ByFusion 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

They call their new building block product "RePlast" (re-use plastic). It requires no adhesive to hold it together, it acts as an insulator against heat and noise, and its "carbon footprint" is 95% less than a concrete block. 

This sounds good, and I hope they make it. But the odds are certainly against them. Most - and we're talking 80% here so it's a huge "most" - businesses fail. Surprised? They'll have to keep their costs down, be smart, figure out who their customers will be and exactly what they want, and set a price that those customers will freely choose to pay.

This sounds good, and I hope they make it.

ByFusion

"There's no shortage of plastic in the ocean: un-recycled plastic from toys, containers, skin cleansers and countless other things fill the oceans in startling volume." That's the raw material which ByFusion uses to make a new building product.

What could be better than taking a problem waste material and turning it into the raw material for something so useful? 



(cont'd tomorrow, the innovative building product)

Mama Rwanda

Rwanda lost hundreds of thousands of lives, maybe a million, in 1994. The mass murders created horrific memories that many of today's adults have to live with. Read some of the background under the "Rwanda" label on the right.

Women make up 70% of the population, often without husbands to help raise the children. A film has been made to tell the story of how some of them have managed to survive. It's called "Mama Rwanda."

Re-gen village

Off-the-grid, is it really possible? Could be the energy grid or the food grid or some other grid, or all of the above. But some inventors and designers are giving serious thought as to how to accomplish living without dependence on public or government-provided necessities.

Regen Villages has a vision to engineer and facilitate "the development of integrated and resilient neighborhoods that power and feed self-reliant families around the world."

"In ReGen villages, household food waste is composted and fed to flies, which in turn feeds fish, which then fertilizes aquaponic gardens (multi-layered systems that combine fish farming and hydroponic agriculture, with plant roots submerged in nutrient-rich solution rather than soil). Those aquaponic farms grow produce for residents to eat, as do seasonal gardens, which are be fertilized by waste from livestock raised to feed residents. Rainwater is harvested and filtered for use in the farms and gardens, and on-site solar panels power the homes."

Grown up skills

A former Stanford University dean has noticed gaps in the maturity of college students. Here are those gaps . . and what you parents can do for your teenagers while still at home:

1. They can't positively engage with strangers - teach them to approach strangers respectfully and with eye contact
2. They don't know how to get around independently - give them experiences with transportation
3. They can't manage their schedules - help them figure it out in high school
4. They don't know how to contribute to the running of a household - give them responsibilities
5. They are helpless in conflict - don't solve all their relationship challenges for them
6. They can't bounce back after trouble - let them fail sometimes
7. They can't earn and manage money - let them have a part time job in hs
8. They think someone else will plan and run their lives - let them make decisions and enjoy the consequences

Carbon prize

(cont'd)

In addition to the Lunar Prize (Tuesday's post), XPrize intends to give $20 million away in competition for the Carbon Prize. "Teams will be scored on how much CO₂  they convert and the net value of their products."

The winning team will be the one that does the best job of capturing carbon dioxide, a gas, and transforming it into something of value. 

Already CO2 is a component  in lots of things, like baking soda, durable plastics (think Legos), cement, concrete. The competing teams are working on fuels, nanotubes, and much more.

"The diversity of products we can make from CO₂ is truly astounding. Imagine a world where one of our greatest liabilities (CO₂) becomes an asset." 

Wait . . I can't agree with XPrize on that last point. The gas that is essential for all green plant life - and thus most of life on earth - just shouldn't be called "one of our greatest liabilities." It is an asset, a life enabler. If it can also be made into additional useful things because of this contest, all the better.

XPrize

(cont'd)

"XPRIZE is a non-profit organization that designs and manages public competitions intended to encourage technological development that could benefit mankind." Lunar X Prize (yesterday's post) is just one of seven that XPrize Foundation is currently trying to give away.

Here's how they describe what they do: "XPRIZE is an innovation engine. A facilitator of exponential change. A catalyst for the benefit of humanity." 

I like what they say they believe in:

• competition
• incentives
• big challenges
• human potential

(cont'd tomorrow)

Moon prize

Someone is going to get a prize of $30 million for going to the moon. It's been more than forty years since we did that, and XPrize wants to inspire someone - not a government - to make it there again.

Thirty teams around the world are hoping to be the successful one. After overcoming every challenge to get there, the spacecraft will have to move 500 meters and then start sending videos and photos back to earth.

The deadline used to be 12.31.15, but with no winner by then it was extended to 12.31.16.



(cont'd tomorrow)

No monopoly

Cell phones replaced dial phones years ago because they worked better for us customers.  You're probably glad the government didn't step in to stop them from competing with the old technology. You and everyone else on the planet prefer the new technology.

