Happy New Year to all you blogo-citizens! I hope 2008 brings happiness all over, no natural disasters, a cleaner planet, little climate change, and world peace.
And, keep reading this blog for my-two-cents on everything around me.
Will be back soon!
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 30, 2007
I Think Birthdays are Just Overrated…
Today is my birthday (sigh); yet another year gone by!
Though my birthday falls between Christmas and the New Year, which is undoubtedly the most festive week of the year, for me it is certainly not the most exciting day. Well I’ve not been a huge fan of the birthday tradition for a long time now and I’m sure it is an age thing. I somehow do not like the pace at which time flies and I guess birthdays are a harsh reminder of that. Yes, I do momentarily feel happy when family and friends send their wishes or better yet, when someone I least expect wishes me. But somehow I do not like the focus being on me for the full day (without any particular reason!). I liked it when I was younger (mainly pre-teens; I guess it was more about birthday presents then) and in my teens when birthday was more about a movie (and an evening out) with friends, but now I am beginning to get convinced that birthdays are plain and simple overrated. It is just another day – right? (Well most around me unfortunately tend to disagree!!)
Today, like every year on the 30th, started with my family wishing me and a few friends calling up (some quite unexpected), followed by a family lunch (a lot of brouhaha about me adding another year to my age!), and a quiet evening. And, I intend to spend a few minutes introspecting (and listing down my resolutions; yes I still do that…) before retiring for the day (after I finish writing this blog entry).
Well if I try to list things that I accomplished during the last one year, I cannot think of many (what was I doing for 365 days I ask myself yet again) – had an average career run, did not improve my guitar playing skills too much, did not travel much (as much as my wife would have liked!), and did not acquire any major asset worth mentioning. I did take an important decision this year though. After several months of evaluating the pros and cons, I finally decided to take a one year sabbatical starting sometime in 2008. I also shed a few kilos, started maintaining a blog site, made a few more friends, and am working towards developing my first web site. Also I think I was generally happier and more contented (about everything) during the past one year than before (but I suspect it is again an age thing).
I am hoping next year I will have a longer list of accomplishments. Maybe (even) more happiness, maybe newer experiences, maybe more vacations, maybe a steeper career trajectory, maybe new and finer guitar skills, maybe more friends, may be…..
Anyways for another few minutes (till the day ends) it is Happy Birthday to me (and Tiger Woods; yes, it is his birthday too!)
Though my birthday falls between Christmas and the New Year, which is undoubtedly the most festive week of the year, for me it is certainly not the most exciting day. Well I’ve not been a huge fan of the birthday tradition for a long time now and I’m sure it is an age thing. I somehow do not like the pace at which time flies and I guess birthdays are a harsh reminder of that. Yes, I do momentarily feel happy when family and friends send their wishes or better yet, when someone I least expect wishes me. But somehow I do not like the focus being on me for the full day (without any particular reason!). I liked it when I was younger (mainly pre-teens; I guess it was more about birthday presents then) and in my teens when birthday was more about a movie (and an evening out) with friends, but now I am beginning to get convinced that birthdays are plain and simple overrated. It is just another day – right? (Well most around me unfortunately tend to disagree!!)
Today, like every year on the 30th, started with my family wishing me and a few friends calling up (some quite unexpected), followed by a family lunch (a lot of brouhaha about me adding another year to my age!), and a quiet evening. And, I intend to spend a few minutes introspecting (and listing down my resolutions; yes I still do that…) before retiring for the day (after I finish writing this blog entry).
Well if I try to list things that I accomplished during the last one year, I cannot think of many (what was I doing for 365 days I ask myself yet again) – had an average career run, did not improve my guitar playing skills too much, did not travel much (as much as my wife would have liked!), and did not acquire any major asset worth mentioning. I did take an important decision this year though. After several months of evaluating the pros and cons, I finally decided to take a one year sabbatical starting sometime in 2008. I also shed a few kilos, started maintaining a blog site, made a few more friends, and am working towards developing my first web site. Also I think I was generally happier and more contented (about everything) during the past one year than before (but I suspect it is again an age thing).
I am hoping next year I will have a longer list of accomplishments. Maybe (even) more happiness, maybe newer experiences, maybe more vacations, maybe a steeper career trajectory, maybe new and finer guitar skills, maybe more friends, may be…..
