Thursday, February 12, 2009

Cutting the Mortgage Baby in Half

I would like to say something positive about the actions of the government in their attempts to repair the US economy. Regrettably, the market is saying it for me. Once again a group of folks are trying out whatever sort of worked last time around without really grasping consequences or providing any confidence that they know squat. All great wars are won over the corpses of failed generals and right now it looks like we are going to have to grind through several before this crisis is resolved.

The mere fact that the other side of the house was unable to support this stimulus package tells us that no one has got it on either side.

The globe has lost half of its wealth and associated credit. Please sit down and consider that for a while. This means that no loans can be profitably called. All bank assets are technically under water. That means that their capital base is really zero or less if any attempt were to be made to liquidate such a bank.

Japan went through ten years of zombie banks holding failed assets that they were attempting to shore up on their balance sheets. It did not end until they finally restructured. This crippled banking for the duration. The USA is now apparently embarked on a similar course.

The banks are desperate to hang onto the book value of the financial assets they hold or they go out of business. That is why they are presently dancing. No investor or anyone else can justify giving them such a break. Their only real escape is a workout system that also saves the borrowers. Yet we have this porridge of a program that will be simply squandered while failing to save the bulk on the victims or restore the banks to solvency.

As I have posted in the past, there is a solution that is unsatisfactory to all parties but allows all participants to fight another day. We change the foreclosure laws to put in place an interim step. We should properly describe is as cutting the baby in half. A little graphic but it gets to the essence of the solution. This is necessary because the foreclosure laws are presently inoperable and will only deliver an unsalable house and an insolvent customer.

The bank accepts fifty percent equity in the property in exchange for a good mortgage on the half it does not own and writes off the balance. This crystallizes the loss at today’s valuation in exchange for a clean title on half the property. Their customer has a real mortgage he can surely afford unless the bank was lending to the fence posts. It also creates a lively market for new buyers who will want to pick up any loose properties on those terms.

This has always been prevented by the bank act, but an exception can certainly be made in these conditions. Once this disaster is resolved, such a plan may need to be revisited, but I suspect that by then it will be properly priced and participants will actually be comfortable. Remember, giving up a half interest in a property for failure to maintain payments is ugly for both sides in a healthy market, yet it certainly allows a real workout to take place for most.

The capital for this has to come from governments but can come at a healthy price that will make the transaction very profitable for the government as the market recovers and becomes very liquid. The banks should end up with huge available capital a large shareholder in the government.

In the meanwhile this article is quite sobering and if you can stand it get to the end in which solutions are discussed. The thirties gave us a disciplined financial system that was ended under the Clinton Whitehouse and that The Bush Whitehouse simply did not understand and what the hell, everyone was making a fortune buying money short and lending long.


Bubble Economy 2.0: The Financial Recovery Plan from Hell

by Michael Hudson

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12265

Martin Wolf started off his Financial Times column today (February 11) with the bold question: “Has Barack Obama’s presidency already failed?”
[1] The stock market had a similar opinion, plunging 382 points. Having promised “change,” Mr. Obama is giving us more Clinton-Bush via Robert Rubin’s protégé, Tim Geithner. Tuesday’s $2.5 trillion Financial Stabilization Plan to re-inflate the Bubble Economy is basically an extension of the Bush-Paulson giveaway – yet more Rubinomics for financial insiders in the emerging Wall Street trusts. The financial system is to be concentrated into a cartel of just a few giant conglomerates to act as the economy’s central planners and resource allocators. This makes banks the big winners in the game of “chicken” they’ve been playing with Washington, a shakedown holding the economy hostage. “Give us what we want or we’ll plunge the economy into financial crisis.” Washington has given them $9 trillion so far, with promises now of another $2 trillion– and still counting.

A true reform – one designed to undo the systemic market distortions that led to the real estate bubble – would have set out to reverse the Clinton-Rubin repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act so as to prevent the corrupting conflicts of interest that have resulted in vertical trusts such as Citibank and Bank of America/Countrywide/Merrill Lynch. By unleashing these conglomerate grupos (to use the term popularized under Pinochet with Chicago Boy direction – a dress rehearsal of the mass financial bankruptcies they caused in Chile by the end of the 1970s) The Clinton administration enabled banks to merge with junk mortgage companies, junk-money managers, fictitious property appraisal companies, and law-evasion firms all designed to package debts to investors who trusted them enough to let them rake off enough commissions and capital gains to make their managers the world’s highest-paid economic planners.

Today’s economic collapse is the direct result of their planning philosophy. It actually was taught as “wealth creation” and still is, as supposedly more productive than the public regulation and oversight so detested by Wall Street and its Chicago School aficionados. The financial powerhouses created by this “free market” philosophy span the entire FIRE sector – finance, insurance and real estate, “financializing” housing and commercial property markets in ways guaranteed to make money by creating and selling debt. Mr. Obama’s advisors are precisely those of the Clinton Administration who supported trustification of the FIRE sector. This is the broad deregulatory medium in which today’s bad-debt disaster has been able to spread so much more rapidly than at any time since the 1920s.

The commercial banks have used their credit-creating power not to expand the production of goods and services or raise living standards but simply to inflate prices for real estate (making fortunes for their brokerage, property appraisal and insurance affiliates), stocks and bonds (making more fortunes for their investment bank subsidiaries), fine arts (whose demand is now essentially for trophies, degrading the idea of art accordingly) and other assets already in place.

The resulting dot.com and real estate bubbles were not inevitable, not economically necessary. They were financially engineered by the political deregulatory power acquired by banks corrupting Congress through campaign contributions and public relations “think tanks” (more in the character of Orwellian doublethink tanks) to promote the perverse fiction that Wall Street can be and indeed is automatically self-regulating. This is a travesty of Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand.” This hand is better thought of as covert. The myth of “free markets” is now supposed to consist of governments withdrawing from planning and taxing wealth, so as to leave resource allocation and the economic surplus to bankers rather than elected public representatives. This is what classically is called oligarchy, not democracy.

This centralization of planning, debt creation and revenue-extracting power is defended as the alternative to Hayek’s road to serfdom. But it is itself the road to debt peonage, a.k.a. the post-industrial economy or “Information Economy.” The latter term is another euphemistic travesty in view of the kind of information the banking system has promoted in the junk accounting crafted by their accounting firms and tax lawyers (off-balance-sheet entities registered on offshore tax-avoidance islands), the AAA applause provided as “information” to investors by the bond-rating cartel, and indeed the national income and product accounts that depict the FIRE sector as being part of the “real” economy, not as an institutional wrapping of special interests and government-sanctioned privilege acting in an extractive rather than a productive way.

“Thanks for the bonuses,” bankers in the United States and England testified this week before Congress and Parliament. “We’ll keep the money, but rest assured that we are truly sorry for having to ask you for another few trillion dollars. At least you should remember our theme song: We are still better managers than the government, and the bulwark against government bureaucratic resource allocation.” This is the ideological Big Lie sold by the Chicago School “free market” celebration of dismantling government power over finance, all defended by complex math rivaling that of nuclear physics that the financial sector is part of the “real” economy automatically producing a fair and equitable equilibrium.

This is not bad news for stockholders of more local and relatively healthy banks (healthy in the sense of avoiding negative equity). Their stocks soared and were by far the major gainers on Tuesday’s stock market, while Wall Street’s large Bad Banks plunged to new lows. Solvent local banks are the sort that were normal prior to repeal of Glass Steagall. They are to be bought by the large “troubled” banks, whose “toxic loans” reflect a basically toxic operating philosophy. In other words, small banks who have made loans carefully will be sucked into Citibank, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo – the Big Four or Five where the junk mortgages, junk CDOs and junk derivatives are concentrated, and have used Treasury money from the past bailout to buy out smaller banks that were not infected with such reckless financial opportunism. Even the Wall Street Journal editorialized regarding the Obama Treasury’s new “Public-Private Investment Fund” to pump a trillion dollars into this mess: “Mr. Geithner would be wise to put someone strong and independent in charge of this fund – someone who can say no to Congress and has no ties to Citigroup, Robert Rubin or Wall Street.”

None of this can solve today’s financial problem. The debt overhead far exceeds the economy’s ability to pay. If the banks would indeed do what Pres. Obama’s appointees are begging them to do and lend more, the debt burden would become even heavier and buying access to housing even more costly. When the banks look back fondly on what Alan Greenspan called “wealth creation,” we can see today that the less euphemistic terminology would be “debt creation.” This is the objective of the new bank giveaway. It threatens to spread the distortions that the large banks have introduced until the entire system presumably looks like Citibank, long the number-one offender of “stretching the envelope,” its euphemism for breaking the law bit by bit and daring government regulators and prosecutors to try and stop it and thereby plunging the U.S. financial system into crisis. This is the shakedown that is being played out this week. And the Obama administration blinked – as these same regulators did when they were in charge of the Clinton administration’s bank policy. So much for the promised change!

