Guest perspective by Ralph Nader
When the Republican Gingrich devolution took over Congress in 1995, it stripped the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) of all its funding and left it a shell with no experts to advise committees and members of Congress.
Whereupon Congress was plunged into a dark age regarding decisions about trillions of national security, offshore oil drilling, transportation, energy, health, computer, biotech, nanotechnology and many other executive branch programs in science and technology.
Confronted with partisan vested interests by federal departments and their corporate lobbies, Congress could not get objective, unbiased reports and testimony from the OTA. For a budget of $20 million a year, OTA ground out over 700 peer reviewed sound reports and many more Congressional testimonies by its staff between 1972 and 1995. Last year Congress had an overall budget for itself of $3.2 billion.
Representative Amo Houghton (R-NY) commented at the time of OTA’s demise that “we are cutting off one of the most important arms of Congress when we cut off unbiased knowledge about science and technology.”
Now, Rush Holt (D-NJ) backed by leading scientists and about 100 citizen, technical and academic groups, organized by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), is urging Speaker Nancy Pelosi to permit a modest restart of the OTA. As noted above, OTA was never abolished, just defunded.
Speaker Pelosi has been resisting, even though this tiny office can provide members of Congress with the technical assessments that could easily save billions of dollars a year. Apparently, she believes that the Republicans will accuse her of empire building, though the OTA is run by an evenly appointed Democratic-Republican Board of Congressional Overseers.
Without the OTA, commercially driven or otherwise wild claims are made for and against Congressionally funded programs.
The UCS (http://www.ucsusa.org) gives many examples of where OTA saved huge amounts of taxpayer money and improved the health, safety and economic well-being of the American people as well. OTA reports, by responding to requests by members of Congress, analyzed what technologies worked or did not work.
After OTA was defunded, the UCS asserts, “the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spent three years pushing for a costly radiation detection system for smuggled nuclear material that did not work as promised, while neglecting to upgrade existing equipment that could have improved security.” Billions of dollars were wasted.
Were it operating today, OTA reports and testimony might question DHS’s installation of whole body back scatter x-ray airport security scanners. Scientific experts are urging independent testing for effectiveness and safety for exposed passengers (see CSRL.org).
On other fronts, Congress is buckling to corporate lobbies and requiring taxpayer guarantees for nuclear power plants that are not nearly as cost effective as energy efficiency and renewables without the perils of atomic power and its unstored radioactive wastes.
The $9 billion a year missile defense project has been condemned as unworkable by the mainstream American Physical Society but the military corporations that receive these boondoggle contracts get it funded year after year.
The risks of nanotechnology, biotechnology and numerous medical devices continue to be unassessed, thereby allowing Congressional advocates to tout benefits and ignore costs.
Congress spends billions of dollars a year on technologies driven by commercial partisan interests, whether from government departments, corporate interests or campaign cash. Congress also ignores promising technologies. Decades of little or no solar energy research and development funding, and billions of dollars into atomic, coal and other fossil fuels, directly or indirectly through tax breaks, have cost Americans in their pocketbooks and in the air and water they breath and drink.
In 1985, OTA issued a report cautioning about the lack of preparedness and knowledge regarding potentially “catastrophic oil spills from offshore operations.” OTA could not follow up on this report, as the oil companies went into deeper seas, because it was silenced in 1995. Clearly, the Minerals Management Service of the Interior Department—a sleazy, wholly-owned subsidiary of Big Oil—was not going to advise Congress truthfully.
Through its impartial assessment capability, OTA could have alerted Congress to defective body armor that unscrupulous companies sold to the Army.
Congress needs an independent, impartial, no-axe-to-grind technical adviser under its own roof and responsive to the unique and timely needs of members of Congress and Congressional committees. Imagine, for example, the computer procurement waste that could have been prevented.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Ayotte has 9% lead in GOP primary
And Romney has a solid lead for 2012: ["Ayotte Has Single Digit Lead for GOP Nomination"].
