carpe annum

I just finished reading Thomas Friedman’s The World is Flat–a book about globalization and the history of the 21st century. In it, he attempts to deconstruct the world that we live in; a world emerging out of the Cold War, a world with incredibly “flattening” technology (i.e.: internet) that is breaking down all sorts of geopolitical walls and redefining how business is transacted everywhere in the world. In the process of globalization and the prosperity America and much of the West has enjoyed, the world has been catching up. Friedman sounds the alarm with a call for diligence and fortitude - academically, politically, and economically. He sees a dangerous complacency, from Washington down through the public school system.

Here is one snippet I found particularly relevant:

Lucky for us, we were the only economy standing after WWII, and we had no serious competition for forty years. That gave us a huge head of steam but also a huge sense of entitlement and complacency–not to mention a certain tendency to extol consumption over hard work, investment, and long-term thinking. When we got hit with 9/11, it was a once-in-a-generation opportunity to summon the nation to sacrifice, to address some of its pressing fiscal, energy, science, and education shortfalls–all the things we had let slide. But our president did not summon us to sacrifice. He summoned us to go shopping.

Friedman points out that one of America’s great moments was when JFK called on the nation to put a man on the moon. Surely there were many non-altruistic motives behind this agenda, but the effect was that by calling on the nation to emphasize education, particularly in science and engineering, a great deal of good and technical achievement came about as a result: computers, the internet, synthetic fibers, etc etc… Now, we live in a time when the only social agenda is to consume, and Friedman points out that while there is nothing inherently wrong with shopping, we have let many important priorities fall by the wayside as a result.

So what should our national priority be? What should be this generation’s “man on the moon?” I really agree with Friedman on this one:

If President Bush is looking for a similar legacy project, there is one just crying out–a national science initiative that would be our generation’s moon-shot: a crash program for alternative energy and conservation to make America energy-independent in ten years. If President Bush made energy independence his moon shot, in one fell swoop he would dry up the revenue for terrorism, force Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and Saudi Arabia onto the path of reform–which they will never do with $50-a-barrel oil–strengthen the dollar, and improve his own standing by doing something huge to reduce global warming. He would also create a real magnet to inspire young people to contribute to both the war on terrorism and America’s future by again becoming scientists, engineers, and mathematicians…This is not just a win-win, this is a win-win-win-win-win.

Comments(5)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4694152.stm

Comments(0)

No doubt, hybrid gasoline-electric cars are a great medium-term solution to our transportation needs. Hybrid engine systems consume between 20-50% less fossil fuels than even the best combustion engine. Their popularity is unquestioned as there is over a year wait for the Toyota Prius. Both Honda and Toyota have been at the vanguard of this technology and are putting hybrid engines into more and more models. Meanwhile, the Big Three have totally missed the boat clinging to cheap oil prices and churning out SUVs and pickup trucks, which even still, barely sell well enough to keep the companies profitable, indeed, they have been loss making the past few years. The Big Three have been playing catchup with the Japanese automakers’ hybrid technologies. To date, only Ford has a hybrid car in production, the Ford Escort Hybrid, but it hasn’t exactly sold well, why is this?

Right now, who is the hybrid car consumer? They are typically environmentally minded people and/or people who want to save money at the pump. While heavier hybrids can average between 35-40 mpg, the Prius and Civic both push 50 mpg; the average gasoline engine car averages 21 mpg. People do not buy cars simply because they can save at the pump (after paying the premium for the car in the first place), but hybrid consumers like to know that their car is more environmentally friendly than a conventional car. The point I’d like to make is that the Japanese car is inherently a more environmentally friendly product. Japanese cars, like most anything produced in Japan these days, has been manufactured with green technology.

Every step of a Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc assembly line has been scrutinized and reengineered to be ecologically friendly; inline with the high standards of Japanese industry. Thus aside from the fact that a Japanese hybrid has a cleaner engine under the hood, the manufacturing processes of the entire car leaves a smaller environmental footprint employing more thorough recycling, waste reduction, energy reduction, and cleaner processes. This goes for the Toyota and Honda factories abroad as well; Japanese firms have an eye on the environmental impact they have, as well as the bottom line. A Ford hybrid still has a conventionally produced body, using multiple toxic chemicals and processes long abandoned by Japanese automakers. A GM hybrid has a green engine in an otherwise unexceptionally produced body, a Honda hybrid is a green car through and through. American automakers have totally missed the mark on this one and the only way they can regain any sort of long-term viability is to ween themselves off gas-guzzling technology and start investing in the next generation, leapfrogging hybrid technology altogether.

Besides, who wants to buy a Ford Escort Hybrid? It just sounds like a piece of crap.

Comments(1)