The three-pronged Treasury program seems to be only Stage One of a two-stage “dream recovery plan” for Wall Street. Enough hints have trickled out for the past three months in Wall Street Journal op-eds to tip the hand for what may be in store. Watch for the magic phrase “equity kicker,” first heard in the S&L mortgage crisis of the 1980s. It refers to the banker’s share of capital gains, that is, asset price inflation in Bubble #2 that the Recovery Program hopes to sponsor.

The first question to ask about any Recovery Program is, “Recovery for whom?” The answer given on Tuesday is, “For the people who design the Program and their constituency” – in this case, the bank lobby. The second question is, “Just what is it they want to ‘recover’?” The answer is, the Bubble Economy. For the financial sector it was a golden age. Having enjoyed the Greenspan Bubble that made them so rich, its managers would love to create yet more wealth for themselves by indebting the “real” economy yet further while inflating prices all over again to make new capital gains.

The problem for today’s financial elites is that it is not possible to inflate another bubble from today’s debt levels, widespread negative equity, and still-high level of real estate, stock and bond prices. No amount of new capital will induce banks to provide credit to real estate already over-mortgaged or to individuals and corporations already over-indebted. Moody’s and other leading professional observers have forecast property prices to keep on plunging for at least the next year, which is as far as the eye can see in today’s unstable conditions. So the smartest money is still waiting like vultures in the wings – waiting for government guarantees that toxic loans will pay off. Another no-risk private profit to be subsidized by public-sector losses.

While the Obama administration’s financial planners wring their hands in public and say “We feel your pain” to debtors at large, they know that the past ten years have been a golden age for the banking system and the rest of Wall Street. Like feudal lord claiming the economic surplus for themselves while administering austerity for the population at large, the wealthiest 1% of the population has raised their appropriation of the nationwide returns to wealth – dividends, interest, rent and capital gains – from 37% of the total ten years ago to 57% five years ago and it seems nearly 70% today. This is the highest proportion since records have been kept. We are approaching Russian kleptocratic levels.

The officials drawn from Wall Street who now control of the Treasury and Federal Reserve repeat the right-wing Big Lie: Poor “subprime families” have brought the system down, exploiting the rich by trying to ape their betters and live beyond their means. Taking out subprime loans and not revealing their actual ability to pay, the NINJA poor (no income, no job, no audit) signed up to obtain “liars’ loans” as no-documentation Alt-A loans are called in the financial junk-paper trade.

I learned the reality a few years ago in London, talking to a commercial banker. “We’ve had an intellectual breakthrough,” he said. “It’s changed our credit philosophy.”

“What is it?” I asked, imagining that he was about to come out with yet a new magical mathematics formula?

“The poor are honest,” he said, accompanying his words with his jaw dropping open as if to say, “Who would have guessed?”

The meaning was clear enough. The poor pay their debts as a matter of honor, even at great personal sacrifice and what today’s neoliberal Chicago School language would call uneconomic behavior. Unlike Donald Trump, they are less likely to walk away from their homes when market prices sink below the mortgage level. This sociological gullibility does not make economic sense, but reflects a group morality that has made them rich pickings for predatory lenders such as Countrywide, Wachovia and Citibank. So it’s not the “lying poor.” It’s the banksters’ fault after all!

For this elite the Bubble Economy was a deliberate policy they would love to recover. The problem is how to start a new bubble to make yet another fortune? The alternative is not so bad – to keep the bonuses, capital gains and golden parachutes they have given themselves, and run. But perhaps they can improve in Bubble Economy #2.

The Treasury’s newest Financial Stability Plan (Bailout 2.0) is only the first step. It aims at putting in place enough new bank-lending capacity to start inflating prices on credit all over again. But a new bubble can’t be started from today’s asset-price levels. How can the $10 to $20 trillion capital-gain run-up of the Greenspan years been repeated in an economy that is “all loaned up”?

One thing Wall Street knows is that in order to make money, asset prices not only need to rise, they have to go down again. Without going down, after all, how can they rise up? Without a crucifixion for the economy, how can there be a resurrection? The more frenetic the price fibrillation, the easier it is for computerized buy-and-sell programs to make money on options and derivatives.

So here’s the situation as I see it. The first objective is to preserve the wealth of the creditor class – Wall Street, the banks and the other financial vehicles that enrich the wealthiest 1% and, to be fair within America’s emerging new financial oligarchy, the richest 10% of the population. Stage One involves buying out their bad loans at a price that saves them from taking a loss. The money will be depicted to voters as a “loan,” to be repaid by banks extracting enough new debt charges in the new rigged game the Treasury is setting up. The current loss will be shifted the onto “taxpayers” and made up by new debtors – in both cases labor, onto whose shoulders the tax burden has been shifted steadily, step by step since 1980.

An “aggregator” bank (sounds like “alligator,” from the swamps of toxic waste) will buy the bad debts and put them in a public agency. The government calls this the “bad” bank. (This is Geithner’s first point.) But it does good for Wall Street – by buying loans that have gone bad, along with loans and derivative guarantees and swaps that never were good in the first place. If the private sector refuses to buy these bad loans at prices the banks are asking for, why should the government pretend that these debt claims are worth more. Vulture funds are said to be offering about what they were when Lehman Brothers went bankrupt: about 22 cents on the dollar. The banks are asking for 75 cents on the dollar. What will the government offer?

Perhaps the worst alternative is that is now being promoted by the banks and vulture investors in tandem: the government will guarantee the price at which private investors buy toxic financial waste from the banks. A vulture fund would be happy enough to pay 75 cents on the dollar for worthless junk if the government were to provide a guarantee. The Treasury and Federal Reserve pretend that they simply would be “providing liquidity” to “frozen markets.” But the problem is not liquidity and it is not subjective “market psychology.”

It is “solvency,” that is, a realistic awareness that toxic waste and bad derivatives gambles are junk. Mr. Geithner has not been able to come to terms with how to value this – without bringing the Obama administration down in a wave of populist protest – any more than Mr. Paulson was able to carry out his original Tarp proposal along these lines.

The hardest task for today’s banksters is to revive opportunities for creditors to make a new killing. (It’s the economy that’s being killed, of course.) This seems to be the aim of the Public/Private investment company that Mr. Geithner is establishing as the second element in his plan. The easiest free lunch is to ride the wave of a new bubble – a fresh wave of asset-price inflation to be introduced to “cure” the problem of debt deflation.

Here’s how I imagine the ploy might work. Suppose a hapless family has bought a home for $500,000, with a full 100% $500,000 adjustable-rate mortgage scheduled to reset this year at 8%. Suppose too that the current market price will fall to $250,000, a loss of 50% by yearend 2009. Sometime in mid 2010 would seem to be long enough for prices to decline by enough to make “recovery” possible – Bubble Economy 2.0. Without such a plunge, there will be no economy to “rescue,” no opportunity for Tim Geithner and Laurence Summers to “feel your pain” and pull out of their pocket the following package – a variant on the “cash for trash” swap, a public agency to acquire the $500,000 mortgage that is going bad, heading toward only a $250,000 market price.

The “bad bank” was not quite ready to be created this week, but the embryo is there. It will take the form of a public/private partnership (PPP) of the sort that Tony Blair made so notorious in Britain. And speaking of Mr. Blair, I am writing this from England, where almost every America-watcher I talk to has expressed amazement at Obama’s performance last week idealizing England’s counterpart to George Bush when it comes to unpopularity contests. Blair’s tenure in office was a horror story, not something to be congratulated for. He privatized the railroads and entering into the disastrous public/private partnership that doubled, tripled or quadrupled the cost of public projects by adding on a heavy financial overhead If Obama does not realize how he shocked Britain and much of Europe with his praise, then he is in danger of foisting a similar public/private financialized “partnership” on the United States.

The new public/private institution will be financed with private funds – in fact, with the money now being given to re-capitalize America’s banks (headed by the Wall St. bank’s that have done so bad). Banks will use the Treasury money they have received by “borrowing” against their junk mortgages at or near par to buy shares in a new $5 trillion institution created along the lines of the unfortunate Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac. Its bonds will be guaranteed. (That’s the “public” part – “socializing” the risk.) The PPP institution will have the power to buy and renegotiate the mortgages that have passed into the hands of the government and other holders. This “Homeowner Rescue Trust” will use its private funding for the “socially responsible” purpose of “saving the taxpayer” and middle class homeowners by renegotiating the mortgage down from its original $500,000 to the new $250,000 market price.

Here’s the patter talk you can expect, with the usual Orwellian euphemisms. The Homeowners Rescue PPP will appear as a veritable Savior Bank resurrected from the wreckage of Bubble #1.

