January 12, 2004
A hybrid car with a new twist.
Was reading an article on the new hybrid electric/gas automobiles, and noticed that Dodge has come up with something quite interesting. It's new hybrid Ram truck doubles as a mobile generator, and is able to supply enough power for a house, campsite, or whatever. That's a nice twist. Somebody did some really creative thinking there. As someone who spends a lot of time out in the woods and on the road, I can think of a lot of uses for that. I'm sure you can as well. But mostly I just admire the genuine 21st century technology. Like I keep saying, things are getting better in a lot of ways.
Hey, here's an idea. Imagine that while you drive your car it generates and stores electricity. Then you come home, and plug it into your house. Better not tell the electric companies though, they'll come up with some way to ban that.
And it could work the other way too. Put solar panels on your roof and use that power to charge your automobile. Well, that's already here. The folks at
solarwarrior.com have been doing that for a while. But their power goes into the electric grid during the day, and then charges their electric cars at night. But the next step could eliminate the need for the grid entirely.
Anyway, it looks like hybrid vehicles are going to be the next big thing in automobiles. Pretty much all of the manufacturers are coming out with them now. The Dodge truck I mentioned is coming out this year. All electric would be better, but that will come too.
permalink, posted by mike on Monday, January 12, 2004 at 08:28 PM
December 30, 2003
Others' predictions for 2004.
I always like to predict the future, and am fascinated by articles that attempt to do so. I'll be gathering links to some of these for 2004, so that a year from now I can go back and see what's what, and what wasn't.
Here's
a list from
BBC News.
They predict Bush will get re-elected, which I heartily disagree with. It's hard to call at this point, and none of the Democratic candidates really appeal to me, but my feeling is that this will be a major Democratic landslide, the likes of which haven't been seen since 1932. I could be wrong, we shall see.
Some things they are definitely wrong about though are their assumptions that (1) Bush will outspend the Demos, since there's beginning to be an awful lot of money flowing to Democratic coffers; and (2) that money will be the deciding factor. People always assume this, but a study of presidential elections doesn't support the thesis. Bush didn't win in 2000 because he had more money, but because Gore ran the most incompetent campaign the US has seen in many years, and because of the incredible corruption allowed by him and Clinton. But people always like to use money as an excuse. It's convenient.
Another interesting prediction is that of the first black pope. I doubt that too, but it's an interesting idea.
Here's
Business Week's 2004 Forecasts.
They too predict Bush will win reelection by a narrow plurality. Like I say above it's difficult to call, but I think this reflects a common mistake people make in predicting: they predict what they WANT to happen, rather than what WILL happen. It's very difficult to separate the two, and business analysts are usually the worst at it than anyone.
Curiously, given the importance of the value of the dollar in business and economics, they don't even bother to mention it. Like most American news sources, especially the financial specialists, the policy seems to be if we just ignore it it will go away. But they should pay more attention. The declining dollar means that American assets are increasingly cheap on the international market, and other nations will start to gobble them up. Why wouldn't they? (See this NY Times article,
Weak Dollar Has Put U.S. Assets On Sale.)
But instead of concerning themselves with such minor inconsequentials as the selling-off of America, they reserve two of their ten predictions for the winners of the Super Bowl and the World Series. Very indicative of the level of maturity found in corporate America, I'd say.
There's another set of predictions from BW. In their "Movable Feast" column, Thane Peterson
reviews his predictions for 2003, and makes some for 2004. Curiously it's mostly cultural changes, not business ones, that he discusses. Although he does briefly mention the economy.
Buy American Will Become a Serious Movement Again.
Call me naïve, but I predict that the U.S. trade deficit, which is coming in at around $500 billion this year, will finally become a political issue with ordinary voters. People will start connecting this unsustainable drain with the flight of jobs overseas, outsourcing, and the steady downward pressure on the dollar.
More Americans will start wondering: Can you really have prosperity in an economy that imports nearly all its tangible goods and is almost entirely based on services? In my view, that can work only if international peace, cooperation, and free trade reign -- none of which the Bush Administration or Congress is pushing very hard right now.
