SIMPLE SOLUTION ESSAYS: Geoengineering of Climate Change

The following continues the serialization of my Book 3, SIMPLE SOLUTION Essays:

The notion of geoengineering at a global scale scares most.  Their argument is, we have so screwed up our planet that to entrust any group to solve these problems at mega-scale is insane.  They have a point, but the concept merely suggests we talk about these super solutions.  My 1July08 posting reviewed these early thinking steps.

Geoengineering of Climate Change

There are those who feel that there is no cause for concern at this time about the increasing amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, and if you trace who they are -- as for example by perusing through the comments of postings like this -- organizations like the Advancement of Sound Science Center or the Heartland Institute seem to regularly pop up. Searching further, you see that companies like Exxon Mobil provide supporting funds. Our White House provides encouragement and Republicans more than Democrats side with these detractors.

For all I know, they might actually be right. However, let's, for the sake of discussion, say that global heating is real and our world leaders are unable to agree on a workable solution in time. What if the situation gets so bad that virtually instant solutions will be required to save our civilization? I provide a wide variety of answers in SIMPLE SOLUTIONS for Planet Earth, but for the purpose of this article, let us look at something called global geoengineering.

Various international conferences on this subject have been held over the past few decades, but, in general, proponents have generally been relegated to the lowest level of respectability by academics and funding agencies. Until, maybe now.

The concept is not new. The industrial revolution, farms, cities, transport systems and remedying the ozone hole can be considered to be forms of geoengineering. The Montreal Protocol actually seems to be working for the latter, but the Kyoto Protocol has been less than successful.

How can you quickly reverse global warming? It has been hypothesized that reducing sunlight by only 1% should eliminate this problem. Various ideas have been floated, from placing reflective sheets on the ocean or in space to exploding a controlled series of hydrogen bombs to stimulate a nuclear winter. Yes, some of the propositions have been certifiably insane.  (To the left is a cloud ship, a concept from the University of Edinburgh, as funded by Bill Gates.)

One I favor (see the chapter on the Blue Revolution in the book mentioned above) has to do with an Apollo Project equivalent of building an armada of open ocean grazing platforms powered by ocean thermal energy conversion to suck up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere while providing new habitats, green materials, next generation fisheries and sustainable fuels. Alas, such an effort will take decades and, horrors, maybe result in a United Nations of a thousand members.

The concept that has gained the greatest traction is the stratospheric sulfate solution (S-cubed), where large amounts of sulfur dioxide are, through various mechanisms, placed at altitude. This gas would form droplets of sulfuric acid in stratocumulus clouds to reflect back sunlight into space. Names like Freeman Dyson, Paul Crutzen and Edward Teller appear as advocates. This cure might cost $100 billion/year, for the effect wears out after a year, but that is a piffle in comparison with the $45 trillion exclaimed by the International Energy Agency as necessary to insure that our surface temperature only increases by 4 degrees Fahrenheit by the turn of the century.

Surely enough, Mount Pinatubo in 1991 blew its top and threw 20 million tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere and the globe cooled about a degree Fahrenheit that year. So the basic S-cubed concept has been largely verified by nature.

Before anyone gets too irrational, let me underscore that no one, not even the most extreme supporter, is even suggesting that anything of any magnitude be initiated today. It wouldn't hurt, though, to set aside a small amount, perhaps 1% of the global climate change budget, to comprehensively study the more reasonable suggestions, especially reviewing the environmental implications, so that if that one in a hundred chance that a perfect global heating storm (as, perchance, depicted in The Venus Syndrome chapter of SIMPLE SOLUTIONS for Planet Earth) actually happens, we will have a few rational emergency options worthy of consideration.

Comments (4):  I thought this issue would have drawn a lot more irate responses, but those that did provide input either missed the point or supported my “insurance” strategy.

-
The Dow Jones Industrials hovered above and below no change, and ended up 38 to 10,771, while world markets were mixed.  Gold crashed$91/toz to $1653, while oil prices continued to dip, the Dated Brent Spot now down to $106/barrel and the WTI Cushing Spot at $80/barrel.

-
Tropical Storm Ophelia in the Atlantic is weakening, but there is another disturbance trailing from Africa.  Hurricane Hillary at 145 MPH remains powerful, but will continue to move West and in time weaken:

-

IS THIS THE BEGINNING OF THE FEARED NEXT DEPRESSION?

