Saturday, January 20, 2018

Support Federal Protection for Medical Marijuana

I am sending this to my contacts this morning to send to their Members of Congress...

Please vote yes to reauthorize Rohrabacher-Blumenauer and please let me know what I can do to motivate Congress to pass federal legislation to support the growth of the medical marijuana industry - an industry that is attracting  record numbers of women entrepreneurs in particular - and creating sustainable American jobs. Thank you for your service. 

Find your Congressional Representative: 
https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

You will need your Zip Code + 4. Find that here: https://tools.usps.com/go/ZipLookupAction!input.action


About Nathaniel Clevenger:

Saturday, January 6, 2018

Trump Creed

My father who art in biggly heaven hallowed be my name. 

My kingdom come. My will be done at Mar-a-Lago which is heaven. 

Give me this day my daily double cheeseburger. And forgive me my tweets but never forgive those who tweet against me. 

And lead me into as much vile temptation as possible but deliver me guiltless from all of the very evil people who can’t understand my genius.

For mine is the Kingdom, the power, and the large nuclear button, for at least the next few years, if not forever!

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

What good are government ethics if they won't be enforced? Or, Why Jared Kushner's Meetings with Russian Bankers Matter

Now I may be just a knucklehead. But...
Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of the President of the United States, wants to secure a loan to develop a building in Manhattan. OK. That is fine. There are lots of places to get a loan for the development of a building in New York. I know. I am a developer. I have to get loans all of the time. And, I think Russians are excellent business people - at least the ones here on the West Coast. Fine folks, the Russians. Oh, and good for Jared Kushner for wanting to create jobs in his home state. "A" for effort, Mr. Kushner. 
I am puzzled, though.
New York is the finance capital of the world. Jared Kushner is from New York and has done business in New York as has his family - for decades. Thus, securing capital in your home town should be easy especially with your family's track record and connections in real estate development. Why Kushner needs a loan from a Russian state-owned bank is a little odd considering the volume of capital available literally at his front door.
Meanwhile, a Russian bank - actually THE Russian Bank owned by the Russian government - wants access to the American market for lending. This Russian Bank, Venesheconombank (VEB), under sanctions from the U.S. Government for three years, wants to see those sanctions end so it can make more money for its shareholders, the Russian people (maybe). Again, not such a bad thing for the Russians to want to put capital to work to benefit their economy and their nation. Side note: the sanctions on VEB were put in place by the U.S. Department of the Treasury for Russia's interference in Ukraine. Interference is a polite way of saying seizing the Crimea by force of arms and killing a bunch of Ukrainians in the process.
But, here's the catch. Jared Kushner has many more capital-raising options than to seek financing from a U.S. sanctioned Russian Bank. The Russians, on the other hand, have few options. What they could use is a friend in The White House to break their sanction stranglehold. On the surface it's a perfect match for a perfect ethics violation (at least). Jared Kushner's father-in-law - Donald Trump - is one of the only people in the world who can see the bank's sanctions lifted. Moreover, Donald Trump has his own business interests in Russia he'd like to see thrive. We don't really know what those business interests yield because Mr. Trump refuses to release his taxes. So, to be fair, I am guessing that Mr. Trump has a vested financial interest in Russia's financial success.
Mr. Trump, as President of the United States AND as an owner of companies he created, has an inherent responsibility to declare his conflicts of interest here, as does Jared Kushner. This should include directing his son-in-law to cease and desist ALL business negotiations with Russian state-owned banks until the nature of those business dealings can be revealed. But, the cat is already out of the bag here. Kushner met with the Russians in December, before his father-in-law was sworn in as President. 
Hmmmm. In the absence of full disclosures from Kushner and Trump and others, what conclusion can be draw?
Kushner should have known when he met with the Russian bankers in December that he was walking an ethical razor's edge. So, at the very least, all of the timing issues should be fully vetted by an independent counsel. The Congress is not the place to consider the implications of all of Mr. Trump's Russian connections. It must be done by an independent counsel. Now.
And it gets even worse for Kushner because in the sanctions, the U.S. Department of the Treasury said that it is prohibited for "U.S. persons and persons within the United States from transacting in, providing financing for, or otherwise dealing in new debt of longer than 90 days maturity or new equity for...VEB, their property, or their interests in property." 
Look, folks, doing the right thing is really quite simple. Transparency stops the games. And while it likely won't stop the nattering nabobs of negativism in all of their spirited guises, it will at least demonstrate to the world that American's value truth, justice, and...well...you know the rest.

Sunday, December 18, 2016

Trump Twitter-Additiction Tilts Toward Tiresome Tirades

December 4, 2016

Dear President-Elect Trump: 
Please cut the mind-numbing, stupid tweeting and focus on your promises. 
You are not the star of a television program any longer. You are the very embodiment of a nation. 
In other words, and with respect, stop acting like an idiot and start behaving like a person worthy of the responsibility you have been given. Unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud numbering in the millions is exactly the kind of illogical drivel we can do without. You want to make a claim like that? Then back it up with data or go through the legal process. Otherwise, shut it. 
Note to the Media: where the hell are you? WAKE UP!!! 
Are there no sober-minded advisors on your staff with the grit to help you eliminate your immature and self-defeating passion for reacting versus helping you respond intelligently? 
You won. Now grow up. Learn to temper your actions with wisdom. If you won't do it for yourself and your own children then do it for mine and their children to come. 
Seriously...please? 
Yours truly, 

An imperfect but conscious American.

Trump pulls China's Tail Again. To What End?


December 18, 2016

Dear President-Elect Trump: 
Your diplomatic sophistication has once again risen to the emotional height of a crack addict resisting arrest. I wake up again this morning to learn that you are shouting - yes shouting - that China should just keep an underwater drone they blatantly stole from an American military vessel. "Keep it!," you Tweet. I have a question for you? 
With great respect, are you stupid? 
Maybe let the adults handle this one, Pee Wee? 
This is not The Apprentice, Sir. Managing the paranoia of 1.4 Billion people requires a little more laconic finesse. I'd expect your kind of response from my crazy, chain smoking, bathrobe wearing, off the wagon neighbor whose newspaper I accidentally ran over with my car in our shared driveway. But from a person who would lead our nation? 
It occurs to this untrained observer that you may have an untreated mental health condition. Impulsive behavior at 72 years old is at least something to be a wee bit concerned about. We need tempered actIon and wisdom from you, not rabid distemper and judgement-clouded reaction. The world needs inspired leadership not the ravings of an insomniac narcissist with the impulse control of a teen drag racer at a street race full of Hooters Girls. 
Again, I ask, is there no sober adult supervision around to put some reasoned limits on your - at least questionable - lack of self control? 
I will give you one positive point. Your behavior is at the very least entertaining. Who doesn't love a fool?