It's called "creative destruction" because demand for the old product is destroyed when a better product comes along. Makers and sellers of the old product may fight it. We could be in at least a couple of cycles of creative destruction now, both involving the car industry.

Taxi-cab companies in Chicago lost an attempt last week to get a court decision against their competition, Uber and Lyft. The judge basically said no company has a right to monopoly.

"Our economy depends on constant innovation – and that sort of innovation can’t occur when governments allow themselves to be used by existing businesses to shield themselves from competition."

Property law

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

When there's no rule of law, there's rule of the jungle.

Watch (African) Herman Chinery in this video saying (at 1:13) that the lack of property rights under the law is a "terrible, terrible problem." He asks us to imagine the plight of farmers who lack law-protected rights to the land that they farm. He says that farmers in Ghana have to buy their land four or five times.

Law protects

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

The rule of law helps obtain justice for the poor and powerless. Just outside Buenos Aires, Argentina, the area of La Cava lacks the protection of the rule of law.

Without clear property title, it's hard to prove your property belongs to you. Without lawful enforcing of contracts, it's hard to go after the compensation you negotiated. Without access to courts, it's hard to pursue your "just reward."

Rule of law

Two-thirds of the world's countries operate under the "rule of man," which means that men and women with power can reward their friends, punish their enemies, and ignore the insignificant. They are largely free to govern as they like.

One-third of the world's countries operate under "rule of law," which means there are stable, reasonable laws that apply to everyone.

It should be obvious which system enables more people to live and create.



(cont'd tomorrow)

How hyped?

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

According to this article, Tesla's CEO Elon Musk is a "hypester," a king of hype. Musk said, "We know exactly what to do, and we’ll be there in a few years. We’ll take autonomous cars for granted in quite a short period of time."

A Lyft co-founder says, "Autonomous vehicle fleets will quickly become widespread and will account for the majority of Lyft rides within 5 years. By 2025, private car ownership will all-but end in major U.S. cities."

Author Lambert Strether says these quotes demonstrate extremely hyped excitement over  self-driving cars. He quotes a couple of experts who think the technology is "not even close."

The director of robotics for Carnegie-Mellon University says, "With autonomous cars, you see these videos from Google and Uber showing a car driving around, but people have not taken it past 80 percent. It’s one of those problems where it’s easy to get to the first 80 percent, but it’s incredibly difficult to solve the last 20 percent."

This post is based on this article. For an attack on Tesla's safety claims, go here.

Hyped tech

Tesla Motors has made a big impression on the public. Its CEO drives the company to thrilling innovation, but there's some skepticism that Tesla will ever be able to deliver on all its promises.

Since the Model 3 was unveiled last spring, Tesla has received over 400,000 pre-orders from excited fans who paid $1000 each. Those wannabe customers - and the general public - want Tesla to succeed. But the risk that it won't succeed is still uncomfortably high.

A key element of excitement about Tesla is its promise that autonomous (self-driving) cars are really coming soon. But technical experts think fully autonomous (also known as Level 5) cars are not even on the horizon.

Incremental improvements, like "predictive brake priming" by Mercedes-Benz, can bring us a little closer. But what's required for a driver to completely disengage (like, go to sleep) is a level of complexity beyond all the improvement tweaks. See tomorrow's post.

Think

"Think for yourself." It used to be a virtue in our classrooms.  To think through the evidence about an issue and form your own opinion was admired. Is it still admired? Or do students feel pressure to conform to certain opinions regardless of what makes sense?

"If you can’t ask a candid question of a professor or fellow students without fear of retribution, you aren’t in a place of learning. That’s because real knowledge can be fueled only by free and open inquiry.

"The process of learning for the high school or college student is the same as it is for a child: a give-and-take with others through which we verify reality by asking straightforward questions of varying complexity. The more open and free the exchange, the greater our knowledge and awareness of what is true."

New Uber use

Summit, New Jersey, had a dilemma. Many of its residents commute by train to NYC, leaving their car in a parking lot at the train station. That lot was too small to handle all the cars so they were looking at building a new parking lot for about $10 million.

Then someone got a great, innovative idea - contract with Uber to get some of those commuters to and from the train station and forget about the new parking lot (because commuters won't need to leave their car there).

The city wins because they don't want to waste space on another parking lot and because this solution will cost far less ($167k the first year). Uber drivers win because they have reliable new demand for their product.

Innovative thinking has created another win-win situation.

(from buzzfeed)

NZ reforms

If it had not been for Lord of the Rings being filmed there, some of us would not know anything about New Zealand. Go here to see the natural diversity of this beautiful island-nation.