The Dow Jones Industrials crashed 391 (-3.5%) today to 10,734.  It could have been worse, as the low was more than 500 points down.  The volume was 50% higher than the past three month average, so that's not good.  Europe was actually up today, and everyone seems to be blaming them these days, but Brazil was down almost 5%.  So, what's happening?  Well, let's look at some indicators.

The 30-year fixed-rate home mortgage loan dropped to a 60-year low of 4.09% last week, with the 15 year rate only at 3.30%.  Re-financing is on the rise, but the home market is still floundering.

Can we blame 9/11 and terrorists?  Here is how the USA has fared since that memorable date (from Forbes):

The terrorists have won the war, for the USA has spent $3.3 trillion in reaction to 9/11.  We way overreacted, and today, as the above graphs show, our defense budget is so far out of line that, when you think about it, that should be our saving grace, for, really, we don't need to waste so much money on, perhaps, a thousand really serious terrorists.  However, we now have a windfall opportunity to shift to renewable energy, global climate change remediation, infrastructure, education and reducing our federal debt.  Will this happen?  Nope.  Why?  The Military Industrial Complex and Republicans.  Is there a way around them?  Realistically, NO!

What is the relationship between the Dow and Gold?  As impressive as the rise in the price of gold might look above, it is nowhere near the record $2250/toz (inflation adjusted $850 in 1980).  However, some are predicting this peak will be exceeded next year.  Remember Watergate?  From all reports, President Richard Nixon's worst mistake was his abandoning of the gold standard in 1971 in reaction to countries in Europe demanding payment in gold.  Read Charles Kaklec's one pager in Forbes, where he laments the results after that decision:

  a.  unemployment increased

  b.  median family income would be 50% higher

  c.  a barrel of oil would today sell for $2.50/barrel

  d.  since 1971 there have been twelve financial crises, compared to only one after World War II

  

His solution?  Go back to the gold standard.  Steve Forbes and Ron Paul have both predicted such a return.  In case you are heavily invested, remember that, then, the price of gold will plummet.  According to at least one expert in survival of the fittest, call him Tom, when the world economy crashes, and society returns to how we lived during the time of the caveman, gold will also become useless.

Gold, incidentally, dropped $38/toz to $1744, so that is interesting, for there is normally an inverse relationship.  Oil was, though, economically consistent, dropping to $80/barrel (WTI) and $108/barrel.  This $28/barrel discrepancy, though, confounds me.

So what do all the above indicators tell us?  I don't know.  Let's see what happens tomorrow.  I'm hoping for a 735 Dow drop so that I can begin buying over the weekend.  Well, I might wait until Monday night to see if we are again heading into where we were less than four years ago.  Remember, the Dow was up to almost 14,164 on 9October2007 and crashed to 6470 on 6March2009:

By the way, for all it's worth, I don't think we are headed into the depths of 1929....unless:

  -  the Saudi Arabian (King Abdullah to the left) Kingdom falls into total chaos for the price of oil or
  -  Peak Oil strikes, suddenly sending petroleum rocketing past $150/barrel, staying there for a few years, or
  -  Global Warming catalyzes The Venus Syndrome (then, who cares about depression)
  -  Iran decimates Israel (the odds are higher, though, for Israel to strategically bomb nuke targets in Iran, which might improve the world economy) or
  -  Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland all default in the same month or
  -  any Republican is elected President of the USA next year (just joking) or

  -  a 7.5 earthquake destroys the Indian Point (nuclear) Energy Center (it does sit on an earthquake fault, and like Fukushima, is right at the coastline), with the fallout wiping out the population of Manhattan (38 miles away) or...

...meaning, perhaps, a double dip, but not much more, for what are the odds of any of the above actually happening?

-

Hurricane Hillary very suddenly became a 130 MPH Category 4 storm, and will look ominous for a few days, but, as I indicated yesterday, should not make any landfall, will move further west, and, in a few days , encounter cooler waters, and not get close to Hawaii.

-

UP AND COMING PERSONALITIES

1.  I begin with Erin Burnett, who you might not know.  She begins her career with CNN next Tuesday in OutFront, a globe-trotting Jason Bourne (think of a female Matt Damon via Robert Ludlum) video journalist who came from CNBC and is better looking than Christiane Amanpour, Geraldo Rivera and Cooper Anderson.  Okay, if you clicked on that, that's not why I think she will do well. I guess it has to do with the chemistry potential of a personality who brought understated sex into a business format.  There are 8 ways to impress her.

