With the drought that ensnared Texas for most of the summer, it became obvious that our favorite tree was  stressed, but we had every confidence that it would make it through the heat and continue to grace us with its presence for years to come.

Alas, that was not to be.  Despite $200+ water bills, scaling of diseased bark and our best wishes, about a month ago all but one of the major limbs leaves withered, dried and we knew our old friend was likely beyond saving.

Not that we didn’t hope.  But the arborists we consulted were certain we were simply the latest in a long list of drought casualties that were littered throughout the area.

So it was, with a heavy heart, and the help of my son and Mark Hagood (plantman extraordinaire), yesterday was spent … well, you can see for yourself below.

Hail and farewell old friend. You will be missed.

Last Man Standing?

In a stunning outbreak of common sense, an editorial in Student BMJ has experts warning that overuse of antibiotics in livestock poses definite risks to both humans and other animals.

For over 50 years farmers have been feeding antibiotics to their herds after scientists discovered the drugs improved the animals’ growth.  As time wore on however, it became apparent that the practice was giving rise to resistant strains of bacteria that could prove hazardous to the public.

In 1977 Congress proposed banning the practice, but the measure was shelved “pending additional study” (or more properly, after being lobbied out of existence).

In the interim we have seen the emergence of deadly strains of e coli, as well as “a global pandemic of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection [5–12]; the global spread of drug resistance among common respiratory pathogens, including Streptococcus pneumoniae [13–19] and Mycobacterium tuberculosis [20–29]; and epidemic increases in multidrug-resistant (and, increasingly, truly pan-resistant) gram-negative bacilli”¹ Additionally, “Three of four recently emerging infections in humans originate from animals: avian influenza H5N1, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and Salmonella.”

The Danish authors cited in the BMJ article, as reported in ScienceDaily, assert “that the routine use of antimicrobials can be reduced substantially, while maintaining profitable animal production, and call for their use to be monitored in all countries.”

Denmark, Norway and other European countries banned routine use of antibiotics in livestock, with no significant loss of production. In 2006 the EU mandated a similar ban for all it’s member countries.

Americans on the other hand have been left to the mercy of industry lobbyists and ineffective action from their elected officials.  As late as last year a “firestorm … erupted over a federal proposal recommending antibiotics only when animals are actually sick”².

In the face of such inaction, is it any surprise then that the only recourse seems to be in the courts?

Your Lightbulb & WiFi, What Could Go Wrong?

NXP, a publicly traded semi-conductor company, and Green Wave Reality, an energy management and automation company, have partnered and announced their intention that every light bulb should have an IPv6 internet address.

That’s right, your light bulb will be able to talk over your WiFi in the not too distant future, and the companies involved are ecstatically proclaiming “The possibilities are endless: You could monitor, manage and control every light bulb from any Internet-enabled device – turning lights on and off individually, dimming or creating scenes from your smartphone, tablet, PC or TV – to save energy as well as electricity costs.”

Green Reality has been instrumental in bringing Smart Meters (new, digital electric meters) to households nationwide, with less than universal appreciation.

While there may be legitimate consumer benefits, there are several issues to consider.  Such as, from the standpoint of network architecture, having a disposable endpoint as the agent leasing an IP address makes less sense than having the fixture that holds it leasing an address.  I want to light the room, and if the light’s burned out or not communicating that’s not gonna happen from my smartphone, pad or PDA.

Another is, what kind of traffic overhead will be produced by all of these internet connected light bulbs?  As Internet Service Providers (ISPs, like Charter, Comcast, Time-Warner) look to institute bandwidth caps on subscribers, how will these “intelligent light bulbs” figure into those equations?  If your light bulb breaks, will it eat your Netflix allowance for the month?

Finally, there are real privacy issues to consider here.  Smart meters are sensitive enough to know not only when appliances and such are used, but based on the amount of power drawn can tell what kind of appliance or device it is and they hang on the outside of the house (or maybe inside the garage).  What are the implications of have internet connected devices throughout every room of your house?  If one chip to allow communication can be put in, why not others?  There’s a war on, ya know?

I’m all for the “next big thing” and really cool gadgets, but this is one I’m going to watch closely.  Maybe you should too.

Press releases for Greenwave and NXP can be found below:
http://www.greenwavereality.com/greenwave-reality-announces-partnership-with-nxp-semiconductors/
http://www.nxp.com/news/content/file_1896.html

Car or Teachers? Which Is Worth More?

If you are a resident of Fort Worth, remember to vote on Saturday, May 14th.

I know it’s “only” the mayoral and city council elections, but these positions are often stepping stones to higher office, and not voting can allow people who make … questionable … decisions to ascend to positions where there are real consequences.

Take our State Legislature for example.

There’s an article over at Bloomberg online that mentions how “Texas, which may balance its budget by firing thousands of teachers, plans to commit $25 million in state funds to Formula One auto racing each year for a decade” in the capitol city of Austin.

That’s right, Texas, who ranks in the bottom ten of all states and US territories for spending on education, proficiency of its students, and graduation rates, is going to fire more teachers and give money to race cars.  Not only that, but taxpayers will be subsidizing a segment of the racing community that’s proven itself to be a total loser over the last three decades in Long Beach, California, as well as Las Vegas, Detroit, Dallas, Phoenix and, most recently, Indianapolis.

I can’t help but think that if we’d culled the candidate pool at the local level back in the 1970s and 80s, we might not be seeing travesties such as this play out in our fair state.

But then again, politicians do like a populace that doesn’t think too deeply.  They tend to stay in office longer.

Product vs. People?