Its clients will be families strapped by their mortgage debt and feeling more and more desperate as the price of their major asset plummets more deeply into Negative Equity territory. To them, the new PPP will say: “We’ve got a deal to save you. We’ll renegotiate your mortgage down to the current market price, $250,000, and we’ll also lower your interest rate to just 5.50%, the new rate. This will cut your monthly debt charges by nearly two thirds. Not only can you afford to stay in your home, you will escape from your negative equity.”

The family probably will say, “Great.” But they will have to make a concession. That’s where the new public/private partnership makes its killing. Funded with private money that will take the “risk” (and also reap the rewards), the Savior Bank will say to the family that agrees to renegotiate its mortgage: “Now that the government has absorbed a loss (in today’s travesty of “socializing” the financial system) while letting let you stay in your home, we need to recover the money that’s been lost. If we make you whole, we want to be made whole too. So when the time comes for you to sell your home or renegotiate your mortgage, our Homeowners Rescue PPP will receive the capital gain up to the original amount written off.”

In other words, if the homeowner sells the property for $400,000, the Homeowners Rescue PPP will get $150,000 of the capital gain. If the home sells for $500,000, the bank will get $250,000. And if it sells for more, thanks to some new clone of Alan Greenspan acting as bubblemeister, the capital gain will be split in some way. If the split is 50/50 and the home sells for $600,000, the owner will split the $100,000 further capital gain with the Homeowners Rescue PPP. It thus will make much more through its appropriation of capital gains (the new debt-fueled asset-price inflation being put in place) than it extracts in interest!

This would make Bubble 2.0 even richer for Wall Street than the Greenspan bubble! Last time around, it was the middle class that got the gains – even if new buyers had to enter a lifetime of debt peonage to buy higher-priced homes. It really was the bank that got the gains, of course, because mortgage interest charges absorbed the entire rental value and even the hoped-for price gain. But homeowners at least had a chance at the free ride, if they didn’t squander their money in refinancing their mortgages to “cash out” on their equity to support their living standards in a generation whose wage levels had stagnated since 1979. As Mr. Greenspan observed in testimony before Congress, a major reason why wages have not risen is that workers are afraid to strike or even to complain about being worked harder and harder for longer and longer hours (“raising productivity”), because they are one paycheck away from missing their mortgage payment – or, if renters, one paycheck or two away from homelessness.

This is the happy condition of normalcy that Wall Street’s financial planners would like to recover. This time around, they may not be obliged to make their gains in a way that also makes middle class homeowners rich. In the wake of Bubble Economy #1, today’s debt-strapped homeowners are willing to settle merely for a plan that leaves them in their homes! The Homeowners Rescue PPP can appropriate for its stockholder banks and other large investors the capital gains that have been the driving force of U.S. “wealth creation,” bubble-style. That is what the term “equity kicker” means.

This situation confronts the economy with a dilemma. The only policies deemed politically correct these days are those that make the situation worse: yet more government money in the hope that banks will create yet more credit/debt to raise house prices and make them even more unaffordable; credit/debt to inflate a new Bubble Economy #2.

Lobbyists for Wall Street’s enormous Bad Bank conglomerates are screaming that all real solutions to today’s debt problem and tax shift onto labor are politically incorrect, above all the time-honored debt write-downs to bring the debt burden within the ability to pay. That is what the market is supposed to do, after all, by bankruptcy in an anarchic collapse if not by more deliberate and targeted government policy. The Bad Banks, having demanded “free markets” all these years, fear a really free market when it threatens their bonuses and other takings. For Wall Street, free markets are “free” of public regulation against predatory lending; “free” of taxing the wealthy so as to shift the burden onto labor; “free” for the financial sector to wrap itself around the “real” economy like parasitic ivy around a tree to extract the surplus.

This is a travesty of freedom. As the putative neoliberal Adam Smith explained, “The government of an exclusive company of merchants, is, perhaps, the worst of all governments.” But worst of all is the “freedom” of today’s economic discussion from the wisdom of classical political economy and from historical experience regarding how societies through the ages have coped with the debt overhead.

How to save the economy from Wall Street

There is an alternative to ward all this off, and it is the classic definition of freedom from debt peonage and predatory credit. The only real solution to today’s debt overhang is a debt write-down. Until this occurs, debt service will crowd out spending on goods and services and there will be no recovery. Debt deflation will drag the economy down while assets are transferred further into the hands of the wealthiest 10 percent of the population, operating via the financial sector.

If Obama means what he says, he would use his office as a bully pulpit to urge repeal the present harsh creditor-oriented bankruptcy law sponsored by the banks and credit-card companies. He would campaign to restore the long-term trend of laws favoring debtors rather than creditors, and introduce legislation to restore the practice of writing down debts to reflect the debtor’s ability to pay, imposing market reality to debts that are far in excess of realistic valuations.

A second policy would be to restore the power of state attorneys general to bring financial fraud charges against the most egregious mortgage lenders – the prosecutions that the Bush Administration got thrown out of court by claiming that under an 1864 National Bank Act clause, the federal government had the right to override state prosecutions of national banks – and then appointing a non-prosecutor to this enforcement position.

On the basis of reinstated fraud charges, the government might claw back the bank bonuses, salaries and bank earnings that represented the profits from America’s greatest financial and real estate fraud in history. And to prevent repetition of the past decade’s experience, the Obama Administration might help popularize a new psychology of debt. The government could encourage “the poor” to act as “economically” as Donald Trumps or Angelo Mozilo’s would do, making it clear that debt write-downs are a right.

Also to ward off repetition of the Bubble Economy, the Treasury could impose the “Tobin tax” of 1% on purchases and options for stocks, bonds and foreign currency. Critics of this tax point out that it can be evaded by speculators trading offshore in the rights to securities held in U.S. accounts. But the government could simply refuse to provide deposit insurance and other support to institutions trading offshore, or simply could announce that trades in such “deposit receipts” for shares would not have legal standing. As for trades in derivatives, depository institutions – including conglomerates owning such banks – can simply be banned as inherently unsafe. If foreigners wish to speculate on financial horse races, let them.

Financial policy ultimately rests on tax policy. It is the ability to levy taxes, after all, that gives value to Treasury money (just as it is the inability to collect on debts that has depreciated the value of commercial bank deposits). It is easy enough for fiscal policy to prevent a new real estate bubble. Simply shift the tax system back to where it originally was, on the land’s site-rental value. The “free lunch” (what John Stuart Mill called the “unearned increment” of rising land prices, a gain that landlords made “in their sleep”) would serve as the tax base instead of burdening labor and industry with income taxes and sales taxes. This would achieve the kind of free market that Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill and Alfred Marshall described, and which the Progressive Era aimed to achieve with America’s first income tax in 1913. It would be a market free of the free lunch that Chicago Boys insist does not exist. But the recent Bubble Economy and today’s Bailout Sequel have been all about getting a free lunch.

A land tax would prevent housing prices from rising again. It is the most hated tax in America today, largely because of the disinformation campaign that has been mounted by the real estate interests and amplified by the banks that stand behind them. The reality is that taxing land appreciation rather than wages or corporate profits would save homeowners from having to take on so much debt in order to obtain housing. It would save the economy from seeing “wealth creation” take the form of the “unearned increment” being capitalized into higher bank loans with their associated carrying charges (interest and amortization).

The wealth tax originally fell mainly on real estate. The most immediate and politically feasible priority of the Obama Administration thus should be to repeal the Bush Administration’s drastic tax cuts for the top brackets and its moratorium on the estate tax. The aim should be to bring down the polarization between creditors and debtors that has concentrated over two-thirds of the returns to wealth in the richest 1% of the population.

If alternatives to the Bubble Economy such as these are not promoted, we will know that promises of change were mere rhetoric, Tony Blair style.

[1] Martin Wolf, “Why Obama’s new Tarp will fail to rescue the banks,” Financial Times, Feb. 11, 2009.
[2] “Geithner at the Improv,” Wall Street Journal editorial, February 11, 2009.
Michael Hudson is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Global Research Articles by Michael Hudson

Automotive Thermoelectric Generation

This is one of those items that allow significant incremental improvement on the efficiency of an internal combustion engine. I am sure there are still issues that have prevented this from been done a long time ago.

However, our increased knowledge makes this an attractive point of departure for a useful bit of innovation. Energy efficiency is no problem when you are using the waste heat dumped by a traditional gasoline or diesel engine.

Most do not realize that only around twenty five percent of such an engine’s power is delivered as brake horse power. This has notched up over the past few years, but climbing from 25% to 35% is dramatic in terms of fuel mileage, but it is still leaving a huge amount of energy on the table as thermodynamic wastage.

What made the argument for Reverse Rankin Cycle engines so compelling in large power plants, was that this waste heat, usually at 100C could deliver a theoretical 75% brake horsepower while lowering the temperature to ambient.