2.  Ryan Gosling is not a movie star, but shows promise for becoming a superstar.  How he can shift from total cool in Crazy, Stupid Love to unaffected in Drive is remarkable.  Let's see how he does with George Clooney in The Ides of March, to be released on October 7.  He's had the prerequite list of past flames in Sandra Bullock and Rachel McAdams.  Is probably a Mormon.  In the first grade he was suspended for throwing steak knives during recess, was prescribed Ritalin and was mostly home schooled, although he dropped out of high school. He for two years barely performed on the TV cast of The Mickey Mouse Club with Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera and Justin Timberlake.  He was nominated for an Oscar in Half Nelson and sings.

3.  Rick Perry leads the Republican presidential candidates today, but he has so many flaws that you got to wonder why.  President Obama was kind at the beginning, and will be smart to say nothing more, for he can count on:

  a.  Ann McFeatters (Scripps Howard)  Just before he decided that God wanted him to run for president, Perry held a huge daylong Christian revival in Houston’s Reliant Stadium where he said that this nation must rely on God to solve its problems. The event was bankrolled by the anti-gay American Family Association and supported by a host of controversial evangelical Christians.

  b.  Roya Wolverson (TIME):  Rick Perry's war against government suffers from funny math.

  c.  Nicholar Confessore and Michael Luo (New York Times):  Rick Perry is a sleazy business as usual politician.

  d.  Politifact.com:  Quote from Perry, social security is a Ponzi scheme.

These generally liberal publications would be expected to react thusly, but, Michelle Malkin, a conservative blogger and Fox News regular warns, "don't trust Perry's Tea Party Ties."

Mr. President, don't even think about commenting on Governor Perry's remarks on God, prayer and evolution.  However, as, perhaps, an overwhelming percentage of Americans believe in some afterlife, maybe this is a political ploy.  Clearly, I need to someday soon give greater exposure to some other Republican misfits, probably beginning with Congressman Ron Paul (looking younger in his relative youth with another Ron, the intellectual founder of the Tea Party and a medical doctor who is #3 behind #1 Perry and #2 Mitt Romney), Michelle Baumann and Sarah Palin.  These polls mean nothing today, but USA Today/Gallup reported today that Perry leads Romney, but Romney would beat Obama.

Shifting to TV entertainment, I followed my recommendations posted on Sunday about the Emmys and watched New Girl last night with the adorkable Zooey Deschanal and as I also was curious about why Jim Parsons won an Emmy for the Big Bang Theory because I never heard of that name before and never watched it before, I did.  A second character, Johnny Galecki, was also nominated for outstanding lead actor in a comedy series, and they were competing against Steve Carell, Alex Baldwin and Matt LeBlanc.  Loved both programs, and now know why Parsons prevailed.  I like to think that I think like his uber geek-genius character.  I'll be back for both next week.

Incidentally, I was disappointed with the Hawaii Five-0 Monday night second season premier for several serious technical flaws, which few probably even noticed.  A couple of added surprises and new actors, but note that the program got only one inconsequential nomination for the Emmys.

-
The Dow Jones Industrials had a 328 point swing today, doing well until the Federal Reserve did not say much about QE3, no, not a third ship, but quantitative easing.  Thus, the Treasury will not pump even more money into the economy, thus sinking the Dow down 284 to 11,125.  World markets were also mostly down.  Gold fell $18/toz to $1782 while WTI oil is at $86/barrel and Brent at $111/barrel.


Earlier last month S&P downgraded America's debt rating, the first time this has ever happened.  Today, Moody's cut the debt rating of Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Citigroup.  Is this just the beginning.

-
Typhoon Roke rolled over Japan, but, apparently only broke a camera at Fukushima.  In the Atlantic Tropical Storm Ophelia is following the same track as the previous few hurricanes, but computer models are uncertain about the future:

Tropical Storm Hillary will become a hurricane on Friday, but might not make landfall:

-

BLUE REVOLUTION FOR GERMANY

A couple of months ago, my Huffington Post article on

  The Blue Revolution Is the Optimal Solution for Japan

galvanized various discussions on how best to proceed, and was clarified at a seminar held on the University of Hawaii campus for the Tokyo University of Science.  This August event was followed by a major September workshop at the Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority, organized as a partnership between Okinawa and Hawaii, to work together on developing ocean thermal energy technology (OTEC), the renewable energy power source for the Blue Revolution.  That photo above is of Aquapolis, the showcase exhibit designed by Kiyonori Kikutake for the 1975 Okinawa Ocean Expo.  Nothing close to this ocean grazing prototype (save for those moored oil drilling platforms, and the BP disaster in the Gulf Mexico is a good example) has since been built for more than a third of a century.

