Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Is this some sort of underwear party?
Sunday, August 18, 2013
House at the End of the Drive
Firstly, I want to thank David Oman for the invitation to the premier screening of his film, House at the End of the Drive, the after party, and a visit for the 44th anniversary of the Sharon Tate and Guests murder perpetrated by Manson Family members. I was unable to attend any of these for financial and vehicular reasons, unfortunately, but I hear it rocked!.
Those of you attending the Las Vegas Paracon this upcoming week will have a chance to meet David, and I urge you to do so! Having spoken with David a few times, corresponded with him several times and having friends in common, I can say emphatically that David is a class act, and a good guy, even if I have not yet met him in person.
It is a little strange how things sometimes come round and round in life for no apparent rhyme or reason, but many times there is a reason if not a rhyme. It's simply a matter of finding the heartbeat of the subject, feeling the cause and effect of a series of events to understand them.
For me some of these things include the shootout at the OK Corral, Valentino's untimely passing, the Black Dahlia murder, the JFK and RFK's assassinations.
Another such event, which for me as a retired paranormal investigator with avid curiosity, a person who lived at the time of the events below and who remembers how the events effected not only the L.A. area, but the nation, and has repeatedly popped into my "sphere of awareness" at regular intervals, is the Manson murders of 1969.
Charles Manson still occasionally makes the news, not as often as in years past, as do some of his minions, usually around the time any of them become eligible for parole hearings. Sadly many of the victims are fast being forgotten to all but a few people with each passing year, as folks who knew them, or of them, pass away and the divergence of time separates us, the living, from them, the ruthlessly taken.
I'm pretty sure that I was on the road with my mom and step dad when these killings occurred, as I recall relatives in Seattle, WA, and Stephenville, Texas, talking about the news of killings "back home," and expressing concern about the "Crazies and Hippies" back in California when we visited them on a quasi cross country drive.
"Yeah, the Hippies and crazies only exist in Cali," I remember thinking with scorn, as I had seen hippies on the whole road trip virtually everywhere. It was the time after all, and hell, most of the crazies in Cali migrated there from everywhere else. Manson, originally named "No Name Maddox" originated in Ohio after his underage mother ran away from her home in Kentucky. Tex Watson was from, you guessed it, Texas, for example.
Murdered just over 44 years ago for heinous, nearly unfathomable reasons, reasons that only could come from the mind of a psychopath, reasons which had their roots in racial prejudice, purely unadulterated evil reasons, were: Actress Sharon Tate and her unborn child, a friend of her husband (the infamous Roman Polanski, who was in London at the time) Wojciech Frykowski, his girlfriend coffee heiress Abigail Folger, and Jay Sebring, (who had at one time been Tate's lover) and Steven Parent, an 18 year old kid who was just leaving the property after having visiting his friend, the caretaker on the property (caretaker survived because the killers didn't know he was there) when the attacks began. The next night Leno and Rosemary LaBianca were also brutally murdered in cold blood. Preceding these murders, and in a way a precursor to these killings, was the murder of Mason Family associate Gary Hinman.
Allow me to address the Family Manson briefly.
Manson was a career criminal, a bum, user, a lowlife, a "man" who had spent nearly half his life in prison prior to these murders. At this point he was a 35 year old man who was preying on the vulnerable Lost Children of the hippie era who were anti establishment, yet looking for something to belong to. These were 19 to 22 year old adults, and his "rap" was (apparently) convincing enough that these kids, and that's what they were, kids, would kill for him in cold blood simply because he told them to. Another aspect is that many of these kids thought Manson was Jesus Christ incarnate, some were utter convinced. They would do whatever he said, because it was "for the family."
However, I in no way mean they were innocent dupes entirely. They were old enough to know better, old enough to know right from wrong. Manson a messiah? Anyone with half a brain would know that a man ordering crimes to be committed, commanding them to commit larceny and murder is not a messiah, is not of God, but quite the opposite. No, they knew better.
