Logorrhea

Recently I attended a ‘policy workshop’ for one of the major parties. Unlike many public events which devolve into a discussion with the loudest participant as to why the federal government should focus more on fixing their sidewalk, this one actually developed into a surprisingly productive and mature discussion about the tactical policies that can help Canada and Canadians navigate the still shifting economic and societal waters of the 22st century, and the strategic framework that could provide effective structure for the policies. At the highest level, it sounded like the members were looking for a government that would focus on the following three objectives;

1.  A Canada Prepared for Change
2.  A Healthy Canada
3.  A Sustainable Canada

Now obviously the above statements are just political ear candy without a bit of further explanation, so below are some of the incipient notes to provide meat on the bones of the strategic framework about (including a very brief and high-level vision and mission statement).

read more…

While many of us enjoy the warmth of natural hot springs around the world, I’m impressed at how the ongoing project at Chena Hot Springs may serve as a model for future small-scale, low temperature geothermal development in the future.

Geothermal seems to be the forgotten pillar in a future low-carbon economy as wind, hydro, and especially solar seem to be receiving the majority of both attention and funding programs.  This is surprising as geothermal is able to serve as a base-load power system to replace current gas, coal, and nuclear plants - supplemented with the other renewable options when the wind is blowing, sun is shining, etc.  Especially for remote communities this development model could help provide stable electricity in areas that are not economically feasible to connect to the current grid, and as drilling technologies continue to evolve larger areas of the globe are opening up to potential low temperature development using incipient Organic Rankine cycle technologies (a fancy term for using a fluid that boils at a lower temperature than water to spin the turbine).

I find it interesting that in many current government feed-in-tariff projects geothermal is left out while hydro and micro-hydro are included.  This will cause capital to flow into all renewable projects except for geothermal just at a time when we need to be developing alternative base-load technologies to wean us off of our coal power addition.  The last thing we need is for our push to alternative energy to become a ‘government farming’ exercise but a legitimate effort to making Canada a global renewable leader this decade.

Wow, it’s been over a month since I’ve posted - not exactly a stellar record.  While there’s lots to write about in the divergent worlds of technology and politics, for now let’s just geek out a little and enjoy some classic Mr. Spock…

Don’t know how I haven’t stumbled on this before - the National Film Board of Canada has place a good deal of their fantastic work online at http://www.nfb.ca/.  Really, I think any Canadian born before 1990 spent a good deal of their time in school watching these classics and now in it’s 70th year the NFB has already won thousands of awards including 12 Oscars and 90 Emmies.  I think it reminds us of the importance of funding the arts in Canada - you don’t need to spend a fortune but a little can go a long way and I think the NFB is an important part of our Canadian experience.  If nothing else go check out the classics such as;

Project Grizzly

The Cat Came Back

The Sweater

And many more…

My wonderful partner recently came back from a conference on Food Security.  While I had images of armed tomatoes fighting back, at it’s core it is an issue all of us should be worried about - after all there are few things more central to our lives than healthy food (water, maybe shelter being up there as well)!

While in Canada we have regulated certain sub-sets of our agricultural industry to ensure quality (I believe there are no growth hormones allowed in our milk for example) or profits (I believe turkeys in Canada have a quota system to ensure turkey farmers make a buck), overall we are still pretty removed from where our food comes from.  What’s interesting is that once you look into it we’ve been riding a system that has allowed us some cheap food, but we’re probably going to pay for it in environmental and health costs moving forward.  What’s crazy is that in a huge country like Canada (with some great agri-regions), with such a relatively small population, there is no reason why we can’t all eat healthy, while providing a profit for all farmers.  After all, who really is more important to you in life - your farmer or your lawyer?  Stop eating for a while and see how important you other problems are…

Some discussion about the conference got me thinking - what would a ‘made in Canada’ food security policy look like?  We’ve made some good steps in the right direction, but could we make a clear policy that;

a)  Provides a fair price to farmers, making family-sized operations profitable again?
b)  Reduces reliance on petrochemical inputs to the agricultural cycle?
c)  Maximizes the natural health of agricultural products (i.e. reducing reliance on CAFOs, ensuring food systems are disease resilient)
d)  Is clear about GMO vs. non-GMO products, and ensures clear protection of seed saving practices?
e)  Does not tick off the general public with massive increases in cost?