Sunday, May 23, 2010
June 2010 Top 30 Noise Chart
Reporting: 13 different radio stations and Internet programs around New England:
1. John Shade – All You Love is Need
2. Magic Magic – Magic Magic
3. Hooray for Earth – Momo EP
4. Deer Tick – The Black Dirt Sessions
5. Ketman – Ketman A Go-Go
6. Ad Frank & the Fast Easy Women – Your Secrets Are Mine Now
7. Forest Fires – Hark! ~ and other lost transmissions,
8. Happy Birthday – Happy Birthday
9. The Motion Sick – “Doomsday Devices”
10. Cotton Candy – Top Notch & First Rate
11. Hallelujah the Hills – Colonial Drones
12. Spirit Kid – Spirit Kid
13. Corin Ashley & The Chocolate Olivers – The Abbey Road Session
14. Whistle Jacket – Compliment
15. Jenny Dee and the Deelinquents – Keeping Time
16. Monique Oritz – When The Pigeon Flies
17. Guillermo Sexo – Vivid Nights
18. Gene Dante & The Future Starlets – “The Love Letter Is Dead”
19. Pants Yell! – Received Pronunciation
20. Sodafrog – Hang the Moon
21. Dear Leader – Stay Epic
22. Symbion Project – Misery In Soliloquy
23. The Everyday Visuals – The Everyday Visuals
24. Tony the Bookie – Tony the Bookie Orchestra
25. Yes Giantess – Yes Giantess
26. Mean Creek – “Liar Thief”
27. The Appreciation Post – Work/Sleep EP
28. Mascara – Fountain of Tears
29. Three Day Threshold – Straight Out of the Barrel
30. You, Lion – End It on the Bridge EP
1. John Shade – All You Love is Need
2. Magic Magic – Magic Magic
3. Hooray for Earth – Momo EP
4. Deer Tick – The Black Dirt Sessions
5. Ketman – Ketman A Go-Go
6. Ad Frank & the Fast Easy Women – Your Secrets Are Mine Now
7. Forest Fires – Hark! ~ and other lost transmissions,
8. Happy Birthday – Happy Birthday
9. The Motion Sick – “Doomsday Devices”
10. Cotton Candy – Top Notch & First Rate
11. Hallelujah the Hills – Colonial Drones
12. Spirit Kid – Spirit Kid
13. Corin Ashley & The Chocolate Olivers – The Abbey Road Session
14. Whistle Jacket – Compliment
15. Jenny Dee and the Deelinquents – Keeping Time
16. Monique Oritz – When The Pigeon Flies
17. Guillermo Sexo – Vivid Nights
18. Gene Dante & The Future Starlets – “The Love Letter Is Dead”
19. Pants Yell! – Received Pronunciation
20. Sodafrog – Hang the Moon
21. Dear Leader – Stay Epic
22. Symbion Project – Misery In Soliloquy
23. The Everyday Visuals – The Everyday Visuals
24. Tony the Bookie – Tony the Bookie Orchestra
25. Yes Giantess – Yes Giantess
26. Mean Creek – “Liar Thief”
27. The Appreciation Post – Work/Sleep EP
28. Mascara – Fountain of Tears
29. Three Day Threshold – Straight Out of the Barrel
30. You, Lion – End It on the Bridge EP
To-do lists don't get done ...
Another interesting press release I got at work ... This one is no surprise at all:
To-Do Lists Don’t Get Done
Portsmouth, NH (May 17, 2010)-While most senior executives and managers keep a list of things to do every day, none of them complete everything on the list by the end of the work day.
Ninety-three percent of business leaders keep a list of things to do each day and 50 percent say they have between 1-10 items on that list. None of them complete the whole list by day’s end.
The majority (51%) finish 50 percent or less of their list each day, according to a recent survey by NFI Research.
“It shows that in today’s business environment, executives and managers have such busy schedules,” says Chuck Martin, CEO of NFI Research and author of Work Your Strengths. “It’s hard for them to complete all that they set out to do.”