So when saying Manson Family, it's not like Ozzie and Harriet, but more like a criminal family, like a gang.
Manson's goal was to create a race war, and failing that, to go back to prison, because he knew he'd eat, sleep, exist on the taxpayer dime.
Wikipedia says: "When released from prison on March 21, 1967, he had spent more than half of his 32 years at that time in prisons and other institutions. Telling the authorities that prison had become his home, he requested permission to stay, a fact touched on in a 1981 television interview with Tom Snyder."
To create a race war, Manson said he'd "have to show blacks how it's done." The idea was that he'd incite the wrath of whites by slaughtering high profile white "piggies" of the establishment, then whites would then begin killing blacks. Blacks would retaliate, but the whites would be divided into racist and non racist factions, which would allow the blacks to kill off all the whites. Then they, the "victorious blacks, being incapable of running the world," would turn to Charlie to run it for them, he as their master." This is NOT me saying this, this is straight from autobiographies and interviews the Manson Family members themselves. Nothing but pure, vile evil.
Now that I've established these points, the movie, House at the End of the Drive.
I have not seen the film, unfortunately, and have not talked with David about what is ok to say and not ok to say, so I'll encapsulate.
The movie is loosely based on actual, real life events in the area that the Tate and guests murders occurred.
The famed Barry Taff visited the area the film is based on and experienced fugues, fainted several times, saw inanimate objects move and became ill after many visits. Taff wrote that the whole area is a "positive magnetic anomaly", which can not be explained by him nor the USGS. He also stated that the area the film is set was considered by Natives to be sacred. He also stated that it is very much haunted.
The characters decide to go into the murder house on the anniversary of the killings, and find themselves sort of reliving the killings.
That's all I'm going to say on it, although I have read more from the reviews, and btw, I have yet to see a bad review of this movie!
On the murder house itself:
Other people who lived there:
Before the Manson murder
Built for French actress Michele Morgan in 1944.
Cary Grant and Dyan Cannon
Henry Fonda
George Chakris
Mark Lindsey
Paul Revere and the Raiders
Samantha Eggar
Olivia Hussey
Terry Melcher (Doris Day's son)
Candice Bergen
After the murders the owner of the property, Rudi Altobelli lived in the house for the next 20 years, and as he said on 20/20, he felt "safe, secure, love and beauty" for those years. Mr. Altobelli sold the property for 1.6 million dollars.
According to Wikipedia:
"The final resident of the original house was the musician Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails. Reznor began renting the house in 1992 and had a recording studio built inside.[6] This studio, dubbed Pig (sometimes called Le Pig) in a reference to murderer Susan Atkins writing "Pig" in Tate's blood on the front door of the house, was the site of recording sessions for Nine Inch Nails' 1992 EP Broken and 1994 album The Downward Spiral as well as Marilyn Manson's 1994 debut album Portrait of an American Family.[6] Reznor moved out of the house in December 1993, later explaining that "there was too much history in that house for me to handle.""
After Reznor left, the house was torn down in 1994, a new mansion constructed in its place which in no way resembles the original. The address has also been changed.
So, do you want to see a frightening film that is based on actual events?
House at the end of the drive. See it!
Links
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/l-a-sneak-peak-house-at-the-end-of-the-drive-inspired-by-the-manson-murders 's 1994 debut album 's 1994 debut album height=object width=
Saturday, July 6, 2013
Paranormal TV shows phooey
Hi everyone! A long overdue opinion piece. I was bored, waiting for something else, so why not.
We've been pretty quiet over here, and that's largely due to my having retired from the para-field and no one really grabbing the reins. I'm still around for advisory purposes, but will hunt if an excellent hunt comes up, or somebody really needs help, but otherwise nah, the field has become too weird to associate too closely with.
Allow me to explain. This might make some angry, be it by subject matter or a perceived "haughtiness" or whatever, and I really don't give a flying fork.
My first likely paranormal experience that I remember was in 1965, the next few in the intervening years, my biggest for sure experience was in 1977, my first ghost hunt was in June of 1979, the first hunt I organized was in 1989 (or 90), my first actual ghost sighting was 1996, 1997, face to face..
