Comments JPoyourow has made

Re: Not in the Image of Fossil Fuels

Sunflower wrote about solar, and quoted solar in terms of units on the desert.  The desert is a valuable ecosystem to the planet, also.  Just because humans find it rather uncomfortable there, doesn't make it worthless in terms of natural capital (def: Paul Hawken, E.M.Schumacker).  

Take a close look at any photo of a desert solar plant - the roads for access and maintenance, the disturbance to wildlife, plants and soils from suddenly becoming traveled and shaded.

Know that there are other places to put solar collectors, for instance every rooftop in every town and city we have.  Then the power sources are right were we need them, local, decentralized.  No, the power companies won't like this, because it "pulls the plug" on their Empire:  the massive interstate trunklines, the grid.

In addition to the semi-rigid panels which one usually sees, there are other collectors coming into the market.  Flexible solar panels are now available to be laid like roofing shingles on existing warehouses.  Sheer solar collectors are now available which can surface our existing skyscrapers.  Panels are now quite efficient, and can generate power at any latitude.  So, don't fall for the propaganda, we don't need to mutilate our desert ecosystems to go solar.

Sunflower also presented solar within the context of a discussion on transportation fuels.  I think solar is a great option for our geographically-fixed power needs (buildings, etc) but I'm skeptical it would do much for us for transportation.  I did see a Solar Prius on Earth Day in Santa Barbara, but the website stats on that make it sound pretty limited.  So, I repeat what I said in my last post:  We must design ways to make it possible, practical, fun and cool to stop driving. On Umbra on ethanol posted 3 years, 6 months ago 28 Responses

Low prices at any cost

It sounds wonderful that Wal-Mart has "goals" to cap their greenhouse emissions.  That's a lot of Wal-Mart trucks, store locations, offices and supply chains to bring under ghg limitations, and would be a terrific thing.  I look forward to seeing CERES level reporting which declares that they have put action behind those goals and have achieved them.

I read about Wal-Mart's recent interest in carrying organic foods and more-sustainably-produced seafood.  At first it sounded terrific - wow, so much more access to these products.  And the thought of such massive supply lines - agriculture, manufacturing, etc. - converted to more sustainable production - wow again.  But then I stopped to think about what has been the Wal-Mart M.O. since the beginning:  ultra-low prices, at any cost.  It's the "at any cost" part that they never say, and which hurts us all when they act upon it.

Wal-Mart comes into town and wipes out all the mom-and-pop businesses by undercutting prices.  They are then the only remaining jobs in town, at next-to-nothing wages with no benefits.  (refer to Ask Umbra )  Think about who produces, supplies and sells organics at this point.  Local healthy-food stores, family farms, small businesses.  These are therefore destined to be the next victims of the Wal-Mart megalith.

The fledgling suppliers do not yet have enough organics to supply Wal-Mart supply chains.  A 4/9/06 Los Angeles Times article tells how organic product manufacturers are currently hard-pressed to find sufficient organic ingredients to continue to call the products organic.  "The producers will just make more," you say.  Sounds nice, but reality is, you can't do it tomorrow out of thin air.  That same Los Angeles Times article reminds us that it takes about 3 years for a U.S. farm to certify as organic - the toxins have to transition out of the soils.  A 4/3/06 article at the Christian Science Monitor says that fisheries have been sustainably certified at small volume, but the industry has not yet solved Wal-Mart caliber supply.  We just don't have the supply yet.

"If Wal-Mart started using or selling those items all of a sudden," Lee Scott says.  Wal-Mart will enter the organics markets with massive contracts, pull all the supply, and undercut the prices at any cost.  The smaller producers and retailers of organic products will be unable to compete.  Once again, the megalithic corporation will crush family businesses, entrepreneurs, local economies.  

And a megalithic entry into such budding industries with limited supply sounds to me like a precursor to legislation degrading the definition of organic so that more products will qualify for the then-meaningless badge of "organic."

Yes, a Wal-Mart entry into the field may stimulate more growers to turn organic, but on the other hand, at Wal-Mart discounts, is that where we really want to head?  Organics farmers and organics-producers reduced to sweatshop wages.  "What happens to the solar-panel market if Wal-Mart makes a large commitment to solar panels?" Scott poses.  Affordability, he claims, but how do they attain that affordability?  At the rape of small businesses.  That part Scott won't mention.

Rather than cheering the entry of the megalith into yet one more arena for takeover, someone should hand Lee Scott a copy of E.M. Schumacker's classic Small is Beautiful.  If Scott wishes to make a better world for his granddaughter, he'll work to negate that unsaid phrase "at any cost."  Rather than green-washing and public relations with continued annihilation, he'll truly nurture human capital, truly steward natural capital.  I hope he does it, and doesn't just pretend he will.On An interview with Wal-Mart CEO H. Lee Scott posted 3 years, 7 months ago 22 Responses