 Around the time that they were ending farm subsidies (Monday's and Tuesday's posts), they were making other really significant reforms.

The Dept. of Transportation had 5,600 employees,  which they shrunk down to 53 employees. The same thing was done to 35 agencies. Those agencies cost New Zealanders $l billion before the reforms, but after the reforms they made about a billion in revenues and taxes.

There were lots of reforms and they resulted in more prosperity and more freedom for those kiwis. Go here to find out how they did it.

Subsidies cut

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

It was a shock when New Zealand suddenly stopped giving subsidies to farmers for growing what the experts told them to. They knew it would be hard on farmers to adjust to a more free economy, and it really was.

But only 1% of farmers took the government's offer of an "exit grant," two-thirds of their former farm income if they wanted to give up on farming.

“Having been through pain, we can say going cold turkey was the right thing—although frankly I don’t think any other country would do that and I wouldn’t expect them to either, because the social pain would be too much to bear,” says an official. 

“But here, we’ve developed a newfound sense of resourcefulness that has encouraged farmers to look after their own interests. For many farmers, I think they underestimate just how good they are, just how successful they can be without government support.”

They don't claim to know that this can work for every nation, but the Federated Farmers of New Zealand says “In our experience, farmers do not want subsidies back. Most farmers want government out of their lives and do not want to be beholden to it.”

Subsidy gone

New Zealand's government used to subsidize farm production. That is, it paid farmers to grow what the government wanted them to grow. A subsidy is money or financial favor. In the 1980's, subsidies were discontinued. Farmers would have to make their own decisions.

There have been good results:  "Since the reforms, New Zealand farmers have cut costs, diversified their land use, and developed new products," like 2200 dairy products compared to the 35 they used to produce.

  

photo: radionz.co.nz

But there is a bad result. Certain bureaucrats (the ones who used to tell farmers what to grow and how much they would be paid) have lost their jobs. They will have to get a new job, maybe making something that people want. So the government overall has lost some power over the people, who are now more free to create and innovate.

 Wait . . that's a good result.

(cont'd tomorrow)

Extinctions #2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

Does it sound uncaring that ecologists "shrugged" when the tortoise died? According to yesterday's author, ecologists are primarily concerned with the healthful functioning of the natural environment as a whole. Extinction of a "keystone" species (like the sea otter for example) that is "essential to the welfare of many other species" would be very serious.

One way to measure the health of an ecosystem is by "biodiversity," which is simply the number of species present. In the era of the woolly mammoth, the number of animals on a square kilometer of earth was hundreds of times more than it is today.

 In northern siberia, "on each square kilometre of pasture there lived one mammoth, five bison, eight horses, and 15 reindeer. Musk ox, elk, woolly rhinoceros, antelope, snow sheep, and moose were also present. Wolves, cave lions, and wolverines occupied the landscape as predators. In total, over 10 tons of animals lived on each square kilometre of pasture – hundreds of times higher than modern animal densities in the mossy northern landscape.’ That’s bioabundance."

That author is now working on the de-extinction of woolly mammoths.

Extinctions

Sometimes you read alarming headlines that an animal we take for granted is almost extinct. It may seem like panic and fear for our planet would be the right reaction.

"The way the public hears about conservation issues is nearly always in the mode of ‘[Beloved Animal] Threatened With Extinction’. That makes for electrifying headlines, but it misdirects concern." 

This author, with decades of conservation experience behind him, says that extinctions are not that big of an issue, that the panicky tone is uncalled-for. New species are being discovered faster than species are going extinct.

photo: huffingtonpost.com

Back in 2012 the giant tortoise "Lonesome George" (above) died, the last of his particular species. But there are 10 more subspecies and 19,000 other giant tortoises on the Galapagos Islands occupying the same "ecological niche." So, "ecologists shrugged."

(cont'd tomorrow)

Dry January

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

What if a drug was discovered that could reduce blood pressure, cholesterol, and insulin resistance? Oh, and it's also free. Those health benefits and more have been found to result when an alcohol drinker, like the author yesterday, quits.

During "dry January," 100 men and women abstained from alcohol while their health was monitored by University College London. That 30-day period rendered surprising results: "liver damage was reduced by 12.5 per cent and resistance to insulin came down by 28 per cent." 

“If [a clinical trial] had a drug that lowered blood pressure by the amount we’ve observed in those that stopped drinking alcohol, the company would be excited beyond belief. If they then also found it reduced cholesterol, they would be doubly excited… it’s such a good story, there’s no drugs that do that.”