I see a lot of questions on facebook fan pages like "Are there too many ghost TV shows?" or "Is TV the reason you're in the paranormal field." I understand, they are making their fan pages and fan bases interactive, and that's cool.
But to the first question I have to say yes, there are too many. Why? How many ghost shows come and go every year? Some have had great promise, others not so much, and many don't make it due to over saturation.
Now follow along. I have some experience with this, having worked with people to a) bring shows to market, and b) bring locations and stories to TV shows, and I have never taken a dime for it.
TAPS is the grand-daddy, they made the paranormal normal. Those other guys (Is that yooooou making all those shows?) had a flying brick, and sans that would not be on the map. Was the magic brick legit? Yes, I believe it was. Was it cause for a TV show, maybe not, but they have succeeded where so many have not. What made the difference? Timing, uniqueness, commitment, and core.
Question 2, and this is the one that disturbs me most, "Is TV the reason you're in the paranormal field."
I have known people who's sole reason for being in the field was the pursuit of a television show. They have harmed others, defamed others, stolen from others, and lied their asses off to try and land a ghost TV show.
I had one group of people I worked with who had watched a TV show and knew all about the field, in equal measure (or greater) to/than the information I had amassed since the 1970's! These folks sole goal? Yup, the lure of being a TV personality, and they would cause harm to anyone who refused to help them, be it by slander or whatever other means.
Too many TV shows? Yes, and I think we'll have a season or two more of fly-by-night TV shows that will pop up and disappear, and after that I think it will become stale, old hat.
People getting into the field for the prospect of stardom? Huge problem, and a problem which has not advanced the field what-so-ever. In fact one might argue that it has actually set the field back years, maybe decades.
You see, when I got in this field there were giants, some of whom are still around today. The average intellectual acumen was incredibly high, and those are the type of folks I enjoy talking to, the smart ones, because something always rubs off. The "I want to be a big somebody" crowd are generally brain dead. They tend to be "street smart", (which is another way of saying "shifty,") but really develop nothing on their own, no theories (except for what's shown on the boob tube) , no new techniques, no new equipment, no new nothing. The pioneers thought outside the box, and could give you solid reasoning for why they did what they did the the way that they did it. These kids? "It was on TV." Even the history of a place might as well not exists to these folks, whereas to the serious investigator of yore, that was a HUGE piece of the puzzle.
Other offshoot of the "WOW, TV" factor is the profiteering. I can see if you write a book on the field or whatever, but places charging, conferences, conventions and the like, which, while they began in earnest to allow people to meet their TAP's caliber of stars, they have become something of a freak show, where a celebrity, (which at its root means "one who is celebrated for their achievement") can be someone who walks past a camera on a "lock down." Personally I would sooner celebrate the local dog catcher who actually gives back to the community, or the soldier who gives his service or even life in the name of freedom, or the college athlete who does what he or she does for the love of it with a remote chance of making it to the major leagues, all while having to carry a full load academically, and be passing those courses.
So when I say I retired from the field, what I'm really saying is that my priorities are different, and in my opinion anyway, more altruistic than that of the opportunists. I'm really saying is that the field is damaged, it is ill. I'm saying that it will, on its present course, become just as disreputable as it did in Houdini's day, and for much the same reasons. I can't change that, one person, and I refuse to go down with those who are sinking it. This field came into existence to try and communicate with the departed, to prove it was possible, to help the living deal with their grief, or to help the living deal with an unsavory haunting. It was never intended to be a circus.
If you don't understand that, or the Harry Houdini reference, then it might be time to turn off the tube and crack a book.
Just saying.
We've been pretty quiet over here, and that's largely due to my having retired from the para-field and no one really grabbing the reins. I'm still around for advisory purposes, but will hunt if an excellent hunt comes up, or somebody really needs help, but otherwise nah, the field has become too weird to associate too closely with.
