The Inquisitr » green

Univ. of Miami researchers study pre- and post-Katrina corals to discover that coral disease can exacerbate bleaching; bleaching leads to increased disease prevalence

AHN — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 11:00:42 +0000

WASHINGTON, D.C (Inquisitr Wire). — Mass coral bleaching has devastated coral colonies around the world for almost three decades. Now scientists have found that bleaching can make corals more susceptible to disease and, in turn, coral disease can exacerbate the negative effects of bleaching. A paper in the October issue of the journal Ecology shows that when they occur together, this combination of afflictions causes greater harm to corals than either does on its own.

“Traditionally, scientists have attributed coral declines after mass bleaching events to the bleaching alone,” says Marilyn Brandt, a post-doctoral researcher at the University of Miami’s Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science and the lead author on the paper. “This study shows that the interplay between diseases and bleaching can play a much larger role than we realized.”

Corals rely on algae that live inside each coral polyp to provide nutrients and supplemental oxygen. Bleaching occurs when these colorful algae die out or leave the polyps, often in response to overly warm ocean conditions. Without their brightly colored algae, the coral’s skeleton becomes visible through its transparent tissue, making it appear white or ‘bleached’. Although the tissue remains intact and can recover over time, this stressful condition can cause corals to stop growing and reproducing.

Warmer water temperatures can also lead to increased incidences of coral disease, which, unlike most bleaching, can cause irreparable loss of coral tissues. In many cases, bleaching and disease occur concurrently on coral reefs. Brandt and her colleagues wondered if the occurrences of bleaching and disease were linked beyond simply occurring under the same conditions.

“Coral bleaching and coral diseases are both related to prolonged thermal stress,” says Brandt. “But we wanted to look closer to find out whether they were interacting and what was actually causing the decline we see.”

In the summer and fall of 2005, the same oceanic temperature shifts that contributed to the creation of Hurricane Katrina caused a warm mass of water to settle over the northeast Caribbean and parts of Florida. This sustained warming triggered a mass coral bleaching event that affected up to 90 percent of coral reef cover in the area. Brandt and her colleagues surveyed colonies in the Florida Keys before, during and after this event to determine the relationship between bleaching and coral disease. The researchers found that the coral diseases they observed were related to bleaching, but in different ways. The prevalence of white plague disease increased during the bleaching event, an observation that Brandt says may have to do with increased susceptibility to the disease.

“Higher temperatures can increase the growth rate of coral pathogens, such as bacteria and other microbes, so we probably see a higher disease incidence because of the expansion of these pathogens in the environment,” Brandt says. “But bleaching is also a stressed state, and just like any other animal under stress, the coral’s disease resistance is lowered.”

In addition, the researchers found that colonies already infected with another disease, known as dark spot disease, suffered more extensive bleaching than healthy corals. Brandt thinks a fungus that’s likely associated with this infection could cause the relationship of the algae and the coral to be weakened, leaving the corals more susceptible to bleaching.

Because diseases happen on a much finer scale than mass bleaching events, Brandt says that more informed management of coral ecosystems should involve more frequent monitoring to determine the underlying causes of coral damage.

“Understanding how these different stressors interact can help explain the mortality pattern we see after large-scale bleaching events,” says Brandt. “If we understand what’s causing the mortality, we can institute control measures that are more specific to the causes.”

The University of Miami’s Rosenstiel School was founded in the 1940’s, and has grown into one of the world’s premier marine and atmospheric research institutions. Offering dynamic interdisciplinary academics, the Rosenstiel School is dedicated to helping communities to better understand the planet, participating in the establishment of environmental policies, and aiding in the improvement of society and quality of life. For more information, please visit www.rsmas.miami.edu

The Ecological Society of America is the world’s largest professional organization of ecologists, representing 10,000 scientists in the United States and around the globe. Since its founding in 1915, ESA has promoted the responsible application of ecological principles to the solution of environmental problems through ESA reports, journals, research, and expert testimony to Congress. ESA publishes four journals and convenes an annual scientific conference. Visit the ESA website at www.esa.org

Carrying green too far – the Pokémon menstrual pad

Steven Hodson — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:10:00 +0000

Look I realize that as a cranky old fart that I don’t have much credibility when it comes to talking about feminine products but isn’t the idea of a Pokéman themed re-useable menstruation pad getting just a little too carried away.

