Thursday, April 24, 2014

Is it Too Big To Fail or is it Global Warming?


Changing The Dynamics of Our

Whole Industrial and Economic

Conversation.










Too big to fail is a term that has been widely discussed since those that were too big to fail did fail and since those that did fail began in earnest to deny the fact they had anything whatsoever to do with the fact that such failure ground to a halt the largest and most powerful industrial economy in the world.

As the term has come to imply that banks with overwhelmingly large portfolios either should or should not be allowed to fail due to the sheer size of their combined wealth, with most of that wealth being held in financial derivatives that have essentially been worthless for the same amount of time they have been in existence, even though their failure led to an almost complete collapse of the US economy, did they really?

I want you to think about this.

In a speech former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan gave in 1996 to the American Enterprise Institute during the dot com boom, he warned of an “irrational exuberance” over the extremely fast paced growth of an economy that had nothing whatsoever to produce other than information.

As computers exchanging information worldwide enabled companies of all sorts to rapidly flourish in a “global economy”, The Chairman’s remarks on irrational exuberance were benchmarked by his entirely accurate assessment that although information technologies had a certain validity attached to them, that validity, which was all about the speed  information could be exchanged, something could be manufactured and something could be distributed worldwide as a result of that speed would much sooner than later equate to the failure of companies who relied upon innovations in informational speed as opposed to pure across the board, broad spectrum industrial re-innovation to remain both competitive and diverse in a global marketplace.

While the US economy grew at a fantastic rate during this dot com boom and in 1998 Chairman Greenspan “modestly remarked favorably in his typical guarded optimism” about the growth of information technologies, the very information technologies that created the entirely false economic boom of the 1990s also created a situation that today, just one and one half decades later has made the most streamlined and supposedly technologically advanced 20th century American companies in the world, absolutely valueless.

As the discussion over too big to fail enters into the realm of finally confronting banking reform, I am certain it is essential to understand why banks that historically were the benchmarks of rational worldwide management of America’s progressive industrial growth policy became entirely irrational and in doing so, became so uncontrollably large and uncontrollably obsessed with financial instruments that had virtually no bearing on that industrial growth.

As this indeed did happen and we are all collectively having to confront the ramifications of this existential fascination with investing in worthless financial theory, how should or will the substantial redirecting of “wholly intangible financial assets” held by these banks be accomplished in a highly structured manner to affect the successful reinvestment of “tangible financial assets” still held by existing 20th century companies? How do sustainable 21st century companies emerge from this process?  

When I refer to pure, across the board, broad spectrum industrial re-innovation, I am not talking about retooling a 20th century American factory to make it more competitive in what can only be considered as a transitional 20th/21st century global economy. This has already happened to every American company regardless of size during and since the dot com era and the only real result of such informational retooling was to essentially produce economic clones of the original (company).  As that company may have had its origins in Cleveland, or Chicago or Memphis but due to the dot com era now has its headquarters in Singapore, so what, as nothing new has actually been produced in the process of company cloning, it is really quite obvious that having one hundred companies making cars does little to affect the broader definition of the car itself. As all such superfluous dot com activity has led to is widespread unemployment and a fundamental collapse in any form of consumer confidence or much more to the point, the greater financial investment confidence of a nation of traditionally sound industrial investors as a whole, the amount of companies worldwide that are making cars, simply does not address the larger issues surrounding the whole environmental awareness of the need to alter the perception of transportation in the first place. As such activity does not alter the perception of transportation, neither does it enable the forward thinking investment into the world of organic commodities that should be considered as essential to the growth of transportation products, the factories these products are manufactured in and the means in which earth based ingredients are transformed into legitimately regulated 21st century derivatives.

What I am referring to as industrial re-innovation here, is then,  the manner in which we re-invent “the whole product life cycle dynamic”.

From the point of acquiring the raw material to the point of returning the raw material back to its original form once the whole product lifecycle has run and therefore should in perpetuity, continuously run its course, how does the pure American made corporation wholly redefine and wholly reproduce its product life cycle dynamic and guarantee that life cycle globally for the next 100 years of 21st century American industrial prosperity? Given that industrial and economic life cycles generally span 100 years, given that the socio-economic nature of a whole industrial life cycle ultimately has to take into consideration the “intellectual learning curve of the investor, the worker and the consumer”, what should we in America realistically expect to have collectively accomplished by the year 2110?