Allow me to explain. This might make some angry, be it by subject matter or a perceived "haughtiness" or whatever, and I really don't give a flying fork.
My first likely paranormal experience that I remember was in 1965, the next few in the intervening years, my biggest for sure experience was in 1977, my first ghost hunt was in June of 1979, the first hunt I organized was in 1989 (or 90), my first actual ghost sighting was 1996, 1997, face to face..
I see a lot of questions on facebook fan pages like "Are there too many ghost TV shows?" or "Is TV the reason you're in the paranormal field." I understand, they are making their fan pages and fan bases interactive, and that's cool.
But to the first question I have to say yes, there are too many. Why? How many ghost shows come and go every year? Some have had great promise, others not so much, and many don't make it due to over saturation.
Now follow along. I have some experience with this, having worked with people to a) bring shows to market, and b) bring locations and stories to TV shows, and I have never taken a dime for it.
TAPS is the grand-daddy, they made the paranormal normal. Those other guys (Is that yooooou making all those shows?) had a flying brick, and sans that would not be on the map. Was the magic brick legit? Yes, I believe it was. Was it cause for a TV show, maybe not, but they have succeeded where so many have not. What made the difference? Timing, uniqueness, commitment, and core.
Question 2, and this is the one that disturbs me most, "Is TV the reason you're in the paranormal field."
I have known people who's sole reason for being in the field was the pursuit of a television show. They have harmed others, defamed others, stolen from others, and lied their asses off to try and land a ghost TV show.
I had one group of people I worked with who had watched a TV show and knew all about the field, in equal measure (or greater) to/than the information I had amassed since the 1970's! These folks sole goal? Yup, the lure of being a TV personality, and they would cause harm to anyone who refused to help them, be it by slander or whatever other means.
Too many TV shows? Yes, and I think we'll have a season or two more of fly-by-night TV shows that will pop up and disappear, and after that I think it will become stale, old hat.
People getting into the field for the prospect of stardom? Huge problem, and a problem which has not advanced the field what-so-ever. In fact one might argue that it has actually set the field back years, maybe decades.
You see, when I got in this field there were giants, some of whom are still around today. The average intellectual acumen was incredibly high, and those are the type of folks I enjoy talking to, the smart ones, because something always rubs off. The "I want to be a big somebody" crowd are generally brain dead. They tend to be "street smart", (which is another way of saying "shifty,") but really develop nothing on their own, no theories (except for what's shown on the boob tube) , no new techniques, no new equipment, no new nothing. The pioneers thought outside the box, and could give you solid reasoning for why they did what they did the the way that they did it. These kids? "It was on TV." Even the history of a place might as well not exists to these folks, whereas to the serious investigator of yore, that was a HUGE piece of the puzzle.
Other offshoot of the "WOW, TV" factor is the profiteering. I can see if you write a book on the field or whatever, but places charging, conferences, conventions and the like, which, while they began in earnest to allow people to meet their TAP's caliber of stars, they have become something of a freak show, where a celebrity, (which at its root means "one who is celebrated for their achievement") can be someone who walks past a camera on a "lock down." Personally I would sooner celebrate the local dog catcher who actually gives back to the community, or the soldier who gives his service or even life in the name of freedom, or the college athlete who does what he or she does for the love of it with a remote chance of making it to the major leagues, all while having to carry a full load academically, and be passing those courses.
So when I say I retired from the field, what I'm really saying is that my priorities are different, and in my opinion anyway, more altruistic than that of the opportunists. I'm really saying is that the field is damaged, it is ill. I'm saying that it will, on its present course, become just as disreputable as it did in Houdini's day, and for much the same reasons. I can't change that, one person, and I refuse to go down with those who are sinking it. This field came into existence to try and communicate with the departed, to prove it was possible, to help the living deal with their grief, or to help the living deal with an unsavory haunting. It was never intended to be a circus.
If you don't understand that, or the Harry Houdini reference, then it might be time to turn off the tube and crack a book.
Just saying.