Those in small companies (500 or fewer employees) and large companies (10,000 or more employees) have a similar number of tasks on their daily lists. However, eight percent of those in small companies do not create a list while everyone in large companies makes one.
“Interruptions, which are of course a part of my position, are the major challenge to my daily productivity,” says one of the 148 business leader respondents.
NFI Research surveys senior executives and managers globally every two weeks. It has chronicled the transformation of business and countless workplace issues for more than nine years. NFI's Chairman and CEO Chuck Martin is a best-selling author of eight business books and frequently presents NFI's findings to businesses. Martin also teaches at the Whittemore School of Business and Economics at the University of New Hampshire, where he teaches Marketing Research and Social Media in Marketing.
Chuck Martin’s latest book, "Work Your Strengths," is being published by AMACOM/American Management Association.
To-Do Lists Don’t Get Done
Portsmouth, NH (May 17, 2010)-While most senior executives and managers keep a list of things to do every day, none of them complete everything on the list by the end of the work day.
Ninety-three percent of business leaders keep a list of things to do each day and 50 percent say they have between 1-10 items on that list. None of them complete the whole list by day’s end.
The majority (51%) finish 50 percent or less of their list each day, according to a recent survey by NFI Research.
“It shows that in today’s business environment, executives and managers have such busy schedules,” says Chuck Martin, CEO of NFI Research and author of Work Your Strengths. “It’s hard for them to complete all that they set out to do.”
Those in small companies (500 or fewer employees) and large companies (10,000 or more employees) have a similar number of tasks on their daily lists. However, eight percent of those in small companies do not create a list while everyone in large companies makes one.
“Interruptions, which are of course a part of my position, are the major challenge to my daily productivity,” says one of the 148 business leader respondents.
NFI Research surveys senior executives and managers globally every two weeks. It has chronicled the transformation of business and countless workplace issues for more than nine years. NFI's Chairman and CEO Chuck Martin is a best-selling author of eight business books and frequently presents NFI's findings to businesses. Martin also teaches at the Whittemore School of Business and Economics at the University of New Hampshire, where he teaches Marketing Research and Social Media in Marketing.
Chuck Martin’s latest book, "Work Your Strengths," is being published by AMACOM/American Management Association.
No Time for Consumer Power
Guest perspective by Ralph Nader
In the end, late on Thursday’s Senate passage of the financial regulation bill, the Senate had no time for independent, non-government consumer power. In the end, after listening to swarms of corporate bank, brokerage, hedge fund, private equity, and insurance lobbyists, the Senate had no time for Senator Chuck Schumer’s amendment to create a non-profit Financial Consumers Association (FCA, SA 3772).
In the end, this massive 1500 page bill shifted very little power directly to shareholders and consumers of financial services (meaning just about everyone) either to better use the courts and to organize nationwide to counteract the lobbying muscle of the financial goliaths ready to turn the new regulators into procrastinatory putty.
The FCA proposal (see csrl.org), which Senator Schumer had backed in 1985 when he was dealing with the savings and loan scandal, did not receive the time of day. It would have required the companies to place an invitation to their customers in their mailing and electronic communications (bank statements, bills etc.) inviting consumers to voluntarily join and pay dues to build a powerful consumer lobby to countervail what Thomas Jefferson once called the “monied interests.”
After all, the criminal, reckless, self-enriching collapse of the economy by the Wall Streeters—the millions of lost jobs, the trillions of dollars in lost pensions and savings—Main Streeters deserved some reciprocal gesture for all the Americans who were forced, as taxpayers, savers and workers to bailout the crooks and ultimately pay the costs of this financial disaster.
In the end, the Senate, like the House of Representatives, told their consumers—their voters—to get lost. There was no room for a Financial Consumers Association in the 1500 pages.