As too big to fail has become the buzzword of impending banking reform and within that definition lies a great uncertainty as to how to actually achieve comprehensive financial reform, the primary reason for that uncertainty is benchmarked by the fact that only a certain percentage of the whole population of America here in 2010, truly has a clue as to the potential that can be realized by 2110. With only a small percentage of visionaries actively working to pass banking regulation that prepares our nation in a forthright manner for all of the accomplishments we will by our 22nd century have been able to look back upon as our nation’s greater industrial successes during our 21st industrial century, another equally small percentage of industrial historians are looking within that same forthright manner, upon the achievements of our 19th industrial century and stating a car is a car even though back then a car was competing with a horse. With neither of these two entities fully capable of establishing a 2010 industrial middle ground that among other things enables both the horse and the car to coexist economically, the middle ground remains the organic commodity that fueled the horse and fueled the car while feeding the horse rider and the car driver both economically and nutritionally in the same breath.

As to big to fail suggests that a small percentage of people from two entirely different industrial centuries are squabbling over the financial remnants of 20th century industrial economy, the financial remnants are quite unfortunately remnants due primarily to the fact that neither group realizes fully the capacity to benefit fully from the actual organic and non organic horseshit, 20th century industrial innovation has enabled us to collectively reprocess, re-work and reinvest both financially and industrially in.

To put into perspective the capacity we now have to successfully blend the combined fuel sources of two centuries of industrial progress into a working blueprint that will enable the third , I would rather coin the slogan “too diversified to ever again falter” to replace the more or less redundant term of “too big to fail”.
As within this slogan would be a much more proactive goal emanating from within the mindset of inventing the whole product dynamic, the technologies available to American industry today certainly can allow such a slogan to become our nation’s collective and attainable socio-economic benchmark.

Having said this, I believe it is imperative to understand why the dot com bubble burst to begin with.

In a nutshell, the birth of information technologies enabled every industrial and environmental function of our twentieth century to simultaneously meet both its zenith and Waterloo.

With virtually every 20th century industry utilizing advanced information technologies simultaneously to achieve both manufacturing excellence and environmental balance, we as a nation collectively achieved technologically advanced industrial and economic obsolescence in the process. As technology removed the work force and the consumer from the equation of continuously being able to afford what factories were capable of producing, it did as well remove from that same equation, the ability of the consumer to own stock in companies that historically produced dividends for both the working American white and blue collar middle American investor.

As the investor pool of traditional companies grew smaller, the need to invent some type of investment portfolio that would draw the investor back to the pool became that much more of a national urgency. But as the investor was no longer working in any of the fields associated with the many newly invented investment portfolios, all monies that eventually went into that portfolio became less and less attached to anything that was actually being manufactured. Thus, the irrational exuberance Chairman Greenspan warned of in 1996 had indeed manifested itself in what today has become, a totally irrational and worthless national investment portfolio filled with an entirely false sense of socio-economic exuberance. But again, with the advent of advanced communication technologies, the events that came about after the dot com bust were preordained and were clearly outlined by not only Mr. Greenspan but many others (including myself) as well.

As we collectively as a nation brought about our own financial demise due simply to the fact that we utilized advanced communication technologies to fully automate every function of our 20th century industrial marketplace without ever seriously realizing the need to weave far more sophisticated industrial re-innovation into the process, convinced that once we had made enough profit from out 20th century that the profit realized in our 21st century would be far more easily realized, we were wrong in virtually every facet of our assumptions, particularly the assumptions that an economy could grow without both an enlightened and progressive national energy policy to sustain it or an equally enlightened banking community to fund it nor an educated workforce to apply it.

But were we wrong?

Our investment portfolios were on one hand littered with stocks we felt would continue to thrive based upon what we knew of the 20th century performance of these companies. And, of course these companies were in many cases the ones that faired the worse. As a good percentage of investment portfolios were made up of these bad 20th century investment choices, another percentage of these portfolios were made up of 21st century speculative stocks. The speculative stocks were and remain to be those relating to among other things, alternative energy companies. Unfortunately, due to the fact that we have never in almost forty years made an effort to aggressively weave the technologies represented by alternative energy companies into our whole industrial marketplace, the potential to realize new growth in these new sectors has become just as redundant as the potential to realize profits in virtually any of our old sectors.