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
How do we make solar work and why, part 2
In 2010, the average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential
utility customer was 11,496 kWh, an average of 958 kilowatt hours (kWh) per
month. Tennessee had the highest annual consumption at 16,716 kWh and Maine the
lowest at 6,252 kWh.
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3
Using $5.00 per watt as a basis for calculating installation costs, each system costs $37,000 to install, excluding all rebates and tax credits for a 1000 kWh system, just above the national average 958 kWh used.
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3
Using $5.00 per watt as a basis for calculating installation costs, each system costs $37,000 to install, excluding all rebates and tax credits for a 1000 kWh system, just above the national average 958 kWh used.
http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/solar.html
That $90,000,000,000.00 that was thrown at the solar companies by the U.S. government? You know, the companies that went bankrupt? That $90B would have installed 1000 kWh self sufficient solar systems into 2,432,432.43 homes. Moreover, that economy of scale would have likely reduced the per house cost.That's monthly electrical savings of about $243,243,243.24, or $2,918,928,918.88 per year total, a payback of 30.83 years, the average mortgage length.
So we see a benefit for the home owner, what benefit for all the other homes, people that did not receive the government money for self sufficient electric panels?
Lower electric rates due to the fact that many of these installs will dump power into the grid. More reliable electrical service. A drop in solar system prices. Less dependence on foreign energy, which enhances national security. Cleaner air and water. Jobs.
On jobs, that could be on the order of about 100,000 jobs. That is factored at 1000 companies, (20 per state), 100 jobs per company completing 10 installs per company per week for 2.43 years.
Let's talk some more about jobs, this time on the manufacturing side.
During the last solar "boom" (or bust) in the US, the vast majority of solar panels were coming from overseas, mostly from China, who, with their cheap labor can manufacture goods at a fraction of the cost that we can domestically. Since the solar bust there have been firms in China that have gone out of business for lack of sales.
Now, if we're talking about 2 million plus homes getting solar panels installed, then economy of scale should kick in on the manufacturing side, making solar panels affordably made domestically. That too equates to many more jobs. Thousands, potentially.
Inverters as well. Frames, concrete tiles, wires, maintenance, the list goes on.
So if the homeowner is given the money for the install based on:
1) their house is ideally situated to take full advantage of the solar installation.
2) on the caveat that they will lose $50.00 a month, $600.00 a year in their nominal tax deduction. Why not $1200 a year? Because they need incentive to agree to the install and structural changes in the house, but also due to the fact that many, if not all, insurance companies will charge the homeowner additional monies for their coverage because of the solar panels. So offset that cost by $50.00 a month.
"Well, if they aren't really gaining anything, what's the incentive?" you may ask.
It's the same incentive that people who did not get the panels have in allowing their tax money to be given to the people who got the panel installations, lower electrical rates, more reliable electrical service, a drop in solar system prices, less dependence on foreign energy, which enhances national security, cleaner air and water, and jobs, plus the feel good benefit of doing something good for our planet and our children.
It's not for everyone, for certain, but I think the benefits are very definitely worth it, for the economy, national security, and cleaner energy.
That $90,000,000,000.00 that was thrown at the solar companies by the U.S. government? You know, the companies that went bankrupt? That $90B would have installed 1000 kWh self sufficient solar systems into 2,432,432.43 homes. Moreover, that economy of scale would have likely reduced the per house cost.That's monthly electrical savings of about $243,243,243.24, or $2,918,928,918.88 per year total, a payback of 30.83 years, the average mortgage length.
So we see a benefit for the home owner, what benefit for all the other homes, people that did not receive the government money for self sufficient electric panels?
Lower electric rates due to the fact that many of these installs will dump power into the grid. More reliable electrical service. A drop in solar system prices. Less dependence on foreign energy, which enhances national security. Cleaner air and water. Jobs.
On jobs, that could be on the order of about 100,000 jobs. That is factored at 1000 companies, (20 per state), 100 jobs per company completing 10 installs per company per week for 2.43 years.