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Do we really need to freely allow people to purchase assault weapons?

In memory of the 28 who died needlessly at the hands of a crazed assault-weapon toting "citizen" in New England this past week.  

I am a southerner. I get the whole gun thing (as it were). 

My grandparents going back centuries owned guns. I own several of those very guns handed down to me by some of those fine folks to whom I owe my very existence. Those who lived long before me surely needed guns to hunt and for personal pleasure (to shoot clay pigeons, skeet, cans and what not). Sure, an argument can even be rationally made that -- depending on where they lived -- they needed those weapons for their own defense especially those living in the wilds of colonial Virginia. 

As technology progressed (so to speak. Is this really "progress?") the weapons have become capable of killing many in the blink of a child's eye lash - alas. Our founding fathers -- the very ones who created the second amendment allowing us to keep and bear arms for our DEFENSE -- would not even allow the average non-land owning person to vote! Do you think -- had they lived in our time -- they would allow the average citizen to own an assault weapon? Would they have allowed average citizens the right to bear these insane weapons for OFFENSE versus defense? 

When you think about it, our country has tacitly approved the ridiculous interpretation that anyone who can fog a mirror (apparently) may be allowed access to weapons whose primary purpose is offensive. It's called an "assault" weapon for a reason. I do not own assault weapons. Why would I need a Sig? Or an AK-47? Or anything that is designed to obliterate a target - human or otherwise? There is only one reason someone might own such a weapon. For their own personal narcissistic pleasure or paranoia. 

Oh, and the nutty idea that the same crazed and twisted murderer who snuffed out 28 lives this past week -- if they were hell bent enough -- could pack a van full of explosives and cause the same kind of murderous mayhem -- is specious at best. Sure, murder is a human constant; mass murder is as well. But we have reached a point where we must be as willing to die for a right to live in a society free of these kinds of narcissistic weapons as we are to live in one with this self-fulfulling gun culture tyranny. 

We allow paranoiacs in the NRA and their lap dogs in Congress to convince us that the path to true freedom is accompanied an assault weapon Bull shit. Why not a rocket launcher? Or, my own personal tank? Flamethrower? I don't know that I want to live in a society that so easily allows every one to own a tool that is designed to annihilate everything in its sights. Sure, someone could come along and bludgeon me with a stick or an ax. But, he or she would have a helluva time using that same stick to kill and murder dozens in seconds. 

You want to own an assault weapon for your own protection? Fine. Go live on an island then. Have all of the assault weapons you like. Just get out of my country. I don't want you here. 

Ban these assault weapons. It won't stop murder. But, it will limit the devastation and the ability of someone like the crazed nut in Newtown from making a life-ending spectacle with the blood of small children. Enough. Please.

Sunday, April 8, 2012

Birthday for Packy the Elephant?

I am 10+ year member of the Oregon Zoo. Sure, I like animals. But, I just received the most ridiculous birthday party invitation. It was from an elephant -- "Packy."

I continue to be surprised at the lengths human beings will go to leverage events to the nth degree to make a buck. When I get invited to celebrate someone's birthday, I am not given 500 opportunities (depending on my donation or gift level) to pay homage. Why can't we just have some cake (albeit a gigantic one) and ice cream, some candles and call it a day?

"Hey Kids! Come celebrate Packy's birthday! For a tax-deductible donation of just $25 you can get a complementary bag of 'Packy's Patty's' for your Mom's garden. If you want your garden basil to grow as tall as Packy, you'll want to get here early to avoid the lines!"

For a donation of just $50, you can get some of Packy's toe nail clippings (Hint:these make great gifts).

And, for a donation of $100 or more, Packy will use his trunk to splash some paint on a piece of paper for you. Yes, Packy is an artist.

Of course he's an artist. He's been in prison for a half-century.

I recently had the opportunity to interview Packy in the prison, err I mean Zoo, visitor center. Zoo officials sat close by in order to monitor our conversation, though this reporter politely refused to allow Zoo officials to edit or review the answers.

Reporter: Packy, you were born in prison. And from the looks of you, it does not seem to have bothered you much.

Packy: Three squares and two hours in the yard a day. Someone to hose you off and scrub you down and all the free hay, healthcare and drugs I need. I live better than most people. Got a roof over my head and a concrete floor to nap on. Life's pretty good. Besides, I am used to it by now.

Reporter: But, don't you think it would've been better to grow up in the wild?

Packy: Elephant's live in the wild? (Pauses). I am kidding! Of course they do. Naw. I ain't that kind of elephant. (Laughs). Besides, I am lazy as hell. Don't like to work.

Reporter: I see that you paint.

Packy: Sure, I enjoy flinging a paint brush around. The people at the Zoo (glancing over his enormous shoulder) spend weeks trying to find meaning in my art. It's hilarious. I am just flinging paint around like a drunk kindergartner and everyone thinks it's a sign of some higher intelligence. I mean...look at me. I am g'damn elephant! The only thing I can draw is flies.

Reporter: What else keeps you busy?

Packy: Showers. Especially when Zookeeper Tammy scrubs my privates. (Giggles).

Reporter: So you are allowed conjugal visits.

Packy: Yeah. You could call it that, I guess. There are other elephant's here, though. These damn keepers are always trying to get us to, uh, you know, get it going on. It makes me laugh. Just the other night after visitors hours were over, Tammy put Marvin Gaye's "Let's get it on" on the loudspeaker. She set the lights down low in the cage, fed me and what's her name some fresh hay and then began to push us close together with sticks. My boys need a lot of room to breath; all that effort ain't gonna cut it in a cage. Besides, I need some g'damn privacy.

Reporter: Have you ever thought of escaping?

Packy: From what?

Reporter: The Zoo?

Packy: Why?

Reporter: Because you are in a cage?

Packy: You serious, man? This is a great gig. I sleep when I want. Eat when I want. Step in my own droppings when I want. Pee on the zoo keepers when I want. I especially enjoy that; drenches them to the skin. They walk out of the cage sloshing in their boots; makes me crack up every time. Priceless.

Reporter: People say you like practical jokes.

Packy: Yeah, I like a good laugh. What I really like to do is break wind in the direction of people who talk on cell phones near my pen. What the hell. Here they come to the zoo with their kids and all they can do is yack on the damn phone? What is wrong with these people? Believe me, they get out of their quick when I send a little "poison air" their way.

Reporter: Do you have a cell phone.

Packy: (Long pause). Are you stupid?

Reporter: Sorry.

Packy: I would like to make a suggestion.

Reporter: What's that.

Packy: Maybe you could report that my feet are killing me. I need some rubber mats or something in here. The concrete floors are really not very ergonomic. Maybe Nike can grind up some shoes and make a soft floor for me. Can you let 'em know about that?

Reporter: Sure, Packy. Any last thoughts?