I was thus inspired to also analyze the future of Germany, which is arguably, with China, one of the two most successful economies today. Yet, Germany might already be experiencing a decline, and is in particular long-term jeopardy because of energy. Chancellor Angela Merkel (yes, that's her to the left) announced earlier this summer that the country will terminate nuclear power production in a decade. Compared to the U.S. at 20 percent, nukes provide 30 percent of the electricity in that country. But, like Japan, they only have a meager renewable energy potential. Their winds are so-so, sunlight below average and biomass hardly worthy. What can they do?

Let's first look at our global energy consumption (refer to right column), where fossil fuels account for 82%, nuclear 5% and renewables 13%. However, only 0.7 percent come from solar, wind and geothermal. How fast do you think we will be able to increase that 0.7 percent? Many decades for sure. Does this worry you a bit more about global warming, now that conventional nuclear power plants are off the table?

Germany's energy use is very close to the above. Any utility, incidentally, dreads the thought of feeding any more than 15 percent of intermittent renewable electricity to their grid. From where will, then, come the 85% baseload? Well, 26 new coal powerplants (above right is one now operating--note the stack gasses) are in various stages of construction. Think Germany will meet its future carbon emission goals? Big deal, as neither the USA, nor China and India, appears to care. But electricity is the easy part, only representing about a third of energy usage.

The big difficulty will be in transportation fuels. Peak Oil is coming and, while Germany, more specifically, the regime of Hitler during the second world war, was creative about producing synthetic liquid fuels from coal, first there is not enough renewable biomass to satisfy this pathway for the country, and, worse, the production cost will remain very high, with a profit-selling range of $136/barrel to $168/barrel for a long time to come. Aviation fuel is yet another concern that has not yet been seriously considered.

So is Germany screwed? Nope. There is the open ocean free for the utilization: industrial grazing platforms harvesting the riches of the sea, and, even, someday, floating cities. The following is the European VISIONS effort for the maritime industry:

I have provided several lectures throughout Europe on "Colonization of the Open Ocean." When the world was carved up by sea explorers in the past, the sociological traumas became tragedies. The Blue Revolution promises a range of renewable energy products, green materials and exciting new habitats, developing the ocean in harmony with the marine environment. And, again, you don't need to pay for the space, it is free for the utilization. While the high seas will draw a new cast of preservationists, there are no pirates, and there will be no conquering nation syndrome. Interestingly enough, maritime leaders from Germany showed the most interest in the Blue Revolution when I gave my talks.

German shipyards have been in a funk since World War II, has recently floundered, but shows huge potential. The opportunity to build grazing plantships can provide a new future for that industry, leading the way to harvesting the riches of the seas, bringing back home biofuels, hydrogen, maricultured seafood and more, instead of spices, gold and tobacco returned by the Spanish, Portuguese and English.

Yes, there will be detractors, but there is every reason to believe that our oceans can become the next frontier for sustainable resources. Let us, though, be wiser this time and plan with the assistance of progressive environmental organizations and financing partners.

Japan has made an initial move with Shimizu's Green Float City in the Sky above (note that the tallest building in the world today is the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, but this ocean tower is projected to be 500 feet taller--as another aside, the USA has only one building in the top ten, #8, the former Sears Tower in Chicago), but Germany can also take on a leadership role for the European Community. I will go so far as to say that this marine pathway is Germany's best, and maybe, only, hope for a progressive future. The organizers of the Pacific International Ocean Station welcome the participation of Europe in our effort to develop a more promising economic opportunity than the soon to be abandoned International Space Station.

-

The Dow Jones Industrials looked good for most of the day, up 150, then precipitously declined over the final hour, still ending +8 to 11,409, with the higher volume occurring towards the end, not a good sign for tomorrow. World markets, though, mostly increased. Gold jumped $22/toz to $1805, with WTI oil at $87/barrel (Brent $110/barrel).

-

Typhoon Roke, at 150MPH, is now a Category 4 storm. In anticipation, a million people could be evacuated. However, Roke (no Japanese meaning, just the name of a Chamorro man from Guam) will weaken before making landfall between Shizuoka and Yokohama, then swiftly move over Tokyo and Fukushima. All projections show the eye directly over Fukushima on Wednesday night. By then the winds will drop way below hurricane force. There will be, however, a whole lot of rain.