Let's talk some more about jobs, this time on the manufacturing side.
During the last solar "boom" (or bust) in the US, the vast majority of solar panels were coming from overseas, mostly from China, who, with their cheap labor can manufacture goods at a fraction of the cost that we can domestically. Since the solar bust there have been firms in China that have gone out of business for lack of sales.
Now, if we're talking about 2 million plus homes getting solar panels installed, then economy of scale should kick in on the manufacturing side, making solar panels affordably made domestically. That too equates to many more jobs. Thousands, potentially.
Inverters as well. Frames, concrete tiles, wires, maintenance, the list goes on.
So if the homeowner is given the money for the install based on:
1) their house is ideally situated to take full advantage of the solar installation.
2) on the caveat that they will lose $50.00 a month, $600.00 a year in their nominal tax deduction. Why not $1200 a year? Because they need incentive to agree to the install and structural changes in the house, but also due to the fact that many, if not all, insurance companies will charge the homeowner additional monies for their coverage because of the solar panels. So offset that cost by $50.00 a month.
"Well, if they aren't really gaining anything, what's the incentive?" you may ask.
It's the same incentive that people who did not get the panels have in allowing their tax money to be given to the people who got the panel installations, lower electrical rates, more reliable electrical service, a drop in solar system prices, less dependence on foreign energy, which enhances national security, cleaner air and water, and jobs, plus the feel good benefit of doing something good for our planet and our children.
It's not for everyone, for certain, but I think the benefits are very definitely worth it, for the economy, national security, and cleaner energy.
Monday, January 21, 2013
Renewable Energy Means Security and Stability.
Hi all! Quick note before I dive in here. I'm not going to only and always write about paranormal stuff, my apologies as you're bound to be put off, because I do have a wide range of interests. This is not a paranormal post, so change channels now, :-).
Solar, in and of itself, is good, clean, renewable energy. I have been
interested in it since I was a little boy when my step dad brought me a solar
powered toy car. How the solar industry was subsidized during the recession,
however, was poorly executed. Rather than throwing money at the businesses, and
expecting them to step up and do the right thing for the public was naive. What
we should have done is subsidized ONLY the taxpayers to convert to solar, and
let that buying power fuel the solar industry, rather than basically giving the
money away while offering only tax credits. Why is this important to the tax
payer?
Two words: Energy Independence. E.I. is important to national security in so many ways, that I shouldn't even have to mention it, but let's boil it down this way to save space: Every bit of energy that we can produce domestically reduced that which we have to purchase internationally. Simple. For instance, cheaper, or free, energy for electric cars means less oil that needs to be imported, which means more of our capital kept in our own country. It also means that the middle east, always a hot spot due to oil, becomes exponentially less important to our foreign policy, and make it less likely our young men and women will have to fight and die there.
One way I think we could make some big inroads to energy independence is to institute some mandatory requirements that come packaged with huge tax savings for the consumers, you and I.
1. All new home construction should use solar cell impregnated concrete tile roofs on their sun facing sides. My house has a concrete roof, and as long as we don't walk on it the roof will last virtually forever. Each tile is molded to reduce weight while enhancing strength, and it's a relatively simple thing to mold them to allow installation of a solar cell in their upper surface, each roof tile pre wired, run to either a single inverter or to a series of smaller, modular inverters. I have seen this concept in the field, and it is effective, and a lot less ugly than the large metal frame arrays. Best of all, they are incorporated into the home's structure. This translates into massive energy $avings for the consumer, especially when the surplus is sold back to the utilities. The downside is that the cells will likely have to be replaced in about 20 years, but by that time the state of the art cells will be that much more efficient.
2. Older homes being re-roofed (asphalt tiles last about 20 to 25 years, architectural tiles up to about 35) should be re roofed in the same fashion as new construction, with solar concrete tiles, the trusses and rafters re enforced when needed to cope with the additional weight. What most people don't know is that an asphalt roof is pretty heavy by itself, anyone who has laid or removed it will tell you that, and one thing I see in the field quite often is layers upon layers of asphalt roof material layer over each other (a no-no, btw), so in many cases re enforcement of the roof when converting to concrete tiles would not be needed. I have seen and documented serious roof bowing under the weight of previous asphalt roofs replaced with concrete, so it does happen.
