EleBlog

24 Apr, 2007

I try to expand my information-intake horizons. It's not easy; there's much too much information out there. But recently, I've tried to add to my regular intake a publication called Grist. The fact that I've not hungrily taken to spending more time on this is reflected in the fact that the article I'm referencing here posted on 1-31-07, and I just read it last week.

It's a Q-and-A with Frank Luntz, who has been one of the brains of the Republican Party. Grist asked Luntz about the environmental issue. It's a pretty entertaining read. Why have the enviros gotten nowhere, the pub asks? Because you can't communicate, Luntz answers.

CLICK HERE to see it.

22 Apr, 2007

Thanks to a "heads' up" from David Shapiro, I became aware of the UL/IAEI Inspectors Meeting Report (from the 2006 IAEI Section Meetings). It's a 37-page PDF (to download it, CLICK HERE), of which pages 5-35 are densely packed with tightly written answers to questions.

What kind of questions? Some samples:


There are many, many more. Questions are answered; many of the answers include links.

22 Apr, 2007

I can reasonably be accused of being "bearish" on the economy. To avoid a long story: It's true -- and I'm right.

However, even if you disagree with me, you probably have not stumbled across two recent facts that are hard to explain if everything is so damn hunky-dory:


Go 'splain those things.

17 Apr, 2007

Let's pretend you are the kind of guy who can borrow $1 million in Japanese yen.


If you wonder why our interest rates do not take inflation into account, THIS is the reason. For the people involved in this trade, the "real" rate of inflation -- which bothers me, at the very least -- is not relevant.

= = = = =

Further: You can manipulate the math, change the assumptions, and fool around with these numbers. But it takes an unreal increase in the yen-dollar exchange rate to make this trade a loser. For example, were the yen to fall to 83 yen = $1, it would take almost $1.49 million to pay back the original loan in yen. But (*assuming all of my math is correct*) . . . you're still making money here. If the dollar's value vs. the yen tumbles by 30% (a fall from 119 to 83 yen), you STILL make roughly $450,000 on the trade outlined above!

For all intents and purposes, it is "risk-free."

Nothing, of course, is entirely free of risk. The "hazard" here is that the Japanese money market will become more expensive. But that doesn't affect the money you've already borrowed (unless you got the $ from the Japanese lender at an adjustable rate -- which seems dumb). It might affect your ability to roll the money over, and borrow more and more -- at some future date.

But that's then. For right now, if you are able to borrow money denominated in yen, you should do it. And the people who are able to do it . . . apparently are doing it. And buying U.S. government securities.

Conclusion: For the foreseeable future, U.S. interest rates will have little or nothing to do with inflation. Unless there's something really BIG wrong with my math.

 (More)

17 Apr, 2007

In the three months ended 3/31, inflation in the U.S. -- at a seasonally adjusted annual rate (INCLUDING food + energy) -- rose by 4.7%. That's the true inflation rate.

Right now, the 10-year bond (according to Yahoo! Finance) is yielding 4.7%. In essence, there is NO yield premium to inflation. Your yield on the 10-year is zero. Short-term rates are also around 4.7%, so if you give your money over to the USG . . . you're settling for ZERO return.

In other words: You've got to be an idiot to invest in U.S. Treasury notes or bonds, unless you think a major economic downturn is coming (and therefore bonds will increase in price, as their yields decline).

Here are some selections from today's Inflation report form the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

• "for the first three months of 2007, consumer prices increased at a SAAR of 4.7%. That compared with an increase of 2.5% for all of 2006."

• "the index for food at home, which increased 1.1% in February, rose 0.4% in March." Note that March's one-month rate averages out to nearly 5% over a year.

• "medical care costs rose 0.1% in March and are 4.0% higher than a year ago." I find this a bit hard to believe, don't you?

• The CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers increased 0.8% in March. Unadjusted, for the 12 months ended 3/07, the all-item rate (excluding nothing) was 2.7%. Unadjusted, the 3-month Urban/Clerical rate (compounded to present it as an annual rate) for Jan-Feb-March was 5.2%.

To summarize:

1. The inflation rate over the past three months, influenced by higher energy and food costs, increased by 4.7% or 5.2%, depending on how you want to look at it. The "core rate" increase of 2.3% should be disregarded by those who have brains.