But is this true?

Unfortunately it is and the reason it is has to do with the fact that the system of industrial integration that needs to be established and who or what entity(s) should be charged with implementing this system have not yet been determined.

While the entities that can implement this system are exactly the same as they have been in the past forty years, they quite unfortunately remain locked into the framework of the very ridiculous ideological warring narratives that have pitted environmentalists against industrialists, both against economists and all against the very regulatory entities that are supposed to assure the success of the whole interactive 21st century industrial growth model to begin with.

Having said this, with an entire industrialized nation paralyzed by isolated ideologies, the system of industrial integration that needs to be established to end our collective economic paralysis must be established by seamlessly blending these ideologies together.

The investment bank should have assets directly related to the industrial sector it invests in and of course all sectors of the industries the bank represents should be directly related to the whole physical environment it has the responsibility to live dynamically in or with. In turn, regulatory entities should move freely about without any form of ideological political maneuvering interfering with the successful implementation of the entire process. As the process I am speaking of is a blueprint that will enable all sectors of our industrial society to flourish unhindered by disjointed ideologies, the process orchestrated properly will prevent the type of economic redundancy realized at the height of our 20th century from contracting any further and in expanding exponentially to include dynamic industrial diversification well into our 21st century.

With the driving force of our 20th century economy being the successful development of any and all industries having anything at all to do with energy production and consumption, the same driving force is what should be supporting the economic growth of our 21st century economy. But as there is still such an overarching ideological separateness that exists within the combined energy sectors that remain the highly unstable economic foundations of our 20th century economy, re-worked and re-orchestrated they quite obviously become the keyways to our 21st century non-separateness.


Could Global Warming versus Too Big to Fail truly lead to Economic Climate Change?

Global warming is today every bit of the buzz term as too big to fail. As all either of these terms essentially convey is absurd arrogance on the part of those who are smug enough to think that they have some unique handle on the future of the universe, it is ironic that both of these terms actually personify the great dysfunctionalism of hopelessly isolated financial, industrial and environmental ideologies I am speaking of.

Global warming “experts” swear by their belief that all that is happening to our planet is manmade. If we don’t soon become entirely aware of the fact that we are collectively destroying the planet, the planet will soon destroy us. While the evidence these experts rely upon is based upon some rather high brow assertions of a scientific community run entirely amuck, virtually every one of these assertions is true and virtually every one of these assertions runs parallel to the capacity our 21st century industrial sector has to apply new technological and environmental innovation to what is clearly the need to restate our whole relationship with the planet we have come to call home.

As this relationship is seemingly complicated and environmental scientists are in many ways categorized as theoretical lunatics whose entire purpose is to make sure tidal waves don’t sweep across northern Louisiana or solar winds don’t topple the Empire State Building, economists on the other hand are looking at equally bizarre financial derivatives in hopes of reinvigorating a global economy that has unfortunately come to symbolize both zero industrial growth and zero environmental compatibility.

Al Gore with his hopelessly vague carbon credits and cap and trade consciousness along with Goldman Sachs and its obsession with inventing equally intangible financial tools are both moving further and further away from anything even remotely related to funding nationwide public utility policy and are as a result, both reside in camps of the theoretically absurd. With neither party capable of looking at pure industrial economics which is the fundamental financial and environmental nurturing of the very industries that would actually put environmentalists and economists successfully in bed together, the economy remains hopelessly dormant.

Having said this, forget entirely about carbon credits and cap and trade for a moment and look instead to proactive commodity futures trading.

As futures trading has historically enabled the price of any earth based commodity ie; soy beans, coal, oranges, precious metals, oil etc. to weave into an industrial economy that relies upon these commodities to produce the products that come from industrial mechanisms, environmental interaction within the foundation of a progressive industrial economy has as a result, always been paramount. 

While the adoption of “carbon credit consciousness” is stating that any given industrial process does indeed leave a carbon footprint is quite obvious, taxing the negative footprint of a carbon as opposed to building the positive industrial model that alleviates the footprint are two entirely different issues. Simply put, how can we possibly expect to tax an industry that produces carbon emissions (as virtually every industry does) if we don’t first enable an organic derivative or an earth based commodity the full capacity to reach its whole intended industrial life cycle potential economically?