3. All large, flat roof structure buildings (malls, supermarkets, plants, warehouses) should be required to have standard solar panels installed on their roofs, provided they can handle the weight load. Not much of an issue there, very heavy AC units are routinely installed on these surfaces. The business derives all or most it's electrical usage from these panels (FedEx has been doing this) and selling back energy to the utilities when they are not active during daylight hours. All that large, flat space put to work, that is efficiency.
4. Out in 29 Palms a couple weeks ago I saw a solar panel electric farm being built, and I mentioned this to the next person I met with, and I was surprised to learn there were a many more being built in the area, a fact I saw first hand a little later in the day.
Lands that are not developed, likely wont be, and receive a lot of sunlight, I thinks that's a no-brainer. Use them for solar farms. Your country will thank you.
5. Wind. Anybody who has driven the Beaumont to Palm Springs corridor can tell you all about the wind farms out there, harvesting the power of the almost continuous wind that blow through that pass.
These giant propeller driven turbines catch the wind shooting through here 24/7, and oddly they sort of resemble giant house fans in a way, as if the people in that pass are being given relief from the scorching heat by these large fans. Lol.
Ok, that wraps it for now. I firmly believe in alternative energy, renewable energy, and we have all this abundant energy around us all the time for the taking, so I think it's kind of foolish for an "advanced" civilization to not take full advantage of that which nature provides freely.
Finally, if you've made it this far through my post, thank you! You have a longer attention span than I!
Two words: Energy Independence. E.I. is important to national security in so many ways, that I shouldn't even have to mention it, but let's boil it down this way to save space: Every bit of energy that we can produce domestically reduced that which we have to purchase internationally. Simple. For instance, cheaper, or free, energy for electric cars means less oil that needs to be imported, which means more of our capital kept in our own country. It also means that the middle east, always a hot spot due to oil, becomes exponentially less important to our foreign policy, and make it less likely our young men and women will have to fight and die there.
One way I think we could make some big inroads to energy independence is to institute some mandatory requirements that come packaged with huge tax savings for the consumers, you and I.
1. All new home construction should use solar cell impregnated concrete tile roofs on their sun facing sides. My house has a concrete roof, and as long as we don't walk on it the roof will last virtually forever. Each tile is molded to reduce weight while enhancing strength, and it's a relatively simple thing to mold them to allow installation of a solar cell in their upper surface, each roof tile pre wired, run to either a single inverter or to a series of smaller, modular inverters. I have seen this concept in the field, and it is effective, and a lot less ugly than the large metal frame arrays. Best of all, they are incorporated into the home's structure. This translates into massive energy $avings for the consumer, especially when the surplus is sold back to the utilities. The downside is that the cells will likely have to be replaced in about 20 years, but by that time the state of the art cells will be that much more efficient.
2. Older homes being re-roofed (asphalt tiles last about 20 to 25 years, architectural tiles up to about 35) should be re roofed in the same fashion as new construction, with solar concrete tiles, the trusses and rafters re enforced when needed to cope with the additional weight. What most people don't know is that an asphalt roof is pretty heavy by itself, anyone who has laid or removed it will tell you that, and one thing I see in the field quite often is layers upon layers of asphalt roof material layer over each other (a no-no, btw), so in many cases re enforcement of the roof when converting to concrete tiles would not be needed. I have seen and documented serious roof bowing under the weight of previous asphalt roofs replaced with concrete, so it does happen.
3. All large, flat roof structure buildings (malls, supermarkets, plants, warehouses) should be required to have standard solar panels installed on their roofs, provided they can handle the weight load. Not much of an issue there, very heavy AC units are routinely installed on these surfaces. The business derives all or most it's electrical usage from these panels (FedEx has been doing this) and selling back energy to the utilities when they are not active during daylight hours. All that large, flat space put to work, that is efficiency.