You still have the problem of stripping the heat which is hardly minor into the working fluid. But why has no one ever tried? If in fact we transition to engine generator combinations, then such integration means a plausible doubling of the output work. This is one of those cases in which the customer is on a budget and this adjustment is likely a doubling of capital costs. For most, it is easier to simply let the end buyer eat the fuel costs. Yet there is a second generation power plant design protocol here that has been outright ignored to our loss.

Using thermocouples to operate a few key engine components is possibly a simple and cheap way to save on brake horsepower if only because it releases the alternator load and perhaps the load generated by peripherals. 600W is a lot of energy to work with. Too bad it is not enough to also take over the full electrical load, but it is effectively free to the car.

Thermoelectrics to replace car alternators and improve MPG

http://www.gizmag.com/thermoelectric-cars-improve-mpg/10928/

February 9, 2009 Thermoelectrics - the phenomena in which a temperature difference creates an electric potential - have been known about for almost 200 years, but practical applications have not been widespread due to their low energy efficiency. That may all now be about to change as Germany automakers Volkswagen and BMW have developed thermoelectric generators (TEG) that recover waste heat from a combustion engine.

According to a report by Prof. Rowe of the University of Wales in the
International Thermoelectric Society, Volkswagen claims 600W output from the TEG under highway driving condition. The TEG-produced electricity meets around 30% of the car’s electrical requirements, resulting in a reduced mechanical load (alternator) and a reduction in fuel consumption of more than 5%.

BMW and DLR (German Aerospace) have also developed an exhaust powered thermoelectric generator that achieves 200 W maximum and has been used successfully for more than 12,000-km road use.

Thermoelectric refrigeration

Thermoelectric have been used for refrigeration utilizing the Peltier effect originally discovered in 1834. An electrical current at the junction of two different metals results in heat being absorbed by one metal and expelled by the other metal. Thermoelectrics can also be used to generate electricity using the Seebeck effect that dates back to 1770. Thermoelectric power generators convert heat energy to electricity. When a temperature gradient is created across the thermoelectric device, a DC voltage develops across the terminals.

Thermoelectric generators

Typical applications for this technology include providing power for remote telecommunications and navigation beacons. A more familiar application is a thermocouple that is a type of temperature sensor that can generate a current proportional to the amount of heat it is exposed to. Thermocouples were used in remote parts of Russian in the 1920s to power radios from a wood fireplace and they also form the basis of radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTG) that use heat from a radioactive material to power deep space satellites. The drawback to all thermocouple based electric generation is that they are very inefficient at between 3-7%.

Automotive thermoelectric generators (ATEG) have been developed intermittently since 1988 when Porsche made a exhaust ATEG capable of 20-30 watts out of a 944 exhaust system but they have never made it past the prototype stage of development.

Paul Evan

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Buffalo Commons Revisit

This is a revisit of the Buffalo Commons that has helped shape discussion regarding the Great Plains for the past two decades and has generated restoration initiatives. We posted on the topic first around eighteen months ago and this is a fresh item on the subject. Do visit the site.

What the Poppers made clear was the rather unwelcome understanding that traditional agriculture was failing in this region. It had been failing from the beginning but this failure had been masked by human optimism.

The thesis today is better accepted and the response is now better directed for this insight. Most importantly, step by step, the buffalo is been reintroduced and properly managed. The herds are expanding steadily, but not as fast as natural expansion. Some form of the old prairie is also been established, even though that biome was driven even closer to extinction.

We can all accept that this will take decades and possibly centuries. On the other hand herd expansion can be fast if simply left alone. Biome expansion has to start with the establishment of refugia.

The other arrow in this quiver that is worth exploring is the reestablishment of the buffalo back in Asia and Europe. It was there and was simply hunted to extinction by our Ice Age ancestors. There is ample grassland and steppe that is suitable for little else.

We do not understand how vulnerable the buffalo and other wild bovines were to human hunting. The muskoxen have been hunted out of the taiga and the boreal forests and the buffalo out of Eurasia. Others such as the aurochs are extinct.

Establishing herd management districts throughout the northern taiga and boreal forest is a viable option. Expanding it into the more productive semi arid grasslands is a natural addition.

In the meantime, buffalo husbandry is now in full stride. There is a ready market for both carcasses and breeding stock and good breeding practices are been established. We now need to do the same thing with muskoxen. Caribou and the like tend to be migratory and more difficult to manage but still represent a husbandry opportunity.

As you may gather, I am a strong proponent of managed ownership of all plausible wild stocks to ensure their health and long term survival and so that we may manage the related environment properly.

Huge buffalo herds may be maintained by the simple practice of a large fall slaughter and the provision of supplemental feed for the wintering breeding stock. Beef husbandry is as simple. Minimal fencing can prevent migration.

And once a biological resource is owned, its survival becomes assured. The same needs to happen the fisheries.

The Buffalo Commons is a cultural and social movement for positive, restorative social and ecological change on the Great Plains.

As both model and metaphor, the Buffalo Commons includes various, sometimes seemingly disconnected components that all add up to a new healthier life for our region centered around sustainability and regained community. This restoration economy can include everything from GPRC’s
Million Acre Projects and Plains Youth InterACTION program, to a small West Texas or Kansas farmer’s re-banking of the soil on his land, to a group of Lakota or Oklahoma or Colorado mothers working together to stage gang intervention or ward off a meth invasion, to a string of communities along two hundred miles of a creek or river working to establish clean, healthy water flows again, to environmental groups making ecologically-focused land purchases. It's problem solving through local, hands-on action.

The Buffalo Commons engages Prairie/Plains people to get invested in the healthful restoration of their communities and local environment wherever they live. Small businesses, housewives, big landholders, small landholders, inner-city children, Indian elders, cities, suburbs, towns and villages can all take pride in the unique identity of being and belonging to our Great Plains region, and working together in a shared sense of community, rather than the old way of every man (or woman) for him/herself.

History of the Buffalo Commons Movement

In 1987, Drs. Frank and Deborah Popper developed their bold new idea for a Buffalo Commons, (Popper and Popper, “The Great Plains: From Dust to Dust, PLANNING, 1987). Their continuing research showed that hundreds of counties in the American West still have less than a sparse 6 persons per square mile — the density standard Frederick Jackson Turner used to declare the American Frontier closed in 1893. Many have less than 2 persons per square mile.

The frontier never came close to disappearing, and in fact has expanded in the Plains in recent years. The 1980 Census showed 388 frontier counties west of the Mississippi. The 1990 Census shows 397 counties in frontier status, and the 2000 Census showed 402. Most of this frontier expansion is in the Great Plains. Kansas actually has more land in frontier status than it did in 1890.

Great Plains Restoration Council mounted a Plains-wide mapping project at the county level, using a series of economic and social indicators, to show exactly where the frontier is and how much further it has expanded. GPRC than did more sophisticated mapping that scrutinized these and other factors down to the Census Block level, allowing for a much more rigorous and exact understanding of ecological, biological, geographical, topographical, demographic and political conditions. Since then, we have specifically honed our focus onto a few, key target ecological areas while developing a new model of youth education.

There once were over 400 million acres of wild prairie grasslands in the central part of North America. The backbone of the Buffalo Commons movement is the work — over a period of decades — to re-establish and re-connect prairie wildland reserves and ecological corridors large enough for bison and all other native prairie wildlife to survive and roam freely, over great, connected distances, while simultaneously restoring the health and sustainability of our communities wherever possible so that both land and people may prosper for a very long time. Future generations may choose to expand these reserves and corridors, as the new culture of caring and belonging we have started today becomes an integral, ingrained part of life in the world of tomorrow, especially as extensive grasslands become needed to help absorb carbon from the atmosphere. (Highly biodiverse native prairies are excellent carbon sequesters.)

Below is the original short scholarly paper that started it all:

“The Great Plains: From Dust to Dust.”

Below is another, more recent, short scholarly paper by the Poppers.

- by Drs. Deborah E. Popper and Frank J. Popper
The Great Plains and the Buffalo Commons
by Deborah E. Popper and Frank J. Popper

Global Warming Heat

This is a good as time as any to comment on the global warming debate. Recent days have seen some fairly hysterical mutual abuse between the two camps who have even gone so far as to associate themselves with the politics of the left and right.

I want you to think about what I just said. How can an issue of science have anything whatsoever to do with your political ideas? That a conservative senator chose to hire a staffer to locate sources that challenged the deluge of pro warming material that is at least as sloppy as any on the other side of the debate is still a necessary public service.

At least I know that the more egregious nonsense will be challenged as they should be.

The debate is now descending to the juvenile art of labeling.

What I must remind everyone is that we are living in a climatic era rightly named the Holocene. Our era has demonstrated a temperature range of variability of about two degrees. Over and over again we have warmed up to present conditions and sometimes a bit higher, before tumbling back as much as two degrees. This channel has been good for ten thousand years and there is no suggestion that it ever varied out of that range, including the little ice age.

I was hopeful that the present warm spell could be maintained as happened during the medieval warm period. It chose not to on the basis of the past twelve months. We have lost a degree as you may have well noticed.