Food is a profitable industry - both the retailers and processors seem to have a solid cost structure.  How can more of the rent be passed onto the farmers?  Some potential solutions include;

1.  Stronger regulatory framework - Regulate the size and scale of operations, set requirements for the space and access to land animals have, strong protection for seed saving, etc.  Essentially define the framework of what Canadians consider ‘healthy food’ then let the market do it’s thing.

2.  Education - Massive push towards educating Canadian consumers about the difference between organic food and industrial food (all tomatoes are not created equal, etc.), much stonger labelling requirements on food.

3.  Price incentives - There is a tax on cigarettes partially to cover their expected cost to the health system.  Perhaps a tax on HFCS or other highly synthetic additives would help to better reflect the true cost of producing and consuming those foodstuffs (we’re going to pay for it one way or another, better with a consumption tax than something else).  I believe the democrats are toying with this in their current attempts at health care reform.

4.  Urban renewal - Support  urban/community gardening systems.  Government owned/managed greenhouses and plots within urban areas could be setup to allow people to grow more of their own food.  These systems could also provide a location for recent immigrants to feed themselves and provide a social network as they integrate into society and look for employment.  Individuals would rent for the plots using an old system of providing some of their harvest to the garden as a whole, which would then be sold off to help offset the cost of the operation.

5.  Try the anti-monopoly tack - Breaking up the food distributors/retailers thus lowering their bargaining power over farmers.  Fairly heavy handed and prone to loopholes however.

Yah yah, there is the possibility that some of these suggestions will lead to either more government (usually something to be avoided) or higher costs at the market.  But we’ve been so spoiled buy an expectation of cheaper and cheaper products that we seem to be forgetting that you often  get what you pay for.  Food quality is one area we cannot afford to skimp on as a society, and hiding the true costs of a mangled food system will certainly bankrupt us in the end.

Yah, some shenanigans may be holding off an election for now but Ignatieff still has that look in his eye and the Libs seem to be gunning for parliamentary blood.  In preparation of a potential election I was wondering how it we treated an election like a job application for the parties, what questions would be asked by the hiring panel?  Most of the election ‘issues’ seem to be fairly tactical so far, but really I don’t think I know strategically how the parties intend on governing if in power.  Maybe I’m just a rube and it’s obvious to everyone else, like the Conservatives are conservative (what does that really mean?), the NDP are ’socialist’ (what does that really mean?) and the Green’s like to get all hot and snugly with trees and such.

In any case, the questions that I would ask the leaders at the very start, just to get a high-level picture of their vision and guiding strategic policies are;

1. In three sentences or less, what would be your ‘vision statement’ for Canada?  (I know these are cheesy but they can sometimes provide solid direction and common understanding for a diverse group like a political party or even a country).
2. What are the core values that would drive your decision making as a government to support this vision?
3. What do you feel are the foundational elements of our Canadian society?
4. What do you think are the key elements to a healthy Canadian society?
5. What responsibilities do you feel the government of Canada has to it’s citizens?
6. What responsibilities do you feel the citizens of Canada have to ensure an effective and healthy government?
7. What services do you think all Canadians should be entitled to?
8. What rights do you think all Canadians should be entitled to?
9. How do you think Canadians define success and prosperity?
10. What do you feel are the most important areas to invest in, in order to ensure Canada is prosperous into the next century?

After strategic questions are answered then we can start asking the more tactical, policy focused questions.   Thoughts?  Any other questions you feel would be important in an opening salvo for our national leaders?