I don't see what's "naive" about facing economic realities. And I also don't see what "Buy American" means anymore. Most of Wal-Mart's stuff isn't made in America. If you buy a Chrysler automobile, you're buying German, not American. If you go see "Lord of the Rings" you're buying New Zealand. If you buy a Harry Potter book, you're buying Scotland. You can't hide a trillion dollar debt behind a flag.
But that isn't a new story. Check out the lyrics to Bob Dylan's
Union Sundown, written twenty years ago, in which he outlines how the lack of homegrown products affects things.
Well, you know, lots of people complainin' that there is no work.
I say, "Why you say that for
When nothin' you got is U.S.-made?"
They don't make nothin' here no more,
You know, capitalism is above the law.
It say, "It don't count 'less it sells."
When it costs too much to build it at home
You just build it cheaper someplace else.
Well, it's sundown on the union
And what's made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
'Til greed got in the way.
permalink, posted by mike on Tuesday, December 30, 2003 at 03:27 PM
December 15, 2003
Spain and Morocco plan tunnel under the Mediterranean.
Guardian article. Continuing the spread of tunnels and bridges connecting various parts of the world, Spain and Morocco announced a plan to construct a tunnel under the Mediterranean.
Plans for a rail tunnel between Africa and Europe have taken a step forward with the agreement by Spain and Morocco on a programme of engineering tests. Machines could be digging under the Strait of Gibraltar in five years.
The Spanish transport ministry said €27m would be invested over the next three years in a geological survey of the rocks between Punta Paloma, on the south-western coast of Spain near Tarifa, and Punta Malabata, near the Moroccan city of Tangier.
A decision whether to start digging will be made in 2008.
The tunnel would be 24 miles long, of which 17 miles would lie under the fast-moving waters of the strait.
Technical studies for three potential routes between the two points suggest that the tunnel could descend to between 100 and 300 metres under the sea.
The sea bed in this part of the Strait of Gibraltar, where the Mediterranean and the Atlantic meet, lies at about 300 metres at its deepest point.
...
The two countries first began talking about a tunnel project in the 1980s, and both set up state bodies to help prepare the project.
The Spanish transport ministry said it had already bored an experimental tunnel 560 metres long.
A similar tunnel on the Moroccan side had been sunk to 300 metres.
The longest tunnel currently being planned anywhere in the world is for a 34-mile stretch of the route between Lyon and Turin, which will not be completed until between 2015 and 2020.
There are also proposals for a tunnel to link China and Taiwan, which would stretch at least 78 miles.
This development hasn't been getting much notice since it's been happening gradually. But slowly the world is being connected together. Tunnels and bridges are also being built between Scandinavia and the European mainland, the Japanese islands and many other places.
The Spanish-Moroccan link is especially important since it would link not just the two countries, but effectively all of Africa and Europe.
The implications for national sovereignty, the environment, travel and the tourist industry, public health and other areas are quite significant. It's likely that by the end of the century, if not by mid-century, people will be able to drive from anywhere in the world to anywhere else.
The people constructing these deserve a lot of respect. It is probably the most difficult and challenging of all engineering tasks. Not to mention extremely dangerous. Much more so than space for instance, which gets a lot more attention.
permalink, posted by mike on Monday, December 15, 2003 at 09:17 AM
June 17, 2003
Using globalization to achieve global democracy.
Writing in the
Guardian, George Monbiot suggests using the power of globalization itself to deal with the problems it creates.
We can seize the day, he suggests.
We may, in other words, be approaching a revolutionary moment. Economic globalisation has made us stronger than ever before, just as the existing instruments of global control have become weaker than ever before. But the global justice movement, vast and determined as it is, is in no position to seize it. The reason is simple: we do not possess a political programme. Without a programme, we can only oppose. Without a programme, we permit our opponents to select the field of battle.
He's probably too idealistic and radical for most, but he's got a lot of good ideas here. What he suggests is all very workable.
permalink, posted by mike on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 at 11:53 AM
June 16, 2003
Devolution and regional government around the world.
Devolution, for Americans who haven't yet heard of it, is the idea of returning powers to local regions, and giving them prime responsibility for managing their internal affairs. In the UK, it's the process by which Wales and Scotland have gotten their own parliaments as a step towards complete independence. The northern areas of Great Britain are also getting their own assemblies.