-

CONVERSATIONS WITH BOCKRIS AND VEZIROGLU ON THE BIOMETHANOL ECONOMY

How this happened is still mystifying, but in 1974 I fortuitously participated in a gathering in Miami organized by Professor Nejat Veziroglu (left):

That trip in the previous paragraph was particularly monumental, for, while I don’t remember why, I first went to Miami to participate in the charter international hydrogen gathering chaired by Nejat Veziroglu. A couple of years ago I wrote a recommendation for him to the Swedish Nobel Prize Committee. Professor Veziroglu started and has been the continuing inspiration for the modern era of hydrogen. One of Nejat’s Romantics, John Bockris (above right), also was there, and is credited with coining The Hydrogen Economy. It is this group that has initiated a campaign to “save the world” from Peak Oil and Global Heating, as reported on in CHAPTER 3.

Mind you, this was more than 37 years ago, and the above quote came from my hydrogen chapter from SIMPLE SOLUTIONS for Planet Earth.  I have sporadically been in contact with both Professors Veziroglu and Bockris since then, but today sent John the following response to our interminable exchanges on the future of the BioMethanol Economy:

Dear John (cc: Nejat):

I generally agree with you on your current thoughts about carbon dioxide and methanol.  My overall thinking was provided three years ago in the Huffington Post.  A few points to consider for your future refinement:

1.  The optimal renewable ground transport fuel option is to gasify and catalyze biomass into methanol.  The problem is that the Department of Energy seems still influenced by the Farm Lobby to minimize research on the biomethanol economy.  This is America's best opportunity to capture world patents.  The Japanese control lithium battery technology, but that's okay because a fuel cell car can go five times further than one powered by a lithium battery, and that is the last battery.  The collateral problem is that hydrogen will be too expensive for a couple of generations, at least, so biomethanol will be this transition biofuel if only the DMFC can be commercialized for cars.   However, very little effort is being expended and a DMFC is at least a decade away from commercialization. 

2. There is no magic cost effective process to harvest carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.  The systems technology for a sustainable energy source that shows the best multi-mode opportunity in a timely manner, first because advocates indicate this pathway can be commercialized in a decade, but, too, the products are fuels and electricity, is something called heavy ion fusion.  Click on my latest Huffington Post article on STARPOWER.  The main product from this process is, surprisingly enough, synthetic fuel (where the carbon will come from the atmosphere), though, of course, electricity will also be an important revenue source.  The problem, and this sounds like a conspiracy (but is not--this is how human emotions work) is that governments and companies will do everything possible to promote their invested cause and subsequently try to prevent the development of this option, as might have happened in 1974 with the KMS fusion program.

3.  If only the USA had, in the 50's, selected thorium over uranium/plutonium, fission might today, actually, be okay.  Certainly, neither the Chernobyl nor Fukushima tragedies would not have happened, and there are only minimal terrorism and dirty bomb threats.  Of course, there was a good reason for this decision:  the Soviet Union and the Cold War dominated all our security priorities, and the military prevailed:

Why pick a bad design? In the early 1950s, the US Military wanted nuclear bombs. The fastest way they could do it was by building uranium reactors. That way, they would have an abundance of the raw material they wanted for bomb making – Plutonium-239; a nasty waste product of a normal uranium reactor. They also wanted a design that they could shoehorn into a nuclear powered submarine. The uranium reactor fit that bill. It really didn’t matter that uranium reactors were pretty inefficient, tended to overheat and relied on a rock that needed intensive mining and refining. They had a bigger agenda.

Now, the general public is so anti-nuclear, that thorium will not be given a chance.  The operative intelligence of public will is limited.

4.  Then more recently, beginning in the 80's, our U.S. Congress, smartly lobbied, took the incredibly stupid step of supporting the conversion of corn into ethanol over methanol from cellulose, and, worse, purposely preventing methanol as a competitive option.  This one track mentality extended to then use hydrolysis and fermentation of the whole plant into more ethanol, a faulty methodology, even with electricity as a by-product.   Methanol has one carbon, while ethanol has two.  That bit of logic should have convinced our braintrust to 40 years ago select methanol and the direct methanol fuel cell over ethanol, the key being that methanol is the only biofuel that can directly be fed into a fuel cell without going through reformation.  Ethanol can too, of course, but those two carbons make this very inefficient.  That a gallon of methanol has 140% more accessible hydrogen than LIQUID HYDROGEN is amazing enough, but the current infrastructure can also be easily retrofitted, an advantage to an entirely new and costly infrastructure required for hydrogen.