Check it out - a company in the US has received government funding to develop ’solar roadways’ that could eventually replace asphalt on our roads with a smart deck that not only generates solar power, when placed together they form a data and power distribution highway.  The panels are self-cleaning, self-heating, and the LED grid can display custom signage and lanes on demand for changing traffic or construction conditions.  This is a very early stage device but you know what, the world needs more good ideas and if this plays out it could be a very good idea.  Pretty basic web page (new one due by end of Sept.) but the information is worth a look;

http://www.solarroadways.com/

Even though we’ve heard the Liberals say it’s time to take down Harper before, this time it looks like Mr. Ignatieff has really backed himself into a corner.  It’s go time Canada, we may just have our fourth election in five years.  The frustration is not only potential voter burnout (the 2008 election had the lowest turnout since the early 50’s, when it seems Canadians were more worried about making more Canadians than voting ), but the amazing animosity our two ‘major’ parties have for each other.

Really the Liberals and Conservatives need to;
a) provide Canadians with a means of choosing between them by each offering a solid vision for the country with strategic policy goals, and;
b) start acting like adults, realizing that where their vision and goals align it doesn’t matter who is in ‘power’ and work together to achieve their common goals or we’re going to be stuck in the minority trap for the foreseeable future. read more…

It’s here!  The Utopian ideal of free education for all is closer than ever thanks to the Interweb.  While the ‘open classroom’ concept has been evolving for several years, many prestigious universities and colleges are now offering high quality audio and even video recordings online of their classes.  I’ve been taking an online physics course (I know, N-E-R-D…) from MIT for the past several weeks and the quality is exceptional.  Some great places examples include;

• MIT Opencourseware
• UC Berkley Online
• iTunesU (Includes courses from Stanford, Oxford, and many more.  To access open iTunes, goto the iTunes Store, and then select iTunesU)
  

  We could use more of these right now...

This is a spectacular idea.  Education is a powerful tool and I cannot applaud the participating institutions enough for providing this content.  I highly doubt that by posting topical and freshmen courses online they will lower their enrollments, while providing information and content that other schools and students from around the world can use to enrich the quality of their courses and educations.  What’s interesting is no Canadian post-secondary institutions currently offer this service (at least not that I could find), and only two of them - Athabasca and Capilano College - are part of the OpenCourseware Consortium.  Since most schools in Canada are largely funded with public dollars, there is a strong case to be made that schools should provide these courses online for public consumption.  This would allow Canadians to appreciate the high quality of our post-secondary system and perhaps help to increase our willingness to fund our universities and colleges so that we may continue to compete globally in the ‘knowledge economy’.  Or, if our schools stink, maybe forcing them to post some of their classes online will light the fire they need to increase the quality of their education.  In any case seems like a low cost/high return program.  Let’s get on it…

Successful foreign aid programs are notoriously difficult to execute, and in the past appear to be as much of a PR tool for governments as an actual attempt to provide assistance to those in need around the globe.  This is not always due to nefarious reasons on the part of our leaders, but it appears that the global foreign aid system is rather complicated and difficult to manage to say the least.

As such, in order to ensure public dollars are most effectively deployed, perhaps we as a country should focus our efforts on being the best at one or two specific niches of aid, instead of responding in a haphazard way to global issues, attempting to spread our dollars a mile-wide but only an inch deep. Our government is starting down this path by further focusing the number of countries that receive aid, but there still doesn’t seem to be a specific focus for our primary aid agency, CIDA.

To start, why don’t we pick a specific global need and strive to become the best at responding to this issue. These goals shoud be measurable and results-based.  For example we could become the most effective country in the world at providing potable drinking water to developing nations or areas affected by a natural or man-made disaster. Recent developments in nano-technology such as the Lifesaver bottle or Lifestraw allow for measurable results in an area that requires fresh water (the Lifesaver bottle is currently marketed to militaries and adventure seekers so a special ‘humanitarian’ cost structure would have to be negotiated).  The next time there is a hurricane Katrina Canada would have a repeatable process to initiate immediately that would allow for potable water to arrive in the stricken area.

Or perhaps Canada could be the world leader in providing and developing micro-electrical stations to communities, a technology that would potentially provide experience and innovations at home that could then be marketed world-wide. Basic education, micro-credit, and food security are all other areas that we could focus on developing niche expertise in.

While there are a variety of options to choose from, it’s time for our national aid strategy to focus on excellence in a specific solution, not just on what countries will receive aid. We have limited resources to spend on aid, let’s make sure that we are very, very effective when it comes time to help those in need around the world.