The answer of course, is we can’t.

What is wrong with our industrial and economic thinking today can be summed up rather simply.

Solar energy, wind energy, geothermal energy, bio-fuel energy, the supposed “free and clean earth energy resources” that have, over the course of the last four decades come to personify our capacity to embrace a healthier earth consciousness are not in any manner whatsoever an end all to the elimination of man’s ongoing obsession with either caring for the planet or exploiting its natural resources for personal economic gain, they are simply new ideas that require new technology in order to move the civilizations that inhabit the planet to a continuously enlightened environmental and industrial and economic relationship with the earth based commodities man has always used.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about.

Enlightened Conversations with Three Centuries of Detached American Garage Dwellers

“You may have invented the oil lamp, but I invented the flashlight.”
“You may have invented the ax, but I invented the chainsaw.”

“Your lantern and your ax may have enabled you to light and heat many homes more efficiently in your day of using the earth’s resources, but my flashlight and my chainsaw enabled me to light and heat many more homes and produce a much more dynamic community economic and industrial growth model than yours because I was able in my day to much more efficiently and rapidly duplicate the original energy source.”

“Well, what you both say may have been true in the 19th century and may have been true in the 20th century, but this is the 21st century and I have an entirely different view of earth’s resources and an entirely different manner to harvest energy”.


As it is today in 2010, the garage built by the man with the ax and inhabited by the man with the chainsaw is filled with stuff that can’t be disposed of. The reason it cannot be disposed of is that a good portion of it is still being used even though its use today is far different than its originally intended purpose. Not only can’t the stuff inside the garage be disposed of but the garage itself can’t as well. As there is simply too much multi-generational interaction of separate centuries of industrial processes taking place, it is doing so because the industrial equation of man’s interaction with his natural environment is constantly evolving. As it is, taxing the overall outcome of the initial idea of creating or recreating light or heat did not come about until after the investment of the next generation of emerging earth management technologies had actually been made.

The horrendously wrong thinking of both environmental scientists and economic theorists today in 2010 therefore, is that instead of allowing overall industrial investment to move forward within the realm of common sense and purely evolutionary reinvestment of the very earth based commodities we as Americans have historically been able to turn into models of community industrial development and economic exchange without much effort, scientists and economic theorists are choosing to forgo entirely the fundamentals of pure and simple industrial invention and broad spectrum economic expansion by regulating the new industrial idea before it actually has been able to take root on one hand and by  wrongfully redirecting potentially enormous quantities of latent 20th century industrial investment capital entirely away from both the commodity and the industrial mechanism that would enable the sound rationale of the new industrial idea from flourishing to begin with.

Alternative energy resources, the accompanying reregulation of the earth based commodities utilized to harvest those resources, the ensuing economic growth made possible by allowing those resources to expand into the overall American marketplace cannot possibly be realized if scientists with little to no common sense are allowed to manage the growth of an economy alongside economic theorists who have even less common sense.


Solar and Wind Energy Based Commodities


As a solar farm or a wind farm can conceivably be characterized as an affront to the fossil fuel based economy that has sought to look upon these emerging green technologies as threatening economic competitors, environmentalists obsessed with their “dying earth scenario”, have done their part to hinder the otherwise cooperative dialog by making it sound as if oil is going to kill the earth immediately whereas solar being “free” will magically prevent the earth’s impending demise. Investment bankers on the other hand have done the same by insisting upon the notion that investing the limited share of real venture capital available from traditional energy companies on financial derivatives that have virtually no bearing on any sustainable reinterpretation of actual and renewable earth based fuel sources will somehow keep these industries alive. As all of this is currently taking place, creating wholly fluid financial management models of derivatives that fully support the inevitable need to look intensely close at the broader dynamic of advanced environmental sustainability principles of our nation’s basic earth based commodities remains the key.