All things been equal we have returned fully to lousy weather for decades. An equally fast advance in warming is an unprecedented climate event in terms of our knowledge, while a fast chilling such as we just experienced is not. In other words a quick recovery is out of the question while an additional drop is not.

Neither side has bothered to put the debate in the perspective of the Holocene which leaves nothing to debate at all.

I have argued ample reasons for the existence of the Holocene, but that is unimportant inasmuch as it clearly exists and is the subject of several earlier posts.

It appears that the Holocene exhibits natural governors that are able to keep the climate well channeled. We have just watched a forty year accumulation of heat be handily discharged into Arctic with minimal effect. I imagine if it got far too cold that the gulf stream would sharply strengthen or the Pacific would do something.
A year ago I was prepared to give the global warming hypothesis a chance. All the Earth had to do was maintain the temperature regime. It did not.

China Mountain Notes

These two stories are of some interest. The reality of a warmer climate over the past forty years has shown up clearly in the retreat of glaciers world wide. But this is a lagging indicator.

The year old temperature reversal will now begin to be felt here and elsewhere and we could expect to see snow accumulation to begin in earnest. No one wants to see a massive reduction in these particular glaciers or the Columbia for that matter.

The second story argues an association with a dam and the major quake that hit china a few months ago. The timing was far too coincidental and it must be assumed that linkage between cause and effect is probably real.

Engineers need to be far more circumspect regarding dams and related fault systems and defensive measure need to be identified.

The good news is that it may be possible to stress test a dam by fully loading it and then largely draining it while making sure that everyone is safe. It was an expensive lesson but it may make it possible to build dams in dangerous locales.

It is reasonable to have confidence once the dam has passed through a full load and release cycle, particularly if a quake results that then surely locks down the fault.

Shrinking glaciers worry Chinese

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Shrinking_glaciers_worry_Chinese_999.html

by Staff WritersXining, China (UPI) Feb 4, 2009

The steady retreat of glaciers on China's Qinghai-Tibet plateau during the past 40 years is troubling, scientists in the Asian nation said Wednesday.

Xin Yuanhong, senior engineer in charge of a three-year field study, said the glaciers at the headwaters of the Yangtze, China's longest river, now cover 406 square miles, down from 482 square miles in 1971, Xinhua reported. The scientists said the melting, enough to fill Beijing's largest reservoir, was occurring at a "worrisome speed," the Chinese state-run news agency.

"The reduction means more than 989 million cubic meters (1.3 billion cubic yards) of water melted away," said Xin.

Xin said the accelerated melting -- a rate close to that of the Quelccaya Glacier in
Peru

, the world's largest tropical ice mass -- is attributable to global warming and will have long-term affects.
"Melting glacier water will replenish rivers in the short run, but as the resource diminishes, drought will dominate the river reaches in the long term," he said.

The information gathered during the study will be used by the China Geological Survey Institute under the Ministry of Land and Resources to draft water-preservation policies.

Dam may have triggered huge China quake: scientists

A man-made dam may have triggered China's devastating earthquake last year, some government officials and scientists are claiming, pitting them against others who insist it was a natural disaster.

Pressure on a fault line caused by water amassed in Zipingpu dam's reservoir in the southwestern province of Sichuan may have caused the disaster that killed and left missing 87,000 people, some Chinese researchers say.

Fan Xiao, 54, a chief engineer at the government-run Sichuan Geology and Mineral Bureau for the past 14 years, is one of the theory's proponents.

"The Zipingpu reservoir was built right on the earthquake fault area, so it was very easy for Zipingpu to have had an impact on the fault," Fan told AFP Thursday.

The phenomenon, well known within the science community, goes by the name of "reservoir induced seismicity" and reservoirs in several parts of the world have caused smaller scale tremors.

But if true in the case of the Sichuan earthquake, this would be the first time that a reservoir caused a large scale, 8.0-magnitude tremor.

Zipingpu, a 156-metre-high dam finished in 2006, and its reservoir, which can store up to 1.1 billion cubic metres (38.5 billion cubic feet) of water, is located just five kilometres (3.1 miles) from the quake's epicentre.

Fan said the location was an important factor, as was the fact that the huge tremor happened at a key moment for the reservoir when its water level was falling at a rapid pace.

"The most dangerous period (for reservoir-induced quakes) is after the water level in a reservoir has reached its highest point, and it changes and starts going down," he said.

That sudden change can greatly destabilise a fault, according to Fan.

"And Zipingpu's water level started to change and go down rapidly just before the earthquake happened."

Lei Xinglin, a geophysicist at the government's China Earthquake Administration, also published a report in December saying the process of storing water in Zipingpu had an impact on faultlines in the area.

However other experts in China have rejected the theory, insisting the earthquake was an entirely natural phenomenon.

Wu Faquan, a researcher at the Institute of Geology and Geophysics at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, another government-run body, said the quake was triggered by natural underground forces.

"After several studies and research, the majority of Chinese scientists have concluded that the earthquake was mainly triggered by the earth movements," he told AFP.

Pan Jiazheng, a well-known hydraulic engineer involved in the Three Gorges Dam project, also rejected the theory in an article published by Science Times, a Chinese magazine, in December.
"There has never before been a case of a reservoir triggering an 8.0-magnitude earthquake in the world," Pan said in the article.

So far, there have been at least four earthquakes of magnitude six or above in the world that have been widely recognised as having been triggered by a reservoir, including one in the southern Chinese province of Guangdong.

But Fan argued that these were in areas where previous seismic activity had been much lower, and that the area around the Zipingpu dam had already experienced seismic activity of 6.5 magnitude.

"So because previous seismic activity in the area was so strong, it (Zipingpu) could have induced an even stronger tremor," he said.

Fan said quake prevention should be a top priority when repairing some of the many dams that had been damaged by the Sichuan quake, and some should not even be re-built.

"But some are already being re-built, and the likelihood of stopping that is slim," he said.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

EEStor's Promise

We have reported extensively on the EEStor ultra capacitor battery here, but also have made no particular note of the scope that the technology holds for improvement. The technology relies on producing a matrix of small spheres of active material coated with aluminum and held together in an active binder. The fine details, we do not know and they are not at this point our business.

But we can say something. They targeted a particle size able to provide sufficient energy density to store enough energy to drive a light electric vehicle a distance of 300 kms.

This implies that any improvement in particle size will improve energy density by the cube of the magnitude of its improvement.

It appears reasonable that a first generation improvement could well produce a device that is superior by a factor of ten through one thousand. This is a huge upside. It also suggests that the potential for the technology is almost unlimited, or at least until we hit the real bounds of the particle protocol. They may have started at the technical limits although none of us believe that.

A thousand-fold improvement, which I suspect is feasible, is a revolution in energy storage.

The point is that improvement is merely an improvement in particle size. That is a rather believable research target. The rest is surely troublesome but likely very achievable.

So we all have a lot riding on EEStor’s energy storage technology.

A next generation overcomes the current issue of vehicle weight, just as the first generation overcomes the issue of vehicle range. I must imagine that a third generation will overcome the issue of power for long haul trucking and heavy equipment.

No other energy storage technology holds this promise. It would be nice to have information on what the theoretical limits actually are. You can be sure that we will eventually test them.

Robert Higgs on Stimulus

Certainly, the stimulus package as put together is perhaps worse than doing nothing. The heart of the problem is the binge of reckless mortgage loans on the bank’s books. I have already posted on how to end that. End it properly and we can have a booming dynamic economy. End it weakly by letting it to unfold slowly will delay recovery for years. The stimulus package increases public debt to serve visibly futile political ends.

If it actually supports a rebuild of infrastructure across the country, then at least some good will come out of it. Accelerating necessary programs in place is a reasonable form of stimulus.

The Chinese have the right of it all. Let millions of migrant workers go home and help stimulate the home front for a while.

The other good news out of China is that the downswing may already be ended. Reorders have kicked in and some numbers are rising or at least standing still.

The reason that I talk about China is that 60% of their business is internal. That means that they can achieve complete recovery just on the growth of internal demand in a very few of years, even if we were all simply to disappear.

The time has come for us to rethink our macro economic assumptions. Fast tracking the mortgage industry which is the only problem facing us will fast track the economy back to health. The auto industry can go chapter 11 and end their present economic disadvantage in which their competitors are trouncing them while building product next door. Protectionism is impossible in the auto industry because of this, except in the wet dreams of the union leadership.

In fact, it would merely encourage the local operations of Toyota and its ilk to crank up a massive investment aimed at grabbing market share from the big three. It would be laughable.

Anyway, bailing out Detroit will add no new jobs unless Americans can buy cars. That means they have to clean up their balance sheets and settle obligations properly with the banks. That also means refinancing credit card debt with term loans.

The eagerness of the lending business to turn loan obligations into usury must be brought under firm regulatory control.