4. Out in 29 Palms a couple weeks ago I saw a solar panel electric farm being built, and I mentioned this to the next person I met with, and I was surprised to learn there were a many more being built in the area, a fact I saw first hand a little later in the day.
Lands that are not developed, likely wont be, and receive a lot of sunlight, I thinks that's a no-brainer. Use them for solar farms. Your country will thank you.
5. Wind. Anybody who has driven the Beaumont to Palm Springs corridor can tell you all about the wind farms out there, harvesting the power of the almost continuous wind that blow through that pass.
These giant propeller driven turbines catch the wind shooting through here 24/7, and oddly they sort of resemble giant house fans in a way, as if the people in that pass are being given relief from the scorching heat by these large fans. Lol.
Ok, that wraps it for now. I firmly believe in alternative energy, renewable energy, and we have all this abundant energy around us all the time for the taking, so I think it's kind of foolish for an "advanced" civilization to not take full advantage of that which nature provides freely.
Finally, if you've made it this far through my post, thank you! You have a longer attention span than I!
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Reality TV celebrities, who the hell are they?
So I'm at the store and all the requisite magazines/tabloids are on display, and
while waiting I do what everybody does, I gaze at the covers. While doing so it
strikes me that, a) Batboy no longer makes the front page, has apparently
disappeared, and b) I don't recognize a single one of these "celebrities" they
have on the covers.
I say to the checker girl that "I must be getting old. Who are these people?" She shrugs, "I don't know, mostly reality TV celebrities, I think. You know, like the Kardashians."
Ah, that explains it. I rarely watch TV, I don't watch reality shows, and I couldn't care less about the Kardashians or any of their ilk.
To get the "person on the street"'s opinion, and out of general curiosity I ask the girl what the Kardashians are famous for, exactly?
"Nothing. Absolutely nothing" comes the expected reply.
So on my way back to my home office, I'm thinking about that response, and what it really says about our society, our culture, the unabashed idolization of people for no good reason other than they are on the tube and have money, who's sole claim to fame is due to their having a TV show based on their wealthy lives.
Beautiful? Well, I guess they're ok, but I know so many people who are better looking physically, who lack that special insane gene that appears to pack crazy baggage full of nutty drama. There are soldiers and law enforcement personnel of all genders and proclivities who warrant attention and idolization far more than these reality TV folks, but they simply quietly go about their lives quietly living in dignity.
So I guess my question is, what price for your dignity? For your integrity? For your lifeblood, toil and soul?
Do you yourself sell your valuable time consumed in the trivial lives of well heeled "reality" television personalities, and if so, why? What's the payback?
I say to the checker girl that "I must be getting old. Who are these people?" She shrugs, "I don't know, mostly reality TV celebrities, I think. You know, like the Kardashians."
Ah, that explains it. I rarely watch TV, I don't watch reality shows, and I couldn't care less about the Kardashians or any of their ilk.
To get the "person on the street"'s opinion, and out of general curiosity I ask the girl what the Kardashians are famous for, exactly?
"Nothing. Absolutely nothing" comes the expected reply.
So on my way back to my home office, I'm thinking about that response, and what it really says about our society, our culture, the unabashed idolization of people for no good reason other than they are on the tube and have money, who's sole claim to fame is due to their having a TV show based on their wealthy lives.
Beautiful? Well, I guess they're ok, but I know so many people who are better looking physically, who lack that special insane gene that appears to pack crazy baggage full of nutty drama. There are soldiers and law enforcement personnel of all genders and proclivities who warrant attention and idolization far more than these reality TV folks, but they simply quietly go about their lives quietly living in dignity.
So I guess my question is, what price for your dignity? For your integrity? For your lifeblood, toil and soul?
Do you yourself sell your valuable time consumed in the trivial lives of well heeled "reality" television personalities, and if so, why? What's the payback?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)