Packy: Yeah, got a cigarette? This g'damn patch is the size of a mouse diaper.












Thursday, June 17, 2010

BP, Please Fire Tony Hayward

It is simply outrageous how Tony Hayward responded to the questions from Members of Congress this week. In spite of the Member's predictable political grandstanding (Rep Joe Barton Fink anyone?), they appropriately reflected the nation's disgust at what is happening in the Gulf of Mexico. In fact, I think they were too soft on Mr. Hayward.

Memo to the board of directors of British Petroleum:

Get your (well) head out of your arses and fire Tony Hayward. Now, please. Lord help us, are you all really as stupid as you look on television? I can't imagine that you are. But, apparently you are.

The Conscious American

P.S. Was your media training session for Tony focused on getting him to a) not become rattled and b) give as few specifics as possible so he did not try to match wits with unarmed opponents? If so, be sure to fire your media training team on your way back to London you impotent tools. You received bad advice -- again.

P.P.S. And now I hear Tony Hayward is attending a yacht race. His balls must be made of titanium. Amazing. Is there any one at BP with an accountable bone in their body? Why are more Americans not outraged? BP must be kicked out of U.S. waters -- permanently.




Saturday, February 20, 2010

Dear Senator Patty Murray

As a business owner in Washington, employing hard-working Washingtonians, I am struggling to understand some things.

I am working with a number of banks in Washington and Oregon. They have told me that their intent is to continue to use government money (at .25 percent) to purchase the land assets of failing institutions. They will then "sit" on those assets in order to constrict the supply of building lots and drive prices up to serve the narrow interests of their shareholders only. Their customers and taxpayers will not benefit from this and are suffering now as a result. Job growth in the construction sector is being artificially stifled by the actions of these bankers and it must stop immediately.

Here are my questions. As a tax payer, an employer, an entrepreneur and an American, I would like a reply.

Why are banks getting near interest free money from the Federal Reserve in the current environment?

Why did the U.S. Federal Reserve transfer hundreds of millions of dollars to the nation's top 2% performing banks in early December and almost NONE of that money has gone into economic stimulation projects? (In one case, a bank in Washington sent several million dollars to a project in Mexico being developed by an American customer).

What is the purpose of not charging banks a fair rate of interest for the money they are using to buy the troubled assets of their failing peers?

Why are banks not being held accountable for their lax underwriting guidelines several years ago? When is Congress going to haul the leaders of the nation's banks to answer questions about their underwriting guidelines?

Why are the bank regulators not being held accountable for their lax oversight of bankers? When is it their turn to face Congress?

Why is that only tax payers and hard working Americans are being forced to pay higher taxes and to pay for the failures of a narrow few? And those narrow few are still getting free or near-free money from the same people -- the American taxpayer?

And, why are banks -- who have been given cash from tax payers and our government -- being allowed to buy distressed assets with that money and turn around and foreclose or threaten foreclosure for the full amount of the notes due when they have little to NO basis in those assets to begin with?

How is that they are being allowed to make money on something they paid nothing for?

Imagine for a minute that a few years ago, I gave you a $100,000 loan. Imagine that I asked you for almost no proof that you could pay it back and simply gave you the loan without checking to see if you could really afford it. Now, let's say you called me a year later and said you could not pay me back. Imagine if I could simply call the government and ask them to give me the $100,000 so I could be made whole and I would then pay the government back when I was able to collect from you.

In this scenario, I am back to even. You are still on the hook for the full amount owed. The good news? I am not punished for my poor credit-making decision. The bad news? YOU still owe 100 percent of the money. Oh, and you have to keep paying the government taxes so they can subsidize my stupidity and the stupidity of my peer lenders (or greedy brilliant thinkers depending on what side of the transaction you are on).

Imagine that I took the government's money, squandered it some more with poor decisions and now I need another government loan to bail me out. The government would give another bank 100% of the money they need to buy my note at say, 20 cents on the dollar, and so I am saved again. YOU, though, are still on the hook for 100% of the money you borrowed. Senator, that's called a scam.

Chief Credit Officers in several Pacific Northwest banks are buying assets from failing banks with money given to them by the FDIC and the Federal Reserve. That's fine, I guess. But they are only paying 20 cents on the dollar at the most for these assets AND they money the government is giving them is costing them almost zero. So now they control most of the permit-ready building lots in Oregon and Washington. They have NO incentive to sell those lots at market rates as they have almost no basis in the lots. So, their stated policy is to hold these lots to purposely constrict supply in order to drive prices higher in the false belief that the value of these assets will rise to the same unsustainable levels to which they rose three years ago.

They are in error in their thinking. I am a home builder. I need lots. But, I cannot get those lots from these bankers who bought them for 20 cents on the dollar because they greedily believe they will be worth even more three-to-five years from now. The Pacific Northwest is already one of the most expensive housing markets in the nation. It is being made more so -- at a critical moment in our history -- by bankers who care only about their shareholders.

It is wrong. It should be a crime. At the very least it is un-American, selfish and greed-driven.

Nathaniel Clevenger

Saturday, November 7, 2009

Green Motor Oil? Green Earth Technologies and Motor Oil Made From Animal Fats

Here's a press release from Green Earth Technologies that recently caught my attention (disclosure, I bought a few shares of their company about a month ago). If their G-OIL product really works, why has their been so little attention paid to this? Why, when we continue to send soldiers to the Middle East to protect our oil interests there, do we not hear more about innovative products likes this?

Is it because Green Earth is too small to have the ability to market aggressively? Don't we realize that each time we fill our gas tanks, we are part of the problem of keeping oil producing nations hostile to us in business? I understand a worry about using a product like G-OIL. I have a German-made car. I would worry about how this oil would affect my engine. But, if it passes all of the ASTM tests, why should I worry? I should just do it because it's apparently better for the planet AND it gets me one tiny step away from people who would seek to kill us for few other reasons than they don't like our culture or our religion. Should be a simple decision to make on my part. And yet, it's not.

I need to call my car dealer. I need to have them ask their mechanics if it's ok to use the oil. I have to then try it out. If I notice even the smallest amount of performance decrease, then I will probably blame it on the G-OIL. But, should I?

It's all so damn complicated. Green Earth could help me out by publicizing which cars and models could take their new oil. They could be a lot more aggressive than simply sponsoring the American LeMans Series. Besides, how does sponsoring a decadent car race help promote the use of earth-friendly oil?

STAMFORD, Conn., Oct 28, 2009 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ --
Green Earth Technologies (Pink Sheets: GETG), a leading manufacturer
and marketer of "green" environmentally safe consumer packaged goods
and products, announced today their third consecutive showcase at The
AAPEX Show at the Sands Expo Center in Las Vegas, November 4-6. In the
previous two years, Green Earth Technologies has previewed G-OIL(R)
Ultimate Biodegradable green motor oils and other environmentally
friendly automotive products at AAPEX, the world's largest business-to-
business event for the Automotive Aftermarket industry. Third time is
a charm, as G-OIL SAE 5W-30 is now available nationally, passing all
the engine test criteria for The American Petroleum Institute (API) SM
Certification and being granted the API "Donut," becoming the first
and only bio-based motor oil to receive such distinguished honors.