The FCA is crucial to assure that many of the other parts of this bill are enforced. For very little in this legislation includes outright prohibitions. Rather the Senate, like the House, delegates the authority, within a broad range of discretion, to a variety of existing agencies, and a new consumer financial protection agency nesting allegedly independently inside the big bankers’ Federal Reserve.
There are so many complex reviews and procedural obstacles for these agencies that the corporate lawyers will collect enough fees to spoil their great-grandchildren. “Paralysis by analysis” is what consumer groups call such legislation. I call them no-law laws—mired in pits of quicksand that mock everything but eternity.
Without an FCA, with millions of members, and hundreds of investigators, organizers, lawyers, economists, accountants and publicists, the good people inside government will lack powerful, knowledgeable public champions to counter industry abuses.
The bill that passed both Houses does not explicitly ban totally speculative derivatives, does not ban banks and other firms above a certain size (where they again become too big to fail), does not declare that the shareholder-owners must have the authority to control their own companies, does not ban companies that mix trading for their own account with other people’s money backed by federal insurance. It does not circumscribe the enormous power of the Federal Reserve, short of a one-time Congressional audit, even after all the Congressional bellowing about the Fed’s derelictions and looking the other way while Wall Street robbed the American people.
Many of the major consumer groups supported the creation of a Financial Consumer Association. Their guarded support of the Senate-passed S.3217 came with the caution that this is an important first step and one that at least recognizes many frauds and rip-offs that still must be curbed.
Yet whether their hopes are even modestly realized will be determined more by how the corporate lawyers wired the bill with many ways to tie up the regulatory processes ad infinitum than anything an unorganized public can demand.
In one major respect, the big bank lobby lost one. They could not stop the creation of a consumer financial protection bureau. But without an FCA, the Bureau will too often find itself with one hand clapping.
However, if that one hand is that of Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren, the odds on favorite to run the Bureau, there will be instances when the big boys on Wall Street will have to face the music.
In the end, late on Thursday’s Senate passage of the financial regulation bill, the Senate had no time for independent, non-government consumer power. In the end, after listening to swarms of corporate bank, brokerage, hedge fund, private equity, and insurance lobbyists, the Senate had no time for Senator Chuck Schumer’s amendment to create a non-profit Financial Consumers Association (FCA, SA 3772).
In the end, this massive 1500 page bill shifted very little power directly to shareholders and consumers of financial services (meaning just about everyone) either to better use the courts and to organize nationwide to counteract the lobbying muscle of the financial goliaths ready to turn the new regulators into procrastinatory putty.
The FCA proposal (see csrl.org), which Senator Schumer had backed in 1985 when he was dealing with the savings and loan scandal, did not receive the time of day. It would have required the companies to place an invitation to their customers in their mailing and electronic communications (bank statements, bills etc.) inviting consumers to voluntarily join and pay dues to build a powerful consumer lobby to countervail what Thomas Jefferson once called the “monied interests.”
After all, the criminal, reckless, self-enriching collapse of the economy by the Wall Streeters—the millions of lost jobs, the trillions of dollars in lost pensions and savings—Main Streeters deserved some reciprocal gesture for all the Americans who were forced, as taxpayers, savers and workers to bailout the crooks and ultimately pay the costs of this financial disaster.
In the end, the Senate, like the House of Representatives, told their consumers—their voters—to get lost. There was no room for a Financial Consumers Association in the 1500 pages.
The FCA is crucial to assure that many of the other parts of this bill are enforced. For very little in this legislation includes outright prohibitions. Rather the Senate, like the House, delegates the authority, within a broad range of discretion, to a variety of existing agencies, and a new consumer financial protection agency nesting allegedly independently inside the big bankers’ Federal Reserve.
There are so many complex reviews and procedural obstacles for these agencies that the corporate lawyers will collect enough fees to spoil their great-grandchildren. “Paralysis by analysis” is what consumer groups call such legislation. I call them no-law laws—mired in pits of quicksand that mock everything but eternity.
Without an FCA, with millions of members, and hundreds of investigators, organizers, lawyers, economists, accountants and publicists, the good people inside government will lack powerful, knowledgeable public champions to counter industry abuses.
