Blackwater civil guardsmen, fresh from a Fair & Balanced retreat with Snow, recently said they have no knowledge of the Cheneys location, but they assume that they are still safe. Some doubts were raised about this, as Mount St. Helens is smoking and no longer dormant, according to geologists familiar with the old-world science of vulcanology.

  When asked about this, Snow slurred a few of his favorite Klingon jokes to groans from the assembled reporters. Snow asserted, "Real scientists don't believe it."

  by ezdidit on Sat May 26, 2007 at 08:48:31 AM PDT

•  Thanks for the Bulb Tip

  Darksyde. It just so happens I bought 5 CFL bulbs yesterday. I'm glad to join the DailyKos effort in saving co2. According to the chart at Billion Bulbs, my replacement of just 5 bulbs will save 740 POUNDS of co2 in one year!! It was so goddamn easy. We all need to do it. I'm getting more bulbs next week. I have a few more spots for them. Unfortunately the CFL outdoor bulbs don't work for our security floodlights. These bulbs don't seem to be compatable with lights that are on sensors.

  by EmilyD on Sat May 26, 2007 at 10:13:18 AM PDT

•  Downside...

  What exactly is the downside here?

  Uh, less profit for BushCo and their buddies.

  I switched to compact fluorescents years ago. My pool pump is energy efficient. My air conditioner too, which I keep maintained and serviced regularly.

  We're buying a hybrid this summer.

  We eat organic, very little beef, no pork, lots of vegetables, as local as possible.

  But please, someone tell me what more I can do, and we'll do it.

  Anything to give less money to these Robber Barons.

  by supak on Sat May 26, 2007 at 10:24:49 AM PDT

•  We're having a garage sale

  Instead of selling the old light bulbs, about 40, we trashed them.  An old refridgerator that runs fine but is an energy pig is going to the dump instead of some poor families home.

  But now my wife's new excuse for "I want a new ..." is "it's not energy efficient anymore".   This global warming has become real trouble.

  by d3n4l1 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 10:33:39 AM PDT

•  Gathering data on the Republican's

  goals for leadership and their POS President is teaching us more than I can bear.  Can we stop this experiment now?

  by d3n4l1 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 10:35:59 AM PDT

•  N.C. Senate: Peter Agre hinted at this

  a couple of weeks ago when I (and a whole bunch of others) had lunch with him.

  In a private conversation afterwards, he and I got talking politics, and he alluded to having "bigger plans coming up" to advance his pro-science education agenda.

  I asked "Ever thought of running against Dole?" and he seemed slightly surprised, but then relaxed and said "That's not a bad idea" with a wry smile.

  Go Dr. Agre!

  by verasoie on Sat May 26, 2007 at 11:00:38 AM PDT

  •  Okay, so the article says MN, not N.C., which

    I couldn't have guessed because he lives in North Carolina (works at Duke), though he did talk at length about growing up in Minnesota.

    I'm not sure that I wouldn't favor Al Franken in this, even though Dr. Agre would have all my support, but I can see why he wouldn't run in N.C. now because he's only been there a few years, maybe 5 tops.

    Either way, good options!

    by verasoie on Sat May 26, 2007 at 11:05:37 AM PDT

    •  Dole couldn't exactly

      make much hay out of the "carpetbagger" argument in that race, considering.

      by kismet on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:03:13 PM PDT

•  The ultimate alternative fuel

  People yak about hydrogen, butanol, ethanol, etc. But I have discovered an alternative fuel that beats the others hands down: lessanol.

  Lessanol is composed entirely of a quantum soup of virtual particles that flit in and out of existence very rapidly. It was once dubbed "ether," but then lost favor for many years. Now its time has finally arrived.

  Lessanol has been proved to help your car's engine last longer than any other fuel. It's completely clean, lightweight and costs are minimal. Best of all, with lessanol in my tank, I know I'm helping America break free of its dependence on foreign oil. Also, it's great for the environment. Using lessanol, I know my car is cleaner than anybody else's around. Using lessanol lets the whole world breathe easier.

  The time is right for lessanol.

  by jimbo92107 on Sat May 26, 2007 at 11:05:11 AM PDT

•  Agre's at Duke

  why not run against Dole, since she needs a challenger to blow her out of the water?  Man, imagine that race.  Agre:  "I am smart and I know science"  Dole:  "lalalala woo woo Republicancakes".

  It would be very strange, that's for sure.

  by kismet on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:02:16 PM PDT

•  One thing that I cannot understand......

  is how an administration can hold schools accountable, but not themselves or industry.  Could it possibly have something to do with the all mighty dollar?

  While rejecting any mandatory emissions amounts, they want schools to meet their sometimes arbitrary testing standards.  They also reject any oversight in regard to spying, torture or the war in general.  Could it be that they have imperial designs? In essence there should be oversight on everybody but the Bush administration and its cronies!

  by Desert Biologist on Sat May 26, 2007 at 12:30:07 PM PDT

•  I'll record my purchases

  But I will not buy bulbs from a Pajamas Media company.

  by TarheelDem on Sat May 26, 2007 at 01:05:20 PM PDT