G-OIL is the world's lowest petroleum, "eco-friendly," ultimate
biodegradable motor oil priced comparatively to synthetics and
similarly performing products. Unlike traditional petrochemical-based
motor oils from leading manufacturers, Green Earth Technologies' G-OIL
is made with American-grown renewable animal fats. These saturated
fats, whose molecular single-bond carbon chains are similar to common
petroleum oils, have no harsh effects on the environment, and
drastically cut our dependence on foreign oil. In the past year, G-OIL
also became the official motor oil of The American Le Mans series.

In addition to G-OIL Green Motor Oil, Green Earth Technologies will be
previewing two new products: G-OIL Marine Oil, which will begin
shipping in 2010 and the GREEN MACHINE(TM), a new product in the
appearance chemical category with TTI. The GREEN MACHINE is a portable
1400 PSI pressure washer designed for cars and trucks specially
equipped with the G-CLEAN High Pressure Detergent Injector to
accommodate environmentally friendly washing using GET's ultimate
biodegradable dissolvable detergent pouches, made with American-grown
plant base oils. The dissolvable detergents go through the pump and
clean at high pressure while conditioning and lubricating the pump, so
no reclamation necessary while cleaning on the road.

"The AAPEX community has truly supported environmentally conscious
brands with increased fervor over the years for 'green' alternatives,"
said Jeffrey Loch, Founder and Chief Marketing Officer of Green Earth
Technologies. "We are very excited to showcase for our third year in a
row, as we now have G-OIL available for shipment in bulk and bottles
nationally, a true achievement for our company."

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Is it even possible to win a war in Afghanistan? Not today.

And here's why...

Follow this link. It will take you to a full description of Forward Operating Base Keating , the same FOB that was attacked this past weekend by 400 Taliban-led troops resulting in the deaths of 8 American soldiers.

What's most amazing to me is how much information the link above provides to our enemies. Wow. Why don't we just put every soldier's Facebook account, street address and photo on these Websites and allow our enemies to just kill them that much more quickly?

Children, we cannot ever "win" in Afghanistan. We can only retreat and allow the Taliban to keep their scrubby piece of mountainous dirt. And why should we care anyway? We have so many things to clean up in our own country.

So, why are we bothering there?

To keep radical Islam from proliferating? Hmmm. That's not working too well. Just ask the British and the Europeans. They can't even contain radical Islam in their own cities.

To control Afghan heroin-producing poppy fields? Does anyone else see the irony in trying to stem supply when Americans have consistently proven that they want heroin and as much as they can shoot? Hey, this drug is now killing more people than auto accidents. Will stemming supply cut that statistic? Doubtful. Americans like to get high. So, they'll just switch to something else. When are we going to learn that the demand side of this equation is where the solution lies?

To win Afghan hearts and minds and make the country safe for democracy? If that's the goal, then maybe the effort is worth it. But, it will take hundreds of years before we see any real change in that direction. The people have to want it. And thus far they don't seem to be too interested in it. If the Taliban can scrape together 400 farmers to take on a fully armed Marine garrison, then I don't think democracy is really on their minds.

Oh, wait, I know what it is. We need a place to use all of the weapons we are producing in order to keep our massive munitions manufacturing industry firing on all pistons. Politicians call it "job creation."

No, I don't want to see us retreat. I want to see us kill every single murdering Taliban member we can find. But, we need to find a different word than retreat to describe the need to get our young soldiers the hell out of there. Time for the Afghans to take care of their own country. Let's use our young soldiers to protect us in more important places like, ahem, San Diego, where are recent shoot out between armed smugglers and U.S. Border Patrol made Quentin Tarantino blush.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Martin Scorsese. Harvey Weinstein. Debra Winger. Michael Mann. Woody Allen. Mike Nichols, Debra Winger, etc. Please move to France.

Dear Hollywood and the French Government (notably Mr. Mitterand):

Wake up! If you can.

Roman Polanski is a convicted child sexual predator. It's as simple as that. He needs help, not more enabling. Your defense of Mr. Polanski is not just anti-American, it's frustratingly ignorant. It's frustrating because some lunatic editor has given you space to share your morally and legally-bankrupt views. Do any of you have a real sense of what's just and correct in this world or are you so jaded by your own fame and reflections that you've simply lost your minds?

Mr. Polanski raped, sodomized and sexually assaulted a 13 year old girl. Who cares if he did it 30 years or 30 minutes ago? It's all the same. This is what someone with a mental illness does. He does not need your protection, he needs your demand that he be sent to a place where he can't do it again. Who cares how talented he is? There will always be plenty of talented people in the movie industry. Personally, I could have lived without seeing Rosemary's Baby.

Your defense that his talent and life tragedies outweigh his crimes is illogical. He should've been jailed and provided with a significant dose of psycho therapy. After all, he is and will remain, a child sexual predator. There are teens who rape other teens and they are given the mark of a sexual predator for the rest of their lives, having to register and be marked on the Internet in perpetuity. Why not Mr. Polanski? What's so special about him?

Further, your excuse-laden defense that he survived the Holocaust and lived through the horrible murder of his beloved wife and unborn child at the hands of the Manson Family, pays no honor to either the Holocaust or to Sharon Tate.

Shame on you. Mr. Polanski deserves better friends. And we, as Americans, deserve better actors. I'll be boycotting all of your next projects until you find the wisdom to understand how sad your defense of Mr. Polanski truly is.

If your 13 year old had been raped, you'd want to make sure -- at the very least -- that it did not happen to another child. You'd demand the perpetrator be locked up for a long time and we'd all agree. Revenge is not what's being sought here. It's simple community protection from a sexual predator and others like him who might think they too can get a free pass for their behavior.

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Rob Cornilles For Congress

I met Alison and Rob Cornilles today. They are running for Congress. Yes, I say "they" as a spouse is as much a part of this type of effort as the name candidate. No, it's not like a pregnancy. It annoys the hell out of me when men say "we're having a baby." I've seen my wife having three of them and I can guarantee there was no "we" at the critical moment of delivery. But, I digress.

Here's why I think you should consider Mr. Cornilles more closely in the primary match up in May against incumbent Congressman, David Wu:

1. Rob seems motivated to win. You can see it in his eyes and hear it in his voice. He wants to replace Rep. Wu and believes that he can do that. He knows that to win he's going to have to put up with a certain depth of bullshit that may find him holding his nose. But, his skin is apparently thick enough. David's a lawyer and is masterful with the king's english. David's a marketing guy and a CEO. So, it will be interesting to see these two debate.

