Advertisement: Scratch proof your iPhone 4 with invisibleSHIELD.
“The iPod version of [a] movie, for example, has a much lower carbon footprint than driving to the theatre or even ordering a DVD through the mail and watching it on an energy-guzzling plasma TV,” Tamminen writes. “More recently, Apple’s iPad has replaced enormous volumes of carbon (and trees, for that matter) by giving people newspapers and books in digital formats. And common iPhone apps save uncounted gallons of fuel by finding the nearest Starbucks and giving directions to it, rather than driving aimlessly in search of your next iced latte.”
Tamminen writes, “Congress has consistently refused to deal with our nation’s addiction to fossil fuels, including the serious problems of carbon emissions, energy security, and unstable prices for the fundamental building block of our economy… So why not ask anyone with an iPhone to take photos and video of members of Congress every time they are wined and dined by lobbyists for the fossil fuel industry or meet with executives of major utilities, oil/gas producers, and coal companies. Let’s post them to a Facebook page that compares the frequency of these contacts with the votes cast in favor of continued tax breaks and subsidies for Big Oil and King Coal.”
“In fairness, let’s also add images of Congress members every time they take mass transit, carpool, or turn off a light switch. Won’t you be fascinated to see how many carbon-cutting images can be posted compared to the fossil fueled lobbying category?” Tamminen asks. “If the iPhone is a fraction as effective at this new task as it has been at everything else it tackles, carbon pollution could be a thing of the past.”
Read more in the full article here.
hmmm… oniony….
Once the iPhone is available on all carriers and has gained an order of magnitude of market share, we’ll all be offering up or down votes for everything in sight. Servers will become polling stations that will gather consensus on every topic known to man.
Looking for a free hot meal? Check the polling station.
Looking for a party with free booze? Check the polling station.
I look forward to the day when our iPhones become our digital identity complete with secure signature transactions for uses in shopping, voting, gifting, bill-pay, tag-teaming, etc…
Oh god….more gobbedlygook about saving the planet.
@Figurative
If that’s what it takes then gobble gobble !!!!!
(Maybe you don’t have kids or grandkids)
California: Quite Obviously The Land of Fruits and Nuts.
I am deeply concerned about President Obama’s cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.
American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy.
There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America’s economy.
Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.
In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.
The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics.
The Americans hit hardest will be those already struggling to make ends meet. As the president eloquently puts it, their electricity bills will “necessarily skyrocket.” So much for not raising taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year.
Even Warren Buffett, an ardent Obama supporter, admitted that under the cap-and-tax scheme, “poor people are going to pay a lot more for electricity.”
We must move in a new direction. We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil. Just as important, we have more desire and ability to protect the environment than any foreign nation from which we purchase energy today.
We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia? Make no mistake: President Obama’s plan will result in the latter.
For so many reasons, we can’t afford to kill responsible domestic energy production or clobber every American consumer with higher prices.
Can America produce more of its own energy through strategic investments that protect the environment, revive our economy and secure our nation?
Yes, we can. Just not with Barack Obama’s energy cap-and-tax plan.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/13/AR2009071302852.html
Repeat after me, there is NO Global Warming, There has been climate change since the dawn of time. And no matter what we did, even if we all decided to go back to the stone age, it would not change the natural evolution of the planet’s climate.
Moron’s like this guy need to be removed from government
I wonder if Tamminen has ever tried to take seven people skiing in a Prius: doesn’t work. I wonder if that will be outlawed in the future as too carbon intensive. Skiing only in VR.
Macinfo,
Actually, there is global warming. It’s measurable and self-evident.
The question is whether – or more accurately, what amount of – it is attributable to man and can it be slowed, stopped, or even reversed?
Anyone who insists that man is to solely to blame certainly has no factual basis for their wild-eyed claims.
Anyone who thinks we can survive without oil and coal for at least the next 20 years has watched too many movies and is totally divorced from reality.
@Macinfo
Repeat after me; you do not know the “facts” you are spewing, they are your opinion and are not based on solid research. Here’s a fact for you; 8 of the last 10 years have been the warmest in all the years that records have been kept. Sticking your head in the sand and refusing to look at the data won’t make the data go away.
How is it the problem of carbon released into the atmosphere, and the denial of it, has become a political issue?
Poor beleaguered MDN folks. Android phones are outselling the iPhone!! I can’t wait to hear the excuses.
James Cameron better watch out. The iPhone will put him out of business. And pretty soon.
There is NO Global Warming.
But there is Climate Change.
Tell that to the people of Pakistan now suffering under floods from unusually strong rains.
Tell that to Filipinos where 1 month’s worth of rain fell in 24 hours.
Just because you can’t feel the changes in your neck of the woods doesn’t mean it isn’t true. That’s why its “global.”
@Drill, baby, drill!
You posted a thoughtful contribution and I would like to respond in kind…
There is no doubt that fossil fuels will continue to play a primary role in the world’s energy infrastructure for years to come. However, even disregarding global climate concerns, it cannot be disputed that fossil fuel reserves are finite. The price of a barrel of oil has increased dramatically since the 1990’s, reaching over $140 per barrel in recent years and, like credit card interest rates in the early 1980’s, the price of oil never settled down to its previous levels after that spike. As oil becomes increasingly scarce – and it certainly will given China’s rapid increase in energy consumption – it will also become increasingly expensive. Therefore, the issue is not if oil will become more expensive and shock the economy, but when. There will also be shortages. Those who lived through the oil embargo of 1973-74 had a small taste of the potential social and economic impact of global oil shortages.