2. Some components of the CPI are clearly understated. I could get into an explanation of the "hedonic adjustments" in these figures, and in GDP, but let's just take a look at the idea that medical care costs have increased by only 4.0% in the 12 months to 3/31, laugh heartily, and come to a collective guess that REAL inflation is higher than 5% on an annualized basis right now.

3. You've got to be out of your mind -- or have some really special financial situation (as in, be able to borrow in yen at 1.5%) -- to consider investing in U.S. Treasury securities that boast of yields roughly equal to the official inflation rate (and below the REAL inflation rate).

16 Apr, 2007

If you trouble to read the Predictions column (from 12/6/06 -- CLICK HERE), you'll see the #1 prediction, which reads as follows:

The business media have been a-buzz about how soon the Fed will cut rates, and how many times – and when it will start. But my understanding of economics tells me that the Fed is in a box.

If it lowers rates, the U.S. economy will be further punished by a decline in the value of the dollar. A series of interest rate cuts might well do the dollar in . . . by which I mean it could send the dollar’s value plummeting to previously unimaginable low cross-valuations.

If it raises rates, the economy could tank. Yet a raise is actually more likely! Why? As you’ve read here previously, the skyrocketing prices of aluminum, copper, gold, oil, silver, tin, zinc (etc.) are more about plummeting U.S. dollar valuations than anything else.

The Fed might be forced to raise rates . . . to keep inflation at bay.

It's not December 31, 2007, so this prognostication is not yet "right" -- and it might not prove out. Yet a number of economists, commentators, and CNBC talking heads who had predicted rate cuts have now come over to the point of view delineated above. Essentially, the Fed is in a box, as I wrote above.

Of course, I'm happy to be right about anything, and I'm aware that one rate cut will invalidate the crystal-ball-gazing above. However, what really makes me smile is the fact that the analysis above is based on my view of the economic world (as influenced by the various analysts and commentators that I read -- folks outside of the mainstream).

There are economic developments and results that flow form that economic view. I've invested so as to take advantage of them on down the road. That's the real reason I'm happy to be "right" . . . so far, anyway.

16 Apr, 2007

In the process of pulling some info together, I assembled links to past columns by me on TEDMAG.com on the subject of COPPER PRICES. It's quite a lot -- 14 columns. I've probably written 20,000 words in these columns, all told, since 2/05.

My favorite: The clearly labeled "predictions" column (12/6/06). Here's what I said in there about copper -- so far, very very VERY correct!


What's important about this -- and gives me what I fear is a severe case of HUBRIS -- is that I'm probably the only person, anywhere, who went on the record with such a prediction. I saw a commodities expert speak (in October 2006) about prices in 2007 averaging in the $2.50-$2.75/pound range for all of 2007. He might yet be right, but right now that's not the smart bet, is it?

Incidentally, as of 7:30 this morning, copper is trading over $3.50/pound.

Copper’s Fall Isn’t About . . . Copper (1/24/07)

Commodity Facts, Forecasts & Fears (12/20/06)

Six Predictions For 2007 – see #5 (12/6/06)

Copper: Topping . . . Or Bottoming? (11/9/06)

No End In Sight To Copper Boom (8/30/06)

Inflation: Nearly Invisible Long-Term Changes (6/14/06)

15 Apr, 2007

On a blog called BIMania, I found a less-than-five minutes video that was taken directly from a BIM model. It's interesting -- take a look (CLICK HERE). If there are additional entries, page down to the April 5th video.

15 Apr, 2007

What the heck is "Buildings 2.0" . . . Anto Budiardjo, who is the guy behind BuilConn (and GridWeek), has penned a piece. It is:


For the op-ed from which this is drawn, CLICK HERE.

14 Apr, 2007

CIO.com has a terrific (it seems to me) -- and  long -- and link-filled --  article, "ABC: An Introduction to Wireless." CLICK HERE to see it. It's a chance for you the catch up on the basics of wireless technology, if you've been ignoring it all this time (and I'm not talking about basic instructions on how to use a cell phone!).

Don't stop browsing or skimming or reading (or whatever it is you do) -- until you get to the bottom, the "8 things you should know" checklist.

14 Apr, 2007

"A continued slide" in lending standards has stimulated Moody's Investors Service to "require more protection for investors in securities backed by mortgages on apartment buildings, offices, and other commercial properties." This is a straw in the wind. It's not the end of the world. It will just make it more difficulit for those wanting to build such buildings to get financing. See the Bloomberg.com story (from 4/11) by CLICKING HERE.