2. He seems like a really nice fella. No, really. Just a nice guy. He's direct. Looks you right in the eye. Shakes your hand firmly. And, he knows how to control a room full of overfed, overpaid, over-educated white guys. Those are the guys who write big checks. Alison is equally charming, but in a more pragmatic way. She seems hesitant about this new journey, but you can see the resolve in her eyes.

3. He admits he's learning and has a lot to learn. Self-deprecation comes easy to him. There is a humility to Rob that reveals itself in his smile when you first meet him. I found myself looking for reasons not to like his views. Couldn't find any. Not yet at least. I do think he, like a lot of politicians, either misunderstands the difference between debt and spending or they use them interchangeably to confuse the voters. Either way, it's wrong. I'd like to see him bone up on these distinctly different notions.

4. He seems to know that this is not going to easy. Alison seems to know that even better. She has to be the one, after all, who sits for uncounted hours listening to the same speech over and over and over again. She will need to be mistress of the living room, dutifully sitting, hands folded in her lap with a pasted on smile no matter what she's feeling from one moment to the next. I think the job of a political spouse has to be one of the worst jobs in the world. Yet, she seems to have an athletes' focus for it. Watch her closely, she's Rob's ace in the hole.

5. Finally, Rob will bring something Oregon SORELY needs to Congress. A self-made business person. Oregon's representation in Washington is far too unbalanced toward gentlemen who have had no experience running small businesses -- or any businesses for that matter. There is something uniquely useful about a small business man who has, as Rob says, "signed the front of a paycheck." Career politicians and lawyers like David Wu can never understand what that simple little notion really means no matter how hard they try.

I don't have a dog in this fight, really. I don't live in his district. Besides, politics makes me sick -- literally. The last time I had my own ass handed to me in politics, I threw up and could not get out of bed for days. And I worked for Marion Barry! You'd think I'd have an iron stomach. So, I hung up any notion of being a part of anything political four years ago. I've been a lot happier since. I do, however, still marvel at people's desire to enter the arena. Getting to know them is a little like knowing a death row inmate. There's something fascinating about them as they prepare to take that long walk. They are, for a short moment, at the mercy of fate. And I can't seem to turn away from what could happen.

Good luck, Rob and Alison. Hope your last meal is a good one.

Portland, Oregon

Will the U.S. Residential Construction Industry Embrace Energy Efficieny Before It's Too Late?

Since January of this year, I have been helping a Canadian-based structural concrete wall panel manufacturer get its second North American factory up and running in Alberta. We have pushed very hard to secure the financing and, thus far, have successfully met many challenging milestones. But, we are not done yet. It is my expectation that the Canadian manufacturer will have an Alberta-based plant operational by sometime in Spring 2010.

Each plant costs about $30M to launch, so it's a pretty massive undertaking. My role has been helping the licensees in Alberta work through the relationship with the manufacturer. Part negotiator. Part facilitator. Part strategist. With a little bit of pyscho-analyst thrown in for good measure. I have also been the go-to person for questions from investors, insurers, builders, government officials, etc.

My focus has, and will continue to be, on developing technologies and techniques that allow communities to build durable, sustainable, modestly-priced homes for average income earners worldwide, not just in the U.S. To that end, I am currently working on a project that will allow for the construction of structural wall panel plants in Iraq. A long story, but an important one. They need 3 million units of housing. In the past 25 years, they've only managed to get less than 20,000 units constructed, according to the United Nations. Lack of adequate housing fuels the cycle of poverty and the resulting after-affects which includes terrorism. A story not being told by the mainstream media.

I have a team of experts now assembled who can rapidly build thousands of units of housing per year anywhere in the world. A welcome, though unintended, consequence of the work we've done over the past three years. If you need housing for your country, call us. :-)

Another part of my work has found me helping raise money for two home builders in modestly-priced residential housing markets in the U.S. and Canada. Since May, I have helped to raise over $6M in construction loans. It's not been easy, but we've done it. Over 50 modestly-priced homes are being built in the these markets this year as a result.

What's frustrating, though, is that I am struggling to get anyone to pay much attention to me on the energy efficiency issue. The many builders I am working with see no compelling reason to change what they are doing. From Nova Scotia, to Alberta to Louisiana, Virginia, Oregon and beyond, there is simply no driving imperative to do anything different. For all of the talk of a green revolution in this critical industry, the realities are FAR from close to what organizations like the USGBC desires. In fact, I'd argue that it will take another 20+ years or more to see any noticeable change in how homes are built.

Yet, I am determined to get through to the people I work with. These are smart, motivated people. But right now they need to make money. Everyone is suffering in one form or another. I wonder if there is not a small baby step anyone could recommend these folks take to bring home building into a more modern era? What's the one simple thing you'd advise on the issue of increasing the energy efficiency of a modestly-priced home?

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Stun Gun Darts and the Potential for Needlestick-like Injuries to Emergency Responders

Did you know...

Stun Gun devices, while reportedly responsible for improving public safety and the safety of police officers in the past several years, have a largely under-reported safety flaw which puts emergency medical workers at increasing risk of life-threatening injuries occurring during the removal of expended darts.

Prior to the development of the D.A.R.T. Pro tool and X-TRACTOR Tips, there were no tools on the market specifically designed to prevent needlestick-type injuries incurred when police officers or medical personnel handle stun-gun darts. Often workers must pull the darts out by hand or use pliers or forceps to remove them from unruly subjects, heightening the risk of a blood infection to the workers. The darts have been sometimes stored in a plastic bag, again putting handlers at risk.

The cost to public agencies to test and treat personnel who may have been infected by bloodborne pathogens could run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. The use of the D.A.R.T. Pro with the attached X-TRACTOR Tip eliminates the risk.

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) bloodborne pathogens standard specifies the engineering controls, such as safer medical devices, which must be used to reduce or eliminate worker exposure.

A recent revision includes new requirements regarding an employer's Exposure Control Plan, including an annual review and update to reflect changes in technology that eliminate or reduce exposure to bloodborne pathogens.

The employer must:

1. take into account innovations in medical procedure and technological developments that reduce the risk of exposure (e.g., newly available medical devices designed to reduce needlesticks) and

2. document consideration and use of appropriate, commercially-available, and effective safer devices (e.g., describe the devices identified as candidates for use, the method(s) used to evaluate those devices, and justification for the eventual selection

No one medical device is considered appropriate or effective for all circumstances. Employers must select devices that, based on reasonable judgment will not jeopardize patient or employee safety or be medically inadvisable, and will make an exposure incident involving a contaminated sharp less likely to occur.