If not and this is up your alley you can drop by the Naturally Hip store on Etsy and order yourself some.

hat tip to Kotaku

Seattle Referendum Rejects Ordinance On Grocery Bag Fee

Duncan Riley — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:00:35 +0000

Seattle, WA (AHN) – Majority of Seattle residents said no to Referendum 1 on Tuesday to defeat an ordinance charging shoppers 20 cents for every disposable grocery bag used.

The “no” votes were 58 percent against 42 percent for the “yes” votes foiling the city’s plan to implement the ordinance meant to reduce the use and disposal of plastic and paper bags.

Introduced in July last year, the ordinance was supposed to take effect Jan. 1 when the American Chemistry Council led a signature campaign against it. Businesses to be affected by the bag fee joined the lobby against the ordinance arguing that disposal bags constitute a small portion of the city’s yearly garbage output.

Based on the Seattle Public Utilities’ estimate, the city usest 360 million disposable bags annually.

Paper Company, California Cities Top “Green Power” List

AHN — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 00:15:08 +0000

Washington, D.C. (AHN) – One of America’s major paper goods manufacturers and four California governmental agencies are among the top five groups in the United States using electricity they generate themselves from environmentally friends materials.

Kimberly-Clark Corp. led a list of the top 20 organizations powered by their own “green power” released Monday by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The EPA ranked the paper company at No. 1 because of the nearly 193 million kilowatt hours of energy used to run Kimberly-Clark’s facility in Everett, WA, that is generated on-site from waste produced in making paper pulp. The generated electricity represents more than 7 percent of the electricity the company would otherwise have to purchase around the United States.

The Los Angeles County Sanitation District ranked second, with 171 million kilowatt hours, about 54 percent of the district’s total energy use. The source of the district’s green energy was biogas produced by sludge digesters and landfills. The gas is burned to create steam that runs electric turbines, a process used by several of the Top 20 companies.

The city of San Diego produced 69 million kilowatt hours, or 27 percent of the city’s energy needs to rank third. A water pollution control plant operated jointly by the cities of San Jose and Santa Clara was fourth with 52.7 million kWh. That plant generates 56 percent of the city’s needs.

Cement maker CalPortland came in fifth with 50 million kWh. The company makes 11 percent of its need from wind.

Collectively, the top 20 companies produced and used more than 736 million kWh of on-site green power, which the EPA said was equivalent to the amount of electricity needed to power more than 61,000 homes.

Sources of green power also include solar, geothermal, biomass and low-impact hydropower.

The complete list can be seen at www.epa.gov/greenpower/toplists/top20onsite.

Excuse me, but is that a daisy growing out of your camera lens?

Steven Hodson — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:45:00 +0000

I’m not much of a camera buff but I know a lot of folks in the tech world are. In some cases it seem to go hand in hand, just as poker does. This means that there are a lot of tech type folks around with camera equipment some of which after years of us might not be in working order, but what to do with those broken lends and camera bodies?

How about turning them into planters?

Yes, planters.

The folks over at Photojojo have an excellent post up today on how you can turn those broken lens and unusable camera bodies into some cool DIY flower planters. So rather than being an environmental bad boy check the post out and do your bit for the environment and be cool doing it – but don’t forget to take some pics.

image courtesy of Photojojo

NIMBY, or why most green efforts will fail

Steven Hodson — Sun, 10 May 2009 17:49:02 +0000

Six months ago sixty-one percent of Peninsula, California, residents voted to support a statewide measure to pledge $9.95 billion for a high-speed rail system. It would ultimately provide high-speed rail travel between Los Angeles and San Francisco making the trip in two hours and 40 minutes. The proposed project is estimated to carry some 94 million passengers by the year 2030.

Part of the green movement is the idea of using massive wind and solar farms located in areas outside of large cities. These farms are estimated, depending on who you talk to, to provide up to 40 percent of needed electrical power in the short term.