While most attention is on the ever-growing European Union, there is this countervailing trend also taking place. It's getting bigger and smaller at the same time. That may seem to be paradoxical, but actually it's two sides of the same coin.
The Guardian offers
a special survey on devolution and regional government around the world.
As John Prescott announces referendums on the creation of three new regional assemblies for England - with powers to be specified at a later date - for the north-east, the north-west and Yorkshire and Humber, here is how some of our European neighbours and transatlantic friends govern themselves.
... Canada
With a federal system created by a UK act of parliament in 1867, Canada may prove a particularly relevant example to Mr Prescott. Although central government can officially overrule the 10 provinces' laws, this has not happened in 50 years, and over the past 80 years the number of provinces, and their competencies, have grown. Provinces now raise their own taxes, control 41% of total public expenditure, and look after health, education, social security, prisons, law, justice, and the police.
... Germany
Probably the most devolved state in Europe. After reunification, West Germany's 11 Lander were joined by 5 from the former East Germany. Each has its own constitution, parliament and executive, members are elected by additional member system, and, perhaps most importantly, the national second chamber (Bundesrat), which has a power of veto over the Bundestag, consists entirely of Land ministers.
Landers have their own judicial systems, their own powers of primary legislation and tax raising powers, are responsible for education, culture, safety, law & order and ultimately control nearly 40% of public expenditure.
... Spain
One of the most devolved governmental systems in Europe, Spain's 17 elected and autonomous regions grew up following constitutional changes in the late 1970s after the death of Franco. Each of these "communidades autonomic" has its own president, executive, parliament and high court of justice, although some have more powers (eg tax systems, police) than the standard portfolio of education, health, urban planning, culture, agriculture and social services.
Also see their
special section on local government in the UK. This
article on the new spirit in northern England is also fascinating.
"They don't know what the north-east is about down there," says lorry driver Kevin Walker, munching his sandwiches on a wall outside the cathedral. "We're just a place on the map. They make all the decisions down there and it's about time our own people up here made them." David Gillespie, a part-time tourist guide who lives near the cathedral, agrees. "I have lived up here for 26 years and there is a feeling of being out on a limb," he says. "Keeping the gospels down there is a disgrace. I find a lot of people now want their own north-east government."
But at Durham county council's headquarters a mile away, Ken Manton, the council leader, thinks people are still confused about the prospect of devolution. An extensive council survey revealed recently that while most wanted a referendum, they were unsure about how to vote. "There is a latent feeling of isolation from London," says Mr Manton. "I see London now as a state within a state and we need a counterbalancing force in the north-east."
While the US wants to believe superpowers and empires are the way to go, the rest of the world is moving toward more local democracy. But I think that in the US as well, for the first time in generations, power is beginning to flow from the federal government to the states. On a number of issues the states are taking the lead: health care, prosecution corporate crime, and more.
And governors are now becoming more powerful than senators. Consider that Carter, Reagan, Clinton and Bush the Second were all former governors who had never held a federal position. Their power came from the states.
permalink, posted by mike on Monday, June 16, 2003 at 09:54 AM
October 14, 2002
More futile efforts to block the future.
The NY Times
reports that Vietnam is now requiring permission for new web sites, at least for "businesses and organizations", however that's defined. That's a first, I think. At least, I haven't heard of any other governments doing this, certainly not so openly and directly. The US government requires internet radio sites to get permission from the government and pay fees in order to exercise their civil rights, which is essentially the same thing, but of course, when Americans do it it's called "business", not censorship.
"Worried by the increasing numbers of Vietnamese with access to news from outside sources, officials have been trying to tighten their control over the Internet. ... The government recently ordered that owners of the country's estimated 4,000 Internet cafes be held responsible for controlling their clients' Web surfing. ... Under current law, however, Internet offenses in the tightly controlled communist country are punishable by fines of up to $3,250 or up to three years in jail."
Anyway, it amazes me that governments continue to think that they can do this. China's attempt to block Google only lasted a few weeks, and so on. But it's a frightening trend.
permalink, posted by mike on Monday, October 14, 2002 at 10:19 AM
End of entries.