According to this chart, half of all adult Americans have an average of less than one drink per week. So if you do what yesterday's author advocates, you'll have lots of company.

Life improved

This author's life improved and he wants you to know how it happened. He considered himself a "light, responsible" drinker with only rare bad incidents. Then he stopped altogether . . and the results were good.

"My chronic insomnia became easier to manage. I had more energy, spent less time watching TV and more time reading, writing, and exercising. When I went out (to the same bars and shows) I felt more present and took home better memories of the evenings."

"[Alcohol] consumption correlates strongly with severe insomnia. And it can lower sleep quality in healthy sleepers as well, making them more tired during the day. Drinking is associated with a higher risk of weight gain and obesity, and it makes you more likely to contract illnesses like hypertension, mouth cancer, pancreatitis, and liver cirrhosis."

(cont'd tomorrow)

Crowded

China's population is the world's largest at about 1.3 billion. Here's another photo essay showing tremendous crowds of people in normal activities, like waiting for a train or taking a school exam.

Sheng nu

Gender imbalance in China, long expected due to 30+ years of one-child policy, is making itself felt. With millions more men than women, single women are under increasing pressure to marry.

Parents or grandparents bring pictures  to "marriage markets" and look for high quality husband material if their daughter isn't getting the job done.

world.wng.org

Huang, 34 years old and still single, became a Christian in her 20's when a job associate shared the gospel with her. She doesn't want the same things in a husband that she did before. 

"It’s a universal issue among single first-generation Christians. The singles group at Huang’s church, Chengdu Early Rain Reformed, even set up a formal debate last spring on the question of whether Christians should attend these non-Christian setups." 

She has reluctantly told her parents she will not date non-Christian men. Btw, "sheng nu" means "left-over women."

Sequel

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

No longer a rumor, the news that Randall Wallace and Mel Gibson are working on another film about Jesus Christ has been confirmed. "It looks like the highest-grossing R-rated film of all time [The Passion] is getting a sequel."

The Passion (above), their 2004 film about Christ's crucifixion, will be followed by The Resurrection, Gibson directing and Wallace writing the script again.

"Wallace was a religion major at Duke University and says the resurrection was a specialty of his. "I always wanted to tell this story," he says. "The Passion is the beginning and there's a lot more story to tell."

Wallace

If you've seen the movies Braveheart, Secretariat, Man in the Iron Mask, you've seen the work of Randall Wallace.

At the lowest point in his career, he humbled himself and prayed for God's help. Then he quit writing what he thought Hollywood wanted, and wrote the script he wanted to write for Braveheart. It was nominated for an academy award.

The requiem hymn "Mansions of the Lord" was played at Ronald Reagan's funeral. Wallace wrote the lyrics of that hymn for a movie he directed in 2001, We Were Soldiers.

He may be currently working with Mel Gibson on a movie about the resurrection of Jesus Christ as a sequel to The Passion.

(cont'd tomorrow)

Water rights

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

Economist Jairaj Devadiga has another option in mind for on-going water war between two Indian states. Their governments withhold water rights from the people. He suggests a different dynamic would solve some problems if people were able to purchase water rights to use on their farms.

 

The water would find its own value level by the price that farmers willingly pay for it. Why do the governments subsidize rice to the point that it's wasted? The article doesn't say, but maybe a market value on the water would direct the water to crops that don't need as much but have a good market value.

Instead of government using the river as a power tool, let the farmers figure out how to use it.

Water war

Two states of India have been waging a war (at times violent) over rights to the Kaveri River. It's been going on for about a century. Only one identifiable group benefits from this on-going war - it's the government in each state.

"Governments give out water to farmers in order to secure votes. Why do farmers require so much water? Because the same governments are giving incentives for overproduction of water intensive crops like rice. Much of that rice goes, not to a table but rather, to a warehouse where it rots.

"Milton Friedman once said “If you put government in charge of the Sahara desert, in five years there would be a shortage of sand.” Similarly, putting government in charge of a river gave us a shortage of water."

Some of that violence - vehicles burned, roads barricaded, even two people killed.

(cont'd tomorrow)

Sully

We saw the movie Sully (with Tom Hanks) last week. You remember the story: U.S. Air flight #1549 was disabled at 2800 feet when both the plane's engines failed. Captain Chesley Sullenberger chose to land right on the Hudson River and saved 155 lives.



When real trouble in the form of a flock of birds hit his plane, he had just seconds to analyze and decide what to do. He brought his decades of experience and his best judgment to the decision, and he didn't back down under pressure.

People didn't get out of their seats until the credits were half over. I suggest you stay in your seat if you go see it, too, and you'll be glad you did :)