Employers must solicit input from non-managerial employees responsible for direct patient care regarding the identification, evaluation, and selection of effective engineering controls, including safer medical devices. Employees selected should represent the range of exposure situations encountered in the workplace, such as those in geriatric, pediatric, or nuclear medicine, and others involved in direct care of patients.

OSHA will check for compliance with this provision during inspections by questioning a representative number of employees to determine if and how their input was requested.

Employers are required to document, in the Exposure Control Plan, how they received input from employees. This obligation can be met by listing the employees involved and describing the process by which input was requested or presenting other documentation, including references to the minutes of meetings, copies of documents used to request employee participation, or records of responses received from employees.

Employers who have employees who are occupationally exposed to blood or other potentially infectious materials, and who are required to maintain a log of occupational injuries and illnesses under existing recordkeeping rules, must also maintain a sharps injury log. That log will be maintained in a manner that protects the privacy of employees. At a minimum, the log will contain the following: the type and brand of device involved in the incident, location of the incident (e.g., department or work area), and description of the incident. The sharps injury log may include additional information as long as an employee's privacy is protected. The format of the log can be determined by the employer.

 At any given time, almost 10 percent of the emergency medical technicians (EMTs) and paramedics in the United States miss work because of injuries and illnesses they suffered on the job.

 In one year, an estimated 8.1 of every 100 emergency responders will suffer an injury or illness forcing them to miss work. Compared to data compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rate of injuries requiring work absence among these first responders far exceeds the national average of 1.3 per 100 lost-work injury cases reported in 2006.

 About 900,000 certified emergency medical services professionals responded to more than 17 million calls in 2005. The most common injuries these professionals suffer are exposure to blood-borne pathogens from needle sticks

 It is estimated a thousand health care professionals are injured each day as the result of hospital accidents involving needles or other sharp objects, according to the Center of Disease Control (CDC). Source: American Nurses Association.

 Nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of U.S. nurses say needlestick injuries and blood borne infections remain major concerns.

 Sixty-four percent of nurses report being accidentally stuck by a needle while working.

 Among those nurses reporting needlestick injuries, a staggering 74 percent have been stuck by a contaminated needle while working. In 2008, more than one-third (35 percent) reported two or more contaminated needlesticks over the course of their career.

 While the overwhelming majority of nurses (91 percent) are familiar with their workplace’s protocol regarding needlestick injuries, 79 percent of those accidentally stuck by a needle while working say they reported the incident, compared to 83 percent in 2006.

 Nearly half (46 percent) of those who have been stuck say, during their most recent needlestick injury, they received an evaluation or were treated within one to two hours; yet more than one- third (39 percent) state they were not evaluated or treated at all.

 Ninety-five percent of nurses report taking a Hepatitis B vaccine to protect them from Hepatitis B infection due to occupational exposure.

Only the D.A.R.T. Pro complies with OSHA regulations promulgated to reduce the risk of needlestick injuries. According to OSHA, devices designed to reduce needlestick injuries must have …
• A fixed safety feature to provide a barrier between the hands and the needle after use; the feature should allow or require the worker's hands to remain behind the needle at all times.
• The safety feature as an integral part of the device, and not an accessory.
• The safety feature in effect before disassembly and remaining in effect after disposal, to protect users and trash handlers, and for environmental safety.
• The safety feature as simple as possible, and requiring little or no training to use effectively.
For more information, please contact nathanielclevenger@gmail.com, 503.753.2120. Provided by Global Pathogen Solutions. All Rights Reserved. www.globalpathogensolutions.com.

Sunday, August 30, 2009

Good Friend, John Barrows, Shares His Thoughts on Cooking

My good buddy, friend and mentor, John Barrows, was interviewed recently in a local newspapaper here in Oregon. Here's the link.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Why we must re-focus our efforts in Afghanistan. Or, why bother with protecting voters in small far-flung villages?

If widespread media reports are even marginally accurate, U.S. efforts to root out terrorist activities in Afghanistan and Pakistan are apparently not working well. More ominous, these efforts are not likely to end well for our soldiers unless we gain some focus - and fast. Protecting handfuls of voters in far flung provincial villages seems like an enormous waste of money and time. Our young soldiers deserve better than to lose their lives in places that are not even on maps.

Our stated government policy is focused on activities designed to disrupt or destroy terrorist activity. Yet, we don't have enough resources to achieve that ambitious goal. Hell, we can't even control the Mexican drug trade in our own country, so how do we think we can control the same kinds of activities in a country half a planet away? Mexican drug lords are simply trying to get and keep us all high. Afghan drug lords on the other hand, protected by their terrorist brethren, are trying to get and keep us high AND kill us at the same time.

If Mexican drug cartels wanted to support democratic rights in territories under their control, would we soften our position to them? No chance. Not so in Afghanistan where we are seeking to join hands with "moderates" in the Taliban political structure. People. Please. We have lost our minds. And soon, if we don't get some common sense working here, we are going to find the rest of our bodies in plastic travel bags.

For example...

I'd like to believe that we can use a few thousand Marines to win the hearts and minds of people living in deserts. But, that's naive. More than that, it's stupid and arrogant to think we can change them. People who live in deserts don't apparently want our assistance -- or anyone's assistance for that matter. If they wanted a better life, they would not be living in a desert. What the hell are we doing trying to help people who believe cultural destitution is their birthright? And yet, we literally "soldier on" in a half-baked and dangerous mission to protect their right to vote?

They've already voted -- with their feet! They don't apparently want to be part of the solution. They don't want to be part of the problem either. In short, they just don't want to be a part of anything. So, let's move on. Let's focus on getting the really bad guys and leave people in the nether regions of Helmand Province, etc., the hell alone (or alone in hell?)

This past week I drove from Edmonton, Alberta, through to Portland, Oregon. It was a long drive. About 1,000 miles. Along the way I passed through many small towns hanging on to the bitter edge of far away economic centers like Edmonton. I stopped for gas and food in several of these places and while no one struck me as a facile student of quantum physics, they seemed happy. And that's my point. They are happy living away from what the rest of the world considers civilization. They enjoy being left alone and I can damn near guarantee you if you asked them if they liked government -- in any form - the answer would be an emphatic, Hell no!

Should we think it any different in Afghanistan or Northern Pakistan? Imagine a group of armed Marines rolling in to your small burg, setting up check points, pointing dangerous weapons at your cars and explaining all the while that they were there to protect your right to vote. It's laughable in the extreme. In fact, I simply can't go on.

We must get back to focus on killing as many at the Taliban and their Al Qaeda friends as possible and stop this folly that we can convert vast amounts of nothingness into an Americanized somethingness. Otherwise, we will be sent packing just like the Turks, the Brits, the Persians, the Greeks and the other powers before us. Maybe we should take a vote first.

Sunday, July 26, 2009

What if healthcare workers made more house calls?