Rather than continue blindly towards an energy (and economic) crisis of staggering proportions, it would be wise to plan ahead. In the past, every time that oil prices increased sufficiently to encourage alternative energy efforts, the price of oil “mysteriously” decreased to a threshold that would maximize profits while discouraging investment in solar, wind, nuclear, and other sources of electrical power. In truth, there is no mystery. There are billions of barrels of “reserves” still in the ground, so it is in the best interest of so-called “Big Oil” to maintain the value of those assets until they are depleted. Unfortunately, this will lead us towards an oil shock of terrible proportions unless we begin to smooth the way now by promoting alternative sources of energy. With a little foresight and effort, we can avoid the worst of the pending energy crisis to the benefit of everyone.
Please consider that the U.S. Government tends to avoid the hard decisions and take the easy way out until confronted with a crisis. A good example is the failure of the Government to deal effectively with the Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid situation. The problem is clear and well defined, but our legislators do not have the guts to make the hard decisions and take the difficult steps. Another example – CAFE standards. Those standards stagnated for decades before the recent increase, and the automobile industry has rapidly responded. It should have happened many years ago.
You may not agree with the current plan. Fine, then develop a better one and promote it. But the status quo is clearly untenable, and wishful thinking, sound bites, and tax cuts will not address the real challenges that our country faces.
I am not satisfied with this post. There is so much more that could and should be said. But I think that the spirit of my meaning is clear – proactive solutions are preferable to crisis management.
@Drill Baby
The Overton window has been moved so far to the right that present day Republicans now call the policies of Nixon, Reagan, and Bush I “socialist” and even “communist.”
I hope you’re aware that even if we could immediately open access to all domestic sources of oil we wouldn’t have anything like the capacity to meet our demand.
We do, OTOH, have limitless sites where we could harness our abundant sun and wind.
The plan that the Dems are pushing is a Republican plan dreamed up based on the radical “conservative” principle that markets are always the most efficient means of determining everything. Though Rs always say they’re against bureaucracy and red tape, these invented markets create a huge new sector that needs to be staffed and enforced. It would be much simpler to just place a straight consumption tax on all forms of energy based on a simple computation of their carbon load. With a very small addition to bureaucracy, this would provide inescapable market incentives for everyone- individuals, businesses large and small, and every aspect of government to conserve and use the least destructive energy sources available. If they didn’t, it would also provide a counterbalanced benefit to help make up for the damage caused.
Drill, baby, drill!
depending on who you elect to get your “facts” from, the growing number of scientists you never hear from, or those that the media “choose” to report, ignoring the rest. It is not self evident that the earth is warming, and actually has been cooling for the past decade.
While we like to take a warm summers or other anecdotal evidence and make facts from it it, its been shown that a number of sources that are under control of government agencies are making up the “facts”.. So who to believe?
I have a tendency not to believe the government these days, because they only want to use this as another means to restrict freedom and control your life.
Many solutions to problems could come potentially much quicker, if government got out of the way.
RicMac, see above.. Cooling, not warming…
If you want the other side of the “facts”, read here..
http://www.drroyspencer.com/
@Drill
Anyone with an understanding of energy policy will know that an increases in energy price is absolutely necessary in order to establish alternatives as a viable source. There will be short term pain, bit wait too long to act (we already have in my opinion) and there will be no prosperity to be had anywhere.
I forget the exact figure, but a few degrees rise in temperature is projected to have an astronomical impact on GDP, much more than the small dent we need to put in to prevent this from happening. Jobs will be lost, but many will be created in new more relevant sectors.
I like my big energy guzzling Plasma. Soon I’ll have another. If the 60″ inch plasmas keep dropping in price, by Xmas, I’ll have one hanging on my wall.
As far as I know, the only company that have reports about NO global warming is the same which has reports of Smoking is good for you… very suspicious…
and please, “there is no global warming, just a climate change?” ok then, it’s just a global climate warming change!
😀
KingMel,
“You posted a thoughtful contribution…”
Credit where credit is due: Most of my post was quoting Sarah Palin (see link to her full article that I included above). The real Sarah Palin, not the one on SNL that the Libs use to try to marginalize a strong, popular conservative woman whom they fear tremendously – and rightly so.
Tiny Fey = pawn and political whore. It’s sad, actually.
Feminists support strong women as long as they think like they do. If not, any and all means will be employed to destroy them.
There is no proof that carbon emission increase causes global warming. Climate change has always occurred naturally.
However, carbon-free is always a good thing.
@MEES
There is enough solid evidence, and if you combine that with common sense it becomes quite obvious. A very accurate model has been constructed that links anthropogenic emissions with increased carbon dioxide levels.
Even if you don’t believe any of it, look up the precautionary principle. If a meteor has a 1% chance of hitting the earth and destroying it, what’s the right thing to do – disregard it or do what you can to set it off its path?
To the ones that say “there is no global warming”, thats not the point.
What about all the diseases associated with emissions and contact with petro based chemicals. What abouy Asthma cancer lung and skin diseases?… What about visible enviromental disasters such as the BP spill that no one can deny? What about all the global conflicts caused by fossil fuel energy control?
To sum it up as global warming is utterly naive.
@Drill, baby, drill!
I think that what you really mean is that you want a “solution” to the energy issue; the pollution issue; the overfishing issue; the lack of water issue; etc etc etc which is achieved without any personal sacrifice.
Presumably you don’t believe that every Chinese, Indian, Pakistani, Mexican, Indonesian, Kenyan, Vietnamese etc etc should be allowed to increase their consumption of everything to American levels.
What’s your personal carbon footprint? Do you know? Do you care?