14 Apr, 2007

The US Army Corps of Engineers is building a new 132 kV overhead power line between the Nasiriyah power station and the Ash Shatra substation. "Projects of this kind will lower the incidence of power outages and help modernize the electrical power system," says a project engineer. See the story here.

14 Apr, 2007

How much power-plant building is going on in India? I found a 4/12 item on Indo-Asian News Service. Check out the facts (plucked from the 600-word article:
AND: Check out this quote: "In view of the high ash content of Indian coal, the annual generation of fly ash is currently about 112 million tonnes (1 tonne = 2,205 pounds) and may double by 2017."

12 Apr, 2007

If you're a business reporter -- or a commodities trader -- you need a REASON for things that are happening. Today, the price of copper is approaching $3.60/pound. That shouldn't be happening, according to a veritable army of prognosticators. Copper's price was supposed to average less than $3.00/pound this year . . . perhaps much less, depending on which economist was speaking.

And maybe it still will. This flyover $3.50 could well be temporary. Copper's price could recede as fast as it's gone up.

My personal feeling is that the price of copper is being dictated by two things that the economists either don't want to think about or just subtract from their calculations:


However, even if you believed the facts were as delineated here, that doesn't fill up the news columns. Today, according to Bloomberg.com, the price of copper is up because 20 workers in Northern Chile elected to block the entrance to a mine. If you find that hard to believe, read the Bloomberg story (CLICK HERE).

Imagine if it were, like, 35 or 50 people!

12 Apr, 2007

While sorting through a massive bunch of stuff I had ignored, I ran across these two articles:

Innovation Lacking in New U.S. Commercial Buildings -- from National Real Estate Investor (posted 6/29/06). CLICK HERE.

Innovations from the Giants 300 -- from Building Design & Construction (from the July 2006 issue). The 300 are the big companies as honored by BD&C. CLICK HERE.
 (More)

12 Apr, 2007

I saved an article (no longer freely accessible) from the Houston Chronicle on "the engineering gap." It noted the many speakers and articles that point out the "fact" that China graduates a lot more engineers than the U.S., and that our innovation is headed down the drain, etc.

I'm not saying our educational system is good. However, I thought it suspicious that China was graduating 600,000 folks with engineering degrees each year. I know there are 1.3B Chinese! I just found the number hard to accept. The fact that the "gap" was heralded by FORTUNE magazine also smelled to me. That's the magazine that ranked Enron as the 7th most admired company . . . just before Enron blew up and its many nasty and illegal escapades came to light.

As a sidelight: You'd think such a publication would permanently retire the "most admired" annual rankings after such a destructive event . . . but, no.

Duke University researchers published "Framing the Engineering Outsourcing Debate" in 12/05. Upon close examination, the numbers are:


Elsewhere, I've read that some of the engineering graduates in China and India are auto mechanics. I'm not kidding. I wish I could find the where on that, but it's not at my fingertips; and I don't know if there are such folks included in China's 351K.

However, I did find the 12-page Duke report -- CLICK HERE to download it.

12 Apr, 2007

Perhaps because I was born in New York City, visit there occasionally, and live near Washington, D.C., I'm more aware of the possibility of a terrorist attack than folks in, say, Wyoming. I've saved a page from the National Academy on Engineering where you can access four Fact Sheeets on Terrorist Attacks -- CLICK HERE to see it.

12 Apr, 2007

According to Figure 1 in a Sept/Oct article in School Construction News, electrical lighting consumes 22% of the energy in a typical school building. To see the article, CLICK HERE.

12 Apr, 2007

Access a 6,200-word glossary of terms in the home technology biz -- CLICK HERE.

12 Apr, 2007

Ken Simonson, econmist for the AGC, published in March a 16-page (PDF) construction inflation alert. The ominous headline on page 1: Lull Between The Storms. CLICK HERE to download the document.

What about the legal issues involved in cost increases for construction materials? ConstructionWebLinks ran a piece back in July on this. It's still relevant. CLICK HERE.

11 Apr, 2007

I just stumbled across this, apparently a regular feature of SeekingAlpha.com -- the Housing Bubble and Real Estate Market Tracker. There are summaries, with links, of more than 35 housing/real estate-related stories. CLICK HERE to see it.

