Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DIY Demand Response

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-13-10 11:24 PM
Original message
DIY Demand Response
An Israeli company is betting on plug-and-play demand response for residential and light commercial customers.
DIY Demand Response


Forget about installations and industrial HVAC systems. One burgeoning demand response company is taking a do-it-yourself approach for institutions and homeowners who want to take part in load shedding and shaping.

Greenlet Technologies is in several small pilots in Israel and the U.S. using its Greenlet pluggable units, essentially smart plugs tailored for demand response. Nearly 25 percent of air conditioners in the U.S. are wall units, according to Itai Karelic, who heads up Greenlet Technologies' U.S. office.

The Israel-based company is not looking to compete with EnerNOC or Comverge, but rather is looking to fill a hole for utilities, a growing trend in the specialization of demand response. While there are huge savings to be had in load reduction in the commercial and industrial segment, with an approximate 150 million appliances in the U.S., there are also large gains that can be earned from getting thousands of households to make small cuts in energy use. Both Austin Energy and PG&E both have fairly large programs under way in which consumers voluntarily, through technology, crank down their air conditioners on select days for brief periods to curb peak consumption.

Greenlet is not just designed to be used by the early adopter, as many home energy management systems are. "My grandmother could use this," said Karelic. Once the Greenlets, which come in 120- or 240-volt models, are plugged into major appliances and wall AC units, customers then connect a gateway to their internet connection. There is an option to connect using Wi-Fi, but Karelic acknowledges that for the majority of people, a hard connection is easier to navigate.

"There are...

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/diy-demand-response/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 12:48 AM
Response to Original message
1. Whoever unrecced this is a piece of shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 05:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Now *that* comment is tempting me to unrec the OP, simply to offset the whinging ...
... of the single-issue poster who wouldn't even have commented
had "that magic name" not been mentioned in the OP ...

(Not to worry Kris, I can still appreciate the good stuff when
you post it without the MZJ appendix :evilgrin:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. There are many pieces of shit
On several threads, we've noticed that the rec count for pro-renewables gets driven down to zero.
The sleazy nuclear industry lobbying group NEI has hired the sleazy PR company Hill & Knowlton to do sleazy PR for them, so it's safe to assume that they've hired people to unrec pro-renewable posts and anti-nuke posts, and to rec pro-nuke posts.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=site%3Ademocraticunderground.com+hill+%26+knowlton&btnG=Search

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Demographically, I kind of doubt we're important enough to burn any effort on.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Really?
Where do they focus their "internet based social networking" efforts if not on popular websites and message boards. Messaging to the rightwing is a waste of time since the right is solidly behind nuclear power, so it is logical to assume that sites like DU (how many are out there that are bigger?) are targets of their efforts.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Could be. My counter argument is that post View-count rarely exceeds a few hundred...
even for fairly popular posts. And that's not unique viewer count, which I suspect is much smaller given that people frequently look at a post of interest multiple times over its life.

So... for that reason I suspect the impact of posting anything here on DU is small.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diane in sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. I've noticed this repeatedly on this thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Sounds like a Conspiracy to me
Verbatim:

On several threads, we've noticed that the rec count for pro-renewables gets driven down to zero.

The sleazy nuclear industry lobbying group NEI has hired the sleazy PR company Hill & Knowlton to do sleazy PR for them, so it's safe to assume that they've hired people to unrec pro-renewable posts and anti-nuke posts, and to rec pro-nuke posts.


Let me get this straight: A major international PR firm is going to pay a professional media consultant to pick through posts on DU for the purpose of annoying the anti-nukes by un-recommending their messages? We must be talking a good 30-100 readers at DU, few if any of which have any influence at all. Okay, maybe they hit a few other sites as well, but reading through political squabbling is time-consuming.

Do you have any idea how many kinds of batshit crazy that is?

I know you are a passionate opponent of all things nuclear, but do you really want to go there?

Incidentally, H&K also do a huge volume of PR for the renewables industry; and one of their founders is Frank Mankiewicz, a long-time Progressive who also has a Huffington Post column, making it easier to check up on his bona fides. I don't know his position on nuclear energy.

--d!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Why do they recruit experts in "internet social media"?
It isn't DU per se, it is control of the message across all media. No matter where you turn you see the same lies from the Nuclear Energy Institute being pushed in a manner designed to drown out the facts related to the relative benefits/risks of nuclear and renewable energy. There are trillions of dollars at stake, so if you think they would balk at a 50-100 person operation to monitor web discussions and letters to the editor you are either being naive or self serving.