The problem is that these efforts to make our cities and society more environmentally responsible are facing some serious roadblocks. It isn’t anything to do with the technology as in many cases we already have the abilities to pull off such projects. The biggest roadblock, once the initial flush of ‘doing the right thing’ has worn off is that old bugaboo – Not In My Backyard, otherwise known as NIMBY.

This is one of the biggest problems facing wind and solar farms. While the actual farms are in outlying areas where they are able to collect all that renewable energy without bothering most people the problem comes in trying to get that energy to its destination point – the cities. To do this means putting up transmission lines and nobody wants these monstrosities anywhere near their homes, which at some point they will have to.

Now we come to the high-speed rail project in California and find that this NIMBY attitude is starting to show its head as people start worrying about the effect the rail system will have on their property values. The people involved try and cover up much of the rhetoric with phrases like “ … no socio-geographic distinction to being on one side of the tracks.” and where the residents were given enough information before the vote.

But when push comes to shove the underlying principal behind NIMBY is an economic one as pointed out by Martin Engel in an San Francisco Examiner post by Will Reisman

“Our home values will absolutely plummet with the prospect of 200 trains a day going by outside,” he said.

The reality is that going ‘green’ isn’t going to be cheap. What is in question though is if a better environmental future is something we really have the stomach to reach for even if it means having to be in your backyard. As it stands right now we mouth the words about how important it is to go green but when it comes down to it costing us personally that all changes. It’s okay to be green as long as it is someone else’s backyard that they need to use but the moment it is your backyard, or wallet, going green suddenly needs more consultation and expensive reviews.

An interesting way to get solar panels up and running

Steven Hodson — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:35:05 +0000

As we continue down the road to more green types of energy solar panels are touted as being the one way that individuals can do their part. The big problem with that though is the cost outlay to buy and install those solar panels. While many people might like the idea of being able to give the power companies the big index finger the vast majority just don’t have those type of funds.

Well it would seem that the city of San Diego has realized this and have come up with possible solution that just might encourage more people to go solar. Starting in July the city will being launching a new initiative that will see the city finance the cost of the solar panels and allow homeowners to pay back the loan with their property tax bills over 20 years.

The loans will be at a fixed rate and will be transferrable if you sell your home during the life of the loan.

It is nice to see that San Diego can realize the benefits of solar power – especially in the hands of individuals – and is willing to make this kind of investment. Not too mention as well that this would also see additional funds being added to the city coffers through the interest being charged on the loans. One would think that this is one of those win-win situations for everyone involved.

[hat tip to EcoGeek]

The business of greenwashing equals more profits

Steven Hodson — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 22:32:37 +0000

With the growing concern, right or wrongly, about climate change and the need to consider more environmentally friendly products when buy both everyday products and our tech toys has become a major factor. As more and more people start looking for these alternatives companies are rushing forward with claims about how green their products are and how they are going to improve in the future. The problem is that a large percentage of these claims are pure bullshit.

For those of you not familiar with the term greenwashing it means, according to Wikipedia

Greenwash (a portmanteau of green and whitewash) is a term used to describe the practice of companies disingenuously spinning their products and policies as environmentally friendly, such as by presenting cost cuts as reductions in use of resources. It is a deceptive use of green PR or green marketing. The term green sheen has similarly been used to describe organizations that attempt to show that they are adopting practices beneficial to the environment.

It turns out according to a new study by Canadian TerraChoice, who run the Canadian government’s eco-labeling program, that only 2% of products labeling themselves as green are completely legit. The remaining 98% of products range from questionable to borderline lying.

In the United States and Canada, a total of 2,219 products making 4,996 green claims were recorded. These claims were tested against best practices, notably against guidelines provided by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, Competition Bureau of Canada, Australian Competition & Consumer Commission, and the ISO 14021 standard for environmental labeling.

Of the 2,219 North American products surveyed, over 98% committed at least one of the previously identified Six Sins of Greenwashing and a new Seventh Sin emerged.

Source: The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – TerraChoice [hi-rez PDF] [low-rez PDF]

Gee who would have thought – companies spewing out cool buzzwords that are nothing more than lies in order to make even more money for the same old products.