Here at the EleBlog, we're big fans of "the investment biker," Jimmy Rogers. Many folks don't know that Rogers was, originally, a partner with George Soros. Here's the item on Rogers & housing:

11 Apr, 2007

As you might know, I'm the Editor of Rexel's magazine, Power Outlet. It's a quarterly publication that the company mails to customers and hands out from its more than 300 U.S. branches. In the issue just out (#2 of 2007), the up-front "Trends" section includes a table on an item that carries the headline you see above.

It's based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data for 2004 and projections for 2014. According to BLS, fewer than 400,000 of the 656,227 professional electricians extant in the United States work for electrical contractors. Where do the rest of 'em work? CLICK HERE to see the Trends section (it's a 7-page PDF -- the table in question is on page 4).

11 Apr, 2007

Floyd Norris and Gretchen Morgenson are two reasons why the New York Times Business Section is light years ahead of most other newspapers. Norris now blogs as well. I found this on his blog (4/8 post):

"Did you know there are more people employed building houses now than there were in 2004? Or perhaps I should ask: Do you believe it?"

Bottom line: MORE bogus data from our national government. The facts Norris writes about call into question the 180,000 increase in employment supposedly posted by the U.S. last month.

Find Norris's post here.

10 Apr, 2007

From The Tree Hugger Blog: Solar equipment industry to grow from $20 billion to $90 billion by 2010. And: A 10-fold increase by 2015 in production of high-purity silicon. CLICK HERE to see the short item.

10 Apr, 2007

Most economists -- almost all of them, in fact -- are relentlessly Positive about the economy's future. I don't remember all that many calling for a decline in late 1999 and early 2000 (Robert Schiller is the notable exception). This is especially true, I've found, when the economist in question is employed by a company that sells advertising (i.e., a publishing co.).

So I was surprised to find this headline today when I cruised over to check out the latest from Jim Haughey, economist for Reed: "Factory Inventory Surpluses Are A Threat To 2008 Construction Volume." CLICK HERE to see it. Here's just a slice of Haughey's analysis:


Incidentally, if you're wondering how to pronounce Jim's name, it's "Hoy." I verified that in person when I met him last fall.

10 Apr, 2007

According to the CE Pro blog, a satellite dish/CATV installation company called 180 Connect - which had $335 million in revenue last year - has been acquired. To see the story, CLICK HERE. Interesting elements of the blog entry (by Julie Jacobson) include a deal the company now has with Ryland Homes, and speculation that 180 Connect might do national installations for the reincarnated Home Director (a home tech equipment vendor that once was part of IBM, and recently emerged from bankruptcy).

The interesting piece:

10 Apr, 2007

I hesitate to provide this link, as (in my experience) stuff on the McGraw-Hill Construction Web site tends to disappear behind a firewall (with a charge to view it). However, if you can get over there soon, you can -- for free -- see a neat story on Education Construction, complete with data and graph. CLICK HERE.

MHC has advantages in presenting such articles -- including the fact that the Dodge project-tracking edifice is embedded within MHC. So the article contains the following paragraph, which I don't think you would find anyplace else:

10 Apr, 2007

If you journey over to the Base Metals section of www.kitco.com -- specifically, to the "historical" copper price charts, CLICK HERE -- you'll see that the price of a pound of copper is up roughly ONE DOLLAR in the past 60 days, from about $2.40/lb. to roughly $3.40/lb. today.

That's a monster move -- more than 40%.

Here's the best part, for me: I told you so.

CLICK HERE To see a Jan. 24 column -- written back when commodity market analysts were writing off copper. It posted to TEDMAG.com, and the headline is "Copper's Fall Isn't About . . . Copper."

And right here on The EleBlog -- on Feb. 23 -- I wrote that "Copper Isn't A Dead Cat." CLICK HERE.

I'm no economist or commodity market player. My frame of reference dictates my "outlook" -- and it's simple to understand: The U.S. dollar is as weak as a kitten (weaker, maybe).

How that's different from the folks who (so far) are -- again -- wrong, wrong, wrong on copper: If your viewpoint is strictly U.S.-based, the huge rise in copper prices makes no sense . . . isn't the housing market drying up?, they'll ask. Well, sure. But that doesn't matter!

If you understand that the driving force for copper consumption -- and the buying and use of one heck of a lot else -- is coming from Asia, you can comprehend how copper can be up a buck in two months. And you also can get some insight into why the price is up: China has pegged its currency to the dollar, and the dollar is weak/weaker than a kitten. Thus a demand increase doesn't have to be huge to drive the price through the ceiling.

. . . which leads me to the "something else to worry about" category . . .