Would we be healthier if professional health care workers made more housecalls?

Why is that all other while collar professionals (lawyers, CPA's, bankers, etc.) are perfectly willing to leave their offices and come to their client's homes or places of business, but we are forced to meet our doctors, physician assistants and the like mostly in their offices alone?

How can the medical professional truly treat the "whole" person without seeing the very day-to-day environments in which they live? It's a fair question, I believe.

Imagine if your doctor could see that what is continuously making you sick is the fact that your home has not been dusted for ten years? Or, he can see that you live next door to a factory spewing out high levels of potentially cacrinogenic particulates. Or, the visiting nurse notices that you have 100 cats living in your house and that may be contributing to your kids' asthma. The list is endless.

Our healthcare system is geared to looking at tactical causes and effects and then presecribing tactical -- read "pharmaceutical" -- solutions to a specific problem. It is not particularly clever at looking at the whole picture of human health and wellness because it only sees its "customers" in a clinical setting. In short, it can not treat the whole person unless it understands the whole picture. But there is a simple answer. And, it won't cost that much. In fact, in the end it will save our healthcare system billions as we should all be that much healthier. Even if the end result is a 10 percent reduction in healthcare cost, the savings would be significant.

Part of pro-active, preventive treatment efforts should include physician assistants, nurses and the like -- if not physicians themselves -- making annual home visits. I don't know one person who likes visiting the doctor's office. It's inconvenient. It's often a cattle call. We wait endlessly and are given 15 minutes or less to visit with someone who is supposed to quickly ascertain our health or lack thereof. It's ridiculous. How much healthier might our society be if the medical profession brought healthcare to the people versus the other way around.

Sure, you'd still need to go to the doctor's office for obvious reasons. But, if you could choose to have a health care worker come to you for routine "maintenance" of your health care, what might the end result be?

Like most Americans I think that we need more common sense approaches to solving our health care system. Throwing more money at it has not reduced the numbers of uninsured. My senior thesis is colleage in the late 80s focused on ideas for insuring the nation's 30 million uninsured at that time. 20+ years later, 50 million are uninsured. So, we've had plenty of time to consider this issue and make creative changes. Yet, here we are -- no better than where we were two decades ago.

Saturday, July 11, 2009

INITIAL ANALYSIS OF BIODIESEL PLANT PRACTICALITY FOR OREGON AND SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON. JULY 2009.

I believe that there is and will be a healthy market for biodiesel in the Pacific Northwest. It’s all about mastering the fundamentals, which includes tax incentives, segmenting market demand, understanding distribution infrastructure, and exploiting Big Oil’s built-in limitations. Oh, and of course, tapping in to the desire of consumers to replace foreign oil with domestic energy sources that help Americans and the planet. Americans seem to understand now that sending our manufacturing jobs overseas has not provided a long-term positive for our own economy and so the pendulum for wanting to keep jobs at home is swinging back. The power of that paradigm shift cannot be overstated.

"For the first time in a long time there are some financial incentives to attract manufacturing in the U.S.," Source: Roger Efird, president of Suntech America, a subsidiary of the world's largest solar power company, based in China.

And while developing a small footprint (sub 2MMgy) biodiesel processing plant may be counter to conventional wisdom, what follows are my arguments for why an opportunity is revealing itself now to create a long-term, sustainable business in biodiesel processing through plants that have annual production capacity of less than two million gallons.

In recent years, several new Federal laws designed to increase the production and consumption of domestic biofuels have been enacted. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established the Renewable Fuel Standard, which mandated that transportation fuels sold in the United States contain a minimum volume of renewable fuels, the level of which increases yearly until 2022. In December 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 increased the mandatory levels of renewable fuel blending credits to a total of 36 billion gallons by 2022, including 16 million gallons of cellulosic biofuels. By comparison, in 2007, the United States consumed 6.8 billion gallons of ethanol and 491 million gallons of biodiesel.

Biodiesel consumption is predicted to increase to 1.2 billion gallons by 2030, or approximately only 1.5% of total diesel consumption. Consumption of renewable diesel, made from cellulosic materials, is expected to substantially exceed biodiesel consumption by 2030.

But this is only part of the story. The big trend is this: Petroleum refining capacity in the United States has been declining since the late 1960s. Petroleum demand has been increasing. So, a massive gap between the decreasing supply of refined oil and the increasing demand has been created. Domestic supplies, then, have been made up by foreign imports of refined oil products. Americans love the oil, they’ve just lost their appetite for foreign oil.

There are only two choices: add more refining capability, which we likely won’t do as no one wants a new refinery in their backyard, or build smaller refineries using domestic oil stocks. If we are going to build refining capacity, we might as well refine our own feedstocks rather than buy them from governments in the Middle East and South America.

Note: Any American who believes that our energy needs are being appropriately provided by the status quo – especially with regard to petroleum – is either naïve or purposely acting counter to our national interests. The fact is, petroleum is not the answer to our long-term energy needs. We must develop more local, closed-loop energy solutions that remove the myriad threats posed by our continued reliance on petroleum and its byproducts.

The arguments for and against biodiesel in particular and biofuels in general are many and complex. The arguments in favor of biodiesel are simple. Here are just a few…

1. BOTH CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES ARE INVESTING IN BIOFUEL INNOVATIONS AT PARADIGM-SHIFTING RATES. Paralleling efforts in the U.S. to expand the use of biodiesel, the Canadian Parliament last year passed a Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) requiring biodiesel sold in Canada to contain an average of 2% renewable content, in the diesel supply. Four years ago, there was no significant market for biodiesel in North America, now both nations are aggressively trying to stimulate the growth of biodiesel production.

According to the National Biodiesel Board, there has been a nationwide explosion of biodiesel production in the past few years. The National Biodiesel Board, an industry trade group, estimates the 176 refineries that were functioning in 2008 produced 700 million gallons of biodiesel -- a 1,300 percent increase over 1999 production. That trend is expected to slow, but there will be continued growth, with at least 39 plants under construction and biofuel regulations either existing or proposed in nearly every state. But biodiesel's long-term future is clouded by, among other things, the availability of raw material for the alternative fuel.

The reasons why governments in Canada and the U.S. and Canada are doing this are simple. In biodiesel, everyone wins. The farmers. The entrepreneurs. The consumers. And, most importantly, the politicians who want to keep their jobs. There is simply no real political or economic downside. It could be argued (and it is by many) that the current price of petro-diesel, which is higher by several cents than gasoline, means that biodiesel is going to be unattractive to consumers for a good while longer. But, that is only a small part of the picture. It ignores the fact that the vast majority of petro-diesel is consumed by businesses like truck fleets, river and ocean shipping, Over the long-term, biodiesel production will provide a wide variety of economic and environmental benefits that cannot be ignored.