As far as our tech toys are concerned the TerraChoice study didn’t have much to say as they concentrated mostly on household and children’s goods. If you accept that Greenpeace has an agenda with anything they do you will find that they do have a good report on computer companies and their green efforts, which they put out yearly.

No related posts.

The Empire State Building to be showcase of green retrofitting

Steven Hodson — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 22:14:29 +0000

There is no denying that as we move down this road of making everything as ecologically sound as possible that the business of retrofitting existing building is going to be big. After all there are a lot of corporate skyscrapers out there that were build without any concept of what it meant to be green.

Probably one of the biggest retrofitting jobs to date will be the work being done to the Empire State Building. The project, a joint initiative between Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the Clinton Climate Initiative, to bring the building icon will be lead by Johnson Controls. The company has targeted eight individual projects out of the 60 possibilities based on which ones would return the largest saving in both money and energy. A few of those eight projects are

Window Light Retrofit: Refurbishment of approximately 6,500 thermopane glass windows, using existing glass and sashes to create triple-glazed insulated panels with new components that dramatically reduce both summer heat load and winter heat loss

Tenant Lighting, Daylighting and Plug Upgrades: Introduction of improved lighting designs, daylighting controls, and plug load occupancy sensors in common areas and tenant spaces to reduce electricity costs and cooling loads.

Whole-Building Control System Upgrade: Upgrade of existing building control system to optimize HVAC operation as well as provide more detailed sub-metering information.

Tenant Energy Management Systems: Introduction of individualized, web-based power usage systems for each tenant to allow more efficient management of power usage.

The entire project will cost an estimated $20 billion but will reduce energy consumption by 38 percent as well as produce energy savings of $4.4 million per year which should enable the build to attain a LEED Gold certified label.

The makeover of the Empire State Build is supposed to be completed by the end of 2010.

[hat tip to EcoGeekhttp://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2670/]

Saving some green is more important than being green

Steven Hodson — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:22:43 +0000

Going green – meaning doing whatever we can in our lives to become more ecologically minded in the things we buy or use is a major part of our news these days. Equally so is the effects of the recession that we are all living through which makes it interesting to see which of the two actually have more of an effect on our decisions to go green and save money while we’re at it.

Well it turns out that the recession is having more of an effect on the things we buy and use rather than wanting to do better for the environment. This is according to a new survey from The Shelton Group who found that 71% of people considered buying energy efficient products in order to save money versus the 51% who said they do it to protect the environment.

Consumers were looking at taking (or had already taken) a bunch of energy-related decisions that would likely save them some green.

44 percent responded they are likely to buy a programmable thermostat; 32 percent already have.

43 percent responded they are likely to install insulation in their homes; 26 percent already have.

42 percent responded that they are to install a higher-efficiency water heater; 26 percent already have.

On the other hand, decisions that might help only the environment, and not their wallet were much less desireable.

Installed natural / indigenous / low water landscaping – 13 percent.

Participate in utility’s green power program – 9 percent.

Buy carbon offsets for plane trips or for home – 6 percent.

Source: EcoGeek.org

I gotta admit that these kind of results don’t surprise me in the least. Until something hurts an individual’s pocketbook the lifestyle of the rich and famous will always trump treating our world properly.

[picture courtesy of EcoGeek]

Cardboard brown is the new green for computers

Steven Hodson — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 01:53:46 +0000

Apple may have cornered the market on cool chic designs for wrapping its computers in but they aren’t the snitz when it comes to the green movement. No sirree Bob. Never mind all that brushed aluminum is for the artsy fartsy Web 2.0 crowd. Us real folks we’re into a whole new way of boxing up our computer goodies and we’re earth friendly to boot.

Yup folks the new green for for computer cases is really cardboard brown in colour as evidenced by the two example I bring to you. The first is Francesco Biasci’s Cardboard Computer Case; which was a top entrant in the Greener Gadgets Design Competition recently. With this design you get the steel wool in name only instead of being used to make the case.

Which on the inside is made up like this

Next up on the cardboard front we have the Recompute which was also a part of the same competition.

[it would help if I actually added the pics huh

This might be a cool way to show off how ‘green’ you are but I’m not sure about the real usability of them.