If you think about it for a second, you can see that sooner or later -- assuming the boom there continues -- the Chinese are going to become interested in decoupling their currency from the dollar. Right now, they are paying roughly 26.3 yuan for a pound of copper. If their currency really IS 40% undervalued, they could be paying as little as 15.8 yuan for the same pound of the stuff!

So . . . what do you think might happen over here if and when that decoupling really does happen?

10 Apr, 2007

With the BIG news that employment in the U.S. was up 180,000 in March, I was a bit unprepared for what I found over at the BLS Web site. Electrical contractor employment in February was DOWN -- albeit by just 6,000, or 0.84% -- from January.

It's minor. And 2/07 EC employment was still UP from 2/06 -- by 2.68%.

As you've seen, the BLS breakdown of employment data trails the big national number by one month. In May, we'll get the March number for the EC industry, and (perhaps) things will be back on the upswing.
 (More)

08 Apr, 2007

We've added a banner ad for Gridweek, whcih will be held April 23-26. It's worth taking a look at. The grid needs attention -- and by putting this four-day event in D.C., maybe it will get it!

07 Apr, 2007

BIM = building information modeling. It's the hottest thing in construction E-business. Lots of people know little or nothin about it, but they will end up learning a lot more. Some will have to learn more soon, as the General Services Administration (biggest landlord in the U.S., and an arm of the government of course) is an early and enthusiastic adopter.

ConstructionRisk.com offers a free legal newsletter. In the April issue, the headline on item #4 warns that considering the legal and professional ramifications, BIM is "a voyage into the unknown." Here's a slice:

Interesting, eh?

CLICK HERE to see the short article (page down to article #5) -- which includes a link to a 12-page newsletter on the subject.

05 Apr, 2007

Jim Jubak is one of my favorite financial columnists. Unlike the "bearish" folks that I read regularly, he's "balanced" in his outlook. He's got a good mind, writes about interesting stuff, and is a good writer to boot. In a recent piece, "Build Your Inflation Hedge With Infrastructure," he threw out some facts about India and China that seemed worth regurgitating:


According to Jubak, inflation in India is running at 6% in the economy as a whole, but 11% in food. Why? "Much of the country's soaring rate of inflation in food rices is self-inflicted. Somewhere between 30% and 40% of the country's crops rot in the fields or spoil in transit because of the country's creaky infrastructure. There simply isn't any way to get the food to market in time. What does make it through the supply chain is subject to huge markups at each stage of the process, because getting food from warehouse to distribution center to retail store to consumer is so time-consuming and cumbersome."

EleBlog take: Despite this apparent inability to feed its people at economic prices, India is out-competing the U.S. for relatively good jobs.

05 Apr, 2007

I took a stroll through the 10-K filing (annual report) for Fiscal Year 2006 of Integrated Electrical Services, the only real pure-play electrical contracting investment you can make (stock symbol IESC). Because IES went into "pre-pack" bankruptcy on 2/14/06, a lot of the numbers from the past year are not useful. So let's forget the sales, profits, etc. Here's what I found of note:

1. In FY04 (ended 9/30/04), IES, pre-bankruptcy, had $838 million in sales. In FY05, it was $869 million. In the 7-month period up to the bankruptcy (from 10/1/05 to 4/30/06), the company had $530 million in sales. In the 5-month period after the bankruptcy (5/1/06 to 9/30/06), the new IES had $420 million in sales. HERE is what's different: In the most recent (5-month) period, 43% of the company's total sales came from Residential. Back in 2004, the company got 33.7% of its annual sales from Residential. Thanks to shedding various companies -- a lot of sell-offs in the past couple of years -- IES has morphed into a company in which Residential plays a bigger role. It's weird that this happened just in time for a new housing construction down-turn!

2. "Our residential business has experienced significant growth. Our compound annual growth rate from residential electrical revenue has grown 11.3% from fiscal 2002 through 2006, compared to an industry average of approximately 8.3% over the same period. Residential electrical contracting represented approximately 34%, 37%, and 42% of our revenues for the years ended September 30 2004, 2005, and 2006, respectively."

3. "Costs derived from labor and related expenses currently account for 44% of our total costs" . . . "Cost incurred for materials installed on project currently account for 52% of our total costs."