As a solar collector is essentially made up of a variety of parts that are manufactured in state of the art assembly facilities, the basic raw materials that go into those parts remain the commodities invested in by a long line of American industrial inventors that have historically been able to shape and reshape what they have dug from the soil into tools of commerce. Having said this, understanding that the dynamic industrial nature of raw the raw materials that go into making the solar collector is constantly evolving, taxing the processes involved with mining or processing those raw materials today in 2010 not for their potential to create a negative carbon footprint but instead investing in the technologies that enable all raw materials to become part of a positive industrial process is essential.

While the raw materials that go into making a solar collector undoubtedly have many more lives in a variety of products, the fact that these raw materials are used in the manufacturing of the solar collector and in turn, the solar collector for all practical purposes is a part of what should be a national mixed use public utility grid, the need to separate out the public utility function of these materials from the private sector use of these raw materials for the singular purpose of being able to fund the growth of an entire national public utility grid is again essential.

If we know (and we do) that solar energy is present everywhere, and we know as well that this energy can be harnessed both actively and passively, then we also know that virtually every product made that deals with the application of this energy does have the capacity once it is installed to have a solar energy public utility tax attached to it. As we do know this, and we know as well that any piece of industrial equipment attached to our public utility grid does have an industrial life expectancy attached to it, taxing all entities having any involvement with solar energy for the singular purpose of assuring continued research of solar energy never stops, becomes the primary reason for this tax. As opposed to a redundant carbon tax that penalizes all industries that create negative carbon footprints, a specific solar energy tax applied to all industries related to the specific production of solar equipment achieves what absurdly speculative investment in worthless financial derivatives has failed to do. As what this tax does is provide a determined set of highly focused financial instruments that allow the prolonged investment and reinvestment of these instruments back into the solar sector, the notion of all sectors creating a negative carbon footprint is virtually eliminated.    

As this is true or should be true with the solar collector and any or all commodities and any or all manufacturing, installation and maintenance processes associated with the solar collector, the same is or should be true of the collective family of industrial and financial processes associated with wind energy.
Essentially, when it comes to the highly advanced economic science of constructively trading real financial derivatives associated with our public utility sector, those derivatives should be encapsulated within the type of energy source being provided.

As a solar energy derivative should be encapsulated within all facets of the industrial sector that has any manufacturing relationship with the solar collector, a wind energy derivative should be encapsulated within all facets of the industrial sector that has any relationship with wind powered electrical generation. Unlike solar energy however, wind energy can be used not only to generate electricity but within its dynamic nature, contribute directly to a larger and much more expansive definition of proactive, nationwide environmental and economic stewardship.

The stewardship I am speaking of is threefold:

First; is the capacity harnessing the wind has to contribute significantly to the adoption of nationwide clean air standards based upon what we already know about our capacity to manage wind currents .

Second; is the capacity to harness the wind both vertically and horizontally.

And, third; is the capacity the successful management of wind currents has on the further growth of the solar industry.


Let me explain.

As harnessing wind does produce electricity and currently, wind farms are being erected in regions throughout the country, the reason for erecting them in these regions is of course the fact that we have successfully studied and mapped wind currents nationwide. Through scientific research, it is clearly understood that certain regions produce the almost constant wind speeds required to make valid, the sizable financial investment that goes into planting these wind farms where they are and will continue to be planted. Having said this, harnessing the wind for the production of electricity can and does produce an opportunity to positively redirect and manage air currents as well.

If air currents that exist in these regions were more comprehensively and proactively managed in and around communities and the buildings that make up these communities, stale air pockets that produce tremendously negative air quality at elevations under 100 ft. above the surface of the earth surrounding a building or group of buildings or an entire community of buildings would ultimately be eliminated. In this process of bad air elimination, the capacity to produce a much more dynamic family of clean air financial derivatives whose benefit is not the trading of a carbon, but the trading of the clean air that moves the carbon effectively to where it can be harnessed and cleansed from the environment by advanced industrial processes would of course lead to enormous industrial expansion and clean economic growth.

When one considers the fact that in order to effectively create such “clean air community wide economic environments” other “environmental mandates” would come into play, one such mandate, which has been in existence for quite some time, would be that of clearing trees.




Yes, I am quite serious!