[hat tip to LikeCool for the Recompute lead]

120 MPG by 2010 for $30G’s

Steven Hodson — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:46:51 +0000

Better mileage is the holy grail for every car manufacturer these days whether it be using electric power, gas or even some form of natural gas. The big problem that has been facing any move to green vehicles has always centered around cost to the consumer with green versions of vehicles costing anywhere from $5,000 and up when compared to their gas guzzling counterparts.

Enter Loremo.

Since 2000 the company has been working hard on a car by the same name. Even though Loremo has yet to produce a production electric vehicle it says that all three of its powertrains should be finished this year. The different powertrains will power 3 different designs of the car. the first version – the base vehicle – will get 120 MPG on a 700 ccm diesel engine that will feature turbo charging, inter-cooling and exhaust gas recycling.

The second model is the GT version with a sportier performance with a 850 ccm engine. As well the car will be able to run on liquefied natural gas (LNG) or pressurized natural gas (PNG).

The final version; and the one closest to production, is Loremo’s take on an ultra-efficient electric motor. Public tests of the Loremo EV are slated to start in March of this year. The price range for all three versions of the vehicle are supposed to range from $22,500 up to $30,000 for the GT model.

If you are so inclined you can keep up with Loremo developments over on the company blog.

[hat tip to EcoGeek]

Enough with the friggin green already

Steven Hodson — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:39:35 +0000

Look don’t get me wrong – I’m all for ecology and saving our environment but really do we need to colour everything some sickening shade of green to get the point across. On top of this obvious greenwashing by all different types of companies the fact is that the green movement has to be one of the most wishy washy I have seen come along.

It seems that people on a large scale only really give a shit when it is their wallets that are being affected. During the last ridiculous spike in oil and gas prices everyone was all ballyhoo over hybrid cars and getting rid of plastic bags. Now hybrid sales are tanking – down some 42% in December and the hottest selling vehicle is the Ford F150 – where’s the green in that?

In many ways green is a fad of the moment .. the moment when a person’s pocketbook is getting squeezed but the second the pressure is eased off people will go back to what they were doing before. Unfortunately having lived through the whole die off of the hippie and back to the land movement this doesn’t surprise me one bit. Companies will market themselves as green for as long as it enhances their bottom line and the moment it doesn’t, green will be thrown out into the non-recyclable garbage bin.

After all do we really need more things like green cement or green coloured cell phones? Tell you what get back to me when you’re serious about the whole thing and then maybe we can talk about it.

I’ll take a wash, hot wax and a spray of weed killer

Steven Hodson — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:44:52 +0000

A lot of this green talk may be nothing more than the latest marketing spin or perhaps to use the really new buzzword – a lot of greenwashing but turning everything possible green is the big trend for 2009. The past year saw everyone talking about hybrid car this and biofuel that as if it was really going to happen on a large scale; but as we have seen in the news today much of those electric cars may be on hold. That hasn’t stopped the marketing spin though.

Leading the charge for the further greening of the automobile is Toyota with word that they will be debuting the next model of the Prius with its Ecological Plastic interior. Yup you heard that right – ecological plastic. Now before you start shaking your head to hard and giving yourself a headache the term applies to plastic that is made from non-edible plant material.

The material will make up to 60% of the interior of the cars. These parts will include things like the door trim, trunk liner, headliner, sun visor, pillar covers and seat cushions. Now you understand why you see the dandelions cozying up to your new Prius next year.

[hat tip to EcoGeek]

Gamers are energy pigs

Steven Hodson — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 21:08:38 +0000

And here everyone thought that gamers are nothing but a bunch of couch potatoes. Well maybe they are but those consoles they are using to play all the hottest games are chewing through a shitload of energy. Between the Wii, the PS3 and the Xbox 360 you gamers are using enough power to keep a city the size of San Diego running.

According to a just completed study done by the Natural Resources Defence council and Ecos Consulting (pdf report) approximately 16 billion kilowatt-hours is consumed by gaming consoles. The average Xbox consumes about 119 watts in active mode, the PS3 averages out to 150 watts and the Wii with its less pull on graphics rates only 16 watts in active mode.

