Simple Solutions for 2009

By now you have no doubt read a dozen reviews of 2008 and projections for 2009, all pure guesses for the latter, unless someone was carefully predicting that the sun would rise tomorrow and the like. I would like to, instead, affect the future by sharing a few simple solutions. Here are my top five:

1. End to the Gaza Strip War: "Why don't those #&%#@* Hamas idiots just stop lobbing rockets into Israel," courtesy of a golf buddy pundit expressed at the Ala Wai Golf Course Clubhouse. He wanted me to carry his views in my daily blog, but I thought I would protect him from any possible fatwa by not specifically identifying the source. White House spokesperson Gordon Johndroe expressed those exact sentiments, with a safe political spin.

2. To initiate the process for Peace on Earth, forever: My very first Huffington Post article, circa May 29, 2008, entitled, "Well, Barack, We have a Problem...", can be paraphrased to say: ...go to your very first G8 Nations Summit, by your declared emergency to be held at United Nations headquarters in New York City, and pronounce a Gorbachev-like bombshell: our country will reduce military spending by 10% this year, and will continue to do so for the next eight years. This scenario is described on page 65 of Simple Solutions for Humanity shown in one of the boxes on the right. You say, we want every country to do the same, for this 10% solution is our best opportunity to create a global fund to combat Peak Oil and Global Warming (PO/GW). At this stage, keep quiet about the "ending wars forever" part, as then, no one will take you too seriously. China's knee-jerk reaction might well be, what, cut defense spending? We haven't had a chance yet to attain your level of capability. But, on quick afterthought, they will realize that they will only need to decrease their spending by $6 billion in Year One, while the U.S. takes a $60 billion hit. Ten percent of the worldwide $1.2 trillion/year for war means that at least $120 billion/year will suddenly become available in the first year to overcome PO/GW. This sum comes close to the annual amount suggested by the International Energy Agency to meet the total $45 trillion recommended by the International Energy Agency earlier this year to cut the carbon dioxide level in half.

3. Saving the American auto industry: Each of us in this country has already loaned GM and Chrysler $44 (for a total of $13.4 billion), which could well end up being almost 10 times more if the situation deteriorates. The best that GM could offer about their future was a plug-in Volt electric car. Why copy the Japanese? Think, really think, about the future of ground transport, and develop a truly promising next generation vehicle. Reference can be made to my posting on "Is there an Option More Promising than the Plug-in Electric Vehicle?" This alternative future is the direct methanol fuel cell. Unfortunately, there is no such widget today, for the U.S. Department of Energy currently bans funds to develop this technology, and also for any biomethanol production research. What better partnership, then, for the auto industry and farmers, with government incentives, to manufacture the renewable fuel and power-train system to lead the world in a decade?

4. Saving the national economy: There will be an Obama stimulus package, perhaps with a trillion dollar value. The details are provided in "Buy American, Again", but the timing is right for our new president to help Main Street when, on President Bush's watch, $863.4 billion were provided to Wall Street, porkers and Detroit. An equivalent amount divided among our citizenry would then be just under $3,000. To save a few bucks for other needs, Congress and the White House should allow $6,000 to each couple filing a tax return and $3000 for individuals. However, don't send a check. Just assign each couple/individual a credit card for the appropriate amount, which can only be used to buy products made in the USA. There are some downsides to this plan, but they are explained away in the indicated article.

5. Saving Planet Earth and Humanity: About global warming, I've published 35 articles in the Huffington Post, and all of them, to some degree, treat this subject. Let me then simplify with two specifics. First, immediately mandate a dollar a gallon investment surcharge on gasoline before oil prices rise again. Gas will still cost much less than European rates. Second, add a penny per pound carbon dioxide disenhancement charge (this will add 2 cents/kWh to your electricity bill if your power comes from a coal-fired facility), proportionately linked to $30/barrel oil, to adjust as oil prices vacillate, so that at $150/barrel, the tax should be 5 cents/pound. Yes, some of the revenues will need to be directly rebated to the people, but a good fraction should be utilized to develop sustainable resource options.

What are the odds of any one of the above attaining reality? Zero, unless each of you sends this posting to ten colleagues, who....