As tree clearing or tree trimming has been a necessary reality designed to eliminate the danger of tree limbs interfering with above ground electrical transmission lines for many decades, the practice has of course been viewed quite negatively by homeowners and whole communities and a host of environmental groups for the same amount of time. As all one has to do is drive along any American roadway to witness the unattractive end result of tree crews leaving row upon row of trees paralleling miles of transmission lines, the fact of the matter is that if these trees weren’t trimmed, every community in America would be plagued continuously with power outages caused by mother nature interfering with man’s larger purpose of powering homes and growing industries that enable us to do so.

Having said this and in turn realizing that we now possess the scientific knowledge to harness regional winds, we do in turn possess the scientific knowledge to “proactively trim trees” for the greater sustainability of not only the wind industry and the electric utility wind farms feed but the solar arrays that would flourish if in fact the trees were trimmed proactively.

When considering the full economic dynamics of wind energy then, not only can we produce all of what I just described above, but we in turn are able to produce an economic mechanism that finally enables us collectively as a nation, the ability to disassemble our ancient electrical transmission grid while in turn, engineering and constructing a new one. But again, such ability cannot possibly be realized if first we do not move away from taxing industries that produce negative carbon footprints without first enabling these industries exposure to the successful financial tools that make such dreams a reality.
  

Precisely the same is true for geothermal energy but in an entirely separate manner than wind and solar.


In the great evolution of “Detached American Garage Conversations”, both solar and wind energy clearly imply that scientifically and environmentally, our America has come to understand that we possess the capacity to harness the wind and the sun in ways never before thought possible. As these energy sources do not come from the earth and exist above and around the earth, we none the less still need to rely upon the commodities dug from the earth to manufacture the components that enable us to harness these “Global Energy Resources” properly.

Geothermal energy is also a naturally occurring energy source. But because it comes essentially from the earth’s core, mining and harvesting it brings the capacity to do so much more in line with our capacity to mine and harvest both oil and natural gas. Unlike oil and natural gas however, geothermal energy possesses certain organic qualities that require very little economic or industrial energy to harness. As geothermal energy is a term that clearly implies heat does exist within earth’s core, it also implies that with modern technologies that energy can be extracted and subsequently harnessed. Just as with solar energy, geothermal energy can be both actively and passively harnessed which again suggests that unlike oil and natural gas that cannot be passively harnessed, it is essentially a clean and constantly renewable energy source.


But it really isn’t.

And, as it really isn’t, its capacity to be viewed as a regulated commodity is much more in line with the same capacity as oil and natural gas have in our 21st century as opposed to either our 20th or 19th century.

As it is abundantly clear that oil and natural gas (along with coal) have been the commodities that have economically fueled all of our past industrials eras, these two fuel sources remain the benchmark of industrial economies. With virtually every industrial potential we have to harness the sun and the wind still reliant upon the use of fossil fuels, the intelligent use of geothermal simply enables us to blueprint a much more dynamic and efficient set of management criteria that is designed specifically to broaden our capacity to understand proactive 21st century fossil fuel resource management.

Geothermal energy exists in two forms.

One of those forms is passive in nature.

The passive form is realized virtually any time anyone who has a basement beneath their home, goes into that basement only to realize how constant the temperature in that basement remains. Regardless of the time of year or geographical locale, the basement temperature remains more or less constant.

Knowing that this passive element naturally exists yet by and large failing altogether to invest financially and industrially in this energy source is a patent example of how much capital is squandered nationwide in all energy sectors by not having a comprehensive understanding of all possible interactions between these sectors. As all that is required to regulate this pre-existing environmental condition is the passage of nationwide building codes that address the fact that geothermal energy is indeed a potentially dynamic 21st century public utility, what would these requirements actually be?

More to the point, if in fact national building codes were required to assure the growth of this utility, what portion of a building would be affected by these codes?

As geothermal energy does exist passively in virtually every building, it exists actively inside the earth around every home as well.  As it does and the technology utilized to draw this energy out of the earth is a series of pipes run underground, the more pipes that are underground and the more buildings connected to these pipes, the greater potential for maximized use of this utility exists. If all subterranean building environments were therefore mandated to utilize geothermal energy to heat these spaces, the relatively consistent temperatures of basements could be raised or lowered without much effort leaving excess reserves of geothermal energy to accumulate and be sold or more to the point, be traded.

If this energy source was installed universally throughout every home and every community in America, the trading of excess power could take place in two forms.