4. On 7/16/06, the company sold $1 million in stock to Tontine Capital Overseas Master Fund L.P., which owns 34% of IES' outstanding stock. Purpose: To make a new investment in Energy Photovoltaics, Inc. IES took the money and invested it in EPV; IES has a history of investing in EPV -- and (unfortunately) . . . thus far . . . seeing not very much from the deal. As of 9/30/05, IES has decreased the carrying value of its investment in EPV to ZERO. "Additionally, we had a note receivable from EPV of $18 million that was completely written off" before 9/30/05. IES now owns 17.64% of EPV, a figure which could be decreased as low as 15.81% (assuming various stock options and warrants are exercised). Find the company at www.epv.net.

5. IES also has an investment in EnerTech Capital Partners II L.P. This (apparently -- see www.enertechcapital.com) is some kind of partnershpi that invests in energy projects. IES has invested $4.7 million total in the partnership, a deal that had a "carrying value" as of 9/30/06 of $2.9 million.


 (More)

05 Apr, 2007

In mid-March, the NSCA held its annual shindig. NSCA = National Systems Contractors Association. Many moons ago, the "S" stood for Sound. Essentially, this association has successfully mutated from representing contractors in a tiny-but-important niche to advocating on behalf of a booming new industry.

I've written many times before about NSCA and Chuck Wilson, its executive director (altho not here on The EleBlog). Essentially, despite the relative UNimportance of the association and the functions performed by its members, Wilson and NSCA stole a march on the electrical construction industry during the Construction Specification Institute's complete revamping of its MasterFormat. As a result, the Electrical portion of the old MF (Division 16) has been spread out into at least four (and perhaps six) of the new MasterFormat's divisions. Wilson didn't do it alone, but he gets the bulk of the credit.

NOW: Recently, I browsed over to the NSCA site to see what's up. At the mid-March convention, it held a special one-day event -- Connected Buildings '07. Short description: "Where architects, developers, design consultants, building owners and facility managers find and share solutions." See www.connectedbuildings07.com.

05 Apr, 2007

From the Xeta Technologies Web site:


What's the significance? This company was not in the structured cabling business. But according to a 2/28 conference call with stock analysts, the company has added structured cabling services as a third leg. Here's is what President Greg Forrest had to say about this in prepared remarks:


Later, in answer to a question:


I'm sure electrical contractors already in the cabling business needed another competitor -- one with an inside relationship with some customers -- like they needed another IRS. And it's not easy for me to understand someone entering the cabling business NOW . . . at a point which I would have called that business "mature" (meaning there's not a lot of profit in it for new entrants).

Yet here it is.

05 Apr, 2007

I received an e-mail from someone who shall remain nameless disputing, mildly, my increasing conviction that the "peak oil" hypothesis is REAL. I don't blame anyone for disagreeing, as:


Lined up on the other side of the fence are some hard facts:


I don't expect anyone to become a believer instantly. The interesting part of this (for me) is that what the "peak oil" advocates are saying we should do dovetails precisely with my natural tree-hugging instincts. Simmons, in a TV interview, said this: "The best new oil basin we will ever find is the one called 'conservation'."

Think about that! Our post-peak-oil future isn't dismal -- it's well within our control. Assuming peak oil is here (and if the hypothesis is correct, the peak either already has occurred, is coming this decade, or will be here by 2025-2030) . . . conserving scarce resources just makes sense. So, by the way, does buying a bit heap of OIH (stock symbol for an oil ETF) and socking it away for a long-term investment.

Assuming you're still reading, there are two things you might think about and do.

THINK: According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, "alternative technologies will displace just 4% of projected U.S. consumption by 2015" (from a report in The Wall Street Journal). GAO isn't all-seeing and all-knowing, but that's a good guess from people who have no dog in this fight. What if they're right? Optimistically, the "something" that will come along clearly will come along after 2015. On the other hand, maybe whatever it is will take a lot longer, and we're not (collectively) making the right decisions.

DO: There's a "peak oil" Web site, The Oil Drum. You might go there if you want to examine the entire issue. But here's a short-cut: The site recently posted two TV clips (from CNBC) and two audio files. The TV clips feature Matthew Simmons and T. Boone Pickens. One of the audio clips is a 60-minute thing featuring James Howard Kunstler, author of the book The Long Emergency. CLICK HERE to go to the page.

05 Apr, 2007

"De-Mystifying Cabling Specifications From 5e to 7a" is the title Siemon slapped on a 3,200-word piece (not counting words in the tables and in the additional links at the bottom of the article. Seems helpful. CLICK HERE to see it.

05 Apr, 2007

Craig DiLouie is a lighting industry genius -- and a friend of The EleBlog. One of the permanent links at right is to his LightNow monthly lighting news. Below, he's contributed an article enlightening (!) all of us on the various movement to ban the incandescent light bulb.

Is it Time to Ban the Bulb?

By Craig DiLouie

In January, a California assemblyman proposed legislation to ban the incandescent bulb, which was quickly imitated in Rhode Island and Connecticut. By the end of March (the time of writing), Australia and the European Union announced that they would begin adopting performance standards that would phase out today’s general service incandescent lamps, and other countries were also considering it.

Then a U.S. Representative proposed national legislation that would establish performance standards requiring lamp efficacies of 60 lumens per watt (LPW) by 2012 (about where compact fluorescents, or CFLs, are now), 90 LPW by 2016 and 120 LPW by 2020. By 2020, in other words, overall U.S. lighting efficacy would be required to more than double. Even if this legislation fails, the Department of Energy (DoE) has already begun the process of regulating general service incandescent lamps.

Every watt saved can reduce U.S. dependence on fossil fuels and strengthen the economy, both of which are considered societal goods. But why such ambitious goals?

The answer is global warming. A United Nations panel of 2,500 scientists recently concluded that increases in average global temperatures by 2100, with attendant climate change, could result in significant migrations and food and water shortages in some countries. The panel further reported that human activity, primarily burning fossil fuels, is “very likely” (scientists are 90% sure) responsible for most of the warming observed in recent decades. Most countries are taking these warnings seriously and have begun enacting policies to address potential human causes of climate change.

So the government steps in because the market would take too long to achieve the same policy objectives. Government interventions, in fact, have long been important drivers in adoption of efficient lighting. According to the International Energy Agency, lighting product efficiency standards, energy codes and utility rebate programs resulted in estimated energy savings of 20% compared to current consumption since 1990 in the U.S. and Canada. This represents billions of dollars in savings, significant reductions in air pollution and less consumption of finite fossil fuels.

However, such interventions are effective when they are sensible. Product bans, as proposed in three states, limit choice. The right approach is to raise the bar on efficacy based on a realistic understanding of the potential of available technology. For example, technology is available to increase incandescent efficiency—manufacturers just have not yet had the incentive to realize it. GE, for example, says it can double the efficacy of general service incandescents by 2010, and may ultimately be able to match the efficacy of today’s CFLs. If this occurs, it may be the CFL, not the incandescent lamp, that ends up in trouble.

Additionally, performance standards must be realistic. For example, an efficacy target of 120 LPW, as proposed in the Harman bill, may be based on dreams of future technological gains in white LEDs that may simply not be possible.

A sensible approach may be to simply allow DoE to do what it has begun doing—beginning the process of regulating incandescent lamps. DoE should work with the lighting industry to establish realistic goals based on technological gains that can be confidently gained, as well as consumer lighting needs, or else risk tossing the baby with the bath water. After all, efficacies as high as 150 LPW are achievable today—but only if you don’t mind high-pressure sodium lighting in your living room.

There is too much at stake for policymakers not to get this right. In the U.S., there are about four billion screw-base light sockets that are currently fitted with general service incandescent lamps. If every one of these switched to the most efficient alternative, consumers and businesses could save about $18 billion annually while reducing energy demand by the equivalent of 80 coal-burning power plants and carbon emissions by more than 158 million tons. This sensible policy goal now needs sensible policy.

Craig DiLouie, a journalist, consultant and analyst specializing in the lighting industry, is principal of ZING Communications, Inc. (www.zinginc.com).

02 Apr, 2007

Major media reported that construction spending was "up" in February 2007 -- up 0.3% from January 2007. It's a HUGE bunch of baloney. Here's a typical report, from Action Economics, taken from the Business Week site (see it by clicking here):

Although the residential component of today's construction report revealed the expected effect of adverse weather, the private, nonresidential figures defied the weather with a 2.3% bounce that accounts for the small headline gain in total construction.

We have modestly boosted our construction estimates for the first-quarter GDP report to a 20% residential drop that would mark the third quarterly decline in the 18% to 20% range, and a 10% nonresidential growth clip.

Now that we've gotten the baloney out of the way, here are the facts -- which I took directly from the Census Bureau report itself (download it here):


How's that for a headline? "Private Construction Drops 11% In Year's First Two Months." Pretty damn depressing. Did you see it anywhere?