The best solution there is to have such debt frozen and paid out at a low interest rate until settled and blocking any further credit until fully paid out by income or the time frame of the amortization whichever is greater.
Jacking such debt with fees and charges is abusive and likely counter productive.

Again, solving the mortgage jackpot now reloads the banks to do business again. Anything else is folly and solves nothing

Instead of stimulus, do nothing – seriously

Stimulus is unconstitutional. And history shows that the economy can recover strongly on its own, if politicians stay out of the way.

By Robert Higgs
from the February 9, 2009 edition

Oakland, Calif. - As we wait to see how the politicians in Washington will alter the stimulus package the Obama administration is pushing, many questions are being raised about the measure's contents and efficacy. Should it include money for the National Endowment for the Arts, Amtrak, and child care? Is it big enough to get the economy moving again? Does it spend money fast enough? Hardly anyone, however, is asking the most important question: Should the federal government be doing any of this?

In raising this question, one risks immediate dismissal as someone hopelessly out of touch with the modern realities of economics and government. Yet the United States managed to navigate the first century and a half of its past – a time of phenomenal growth – without any substantial federal intervention to moderate economic booms and busts. Indeed, when the government did intervene actively, under Herbert Hoover and Franklin D. Roosevelt, the result was the Great Depression.

Until the 1930s, the Constitution served as a major constraint on federal economic interventionism. The government's powers were understood to be just as the framers intended: few and explicitly enumerated in our founding document and its amendments. Search the Constitution as long as you like, and you will find no specific authority conveyed for the government to spend money on global-warming research, urban mass transit, food stamps, unemployment insurance, Medicaid, or countless other items in the stimulus package and, even without it, in the regular federal budget.

This Constitutional constraint still operated as late as the 1930s, when federal courts issued some 1,600 injunctions to restrain officials from carrying out acts of Congress, and the Supreme Court overturned the New Deal's centerpieces, the National Industrial Recovery Act and the Agricultural Adjustment Act, and other statutes. This judicial action outraged President Roosevelt, who fumed that "we have been relegated to the horse-and-buggy definition of interstate commerce." Early in 1937, he responded with his court-packing plan.

Although Roosevelt lost this battle, he soon won the war. As the older, more conservative justices retired, the president replaced them with ardent New Dealers such as Hugo Black, Stanley Reed, Felix Frankfurter, and William O. Douglas. The newly constituted court proceeded between 1937 and 1941 to overturn its anti-New Deal rulings, abandoning its traditional, narrow view of interstate commerce and giving the federal government carte blanche to spend, tax, and regulate virtually without limit.

After World War II, the government enacted the Employment Act of 1946, codifying the government's declared responsibility for managing the economy "to promote maximum employment, production, and purchasing power," and it has actively intervened ever since, purportedly to attain these declared ends. Its shots have often misfired, however, and we have endured booms and busts, a decade of stagflation, bouts of rapid inflation, and stock-market crashes. The present recession may become the worst since the passage of the Employment Act.

Federal intervention rests on the presumption that officials know how to manage the economy and will use this knowledge effectively. This presumption always had a shaky foundation, and we have recently witnessed even more compelling evidence that the government simply does not know what it's doing. The big bailout bill enacted last October; the Federal Reserve's massive, frantic lending for many different purposes; and now the huge stimulus package all look like wild flailing – doing something mainly for the sake of being seen to be doing something – and, of course, enriching politically connected interests in the process.

Our greatest need at present is for the government to go in the opposite direction, to do much less, rather than much more. As recently as the major recession of 1920-21, the government took a hands-off position, and the downturn, though sharp, quickly reversed itself into full recovery. In contrast, Hoover responded to the downturn of 1929 by raising tariffs, propping up wage rates, bailing out farmers, banks, and other businesses, and financing state relief efforts. Roosevelt moved even more vigorously in the same activist direction, and the outcome was a protracted period of depression (and wartime privation) from which complete recovery did not come until 1946.

The US government has shown repeatedly that as an economic manager it is not to be trusted. What we need most are authorities wise enough to follow the dictum, "First, do no harm." The stimulus package will do enormous harm. The huge debt burden it entails, by itself, ought to condemn the measure. America is already drowning in debt. But the measure will also wreak harm in countless other directions by effectively reallocating resources on a grand scale according to political priorities, rather than according to individual preferences and economic rationality. As our history shows, the economy can recover strongly on its own, if only the politicians will stay out of the way.
• Robert Higgs is senior fellow in political economy for The Independent Institute, editor of The Independent Review, and author of "Depression, War, and Cold War."

US Green Groups Hail Reversal

I have been involved directly in the extractive industries for around thirty five years and I weary of the persistent attacks of perhaps well meaning people on the industry in general.

The industry has one huge advantage over any other industry. While it has a clear beginning, it also has a very clear end. It is trivial to create regulations that simply demand a site remediation plan and bond for when a project is done. This is common sense to begin with and only disadvantages those reckless fools who attack a project underfinanced.

The reality is that no land should actually be excluded as a matter of course; simply for fear that damage cannot be remediated. It is better to place the bar high enough to curtail development were it is never wanted.

The easiest remediation prospect is the site of an oil or gas well. It lasts typically perhaps twenty to fifty years, upon which the casing is pulled and the well is plugged with cement. Everything is easily removed and the site is returned to its original status. The pad is easily cleaned up and moved to a gravel tip. In a year there is no evidence whatsoever that such an operation ever existed.

Open pit mines are obviously more of a challenge, and may need to be operated for decades to collect leachate for the contained metals. Again a site cleanup today leaves little evidence of the operation. And you still do not want one in a national park. The key remains to insist on site cleanup.

Folks need to understand that this industry is able to minimize its footprint and to generally make itself disappear. On top of that, all the metal mines in North America likely use less than a few square miles of land. Your biggest is good for a mere two square miles.

Real impact is generated for agriculture first and forestry second. After that it is all about industrial sites and housing.

In fact a proper ordering of environmental priorities should be agriculture, forestry, urban management, coal mining, oil, and mining. The regulation already exists to keep the last three in very good order, while only agriculture has avoided tight oversight.

US green groups hail reversal of Bush-era land lease

by Staff Writers
Washington (AFP) Feb 6, 2009

http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/US_green_groups_hail_reversal_of_Bush-era_land_lease_999.html

US environmentalists including actor Robert Redford have hailed US President Barack Obama's administration's reversal of a Bush-era move to lease wilderness land in Utah to energy companies. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has ordered the Bureau of Land Management "not to accept the bids on 77 parcels" that, he said, former president George W. Bush's administration had rushed to sell off in its dying days in office.

The lands involved sit "at the doorstep of some of our nation's most treasured landscapes in Utah," including Arches National Park, Canyonlands National Parks, Dinosaur National Monument and Nine Mile Canyon, Salazar said Wednesday.

Actor, environmental activist and Utah resident Robert Redford called the move "a sign that after eight long years of rapacious greed and backdoor dealings, our government is returning a sense of balance to the way it manages our lands."

"I'm celebrating wildly," said Sharon Buccino, a senior attorney for the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), of which Redford is a trustee.

"The Bush administration left a huge mess on Salazar's doorstep and this is a step in the right direction," she said, lauding the new interior secretary for "recognizing that we need to move toward clean energy and away from reliance on fossil fuels."

Bush had pressed Congress to lift bans on offshore oil prospecting and backed moves to allow oil exploration in wilderness areas including Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

David Garbett of the Southern Utah Wilderness Association (SUWA) described how one of the companies eyeing the land up for grabs, the Bill Barrett Corporation, had submitted a proposal to build 800 natural gas wells in Nine Mile Canyon, renowned for its ancient Native American rock art.

"Part of the plan was to create temporary worker camps that would last three to four years in an area that is completely undeveloped, totally remote, one of the most spectacular areas in the state," he said.

"We're not asking for no development. We are asking that areas that the Bureau of Land Management has identified as having wilderness characteristics" be left alone, he said.

But the energy industry criticized the cancellation of the leases and contested Salazar's and the environmentalists' claims that the Bush administration had forced through the lease sale.

"This wasn't rushed or last minute. The Bush administration took a lot of time to analyze environmental impact and put in additional environmental protection," said Kathleen Sgamma, director of government affairs for the Independent Petroleum Association of Mountain States (IPAMS).

Natural gas from Utah and other western states in the Rocky Mountain range provides around 27 percent of natural gas used in the United States, and has minimal impact on the environment, said Sgamma.

"For that small impact we would get the energy we need to back up renewables, and it's a secure American source of energy," she said.

Garbett, meanwhile, dismissed as "laughable" criticism that Salazar's move had harmed US efforts to become less dependent on foreign energy.

"Yes, there may be some resources here, but they are not significant and not worth the sacrifice of one of the most unique areas in the US for a brief amount of natural gas," he said.