Comments

[WilliePilgrim]

I sure do prefer simple solutions.
Regarding global warming, I would love it we'd finally realize that the multi-trillion dollar investment instrument which is proposed for cap and trade in CO2 only makes sense from the standpoint of the investor and not the actual amount of cooling it will achieve, despite the profound costs it will subject an already staggering world economy.
Here's a simple, if short termed, solution to ease warming, if in fact that's the problem; paint the roofs and paved areas of the worlds largest cities white. The math and physics are unequivocable and the costs are minute compared to any of the other suggested solutions. If the world is actually heading into a cooling phase which might threaten our ability to grow enough to feed ourselves (or, if we fall for bioethanol: to feed our cars), we could repaint the same roofs and paved areas black to increase warming.
Does it get simpler? Or are we already invested in the convoluted CO2 concept. Tsk tsk.

[Patrick Takahashi - Huffpost Blogger]

Ah, a black or white solution. That's pretty simple, but the percentage of actual covered space at a cost of a few billion dollars might place this recommendation on the giggle list. Further, think about this: how many of us would actually paint our roof, even if the government pays for the materials? We would rather watch TV than even clean up the house. I also fear the body count of those too old to be doing this. Or, maybe, this should be one of those make work green jobs.

[MarcelWilliams]

First of all, moving towards an nuclear and renewable energy economy helps the economy. Despite the high capital investment, nuclear power is actually very cheap. Fossil fuels keeps us economically dependent on hostile states, coal kills tens of thousands of Americans annually and hundreds of thousands a year globally. A nuclear and renewable energy economy would keep hundreds of billions of dollars right here in the US every year instead going to some hostile foreign country.

Secondly, there is no doubt that the polar ice caps are melting and that sea levels are rising. The absolute worse case scenario could put east coast US cities underwater and the entire state of Florida. Of course, Florida is normally underwater during interglacial periods. But we're conducting an dangerous experiment with our atmosphere that could create greenhouse conditions that this planet hasn't seen in perhaps 50 million years.

[MarcelWilliams]

Part 2

4. I'd like to see the establishment of a Democratic Free Trade Zone amongst free and democratic nations in order to promote global economic growth amongst free and democratic nations. I'd also like to see higher tariffs on those nations that are not free and democratic.

5. In order to stop global warming, the US needs to start providing huge amounts of capital investment for the construction of nuclear and renewable energy systems and for the production of carbon-neutral synthetic hydrocarbon fuels. I seriously believe that the US could be totally independent from fossil fuels in less than 30 years if the Federal government-- invested-- 30 billion dollars annually towards this effort-- a meager sum, IMO, for halting global warming and achieving total energy independence from fossil fuels! We spend more than that in just three months in Iraq.

Marcel F. Williams
http://newpapyrusmagazine.blogspot.com/

[MarcelWilliams]

Happy New Year!

1. The more missiles Hamas launches at Israel, the more legitimacy Fatah (which recognizes Israel's right to exist) gains. The US, Britain, and Israel need to recognize Fatah as the sole Palestinian government and authority in Palestine an continue the peace process dealing solely with Fatah.

2. There will never be peace on Earth until freedom and democracy spreads to every state on Earth. China is currently building a massive submarine fleet for some reason which has alarmed the Japanese and the US for a couple of years now.

3. I still believe that Americans are going to like the convenience of being able to fuel their automobiles at home. The new infrastructure investment in being able to charge batteries on the public streets should also be a boon to urban economies across America. But it should be mandated by congress that all automobiles in the future should be able to utilize gasoline, ethanol, and methanol. Electricity will add even more flexibility.

The direct methanol fuel cell will be the ultimate high efficiency fuel engine in the future, IMO. And in combination with plug-in-hybrid technology, we'll be well on our way towards total independence from the gasoline economy in the long run. Farmers a raising food prices by using corn for ethanol production while at the same time wasting 60% of the waste biomass that could be used to make methanol.

Part 1

[Patrick Takahashi - Huffpost Blogger]

I guess we agree with most of these solutions. I actually praised George W. Bush for his democratization strategy, for my Chapter 1 of SIMPLE SOLUTIONS for Humanity (see box on right) reports that there has been no major war between two democracies over the past 200 years.

In several of my postings I have underscored that we don't have a national energy policy because the people don't care enough. I suspect $50/barrel oil will again delay a monumental sustainable energy plan until oil again surges past $100/barrel...which would well be this year or next.