Contradictory demands stand in the way of transitioning to a greener economy.

Transitioning to green technology, while maintaining the American people's consumptive lifestyles, is likely to be very difficult. I listen to both liberal and conservative experts and I especially hear from conservatives about logistical problems with things like mandating electric 18 wheeler trucks. Things like weight of batteries + vehicle, given road weight restrictions, for instance. Another topic is sources for the minerals in batteries, given restrictions on domestic mining. There's lots of nimbyism and contradictory environmental concerns that need to be sorted through.

Some conservatives make good points about economic logistics; when they aren't just yacking about the culture wars.

I still think the economic transition is possible, but it will take a lot more patience than most people have in this era of blame and finger pointing. I think we can make these transitions, but the current culture of blame and greed puts obstacles in the way.

In an ideal world, technology would keep advancing and evolve into greener practices, but it will be difficult to bring a lot of changes without people, themselves, accepting change. We will need changes; such as using more public transit and less private cars, on the one hand, while on the other hand, accepting more things like wind turbines, solar panels, mines and even nuclear power.

Transportation is just one example, but people will need to be open to big changes across the entire economy.

Some of these changes can be seen as improvements, rather than sacrifices; such as enhanced safety of public transit versus private cars and the health benefits of things like bicycling. Benefits; such as the quieter world of electric motors versus internal combustion engines comes to mind as well.

Advancing technology can help us. I don't think we can go back to the past; especially with our much larger population than before.

I wonder if we can make the transition and changes we need, given the political climate and the fact that so many people feel like they aren't getting a fair deal. People seem to always want more wealth.

Our entire culture will need some deep changes not just at the top, but at the grass roots level as well.

I wrote this after hearing an interview on June 26 Pullman Radio News with Idaho Congressperson Russ Fulture. After his dismal post mortem of Biden's performance at the debate (to be expected from a Republican) he talked about electric truck mandates. Yes, if we use current battery technology, it adds extra weight, on road surfaces, to an already heavy vehicle for tractor trailers. There are lots of rules about weight of trucks on highways. That could mean less weight devoted to the load which reduces "economy of scale" in transport. More cost, or a need for less consumption.

I personally think mandates are a bad idea leading to lots of pushback. For instance about the vaccine, it's a good vaccine, but the mandates may have backfired in terms of the overall goal of getting people vaccinated.

An example of change in culture could mean going to more rail, for transport of goods, versus highway trucks, but rail lines need to be built and changes in the way business is done needs to happen. This could also mean some inconvenience with less door to door delivery, but we could go back to having more patience as consumers.

Barge on Lake Washington Ship Canal. Image taken during my June 2024 trip to Seattle.

He also panned the proposals to remove dams on the Snake River and the loss of both hydropower and barge traffic. Yes, that fits the narrative of contradiction. Barges that ship wheat out of that Northern Idaho / Eastern Washington region could be another way to reduce reliance on trucks, but there are proposals to remove the dams. Lewiston now calls itself "the seaport of Idaho" due to barge traffic on the Snake / Columbia River system.

Yes, lots of contradictions in demands for having an economy while protecting the environment. Logistics that will need to be dealt with.

Link to my most recent bike tour photos on Flickr.

Pictures from my recent (June 21 to 23) trip to Seattle are now at the top of my most recent trips album on Flickr.

My take after the June 27 presidential debate between Biden and Trump.

If Biden remains the nominee, I would still vote for him based on the issues and the team behind the president. Optics, of a debate on television, is not everything. Still, I admit optics could loose an election.

I also think that we place too much emphasis on the president. The future of this country depends on how the American people treat one another at the grassroots level. How people respond, at all levels, to the challenges and opportunities going forward. Much also depends on who gets elected to Congress and at the state levels. If Trump were to become president, Congress can prevent him from becoming a dictator depending on who's in Congress.

I am already sort of writing a post mortem for the 2024 election, but the election is still months away and lots of things can happen between now and then.

Is gender really that important in every discussion group?

At the start of small group discussions it seems like a lot of time is wasted asking everyone for their name and preferred pronouns. There are other things about each person that's more interesting to me; like someone's quick response to a question about the topic being discussed.

I usually don't remember just names and pronouns where as other topics are more unique and memorable and likely better at starting a discussion.

Pronouns and even names may only matter if one is talking about another person in third person such as "he, she, they, who, was just at the microphone, made a good point." In that case one could maybe always say "they, or that person, sitting over there, made a good point."

Seems like when time is limited, getting to the meat of the topic is more interesting.

In quite a few cases, I've met people once in a group discussion and then never seen the person again. I'll remember the topics, but not the name. If I don't see the person again, it may not matter what name or pronouns they go by.