Anyways for another few minutes (till the day ends) it is Happy Birthday to me (and Tiger Woods; yes, it is his birthday too!)
Monday, December 17, 2007
My Quest for the Most Modern Music Machine!
Most of my late evening surfing hours for the past few weeks have been spent comparing iPod models and looking for the cheapest deal in the city, and trust me, each time I get closer to making the payment, I am nervous about the product category I am going to buy. I am not the most indulging and impulsive of buyers, so the selection is all the more difficult.When I started my “quest” for the most modern music machine a few weeks back, I thought what is the deal with so many versions of the iPod being launched? They all serve the same purpose don’t they? People use the iPod to listen to music (or watch videos) right? So what is all this brouhaha about iPod Classic versus iPod Nano? While my practical self (and alas! all the work experience in the technology terrain) tells me that I should go in for the 80 GB/160 GB classic model as it gives me more storage per rupee spent, my gut feel says that I should go in for a 4 GB Nano model as it is much more compact.
Here are my-two-cents on the two models:
Video-ability -- While iPod Classic has a 2.5-inch display screen which makes watching videos so much fun, the Nano version has a smaller screen. Even though the Nano version offers a video option, it certainly does not have enough memory for more than a few videos. I am not however sure if it makes all that sense to watch videos on a 2.5 inch screen!
Storage and battery life -- The storage space and the battery life of the iPod Classic model is its true selling point. With storage options of 80GB and 160GB the iPod Classic makes storing music, videos, photos, movies and games so much more convenient. The battery life is another plus in the Classic model; Apple’s Web site claims it can play 40 hours of non-stop audio playback and 7 hours of video playback with the 160GB iPod classic and 30 hours of audio and 5 hours of video on the 80GB iPod Classic.
Size -- The Nano version is low on storage and battery life no doubt, but is much lighter than the Classic version. The Nano is smaller (as the name suggests!), very convenient on the move, and can hold up to 2000 songs for 8GB and 1000 for the 4GB (which I guess may be enough for me).
Price – While the Classic 80 GB model is available for Rs 14,500, the Nano 4 GB Video is available for Rs 8,800.
Net net, here is my decision matrix: If you are someone with a huge i-Tunes library and value watching videos on the move (for some reason!), buy iPod Classic; while if you value usage convenience (lighter weight) and are primarily buying for music (and not videos) then go in for the Nano version.
For me, Nano it will be... for it is easier on the pocket and in the pocket (pun intended)!
Thursday, December 13, 2007
My Yet Another Baby Step in Blogosphere
I just launched another blog site called Renewable Energy India, a blog dedicated to renewable energy and environment, something close to my heart. I envision the new blog site to play the role of a “consigliere,” and present news, views, and my analysis on the development of renewable energy in India…
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Carbon Trading – A Great Opportunity….But What about Ethics?
Being from a renewable energy world, I (and am sure many like me) have been following the recent developments in the “climate-politics” arena closely. And like many other clean energy lovers, I have a lot of hopes from the ongoing discussions in Bali (which conclude this Friday) that are aimed at setting an agenda and deadline for negotiations leading to a global warming pact to succeed the Kyoto Protocol at the end of 2012.
For readers who are new to the climate change terrain, the global community led by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (now headed by RK Pachauri) agreed upon the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 (ratified in 2005) where 38 industrialized/developed countries (US and Japan were two key countries that stayed out of this; incidentally US is the biggest greenhouse gas emitter!) agreed to reduce their emissions by 2008-2012 to an average of about 5% below their 1990 levels. The developing countries were exempt from targets at Kyoto. According to the Protocol, to bring down their emissions, the developed countries can trade carbons in an international exchange, jointly implement projects within the developed country community, or buy credits by funding projects (through clean development mechanism, or CDM) that reduce emissions in the developing countries. The current talks in Bali are expected to draw up the post 2012 plan.
The conventional wisdom in India on CDM-based funding is that it is the best thing to happen to the Indian renewable energy arena, as the projects (mainly solar, wind, small-hydel, waste-heat conversion, aforestation, energy efficiency, cogeneration, etc.) now have another source of funding through CDM. The NGOs are gung-ho on the concept, the ministry is bending backwards to ensure we have a smooth process to bring “carbon money” to India, the financial institutions are more-than-ready to structure such projects.