The bill that passed both Houses does not explicitly ban totally speculative derivatives, does not ban banks and other firms above a certain size (where they again become too big to fail), does not declare that the shareholder-owners must have the authority to control their own companies, does not ban companies that mix trading for their own account with other people’s money backed by federal insurance. It does not circumscribe the enormous power of the Federal Reserve, short of a one-time Congressional audit, even after all the Congressional bellowing about the Fed’s derelictions and looking the other way while Wall Street robbed the American people.
Many of the major consumer groups supported the creation of a Financial Consumer Association. Their guarded support of the Senate-passed S.3217 came with the caution that this is an important first step and one that at least recognizes many frauds and rip-offs that still must be curbed.
Yet whether their hopes are even modestly realized will be determined more by how the corporate lawyers wired the bill with many ways to tie up the regulatory processes ad infinitum than anything an unorganized public can demand.
In one major respect, the big bank lobby lost one. They could not stop the creation of a consumer financial protection bureau. But without an FCA, the Bureau will too often find itself with one hand clapping.
However, if that one hand is that of Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren, the odds on favorite to run the Bureau, there will be instances when the big boys on Wall Street will have to face the music.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
"Run it's Godzilla!"
Tuned into the Sox at Phillies game. Daisuke is pitching and when he came up to bat, my wife said she saw a sign saying "Run it's Godzilla!" Hilarious.
This is the car ...
I meant to write about this last year, when I saw the picture. But it's been sitting on my desktop now for months and ... well ...
It's the VW L1 concept car. It's a two-seater, built kinda like a airplane cockpit. It will have a top speed of around 75 mph and supposedly get 200 mpg! Bring it on already.
It's the VW L1 concept car. It's a two-seater, built kinda like a airplane cockpit. It will have a top speed of around 75 mph and supposedly get 200 mpg! Bring it on already.
Polling by Gov. Lynch to my cell phone
A polling firm supposedly doing data gathering for Gov. John Lynch called my cell phone earlier today (it was a private number, so I can't look up the number to find out about the polling firm). It's the first time I have received such a call on the cell. I spent about 20 minutes talking to the kid, rating various things, and listening to test messages that the governor (or his campaign) are considering.
A few thoughts about the polling: First, the governor is going to rely on previous messages he has used - helping small biz, keeping taxes low, being a leader, etc. He also seems to be considering bringing up some of his previous private sector background, even though he hasn't worked in the private sector for what, eight years or so? In addition, Lynch only seems to be taking one Republican candidate seriously - John Stephen - since none of the other candidates, like Karen Testerman, was even mentioned in the questioning.
The campaign is also testing reactions to possible negative messages used by the Stephen campaign and talking points to attack Stephen, if things get ugly. I found some of the points against Stephen interesting, including whether or not Stephen is truly an outsider, since he has worked for various government entities for more than 20 years. Another issue that may get raised is Stephen's consulting business, in which he reportedly is advising government leaders in South Carolina to raise taxes (I don't know if this is true or what they were even talking about here. I know Stephen was involved in some situation with health care in Kentucky that a friend of mine mentioned to me years ago).
It's not even June yet, so it's a good time to be testing messages, it would seem. However, I wonder if Gov. Lynch is really that worried about re-election. If his strongest opponent is Stephen, he's probably a shoo-in.
A few thoughts about the polling: First, the governor is going to rely on previous messages he has used - helping small biz, keeping taxes low, being a leader, etc. He also seems to be considering bringing up some of his previous private sector background, even though he hasn't worked in the private sector for what, eight years or so? In addition, Lynch only seems to be taking one Republican candidate seriously - John Stephen - since none of the other candidates, like Karen Testerman, was even mentioned in the questioning.