2. THE ECONOMIC RECOVERY IS ABOUT ONE THING: JOB CREATION. Renewable fuels provide a major source of economic opportunity. New green jobs are already being created. Expanded production will equal increased industrial and commercial development. Perhaps most excitingly, renewable fuels will spark economic expansion for farm families and the forestry sector - which will provide the feedstocks for new fuels that we harvest, rather than extract. Re-creating jobs in the forestry and agriculatural sectors in the Pacific Northwest is politically attractive.

The Portland Development Commission (PDC) commissioned a study two years ago to evaluate crops that have the highest potential as a biodiesel feedstock and where they may be grown in Oregon. The PDC did this, in part, to demonstrate to the majority of the state – which is rural – that it could be a partner in providing win-win economic solutions for not just city dwellers, but rural as well. The report examined the viability of a Portland-based biodiesel refinery with a capacity of one half million gallons annually as a starting point. Canola was the feedstock focal point because of its hardiness as a seed oil crop in many parts of Oregon.

3. THERE IS A LOT OF MONEY BEING PUT INTO THE “GREEN ECONOMY.” The U.S. plans to spend $50-$100 billion in economic stimulus funds for extended renewable energy tax credits, building efficiency retrofits, subway and light rail projects, and environmental restoration programs. Many of these programs intersect with the business of biodiesel. In particular, the U.S. Department of Energy is providing loan guarantees up to 80% of the project costs. States are also providing incentives. A list of some of those incentives is attached.

4. OUR BIGGEST LONG-TERM COMPETITOR, BIG OIL, IS ALSO LIKELY OUR MOST SIGNIFICANT LONG-TERM PARTNER PROVIDING A CLEAR POSSIBLE EXIT OPPORTUNITY. Large petroleum processors like ExxonMobil, Marathon Oil and ConcocoPhillips have a right to be concerned about the proliferation of biofuels processing in the United States. It’s only my opinion, but It could be argued that a conspiracy is being led by Big Oil to kill the budding biofuels industry by, among other things, stifling production of petroleum in the near-term. They are also trying to drive up prices for their own products, but if it harms the nascent biofuels market that can’t be bad for them either.

Big Oil’s greatest threat is our greatest asset and that is this. Big Oil has a finite amount of refining capacity for at least the next ten years. No new refineries have been developed in the United States since 1976 and it can take a decade or more to build a new one. In early 2009, many larger refineries cut capital investments by billions of dollars, so capacity will not be able to come online quickly once the economy inevitably turns around.

Even in the worst-case scenario where the economy does not start growing again for another five years, petroleum refinery capacity will not be much different from what it is now. This means that prices for petroleum will inevitably rise which leads to more dependence on foreign stocks ultimately. That is not a sustainable model for the United States in the long-run.

5. SMALL BIOFUEL REFINERIES THAT ARE CLOSE TO THEIR FEEDSTOCKS SIMPLY MAKE SENSE. In a late November 2008 report, widely cited by media around the world, Merrill Lynch analysts shared a belief that energy markets today are mostly centralized, thus decentralized energy generation is evolving toward a horizontal, distributed industry. That’s a fancy way of saying that “small is beautiful.” In Oregon, small biodiesel refineries can create local markets for farmers. They can create local jobs, which is attractive to local governments. They also reduce the costs of fuel eventually because one of the biggest costs for petroleum is in transportation.

Recent yield trials in the Willamette Valley have shown that available winter canola varieties can produce in excess of 4,000 lbs. of seed per acre. Other production regions under consideration are the Columbia Basin (dryland and irrigated), Central Oregon near Madras, and Northeast Oregon in the LaGrande area. Even though yields may be lower (2,000 to 3,000 lbs. per acre) outside the Willamette Valley, canola may serve as a valuable rotation crop in these areas.

In spite of recent media reports suggesting that biodiesel crops may be restricted from expanding in Oregon, growing demand is likely to ensure that just the opposite will occur. We can be a part of ensuring that Oregon continues to expand production limits which are due for reconsideration by Oregon Department of Agriculture crop regulators in September. There is a more technical reason, though, why Oregon is likely to expand canola crop expansion. Using canola in a crop rotation with grass seed and wheat benefits Oregon growers.

Canola plants have strong taproots that penetrate compacted soil layers that fibrous roots of grass seed and cereal crops cannot. Growing canola can significantly improve soil tilth and increase water infiltration rates in compacted soils, reducing tillage costs and improving performance of following crops. Including canola in the crop rotation will also help growers control grass weeds, which are becoming greater problems in both grass seed and wheat production. This is particularly important in the Willamette Valley where grass weeds have become a major problem in grass seed production fields, and growers have few non-grass crop rotation options.

6. ANOTHER SUPPORTING COROLLARY TO THE “SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL” SCENARIO INVOLVES THE DISTRIBUTED GROWTH OF SEED CRUSHING OPERATIONS. The use of small, decentralized mechanical oilseed crushers that extract vegetable oil without the use of solvents is a growing phenomenon. This concept has been used very successfully in Europe and Asia for local production of cooking oil, biodiesel, and oilseed meal for animal feed for decades. This technology allows extraction of oil on-farm or by small local enterprises, virtually eliminating transportation costs. Filtered, virgin oil is sold for edible or industrial use, and the meal is usually consumed by animals on-farm or sold to local dairies.

Advantages of On-Farm Oilseed Processing Facilities:
Low capital cost ($100,000 – $250,000)
No waste products
Minimal siting issues – on-farm or industrial sites will work
Small footprint and low power usage
Low raw material transportation and storage costs
Create rural jobs and value-added opportunity

There are, of course, some disadvantages to on-farm oilseed processing. These include, low throughput, possible quality control issues (no on-site lab) and high residual oil content ( 8-12%) remaining in the meal. But, mobile oilseed crushing units are already being considered as a potential solution to the problem. These mobile crushers would likely be able to quickly increase their capacity from about 200 gallons of oil per day to as much as 400 or more, thus making them economically-viable. Indeed, there may be another profitable business in this sector focused on bringing the crusher to the farm, rather than the seeds to the crusher.

7. OREGON’S BIGGEST INDUSTRY IS AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS. WHY? BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF LAND. According to state agricultural resources, Oregon can suitably grow as many as 300,000 acres of canola in the next few years on an annual basis. This represents a 100X increase in production from the current 3,000 acres. Our calculations show that for every 1MMgy of production, you’d need about 30,000 acres of canola in rotation. That can likely be cut by a significant amount if yields can be properly managed. As we do have such a large agricultural product base, we have a significant volume of relevant infrastructure for moving agricultural products to markets. These include strong networks of roads and rail transport, as well as the infrastructure that supports river movement of products along the Columbia – the fifth largest river in the world.

END NOTES
http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/energy-resources/variable-817.html
http://www.biodiesel.org/news/taxincentive/