The first would be the use of this energy to heat public buildings and such physical structures as public sidewalks.

The second would be to use this energy to heat the upper floors of buildings that would be heated more efficiently by utilizing other heat sources. As the first floor of any given building might be able to physically utilize the geothermal heat accumulated in the basement, the overall carbon footprint would probably be better served by integrating natural gas and passive solar into the whole house heating system. Thus, by approaching the heating of a home or a community of homes in this manner, the carbon offset theory being bantered about on an obscure and virtually unattainable worldwide level, now begins to be realized on literally a house by house level.

Given that geothermal energy requires the installation of underground piping, the fact that this new utility becomes a companion to other underground utilities is quite compelling. Knowing that our nation’s entire utility network both above and below ground is in need of entire replacement, weaving all piping pertaining to all subterranean public utility transmission upgrading simultaneously has the very real possibility of being accomplished.

The bottom line here is simple, harnessing the full potential of geothermal energy suggests something much more economically compelling than simply utilizing that heat to enhance the comfort level inside of a building and growing a small and random collection of companies that might under current regulatory policy, install such technology in one or two homes of an entire neighborhood. As solar energy is a universal commodity that has a direct impact on the overall physical performance of virtually every building in the world, as wind energy has the same direct impact on the physical environment surrounding every building, geothermal has an equal impact on the earth beneath every building. A set of constantly interacting and naturally occurring energy forces, all of which directly affect the economic efficiency of a building; solar, wind and geothermal are as well energy commodities fully capable of regulation and fully capable of being exchanged financially in the terms traditionally associated with trading any other earth based commodity.



Natural Gas.  


Natural gas is of course, a fossil fuel. Of all such fuels, it is by far, the cleanest and most interactive of fossil fuels. By interactive, I mean this. Of all fossil fuels, natural gas has the greatest ability to interact with solar, wind, geothermal as well as bio-fuel energy resources. As natural gas is the purest and most fluid fossil fuel it is by its gaseous nature, also the most readily malleable. It is not difficult to adapt a building or structure of any size or function to accommodate the combined potential of mixed use energy resource management when natural gas is the benchmark fossil fuel associated with that adaptability. It is easily monitored, it is easily integrated into advanced, electronically and computer controlled metering systems and above all else it has what I would describe as an “industrial and economic breathability factor” built in to its very gaseous nature.

The proper and intelligent use of natural gas therefore, is to combine its “overall dynamic breathability” with the same breathability of solar, wind, geothermal and bio-fuel resources. As such combining has to take place somewhere, again, that somewhere can and will be found in the buildings where such breathability actually takes place and is regulated through the advanced application of energy sustainable, nationwide building codes. By focusing on broad spectrum residential, commercial and light industrial retrofitting of all buildings within these categories and having as a regulatory benchmark, the integrated installation of solar, wind, geothermal, bio-fuel and natural gas systems, the economic fluidity of these systems will instantaneously result in, a quite rapid acceleration of both new industrial growth and new and highly intelligent job growth in all of these sectors. Abandoning altogether the notion of again burdening existing industries with the impossible notion of carbon credit penalization, the larger notion of enabling overall dynamic breathability does indeed enable full carbon offset trading to be realized.


Ground and Rainwater Management Utilities


If the air we breathe is laden with the chemical byproducts associated with our attempts to become more industrially competitive, energy efficient and economically profitable and we in turn, now have the capacity to benefit from truly capturing and re-harnessing those airborne byproducts, we in turn, have the capacity to do the same with both rainwater and ground water.

As the collective process of capturing all airborne pollutants enables the growth of tradable earth and air based commodities associated with the total capturing and management of these pollutants, the same is of course true with rainwater and groundwater capturing and management.

If a home is rained upon and the rain coming from the sky is laden with chemicals, quite naturally the environment around the home as well as the environment inside the home will be adversely affected by those chemicals striking the home and being absorbed into the soil around the home every single time it rains.