Now the NRDC does say that by actually using the power down options that are available on all the consoles – but are disabled by default DUH! – that if combined with better power saving measures could save 11 billion kilowatt-hours per year. In real money that would come out to about $1 Billion saved annually.

So remember you gamers out there in this new green world – Power Down when you’ve finished blowing up the world.

[hat tip to EcoGeek]

Saving whales can get you labelled a terrorist

Steven Hodson — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 01:57:06 +0000

If there is one label that get thrown out in just about every part of our social interactions it has to be the terrorist one. You sneeze the wrong way you can be a terrorist. You belch the wrong way and you can be a terrorist. Decided to do whatever you can to save whales from being slaughtered by Japanese research ships in the Antarctic and you will find yourself being called a terrorist.

At least that is the case with the Sea Shepherd and the people behind the organization. It is this organizations goal to stop any whaling operations in any of the worlds oceans – especially the Antarctic as this is where the Japanese whaling fleet has been operating lately. The Sea Shepherd organization has been so successful over the last year that the Japanese press has labelled them a terrorist organization.

Japanese research whaling in the Antarctic Ocean has been sabotaged by the radical US conservation group Sea Shepherd.
Japanese fishery officials say activists hindered the whaling ship Kaiko Maru by throwing bottles of strong-smelling liquid into it and banging a boat into it over about 3 hours on Friday. They say the ship was only slightly damaged and that no one on board was hurt.

Source: NHK World

You can also watch the exploits of the Sea Shepherd ships in the new reality television show The Whale Wars on the Animal Planet cable station. As well you can see back shows on the AnimalPlanetTV channel on YouTube

<\/param><\/embed><\/object><\/div>";" alt="">

[hat to Treehugger]

Sometimes kids are smarter than adults

Steven Hodson — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 00:08:08 +0000

As we slowly move to more green methods of powering our vehicle there are a lot of discussions going on about the best alternative to gasoline we should be using. High on the list is the use of ethanol and the money being made in growing corn for power instead of food. As much as we might like to push it as the best solution we seem to be forgetting how much corn is relied on as a food staple around the world; or what the cost of producing ethanol really is.

That is except for Madeline Stewart who wrote this letter to the editor of the Monitor newspaper

We have been polluting our world too much. Naturally, we have tried to do something about it. What we use to create energy is the big problem, so people have tried to come up with a new, renewable energy source that is easily obtained. We have already figured out several non-polluting techniques: wind, water and solar power. But another attempt is not working out so well: ethanol. The problems start at the very beginning.

Most ethanol is made from corn. However, that corn must be supplied in enormous quantities, and corn is used in much food for humans and animals. If we use corn for fuel, more will need to be grown, on huge farms receiving government subsidies. We are paying extra so that our food can be used for fuel.

The corn is grown using chemical fertilizer, which is awful for the environment. Most pesticides are made from petroleum, exactly what ethanol is supposed to be preventing the use of. Also, the machinery on big farms needs massive quantities of gas.

The next step is even worse. The corn, grown with petrochemicals, must be distilled in factories to become ethanol. These factories need to get their energy from somewhere, and that somewhere is fossil fuels. It takes about nine-tenths of a gallon of fossil fuel to make a gallon of ethanol. Ethanol pollutes the environment about the same amount as if we just used fossil fuel.

To add insult to injury, ethanol is not as efficient as fossil fuel. In short, ethanol is stupid. It just doesn’t do what it’s supposed to do – namely, reduce our carbon footprint. Our government needs to start focusing its attention elsewhere. Wind, water and solar energy could use some boosting.

Not bad for a 13 year old eh?

Brown going green in Portland

Steven Hodson — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 23:48:54 +0000

Word has it that UPS is gearing up for a switch to a new mode of transportation for their delivery guys in brown shorts. According to Nick Chambers over at Gas2.0 UPS in Portland has already launched a pilot program that has drivers of those gas guzzling vans behind the handlebars of a pretty nifty bike and wagon setup.

Apparently the UPS bean counters did some number crunching and found out that by replacing a certain number of trucks with bikes in temperate climates they could save a boatload of money over the holidays – to the tune of $36,000 in one UPS district alone. I guess that kind of money can add up if you consider that the program is being trialed in Oregon, California and Washington.