Monday, February 9, 2009

Pineapples and Cannibalism

This article, though interesting because of the unique development history of the pineapple and the insight it casts on the lack of natural sweetening in Europe in particular is interesting to our efforts because of the description of the Indian culture of Brazil. Whatever one may think of them, they were populous. It is also quite arguable that cannibalism was a convenient response to population pressure.

Prior to the contact, there is little evidence of pandemic plagues decimating the population. I make only an exception for a collapse in North America taking place several hundred years before first contact which smells like the impact of fresh European contact that was simply brief and unreported.

We have evidence of extensive Bronze Age contract but also little evidence of a plague pandemic history during this period in old world records. Perhaps that was a result of Palace cultures and minimal interaction at the ground level. That is hardly supported though by the history of the post contact population collapse which proceeded in waves to strip both continents.

Of course, a collapse may well have occurred during initial contact in the early Bronze Age and this was simply recovered from unlike the situation after first contact. It is worth noting that the Pacific Northwest avoided collapse until the nineteenth century because of geographic barriers. This gave us a first hand record of the indigenous collapse and also is showing us that once the disease is eliminated that human populations will smartly rebound.

I do not think that Pacific Northwest populations have fully rebounded and many historic villages will never be reestablished to our loss, but the end of the recovery is surely in sight. I also suspect that Cree populations of Northeast America are likely superior to pre contact populations. It is much harder to say that elsewhere.

This reference to the Brazil of 1492 shows a thriving population that conducted tribal warfare and never wasted the results. The story was exactly the same across the water in southern Africa. I once read a book recording the experiences of a English seaman caught by the Portuguese and sold into slavery in Angola, who ran with a Zulu like Impi and who lived their life. You could not make it up, yet the Zulus two hundred years later were confirmation.

Monday, 19 January 2009

THE HISTORY OF THE PINEAPPLE

http://gardenofeaden.blogspot.com/2009/01/history-of-pineapple.html

Born in 1541 to a middle-class wool weaver and part-time cheese salesman, the great Genoan explorer Christopher Columbus has the legacy of one of the worlds greatest visionaries. Inspired by his beliefs, his journeys of incredible discovery caused an intellectual transformation that ushered in the modern age. Although he is now credited with history’s ‘most recent’ discovery of the Americas (the 11th century Icelandic explorer Leif Ericsson is currently the earliest documented European to set foot in mainland America) the fruits of his travels have also made him the accidental father of modern glasshouse production. A strange association indeed, but a feat that would never have been impossible were it not for his mis-calculation of the size of the Earth (in particular the Eurasian continent) and poor grasp of maritime navigation.

Inspired from works by Ptolemy, Pierre d’Ailly and the ‘Travels of Marco Polo’ Columbus wrongly concluded that Asia could be reached easier and far quicker by using a western route across the Atlantic. His conviction was soon to become an obsession and so he began to petition the various European Royal heads of state in order to finance his ’Enterprise of the Indies’. Beginning first with Portugal, then France and even England, he was refused time after time mainly on the grounds of the huge costs that an exhibition like this would encounter. Eventually, after already rejecting him once before, it was Queen Isabella of Spain who granted him the commission he required, making his dream of finding a western route to Asia a reality.

History was sealed on August 3rd 1492 when a small fleet comprising of the Santa Maria, the Pinta, and the Nina set sail for the first of four voyages of discovery exploring the New World. However it was during his second voyage to the South American mainland that he stumbled across the indigenous Tupi-Guarani Indians. This was the encounter that was to change the course of history, triggering a chain of events which for centuries captured imaginations across continental Europe. By doing so he set in motion a desire for massive investment and innovation, the like of which may never be seen again.

The Tupi-Guarani Indians were the dominant civilisation in the areas that Columbus visited, inhabiting the Brazilian coast from the mouth of the river Amazon, down to Cananéia, and including large sections of the Amazon basin. They enjoyed an advanced culture that practiced what we still regard as modern agricultural and horticultural techniques including the selective breeding of plants to increase flavour and yields. Unfortunately their culture also included a taste for human flesh, the dish of choice being captured prisoners of war.

Their whole culture and government was based on the act of cannibalism, and following a successful raid on a neighbouring tribe, prisoners would be brought back to the village to be fattened up. A few weeks later an elaborate party/ritual would be arranged, after which the prisoner is summarily executed by a blow to the back of the head. He was then skinned and cooked with seasonal fruits and vegetables. A small piece of flesh was then served to each member of the tribe so that they could gain the spiritual strength of the unfortunate victim.

Despite these rather gruesome eating habits the Tupi-Guarani Indians are also the first humans to encounter and domesticate the pineapple. This highly specialised fruit also has a unique characteristic, which in one way is quite poetic when you consider its ancestry. It has the only known source of bromelein, an enzyme that can digest protein. In other words the pineapple has quite literally flesh-eating properties. In fact over the years there have been numerous reports where eating pineapples has caused an itchy or burning sensation to the mouth. In extreme cases this has caused the lips and internal parts of the mouth to bleed.

Their first encounter with a pineapple occurred in November 1493 during the second voyage to the Caribbean region. After securing anchor off the volcanic island of Guadeloupe, Columbus led a small party ashore to study what appeared to be a deserted tribal village. Among wooden pillars spiralled with serpent carvings, his crew found large pots filled with human body parts, accompanied nearby by several piles of freshly foraged fruits and vegetables. Undaunted or perhaps just extremely hungry, the party helped themselves to the non-human aspect to the meal, enjoying in particular a curious new fruit which they had found. They described it as having ‘…an abrasive, segmented exterior like a pine cone and a firm interior pulp like an apple...’ Luckily they were able to return to their ship before the tribesmen returned.

During his fourth and final voyage to the West Indies in 1502 Columbus made his way down to the Isla de Pinos off of the coat of Honduras. Here that he met, along with his brother Bartolomeo, native traders travelling with a large canoe filled with merchandise. It was described at the time to be ‘… as long as a galley…’ It’s believed that this was the moment local tribesmen first traded fresh pineapples to Europeans eventually reaching mainland Europe for the first time in November of that year.

The Renaissance Europe to which Columbus returned to was a civilization largely bereft of common sweets. Sugar refined from cane was a rare commodity and at the time had to be imported at great cost from both the Middle East and the Orient. Without modern methods of refrigeration or transportation, fresh fruit was also scarce with orchard-grown produce only available in limited numbers during their harvest periods.

Once safely returned to Europe, Columbus’s succulently sweet pineapple became an instant hit.
Overnight it had become an item of both celebrity and curiosity for royal gourmets and professional horticulturist alike. Unfortunately combining its notoriously short shelf life with a 1-2 month sea journey made obtaining the fruit for Europe almost an impossibility. Its extreme rarity meant that the pineapple quickly became a symbol of wealth and luxury, but despite the best efforts of European gardeners it was nearly two centuries before they were able to mimic the perfect environment in which to grow and then bring to fruition a pineapple plant. It was during the 1600s, when the pineapple was still regarded as a rare and coveted commodity that King Charles II of England actually commissioned an official portrait by Hendrick Danckurts to immortalize him in an act of royal privilege. The theme naturally was to have the King receiving a pineapple as a gift from his head gardener John Rose.

The race was on across Europe to be the first to produce a home bred fruit, but the biggest obstacle that contemporary gardeners faced was that the pineapple could only fruit in a tropical climate. Temperature was the crucial factor as the mother plants are unable to survive frost and tended to go dormant when the soil temperatures dropped below about 70°F. At the same time they needed a minimum air temperatures of between 60-70°F, high light levels, humidity and a soil rich in nutrients. This was the challenge facing nursery men all over Europe, the main problem being able to maintain these high soil and air temperatures throughout the year. The key was to use the heat properties of maturing compost, but this had to be properly researched and refined as at the time they couldn’t get it warm enough. Eventually they realised that differing compositions affected the rate at which the waste matter broke down, and that this was directly responsible for the heat it generated.

Luckily the gardeners found that by using a 1:2 balance of green (leafy) and brown (woody) composts they could achieve temperatures of between 55 and 65 degrees Centigrade. Unfortunately not only was this still too cold for pineapple production it also did little for raising the humidity. Eventually they discovered a successful mix that was largely comprised of tan bark (Lithocarpus densiflorus). This was a North American evergreen tree related to the Beech family and greatly used in the leather industry due to its tannin rich bark. This produced the richer and far moister compost they required while maintaining a higher temperature compared to traditional composts. By achieving this they had overcome the first hurdle from which the industry could take its next leap forward.

The race was set, and the quest to grow this luxury fruit in Europe continued to be a major force for a series of technological developments in glasshouse design. Originally growers used what was available to them which were principally sixteenth and seventeenth centuries orangeries. Although perfectly suitable for over-wintering relatively undemanding citrus fruit, they had solid roofs, primitive heating, and windows not much larger than you would find in a normal house. It wasn’t long before these designs had proved completely inadequate for providing the year-round heat, humidity and higher light conditions required for pineapple fruit initiation and so we began to see the introduction of sunken tanbark hot beds were enclosed by large glass frames.