Having said this, and knowing polluted particulate matter falls from the sky via rain and subsequently pollutes the land around home, it is also known that once the rain stops and the sun emerges, polluted vapor from the earth rises, inhabits the land surrounding the home and of course penetrates the walls and windows separating the indoor environment from the outdoor. Thus, the airborne particles being emitted from factories that produce the components that go into the manufacturing the clean solar collector ultimately are washed from the sky by rain, absorbed into the soil and are tracked into the home. But, if rainwater was fully harnessed and if groundwater was fully encapsulated and all such encapsulation and harnessing was indeed managed by the solar collector or a combination of mixed use energy sources, the solar industry, just as the wind industry, geothermal, natural gas and bio-fuel industries would have that much more potential for economic and industrial diversity.

“Welcome to Sunny James Solar Incorporated – where harnessing the sun for power and warmth, combines with harnessing the sun for environmentally clean water source reclamation”.

The utility within the utility all within the highly advanced economic framework of fully diversifying our holistic 21st century industrial re-management of our original collection of earth based organic commodities.

Full Construction Waste Stream Commodity Management

What would the scenario of a massive nationwide 21st century housing boom actually look like?

Well, first of all, there would be very little time set aside for watching your favorite television show. As you would be too damn busy covering yourself with the dust of your reconstructive housing ambitions, you would as well, be too damn busy managing the financial portfolio associated with placing the debris removed from your home renovation project into the bins filled with commodities being directed back to their collective and original source of industrial processing to be fully re-processed and re-invested in.

If you have been reading this essay and coming to the astute conclusion that virtually everything that is made has a detrimental effect on our environment based upon both our 19th and 20th century approach to industrial and economic growth policy, you should as well be coming to the conclusion that such practices are archaic. 

As there are literally hundreds of thousands of homes across America that are roofed with multiple layers of asphalt and fiberglass based roofing shingles and as there are now clearly evolved industrial procedures that fully recycle these products, imagining the scope of commodity growth associated with such recycling is monumental.


Matured Light Industrial Fossil and Bio-fuel Powered Transportation Systems Management

If the entire residential, commercial and light industrial building sectors were being retrofitted with the mixed bag of energy sources mentioned above and, if a nationwide housing boom fostered the need to collect and redistribute massive amounts of construction waste debris, some form of transportation would be required to remove the debris and another form of transportation would be required to bring new technology systems in and out of the communities being built.

As again we are an industrial society benchmarked economically by our capacity to continuously make profit from earth based commodities, assuring the fluidity of economic dialog associated with harnessing those commodities remains paramount. As it must and as we are capable now as a nation of combining mixed sources of energy to power our homes, that same capability exists in our transportation sector. Knowing this, how to remove the volume of materials that would need to be removed from a given community undergoing massive retrofitting is just as important as knowing not only the type of vehicle but the fuel source needed to power the vehicle in order to haul the material to its final destination.

Given the fact that both heavy fossil fuels and heavy bio-fuels require significant industrial processing before they are refined enough to make the fuel needed to power these vehicles, it is important to understand that in many cases the recycled materials coming from these communities will require the same fuel sources to effectively be recycled.

Having said this, the notion of industrial transportation and building material carbon emissions taxation comes seriously into play at this particular economic and industrial intersection. Knowing that the vast amount of building materials once used to construct the building materials that went into building American housing were derivatives of our oil economy, every single one of those materials being now reclaimed should be taxed accordingly.

What’s so terribly exciting about such a notion is that if done so properly, transportation taxes once relied upon exclusively for the reconstruction of our nation’s interstate highway system and our overall system of building roads and bridges that bring us into and out of the communities every American calls home, can now be offset with the taxation of the recycled fossil fuel based materials that went into building the homes to begin with. As in doing so we have collectively transformed a static transportation tax focused exclusively on vehicle movement and replaced it with a non-static, whole community non- fossil fuel reliance tax, anything and everything even remotely related to bringing the recycled building material out of a neighborhood would in turn be taxed to rebuild the roads and bridges the community still clearly needs.

No longer going to the “gas station” on underfunded and under improved roads, the light industrial fossil and bio-fueled vehicles that travel now on fully funded and technologically improved roads will do so in part by the fact that transportation taxes once defined exclusively as being a fee paid for usage of the road are being shared continuously by the house and the advanced industrial functions taking place in the house built alongside the road. As one of those in house functions might very well be the application of plug in electrical current used to power the family sedan, the plug and the power coming from the plug are all integral aspects of our overall transportation funding mechanism.
         

Mike Patrick Dahlke