Here is a blurb from the resume of an NEI staff member:
Responsible for content management across all of NEI’s Web properties including public Web site, member Web site, and the Blog, NEI Nuclear Notes. Completed re-design of public site in 2007. Also head of NEI’s online outreach activities via Blogs and other social media. "


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Yeah, but when H&K work for renewable companies it's totally different
because of teh magick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Don't you know?

teh renewables will save us all. they will go for 1% of the world's energy output to 50% in teh blink of an eye!

then we will all get ponies and rainbows!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Rainbows AND ponies!?


Fuck yeah. That's the good shit, right there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. The world without nuclear power or renewable energy
No nuclear power plants? No solar, wind, geothermal and wave power?



Not the world I want to live in. I'm saving my pennies for a Nissan Leaf!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. You do know about "Nayirah", don't you?
Her fake testimony was broadcast on live TV. It was gripping drama. And completely fake. To manipulate congress and the American people into going to war.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Citizens_for_a_Free_Kuwait

Citizens for a Free Kuwait (CFK) was a front group established by the Hill & Knowlton PR firm to promote the 1991 U.S. war in the Persian Gulf (Operation Desert Storm).

Contents

* 1 History
o 1.1 Packaging the Emir
* 2 Suffer the Little Children
* 3 Articles and resources
* 4 Other Related SourceWatch Resources
o 4.1 References
* 5 External Articles

<snip>

Hill & Knowlton, then the world's largest PR firm, served as mastermind for the Kuwaiti campaign. Its activities alone would have constituted the largest foreign-funded campaign ever aimed at manipulating American public opinion. By law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act should have exposed this propaganda campaign to the American people, but the Justice Department chose not to enforce it. Nine days after Saddam's army marched into Kuwait, the Emir's government agreed to fund a contract under which Hill & Knowlton would represent Citizens for a Free Kuwait, a classic PR front group designed to hide the real role of the Kuwaiti government and its collusion with the Bush administration. Over the next six months, the Kuwaiti government channeled $11.9 million dollars to Citizens for a Free Kuwait, whose only other funding totalled $17,861 from 78 individuals. Virtually all of CFK's budget - $10.8 million - went to Hill & Knowlton in the form of fees.

The man running Hill & Knowlton's Washington office was Craig L. Fuller, one of Bush's closest friends and inside political advisors. The news media never bothered to examine Fuller's role until after the war had ended, but if America's editors had read the PR trade press, they might have noticed this announcement, published in O'Dwyer's PR Services before the fighting began: "Craig L. Fuller, chief of staff to Bush when he was vice-president, has been on the Kuwaiti account at Hill & Knowlton since the first day. He and (Robert) Dilenschneider at one point made a trip to Saudi Arabia, observing the production of some 20 videotapes, among other chores. The Wirthlin Group, research arm of H&K, was the pollster for the Reagan Administration. ... Wirthlin has reported receiving $1.1 million in fees for research assignments for the Kuwaitis. Robert K. Gray, Chairman of H&K/USA based in Washington, DC had leading roles in both Reagan campaigns. He has been involved in foreign nation accounts for many years. . . . Lauri J. Fitz-Pegado, account supervisor on the Kuwait account, is a former Foreign Service Officer at the US Information Agency who joined Gray when he set up his firm in 1982."

In addition to Republican notables like Gray and Fuller, Hill & Knowlton maintained a well-connected stable of in-house Democrats who helped develop the bipartisan support needed to support the war. Lauri Fitz-Pegado, who headed the Kuwait campaign, had previously worked with super-lobbyist Ron Brown representing Haiti's Duvalier dictatorship. Hill & Knowlton senior vice-president Thomas Ross had been Pentagon spokesman during the Carter Administration. To manage the news media, H&K relied on vice-chairman Frank Mankiewicz, whose background included service as press secretary and advisor to Robert F. Kennedy and George McGovern, followed by a stint as president of National Public Radio. Under his direction, Hill & Knowlton arranged hundreds of meetings, briefings, calls and mailings directed toward the editors of daily newspapers and other media outlets.