It was William Parker who in 1723 took tanbark pits technology to the next level by supplementing them with hot air flues. Housed in what was then the cutting edge technology of a ‘modern’ greenhouse, this was the first time that a specific environment had been created with the ability of being controlled throughout the year. This is generally thought to be the first true ‘pinery’ but it was Agnes Black, a Dutch woman, who grew the first European grown pineapple in 1687. The first British grown pineapple didn’t appear until 1721, grown by Henry Telende, gardener to the wealthy Dutchman Sir Matthew Decker. As this was prior to William Parker’s hot air system Henry had no choice other than to keep moving his plants from the pit into a conservatory causing him to loose months of precious growth every year.

From about 1760 it became standard practice to culture pineapples and grapevines together in ‘pinery-vineries’, which supposedly gave each species the mutual benefits of heat and shade. This practice must have been successful as it became standard practice for over 50 years; in fact there is an illustration by George Tod in 1810 shows a pinery-vinery of 1810, very similar in design to one built at Penpont eight years later. Other innovations, such as glazed sidewalls and front flues also appeared.

By the 1850s pineapples production had been perfected, growing on a three year cycle; After succeeding in getting the suckers or crowns to root in the first year they were transplanted into a ‘succession bed’ to be grown on for a second year. After that they would be transplanted into a ‘fruiting bed’ for the third. Pinery houses were often separated into two sections divided by a partition wall. This enabled each section to be individually heated allowing each environment could be controlled separately.

Pineries and the smaller pine pits continued to evolve in parallel; an excellent and sophisticated pine pit was discovered and has now been restored at Heligan, but the larger pineries have almost entirely disappeared, with only a few partial features around to show us their existence. In fact the National Trust is now involved in an ambitious plan at Tatton Park where they intend to use reconstructive archaeology to rebuild the pinery instead of their usual building conservation policy which would keep these remnants as they are in perpetuity.

Of course today pineapple growing is big business with over 15 million tons of produce being harvested by 80 countries every year. Each one sells for less than a couple of pounds, bought by people without a single thought as to the fascinating history of its origins. And why not, even on his death bed Columbus had no idea as to the value his pineapple brought to the world, but to be fair neither did he know what part of the world he had discovered it from.

Electric Car Concensus

This item came out over a month ago but it sat in my inbox as other stories got precedence. Today’s item on the general sh9ifting of the energy production industry increases the significance of this story.

We may think that we are at the beginning of a technology transition, but these stories show us that we are really at the beginning of the actual build out. We are not inventing anything in order to accommodate electric cars.
We are building what is possible in the best way possible so that improvements can be simply folded in.

EEStor cars will still need electric power depots. Those depots will need access to massive power supply. The nighttime surplus that the grid is plagued with will disappear fast and a lot of fresh grid power must be added.

Electric cars mean that a lot of this power will need to be supplied by huge new power sources, and the swift rise of alternatives is showing us the way.

***********************

We are in a world in which the proverbial crap has hit the energy fan. It is now accepted that we must remove ourselves from the oil teat just as fast as we may. The developed world has a consensus as this article truly reflects.

We knew a long time ago that it was the right thing to do but cheap oil let us put of that day. The determination now exists to see this trap ended and this article talks of the use of a dense power distribution network. This is the brute force solution that we hope is never needed.

Otherwise this is a pretty complete survey of what is brewing as more and more outfits pile into the electric car rush.

If EEStor can deliver then I will be brave and now predict the fastest convergence to new technology in human history. I can see been paid to remove gasoline cars from the rolling stock in as little as three years after this happens.

http://www.financialpost.com/magazine/story.html?id=1086989

Online exclusive: Electric storm on the horizon

David Dias, Financial Post Magazine Published: Monday, January 05, 2009

If necessity is the mother of invention, you might wonder if the electric car runs the risk of being orphaned. Gasoline is cheaper than it's been in years, and cash-strapped automakers are looking to avoid risky ventures. So will the electric car be killed yet again? Not a chance. With emerging nations increasing their appetite for oil, and the U.S. sticking to its planned increase in fuel-efficiency regulations, the race to set the standards for the electric cars industry is hotter than ever.

The battle to mass-produce the first modern electric car has garnered a lot of ink: GM's vow to take the lead by producing over 50,000 Chevy Volts a year after its 2010 launch date is being challenged by Renault-Nissan's plan to produce up to 100,000 electric vehicles by the end of 2011. What type of vehicles become dominant will impact another looming battle: the fight to set the standard for the electric infrastructure that the vehicles will tap into.

Renault-Nissan has signed a deal with a visionary California-based sustainable transportation company by the name of Better Place, which was formed in 2007. The company hasn't built anything yet, but its CEO, Shai Agassi - a software tycoon and former VP at SAP - has been busy cobbling together deals to blanket cities with charge spots and battery-swapping stations, all tied to a sophisticated IT network.
Sound like fantasy? Tell that to governments in Israel, Denmark, Australia, Hawaii and California, which have signed up, offering billions of dollars in support.

With the government's backing, Better Place will soon start building its electric vehicle infrastructure.
"We take a holistic, systematic approach," says the head of global development, Sean Harrington.
People buying an electric car will sign up for a subscription to Better Place's network. The company will install a home charging station and set up a GPS device on the vehicle's dashboard that can guide the driver to one of the thousands of charge spots that Better Place intends to build - at workplaces, in parking lots and at shopping malls. If the client can't wait several hours for the battery to charge, the GPS system will guide them to a station where the battery can be swapped with a fresh one in five minutes. Better Place hasn't announced its pricing, but insists it will be cheaper than gas. "This is not only for elite people who can afford it," says Harrington. "We are going for the masses here."

But Paul Scott of the electric vehicle advocacy group Plug-In America isn't convinced. He says plug-in hybrids like the Chevy Volt - which will be able to go 60 kilometres on battery power before switching to gas and can be charged at home - will have little use for Better Place's grid. "We're shaking our heads thinking, ‘Man, nobody's going to really need that,'" he says.

Meanwhile, a Texas company called EEStor is working on an ultra-capacitor that could allow a small electric vehicle to travel 400 kilometres and charge in five minutes. If something like this becomes a reality, the need for an electric network may vanish.

None of these threats, however, seem to be stopping Better Place from working to make its ideas into reality. In Israel, the company's pilot project is set to be built early this year, including 1,000 charge spots. Denmark and California will likely follow.

At this early stage, it's impossible to say if Better Place will ultimately set the standard for the industry, and its early entry into the sector may not amount to much once the big auto companies realize how lucrative the electric car market will be. But its bold experiment will certainly help get automakers and consumers moving toward an electric reality.

More Green than Dirty Power installed 2007

This change cannot go unnoted. A big part of this is a direct result of the reality that the permitting process for coal fired facilities is both expensive and laborious. In the meantime a single windmill, with no waste management problems is easily permitted as shown by the sheer volume going up globally.

I am expecting the same rapid build out of geothermal power in Nevada. A major facility is going on line this September, and it was green fields project as little as a couple of years ago.

It a continental high power line is run from California through Nevada to the East Coast, Nevada could build out geothermal power plants just as fast as we could find markets for the power. This would just as clearly employ thousands of people throughout the state.

The importance is that alternative power has allowed massive amounts of capital to be deployed quickly and that this will easily survive the present difficulties. The risk in building one of these is negligible and it easily supports a two decade payout.

Windmill and geothermal plants have a huge number of potential sites and the land aspect is trivial and will remain so. The regulatory cost is likewise small. Expect that the next twenty years that these systems will take their place with a maximum market share of energy generation.


More Clean than Dirty Power Installed in 2007

Written by Hank Green

Monday, 26 January 2009

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2505/86/

For all we talk about solar and wind power, they still produce tiny amounts of the United States' (and the World's) electricity. But now we've finally got some numbers reflecting just how exciting renewables are. In 2007, the U.S. the majority of new power installed was wind power, and total production of coal-fired power actually shrunk!

A total of 8.6 gigawatts of new power were installed in 2007 with around 5 gigawatts of that coming from wind. Almost all of the rest of the power addition came from natural gas.

Two coal fired power plants went online in 2007 for a total addition of just over a gigawatt. However, reductions and retirements of coal fired power elsewhere actually resulted in a 200 MW decrease in coal-generated power during the year.

That's freaking awesome.

Sometimes it's hard to see long term when we're all focused so much on the day's big breakthrough. But it's important to note that 2007 was a breakthrough year even though no one noticed. We can't just shut down all the coal-fired power plants in America, but we can start installing clean power instead of dirty power.

The Department of Energy apparently takes a long time to get these reports together, they just released these 2007 numbers about a week ago. But, frankly, I'm already holding my breath for 2008's numbers. You can read the
full report here.