A few years back the local warehouse store had a great price on a combination rainfall shower head / handle sprayer combination.  Lifetime warranty too.  So I bought it.

Fast forward to today and the spray handle has lost its rubber anti-scratch bumper, the head itself is loose, expanded from the seam, and leaking water.  OK.  Call the warehouse store.

“When  did you buy it?” asks the customer service person.
“I dunno, it’s been a while.” I reply
“Well, I have to know.  We might not be able to take care of this.”
“Oh?  It has a lifetime warranty.”
“Well, that’s the lifetime of the product, not your lifetime.” she replies

WTF? Are.you.serious?  Seems that the definition of “lifetime” keeps changing.

When I was growing up, a lifetime warranty was for as long as you owned the product, or shuffled from this mortal coil, whichever came first.

Then a few years ago I found out it was the lifetime of the company (so if the original manufacturer was “vertically integrated” all bets were off).

Now it’s the lifetime of the product?  Who defines that?  How does a consumer know?  More to the point, where on the packaging did it state that?

In my case, it’s five years. I’m just two months under the wire in this case, so I’ll get a replacement.  From now on, I’m going to ask what a warranty means, and get it in writing at the time.

Caveat emptor.

You're not chilly now, are you?

This months article from Low Tech Magazine would have come in handy about 90 to 120 days ago.

In it, the age old idea of controlling what we put on our scrawny frames, rather than manipulating our room environments, is thoroughly explored from a number of perspectives; not the least of which is how dressing appropriately can save you money in heating bills.

According to the author, there is a paucity of historical data on indoor room temperatures over the last century. From anecdotal sources it is thought that people may have kept their homes up to 17° cooler in the winter in the 1950s than we do today.

So how does that stack up from the standpoint of energy savings?

If lowering the thermostat 1° delivers a 9% to 10% energy savings, then our grandparents and parents were “greener” by at least 153% than we are today.

“But wait!” you say, “I live in a new, energy efficient home!”

Statistically, such homes deliver only a 20% energy savings over homes constructed conventionally in decades past. Which means at best you’re only burning 133% more energy to watch TV in your t-shirt in January (a relatively recent phenomena to be sure); and if your shiny new home sits on a site where a conventional structure was demolished to make way for it, some research states it takes between 35 and 50 years to recover that embodied energy.

Which means your Energy Star Home® may be a whole lot less environmentally friendly than you thought it was.

So what’s a green warrior to do?

Head on over to Low Tech Magazine and find out more than you ever thought you could about the “clo”, types of clothing, what they do, and how you can reap the benefits. After all, Kris De Decker’s done the heavy lifting there.

I’m only the messenger, who’s also eagerly awaiting the summer swimsuit article (I live in Texas, and need to lower my air conditioning bill).

Bill Young Productions main page for "concerts"

We’re coming up on the one year mark for the Deepwater Horizon disaster and what do you suppose I saw on CBS the other morning?  Yep, another BP Look-What-We’ve-Done-For-You-It’s-Almost-Shiny-As-New commercial.  My blood pressure elevated by six points.

So I went searching for an online version of it to share with you, as I ripped it to shreds, and guess what?

You won’t find it.

In fact you won’t find a single, solitary, one, of BPs PR obfuscations online.  Sure you can go to BPs website and snooze through over an hours worth of 4 to 5 minute puff pieces, all of which are handled by Bill Young Productions, none of which can be easily shared.

Try I as I may I could not find the commercials that are aired on mainstream TV, touting the great job they’re doing and the amazing resilience of the Gulf and its citizens.

Maybe because they’re afraid (justifiably in my opinion) that people of a skeptical/critical mindset might compare this:
BP press conference of November 2010
to this:
Scientist finds Gulf bottom still oily, dead

I think this quote sums the situation up succinctly:

“The control of information is something the elite always does, particularly in a despotic form of government. Information, knowledge, is power. If you can control information, you can control people.” ~ Tom Clancy

Fear This Email

MEDICAL ALERT!
The FDA web site is at the bottom of the page for verification…
<snip [to spare you the sad, sad story and FEAR about phenylpropanolamine]>
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/InformationbyDrugClass/ucm150767.htm

What it should have said was:

DUSTYPALEOLITHICDEADNEWS ALERT!!

Because someone was behind the times by ABOUT A DECADE.

Phenylpropanolamine, or PPA, was ordered off the market in 2001, Japan followed suit in 2003.

It was totally banned in the US in 2005.

“In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a public health advisory[9] against the use of the drug in November 2000. In this advisory, the FDA requested that all drug companies discontinue marketing products containing PPA. The agency estimates that PPA caused between 200 and 500 strokes per year among 18-to-49-year-old users. In 2005, the FDA removed PPA from over-the-counter sale.[10] Because of its potential use in amphetamine manufacture, it is controlled by the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005. It is still available for veterinary use in dogs, however, as a treatment for urinary incontinence.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenylpropanolamine

It is worth noting that as a percentage of the target population (2005-2009 being the earliest data I could easily find online) the maximum number of those potentially affected by this drug amounted to approximately .0000002% of Americans.

Additionally the FDA *estimated* those numbers, and those were not fatalities, but strokes, which come in all degrees of severity.

I can personally attest that I stopped buying most of the over the counter cold nostrums post-PPA ban.  Not because of any fear that I’d have a stroke, but because they’d become totally ineffective, at least insofar as I was concerned.

Nope, reading between the lines, this wasn’t about keeping people safe, rather it was shielding Big Pharma from the looming specter of lawsuits.

Emails like this are just about spreading fear, nothing more.  Which, if people did a little research, they’d find out for themselves.

That’s my 2¢, and I’m stickin’ to it.