5.  This is getting even more comical, but just this year, the farm industry must determined ethanol was not worth the effort, for, as the oil companies were getting all the tax benefits anyway, the Farm Lobby backed off, and these credits will apparently be dis-continued at the end of the year because of that debt deficit matter.  Farmers have selected to focus on their surer and more traditional kind  of aid from Congress.  Surprisingly enough, very few realize that, subsequently, new and future ethanol investments will be placed in serious jeopardy.

6.  How we continue to head down the wrong path defies my common sense, but the private sector is still avoiding methanol (too low energy density to combust, plus a perceived and inaccurate concern about it being carcinogenic) by now plunging into the fermentation of biomass into an expensive  4-carbon fuel feedstocks, butanol and isobutanol (right), with the intent being to link them to synthesize 8-carbon gasoline and 12-carbon diesel substitutes.  I doubt if they will get under $3/gallon ($126/barrel), ever, for fermentation is just too slow and equipment bulky, meaning expensive.  Jetfuel is a mixture from 6 to 16 hydrocarbons, so there is a semblance of rationality here, as methanol will never be used for aviation, which is where, I think, hydrogen will someday bring advantages.

Aloha.

Pat

-

After being down by almost 250, the Dow Jones Industrials recovered to only drop 108, ending at 11,401.   World markets were also mostly down, especially Europe, for the Greek problem remained metastable.  Hopefully, after their stock exchanges closed, signs of substantive and productive discussions surfaced, rescuing the American bourse.  All common sense now should inspire the trader to go big tonight in anticipation of a major stock market recover tomorrow.  However, when it comes to the Greek debt matter, what is announced is not necessarily what is real nor realistic.

-
Oh, oh!  What looked like a weak tropical storm Roke has not suddenly become a Category 3 Typhoon, which is projected to strike Shikoku, Japan on Wednesday with near hurricane force strength, roll over Tokyo as a tropical storm:

with the eye almost directly over Fukushima by midnight on September 21.  People trying to recover in Tohuko must be wondering why them.


-

THE EMMYS

I remember I Love Lucy and the Ed Sullivan Show in those early days of television when people actually religiously watched these and other programs each week, in black and white.  I might now and then view America's Got Talent, some nostalgic revival on public TV and Hawaii Five-O, but I just can't find time to devote to any weekly series.  However, here comes the Emmy, almost as old as me, first happening in 1949.  There are now several types of Emmy programs, but the dominate one is for tonight's prime-time shows.  Click that to get the details.

At the beginning the term Immy was suggested, in honor of the early image orthicon camera, but, as the statuette selected (modeled by the wife of a television engineer) was female, they feminized the name to Emmy.  By the way, hardly anyone notices this, but Emmy, with wings, is holding what was 62 years ago thought to be a model of an atom.  She is almost seven pounds, is partially gold and manufactured by the same company of Oscar (8.5 pounds).

Okay, who remembers, or cares, that the host last year was Jimmy Falon, and that the HBO miniseries The Pacific (got 24 nominations and gained "only" eight) won the most awards, while ABC's Modern Family gained the most comedy Emmys?  Modern Family should (and did) repeat.  It will be hosted by Jane Lynch of Glee, now well established as the second Ellen DeGeneres, or female version of Neil Patrick Harris, who hosted two years ago.

If you're already bored, this is why I have never watched this program, ever.  Well, maybe tonight I might, even though the beginning (the programs goes on and on for four hours) will clash with Michael Vick and the Eagles against Matt Ryan and the Falcons.  To further draw potential viewers, the producer will be Mark Burnett, who will insert as much raunchiness into the programming as NBC lawyers will allow.  Who is Burnett?  A very infamous reality producer.

By the way, the new TV season starts this week, meaning:

  -  Hawaii Five-O on Monday

  -  New Girl (Zooey Deschanel to the right) which shows promise, following Glee, on Tuesday.

-  Wednesday and Thursday this week, the American version of X-Factor (yes, Simon Cowell is back, with Paula Abdul, Hawaii's Nicole Scherzinger--left, who really is part-Hawaiian and is the former lead singer of the Pussycat Dolls and last year winner of Dancing with the Stars--and someone named L. A. Reid)  premiering.  X-Factor, like American Idol, began in the U.K. as Britain's Got Talent.  You've to click on this one, with Simon Cowell, Piers Morgan and Susan Boyle, who was listed on her first audition as unemployed, even lower on the social ladder than Landau.

-