<snip>

Hill & Knowlton produced dozens of video news releases at a cost of well over half a million dollars, but it was money well spent, resulting in tens of millions of dollars worth of "free" air time. The VNRs were shown by eager TV news directors around the world who rarely (if ever) identified Kuwait's PR firm as the source of the footage and stories. TV stations and networks simply fed the carefully-crafted propaganda to unwitting viewers, who assumed they were watching "real" journalism. After the war Arthur Rowse asked Hill & Knowlton to show him some of the VNRs, but the PR company refused. Obviously the phony TV news reports had served their purpose, and it would do H&K no good to help a reporter reveal the extent of the deception. In Unreliable Sources, authors Martin Lee and Norman Solomon noted that "when a research team from the communications department of the University of Massachusetts surveyed public opinion and correlated it with knowledge of basic facts about US policy in the region, they drew some sobering conclusions: The more television people watched, the fewer facts they knew; and the less people knew in terms of basic facts, the more likely they were to back the Bush administration."

<snip>

In fact, the most emotionally moving testimony on October 10 came from a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, known only by her first name of Nayirah. According to the Caucus, Nayirah's full name was being kept confidential to prevent Iraqi reprisals against her family in occupied Kuwait. Sobbing, she described what she had seen with her own eyes in a hospital in Kuwait City. Her written testimony was passed out in a media kit prepared by Citizens for a Free Kuwait. "I volunteered at the al-Addan hospital," Nayirah said. "While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns, and go into the room where . . . babies were in incubators. They took the babies out of the incubators, took the incubators, and left the babies on the cold floor to die."

Three months passed between Nayirah's testimony and the start of the war. During those months, the story of babies torn from their incubators was repeated over and over again. President Bush told the story. It was recited as fact in Congressional testimony, on TV and radio talk shows, and at the UN Security Council. "Of all the accusations made against the dictator," MacArthur observed, "none had more impact on American public opinion than the one about Iraqi soldiers removing 312 babies from their incubators and leaving them to die on the cold hospital floors of Kuwait City."

At the Human Rights Caucus, however, Hill & Knowlton and Congressman Lantos had failed to reveal that Nayirah was a member of the Kuwaiti Royal Family. Her father, in fact, was Saud Nasir al-Sabah, Kuwait's Ambassador to the US, who sat listening in the hearing room during her testimony. The Caucus also failed to reveal that H&K vice-president Lauri Fitz-Pegado had coached Nayirah in what even the Kuwaitis' own investigators later confirmed was false testimony. In an opinion column in the New York Times in January 1992, MacArthur wrote that "a Hill and Knowlton vice president, Gary Hymel, helped organize the Congressional Human Rights Caucus hearing in meetings with Mr. Lantos and Mr. Porter and the chairman of Citizens for a Free Kuwait, Hassan al-Ebraheem. Mr. Hymel presented the witnesses, including Nayirah. (He later told me he knew who she was at the time.)"<1>

If Nayirah's outrageous lie had been exposed at the time it was told, it might have at least caused some in Congress and the news media to soberly reevaluate the extent to which they were being skillfully manipulated to support military action. Public opinion was deeply divided on Bush's Gulf policy. As late as December 1990, a New York Times/CBS News poll indicated that 48 percent of the American people wanted Bush to wait before taking any action if Iraq failed to withdraw from Kuwait by Bush's January 15 deadline.85 On January 12, the US Senate voted by a narrow, five-vote margin to support the Bush administration in a declaration of war. Given the narrowness of the vote, the babies-thrown-from-incubators story may have turned the tide in Bush's favor.

Following the war, human rights investigators attempted to confirm Nayirah's story and could find no witnesses or other evidence to support it. Amnesty International, appears to have participated in this deception, and the opening salvo of the campaign featured an interview with George Bush (Snr) referring to the AI-press alert on "throwing the babies out of the incubators". AI has not issued an apology for its role in this deception. Furthermore, there is an account by Prof. Francis Boyle, a former board member of AI-USA, who describes in detail AI's role in this propaganda campaign.

<snip>

Nayirah herself was unavailable for comment. "This is the first allegation I've had that she was the ambassador's daughter," said Human Rights Caucus co-chair John Porter. "Yes, I think people . . . were entitled to know the source of her testimony." When journalists for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation asked Nasir al-Sabah for permission to question Nayirah about her story, the ambassador angrily refused.

Following the publication of MacArthur's column in the New York Times, Hill and Knowlton at first refused to comment. NPR's Mara Liasson reported on the day the article appeared that the PR firm "did not return repeated calls from NPR".<2>

<snip>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-14-10 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Thanks - lest we forget just how evil these bastards are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 05:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC