<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
 <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://my.netscape.com/rdf/simple/0.9/">
 <channel>
  <title>EleBlog</title>
  <link>http://www.electricalcontractor.com/plog/index.php?blogId=1</link>
  <description>Joe Salimando&#039;s Blog on the electrical industry.</description>
 </channel>
    <item>
   <title>Self-Employed Electricians</title>
   <description>A better titled might be:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: bold;&quot;&gt;Self-employed electricians who run their own companies, &lt;br /&gt;and their companies have ZERO employees. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;That&#039;s what &lt;font size=&quot;4&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tedmag.com/news/news-room/special-report/Special-Report/Special-Report--8-31-2010.aspx&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-style: italic;&quot;&gt;this column&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/font&gt;, which I wrote (using US government statistics), is all about. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br/&gt;</description>
   <link>http://www.electricalcontractor.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&amp;articleId=2925&amp;blogId=1</link>
  </item>
    <item>
   <title>ENERGY Linx</title>
   <description>Carbon Monoxide Capture -- &lt;a href=&quot;http://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/green-tech/clean-coal/the-future-is-nowish-futuregen-20-gets-1-billion-for-co2-capture&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;the future is now-ish&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; -- from IEEE Spectrum&#039;s site. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.grist.org/article/2010-08-18-what-if-theres-much-less-coal-than-we-think/&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;&quot;&gt;What if there&#039;s much less coal than we think?&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;DoE changes course on &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/business/energy-environment/06coal.html&quot; style=&quot;font-style: italic;&quot;&gt;capturing emissions from coal burning&lt;/a&gt; (NY Times)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://seekingalpha.com/article/220609-energy-storage-earnings-season-surprises&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: bold;&quot;&gt;Energy Storage commentary&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; by John Peterson -- this one is on &amp;quot;earnings season surprises,&amp;quot; but here&#039;s a paragraph that I liked:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-left: 80px;&quot;&gt;In late-July I argued that the origins of specious battery-cost forecasts were political and ideological rather than scientific, and drew 
vitriolic comment from scores of readers who&#039;ve bought the mythology and
 think me out of touch with the way technology develops. It&#039;s more than a
 little gratifying to see a man with the technical stature of Bill Gates
 joining me in the Luddite camp and cautioning that while we can expect 
baby steps, the giant leaps for mankind will be few and far between.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br/&gt;</description>
   <link>http://www.electricalcontractor.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&amp;articleId=2924&amp;blogId=1</link>
  </item>
    <item>
   <title>Lightwave Solar Electric</title>
   <description>The 8/8/10 issue of The Tennessean apparently featured a Q-and-A with Steve Johnson, who opened Lightwave Solar Electric LLC in 2006. The company installs solar PV panels and is based in Nashville. Read the thing, it&#039;s interesting (note that it is posted to three web pages, not one). &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Just a couple of the questions/answers:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-style: italic;&quot;&gt;How are your sales and what&#039;s the outlook for the coming year?&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-left: 40px;&quot;&gt;We have been doubling every year, and it looks like we will double again. Some people hear that and think they ought to jump into this market, and they&#039;ll make a lot of money. But the market is fairly limited and fairly small. But it&#039;s growing rapidly. Last year we did $2.7 million in sales, and this year could hinge on a big job, but I&#039;d say $5 million to $6 million.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-style: italic;&quot;&gt;What changes do you see coming in the solar installation business?&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-left: 40px;&quot;&gt;More companies will enter the market. The market is changing in solar, so you have to keep up with the new technology. We do that, and that&#039;s something you couldn&#039;t do if you weren&#039;t doing solar full time. New companies will be good for the market. We&#039;d like to see managed growth, though, with quality entries into the market. You want people dedicated to solar, not just rushing in to make a buck.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br/&gt;
</description>
   <link>http://www.electricalcontractor.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&amp;articleId=2923&amp;blogId=1</link>
  </item>
    <item>
   <title>Lighting Color Quality</title>
   <description>There&#039;s a paper (downloadable PDF) on the DoE microsite devoted to LEDs on Lighting + color quality. Title: &amp;quot;Rationale of Color Quality Scale.&amp;quot; Among the points:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-left: 40px;&quot;&gt;the color-rendering index (CRI), which has been used in the lighting industry for a while, &amp;quot;does not correlate well with visual evaluation when the . . . [color saturation] of an object is increased by the light source.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;the new suggested substitute -- Color Quality Scale, or CQS -- runs on a 0 to 100 scale. &amp;quot;The CRI is confusing because it produces negative scores.&amp;quot; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The paper is readable, even for schmoes like me, as there are illustrations throughout that help you see the case being made. You don&#039;t have to &amp;quot;buy&amp;quot; the substitution of CQS for CRI, but you ought to read the thing. To download it, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ssl/articles.html&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;&quot;&gt;go here&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and look under June 2010. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br/&gt;</description>
   <link>http://www.electricalcontractor.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&amp;articleId=2922&amp;blogId=1</link>
  </item>
    <item>
   <title>I Just Don&#039;t Understand This</title>
   <description>I read this paragraph several days ago. &lt;a href=&quot;http://seekingalpha.com/article/223287-the-misinterpretation-of-economic-data&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;&quot;&gt;It&#039;s the last paragraph of an article,&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; almost a throw-away from the writer. Let&#039;s take a look at it, and I&#039;ll tell you what I think it means:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-left: 80px;&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The banking system needs to de-leverage even more considering that the 
Notional Amount of Derivative Contracts increased another $7.365 
trillion to $225.4 trillion at the end of the second quarter. Since “The
 Great Credit Crunch” began at the end of 2007 the Notional Amount of 
Derivative Contracts have increased $60.65 trillion.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Now, here&#039;s what I think this paragraph means: &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-left: 40px;&quot;&gt;a. It seems to indicate that on 12/31/07, there were derivative contracts outstanding with a &amp;quot;notional amount&amp;quot;of about $165 trillion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;b. It directly says that the current amount (6/30/10) is $225.4 trillion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;c. Therefore, the notional amount of derivatives outstanding has increased by $60.65T divided by $165T -- or almost 37%.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;d. THIS IS EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION of where we all have been led to think that derivatives outstanding would be headed -- isn&#039;t it?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In other words; Instead of unwinding this mess, it seems to be . . . getting worse (? ? ? ? ? ?). &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;How the F is that possible? &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br/&gt;</description>
   <link>http://www.electricalcontractor.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&amp;articleId=2921&amp;blogId=1</link>
  </item>
    <item>
   <title>Solar Licensing Database</title>
   <description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://irecusa.org/2010/08/solar-licensing-information/&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: bold;&quot;&gt;State-by-state info&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;br/&gt;</description>
   <link>http://www.electricalcontractor.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&amp;articleId=2920&amp;blogId=1</link>
  </item>
    <item>
   <title>Energy Graphic Porn</title>
   <description>Barry Ritzholtz (of The Big Picture blog) calls this kind of thing &amp;quot;chart porn.&amp;quot; I&#039;m not sure it&#039;s the easiest thing to understand but . . . stare at it a while. It&#039;ll grow on you. (I found it &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.ceileadership.org/2010/08/chart-of-the-day-energy-use-in-the-us/&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: bold;&quot;&gt;here&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;). &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.electricalcontractor.com/plog/resserver.php?blogId=1&amp;amp;resource=energy-flow2009_650x360.gif&quot; /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br/&gt;</description>
   <link>http://www.electricalcontractor.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&amp;articleId=2919&amp;blogId=1</link>
  </item>
  </rdf:RDF>