In some cases, I'll admit, I've known someone for over a year and can pick up a meaningful conversation, where we left off last meeting, but never learned their name. Their ideas and experiences were more unique and meaningful to me.

Much of the rest of it is just "check the category or box" and move on. In many cases people don't fit in a box anyway.

In some cases, people don't feel safe being expected to reveal their gender preference; especially depending on the topic and the nature of the group that is having the a discussion.

Scientific discussion can include speculation. Religious ideas can be part of the discussion as speculation.

I believe some ideas, thought of as religious or supernatural, can have validity as speculation. In science, there are many lines of thought that are speculation; for instance String Theory in cosmology. Scientists often speculate about big ideas beyond what's considered more proven fact.

String Theory, Quantum Gravity and other ideas, on the frontiers of physics and cosmology, are fodder for educated discussion. There may be a time in the future when more clear evidence becomes available bringing some these ideas into the realm of more fact, or on the other hand, these ideas might be discarded. In the past ideas that societies had about the earth being flat have been discarded, for the most part.

Speculation about big questions such as what brought the universe into existence, the meaning of life, whether there is any intent or design to the universe beyond us and even speculation about an afterlife, is all fodder for good discussion.

There is still a lot that we don't know. I think religion makes a mistake when speculations about these things are thought of as being proven fact. Speculation does have a place in real science, but speculation shouldn't be confused with more proven fact.

Thousands of years ago, many societies thought it was a fact that the earth was flat. This was based on the evidence one sees just standing on the level ground. We could have stuck to those so called facts, or we could speculate and explore the possibilities of things beyond that worldview.

My dream job; sort of.

When I graduated from college, my dream was to have my own newspaper based on my opinions. A professor told me about something called the IF Stone Weekly; an individual publishing his own paper. Not knowing much about that, I set out to publish on my own.

Since then, the advent of social media has, basically, given me my own media outlet. Not huge, but still, it's me.

Before Facebook and all of that, I did some self publishing. Sent little newsletters out in the mail. Even had my own second hand mimeograph machine, for a while.

It never got very far in terms of commercial viability, but I've had a good time all along. My work as a custodian paid the bills.

I have links to things, including this blog, my Flickr and Facebook walls, at www.theslowlane.com

Pandemic is mostly old news as the vaccines and other factors have brought most of life back to pre pandemic normal.

Factionalism within the anti vax folks means potential problems for the Trump Campaign as Kennedy's third party bid could drain away Trump voters.

Trump did support Operation Warp Speed vaccine research at beginning of pandemic, but is now trying to also appeal to anti vax crowd.

Meanwhile, it does seem like pandemic is mostly old news as the vaccines and other factors have brought most of life back to pre pandemic normal.

Saving money by putting the elderly more at risk.

About the stereotype of conservatives and liberals, I got to thinking that conservatives were less enthused about the shutdown of businesses during the pandemic. They tended to think schools and business should have been allowed more leeway to be open.

That would have lead to more deaths of vulnerable and elderly people whereas younger people, such as school children, were less apt to die from the pandemic.

Less elderly helps the budget by saving money spent on Medicare. Meanwhile school age folks are said to be suffering now, due to lack of face to face school during quarantine. Maybe the old folks could have taken a hit for the team, so to speak, as I remember a lieutenant governor, in Texas, suggested early on in the pandemic.

On the other hand, I'm glad they tried to reduce death rates during the pandemic. I also have heard that some children learned better on line than sitting in classroom settings.

The cup is either half full or half empty. Things are a tradeoff and there are both good and bad consequences to various choices that governments make. There is sure a lot of complaining about things, however.

Encouraging news from India.

India has had a big election recently. Looks like moderately good news. The prime minister, Modi, said to be somewhat of a one sided religious nationalist, did win reelection, but opposition parties gained ground. He was expecting more of a landslide. I think he will have to work with the opposition and form coalitions.

India is now the most populous country in the world surpassing China, so what happens in India can make a big splash.

India has quite a few different religions besides the majority Hindu. It also has Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Sikh and other religions as well as non believers; a country with lots of diversity of thought. USA, another country with diversity of thought.

Maybe Trump and much of his evangelical Christian base should just admit that they are into hedonism and the prosperity gospel.

Donald Trump, Bill Clinton and even Richard Nixon got into trouble with coverups. In Trump's case, hush money paid to keep Stormy Daniels from talking about an affair. In Clinton's case lying about the Monica Lewinski affair. In Nixon's case, the Watergate Coverup.

I wonder what would have happened if Trump, for instance, had just been open about it? How would the Evangelical Christian base react? How many of them would part company with him, or stick with him?