Although I’m not too sure how much fun it would be on rainy days or in San Francisco on any day.

[image courtesy of Nick Chambers]

No related posts.

Some sympathy for the auto makers

Steven Hodson — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 22:55:27 +0000

Man everyone is just dumping on poor old Detroit these days. It doesn’t matter that for years government has done everything it can to make sure they got preferential treatment. It doesn’t matter that for even more years unions have been busting the balls of the companies for wages and benefits that even our teachers, firemen and police only dream of seeing. It doesn’t matter that we’ve been the ones pushing for bigger and faster with our redneck General Lee Charger attitudes.

Now though, because our lifestyles are being affected at the gas pumps we want the auto maker executives lined up against the wall and severely lashed to within an inch of their fat cat lives. Sure they haven’t helped themselves by flying in to appear before Congress on their private corporate jets. It also doesn’t help when GM executives act like rock stars with specialized demands from hotels they stay at; which was pointed out in an excellent post by the Urbanophile

I’ve heard a lot, but some of the most incredulous came from a college buddy who used to work for General Motors. He was a manager level employee in field operations, but was often called in to work auto shows and the like. What was his job at the auto show you might ask? Well, at one Chicago Auto Show, his first responsibility was to make sure the hotel room for the executive was prepped correctly. This exec had very specific detailed requirements as to the brands of soft drinks, liquor, chocolates and cigars that needed to be on hand when he arrived, so it was my friend’s job to make sure this happened. After that, he got his company Escalade and went to O’Hare to pick up said exec’s wife, whom he then spent much of the afternoon ferrying around on a Michigan Ave. shopping trip.

But hey, when you’re making millions of dollars a year in salary and perks while you drive your business to the junkyard why not take what you can get while the getting is still good.

Now that we have the Big (Dying) Three lining up like paupers at a soup kitchen everyone is climbing on the anti-big-automobile-we-all-really-wanted bandwagon. Everyone is coming up with suggestions or demands that the auto makers must meet before any cash heads their way. Of course we get as well the typical know-it-all diagnosis of why this happened and what we can do to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

In other words – Yada, Yada, Yada.

What these bunch of knowledgeable dumb fucks keep forgetting is that we live in a capitalistic society where supply and demand are king. We demand a product and you betcha some company is going to provide it for us. Oh sure some will say that we’re only being marketed to but you know what – that argument is bullshit because if we truly didn’t want something no amount of clever marketing would make anyone buy a product – any product. Hell we’re a society that has 10 different types of toothpastes from just a single company and we still buy this crap. Why? Because we all want to use the newest and supposedly the best (which of course means new).

So who can blame the auto makers for cranking out all those SUV’s and big assed trucks. Even though 90% of the people buying either one of those gas guzzling air polluting (which we all know they were) don’t even need them for their intended purposes – we still bought them. Think not? Well the next time you decide to walk to the corner store instead of hopping in your shiny new vehicle take a look around for once and see who is really driving what.

Chances are you’ll see some housewife driving an Escalade or some other ridiculous SUV type vehicle and who knows, you might realize she’s your neighbour – so why does she need a vehicle like that. Chances are she drives it to work, parks it in some expensive parking lot, drives it home in rush hour traffic and then maybe takes some kids to soccer or some such thing. Or how about that kid whipping off the car lot in a hot new half ton truck that he got – not because he needed it for work but because he looks cool driving it.

The reality is that when it comes to our vehicles we are the ones to blame. When the gas is cheap we want our Shelby Mustangs but gawd help us when gas starts costing more than our food bill. Suddenly it’s not our fault anymore but the companies that marketed these gas guzzlers to us. It’s easier though to point the fingers at some nameless greedy corporation instead of ourselves and each other.

You want green – then start acting like it; even when time are good and goods are cheap because until then all we are doing is posturing and making someone else responsible for our own greed and egos. Gawd forbid that we be the ones responsible for throwing that empty water bottle in the gutter, or the ones that wanted that shiny new SUV because we look so good driving it, or that we are the ones who believe bigger is better.

You want the auto makers to pay the prices of giving us what we want then look in the mirror and see how green your life is before you start making demands of others.

No related posts.