The campaign is also testing reactions to possible negative messages used by the Stephen campaign and talking points to attack Stephen, if things get ugly. I found some of the points against Stephen interesting, including whether or not Stephen is truly an outsider, since he has worked for various government entities for more than 20 years. Another issue that may get raised is Stephen's consulting business, in which he reportedly is advising government leaders in South Carolina to raise taxes (I don't know if this is true or what they were even talking about here. I know Stephen was involved in some situation with health care in Kentucky that a friend of mine mentioned to me years ago).
It's not even June yet, so it's a good time to be testing messages, it would seem. However, I wonder if Gov. Lynch is really that worried about re-election. If his strongest opponent is Stephen, he's probably a shoo-in.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Monday, May 17, 2010
Great political ad ...
Via Political Wire ... this is pretty good ... I love the not-so-subtle presence of the rifle ... yee haw!
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Comcast: Change the name, raise the rates
Crossposted at OurConcord.com
Finally got a chance to look at the bills this afternoon. Noticed a $7 increase in the Comcast bill. Hmmm, what's this?
Well, it looks like Internet went up $2 per month. The TV side went up $5.01.
I had to go back to April's bill to look up why this was happening.
The HD cable box charge increased by $0.95 per month. If anything, the more people get HD sets, the more the price should go down. In fact, why are we being charged a surcharge for the HD box again? Basic service went up $3. Digital Classic also went up $3 (we have this for the kids programs and other things). Comcast also warned subscribers that Digital Classic will no longer be available for new subscribers. Hmm ...
Standard cable, something we don't have, went up $2.45 per month. Everything else seems to have stayed the same. Expanded basic service, something we don't have, was reduced by $0.50.
Interestingly, two items I don't use - Digital video recorder, recorder service - were also reduced. The "Digital Additional Outlet Service Charge" was increased by $1.
The letter from Comcast stated that the increases were due to "programming and other business costs." But looking at this, one has to really wonder.
Comcast recently started dubbing its services "XFINITY" ... whatever that means. It looks like it means higher rates and a name change. Big deal. Maybe if they spent less money on commercials, the bill wouldn't have to be so high.
More complaints
In looking at Basic Service, one has to wonder what is going on.
First, there are three free "multicultural" channels, specifically, three Spanish channels. Are these really necessary in New Hampshire, where there are few Spanish people?
Second, New England Cable News' HD channel is not on the Basic lineup (the non-HD version is). One has to wonder why we have to pay a surcharge to view this in HD.
Third, still no C-Span or C-Span II in the free service or the Digital Classic. This seems stupid since these channels are free. I have tried to get answers on this in the past and have not received them. I guess I'll be waiting even longer for an answer.
In many ways, these are small complaints. But the $7 increase is a bit much. If anything, the cost of business is dropping, not increasing. We should be seeing decreases in bills, not increases. And, with no competition in Concord, I guess we'll just have to live with it, unfortunately.
Finally got a chance to look at the bills this afternoon. Noticed a $7 increase in the Comcast bill. Hmmm, what's this?
Well, it looks like Internet went up $2 per month. The TV side went up $5.01.
I had to go back to April's bill to look up why this was happening.
The HD cable box charge increased by $0.95 per month. If anything, the more people get HD sets, the more the price should go down. In fact, why are we being charged a surcharge for the HD box again? Basic service went up $3. Digital Classic also went up $3 (we have this for the kids programs and other things). Comcast also warned subscribers that Digital Classic will no longer be available for new subscribers. Hmm ...
Standard cable, something we don't have, went up $2.45 per month. Everything else seems to have stayed the same. Expanded basic service, something we don't have, was reduced by $0.50.
Interestingly, two items I don't use - Digital video recorder, recorder service - were also reduced. The "Digital Additional Outlet Service Charge" was increased by $1.
The letter from Comcast stated that the increases were due to "programming and other business costs." But looking at this, one has to really wonder.
Comcast recently started dubbing its services "XFINITY" ... whatever that means. It looks like it means higher rates and a name change. Big deal. Maybe if they spent less money on commercials, the bill wouldn't have to be so high.
More complaints
In looking at Basic Service, one has to wonder what is going on.
First, there are three free "multicultural" channels, specifically, three Spanish channels. Are these really necessary in New Hampshire, where there are few Spanish people?
Second, New England Cable News' HD channel is not on the Basic lineup (the non-HD version is). One has to wonder why we have to pay a surcharge to view this in HD.
Third, still no C-Span or C-Span II in the free service or the Digital Classic. This seems stupid since these channels are free. I have tried to get answers on this in the past and have not received them. I guess I'll be waiting even longer for an answer.
In many ways, these are small complaints. But the $7 increase is a bit much. If anything, the cost of business is dropping, not increasing. We should be seeing decreases in bills, not increases. And, with no competition in Concord, I guess we'll just have to live with it, unfortunately.
Cool press releases I get ...
Sometimes at work, I get press releases that have nothing to do with my job. A lot of times, these press releases show off something cool.
Earlier this week, I received a press release from this company called BluHomes: ["BluHomes"]. The company manufactures prefab "green" homes, in all kinds of very interesting designs. And prices aren't that bad either. In addition, they don't look like the "normal" prefab house. That is, this isn't a Kid Rock double-wide.
The problem, of course, is where to get the land, which is getting more and more expensive and hard to find. An empty nester home starting at $64K to $125K isn't bad ... until you realize what a lot is going for these days (never mind the property taxes in some New England areas after you make plans to build the house ...). However, BluHomes has it all kinda planned out for folks, and has the payment structure and planning spread out over a year. Having said all that, this company seems to be worth a look.
I have been tracking alternative housing options for about 9 years, since I learned about this guy in Belmont, Mass., building an alternative duplex on a very small site. The home was designed and built in Sweden and then the pieces came over and were plopped together over a period of three days (I will try and find the text of the story at a later date). One of the duplexes had this huge master bedroom loft and the walls were built in such a way to allow air to flow between them, to keep mold from becoming a problem.
I've also been investigating alternative energy for about the same time, since learning about a guy in Belmont who had a two-family with a solar panel to heat hot water for both apartments. I believe the payoff date was eight years, at the time of the story. Meaning, in the ninth year, hot water would be free for the next 20-plus years. Now, with all the incentives, alternative energy is a bit more affordable if you have the start-up costs (I was at a home show recently where they were promoting $20K windmills with a big chunk of the money coming from state and federal grants. If you have a big electric bill, do the math. It almost pays for itself).
Earlier this week, I received a press release from this company called BluHomes: ["BluHomes"]. The company manufactures prefab "green" homes, in all kinds of very interesting designs. And prices aren't that bad either. In addition, they don't look like the "normal" prefab house. That is, this isn't a Kid Rock double-wide.
The problem, of course, is where to get the land, which is getting more and more expensive and hard to find. An empty nester home starting at $64K to $125K isn't bad ... until you realize what a lot is going for these days (never mind the property taxes in some New England areas after you make plans to build the house ...). However, BluHomes has it all kinda planned out for folks, and has the payment structure and planning spread out over a year. Having said all that, this company seems to be worth a look.
I have been tracking alternative housing options for about 9 years, since I learned about this guy in Belmont, Mass., building an alternative duplex on a very small site. The home was designed and built in Sweden and then the pieces came over and were plopped together over a period of three days (I will try and find the text of the story at a later date). One of the duplexes had this huge master bedroom loft and the walls were built in such a way to allow air to flow between them, to keep mold from becoming a problem.
I've also been investigating alternative energy for about the same time, since learning about a guy in Belmont who had a two-family with a solar panel to heat hot water for both apartments. I believe the payoff date was eight years, at the time of the story. Meaning, in the ninth year, hot water would be free for the next 20-plus years. Now, with all the incentives, alternative energy is a bit more affordable if you have the start-up costs (I was at a home show recently where they were promoting $20K windmills with a big chunk of the money coming from state and federal grants. If you have a big electric bill, do the math. It almost pays for itself).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)