I however feel the CDM mechanism is not ethical. Why should developed countries (such as US, EU and Japan) continue to contribute more than their share of global carbon emissions by buying ‘cheap’ carbon credits in developing countries? At best they should trade emissions among themselves!
For readers who are new to the climate change terrain, the global community led by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (now headed by RK Pachauri) agreed upon the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 (ratified in 2005) where 38 industrialized/developed countries (US and Japan were two key countries that stayed out of this; incidentally US is the biggest greenhouse gas emitter!) agreed to reduce their emissions by 2008-2012 to an average of about 5% below their 1990 levels. The developing countries were exempt from targets at Kyoto. According to the Protocol, to bring down their emissions, the developed countries can trade carbons in an international exchange, jointly implement projects within the developed country community, or buy credits by funding projects (through clean development mechanism, or CDM) that reduce emissions in the developing countries. The current talks in Bali are expected to draw up the post 2012 plan.
The conventional wisdom in India on CDM-based funding is that it is the best thing to happen to the Indian renewable energy arena, as the projects (mainly solar, wind, small-hydel, waste-heat conversion, aforestation, energy efficiency, cogeneration, etc.) now have another source of funding through CDM. The NGOs are gung-ho on the concept, the ministry is bending backwards to ensure we have a smooth process to bring “carbon money” to India, the financial institutions are more-than-ready to structure such projects.
I however feel the CDM mechanism is not ethical. Why should developed countries (such as US, EU and Japan) continue to contribute more than their share of global carbon emissions by buying ‘cheap’ carbon credits in developing countries? At best they should trade emissions among themselves!
According to a recent study, the annual per capita energy consumption in India is 0.53 tonnes of oil equivalent per person, and the average per capita electricity consumption in India is about 450 kWh per year — less than 1/5th of the world average and 1/30th of the US average! The volumes of certified emission reductions of carbon dioxide (CERs) recorded annually by the UNFCCC (UN agency regulating the emission reduction) are 174 million tones; and the price for CERs is “engineered” at less than $20 per CER. Researchers indicate that if the developed countries had to meet their Kyoto targets, the economic cost incurred by the US would be $32 billion, by the EU would be $14 billion and for Japan it would be about $6 billion. This would indicate costs of reduction ranging from $41 to $55 per tonne of CO2. This is more than double the existing price of the CERs!
India (along with China) is actively participating in CDM activity with approx 300 projects with 28 million CERs registered per year. Most of these projects allow the industrialized countries to pick up the low hanging fruits at the cheapest price.
So in effect we are allowing the developed countries to keep polluting the climate by selling our carbon credits. And, we are not even making enough money in the process! So, is promoting CDM a smart opportunistic move or poor judgment? I leave the decision to the reader…
Friday, December 7, 2007
The 90-10 Magic Formula…
I guess I am again in my gyan mode today.
I work for an organization where the average age is to the south of 30 years (I skew the average in the wrong direction though). Every day I witness young 20-something folks (and often much older and much more experienced colleagues!!) cursing and complaining about their manager being rude to them, inadequate compensation hike, getting a "ding" at the recent promotion interview, general work environment, delayed cabs, traffic on the road, etc. I can see people generally getting stressed about everything around them. Though I don’t consider myself a “monk” who is at total peace with himself (I am sometimes grumpy, and have bouts of anger once in a while; ask my close friends and wife about it), I think I am generally happy about life and work if I compare myself with the majority of people around me (I am confident my colleagues at work can vouch for that). One mantra that has helped me bring more sanity to my life is the 90/10 principle. Though I read about it only recently, I have believed in the concept for several years now.
The principle is simple – 10% of life is made up of what happens to you, 90% of life is decided by how you react.
Let me double-click on it. People have no control over the 10% of what happens to them. We can not stop the manager from having a bad day at work (and therefore becoming his punching bag), the cab guy starting out late, it being really hot outside (therefore the air-conditioning not being effective). We have no control over this 10%.
The other 90% is different. We determine that by our reaction. Do we get upset about the cab guy not showing up at work and then due to frustration pick a meaningless argument with a cab-mate on the way. And therefore come to work with the grumpy face, and generally feeling bad about everything. Do we get upset about sloppy air conditioning, and say something silly (that we may repent later) to the administration person in the office, that gets reported to the office head. We can not control red light, traffic on the road, rising mercury, but we can certainly control our reaction.
Though I know the principle seems fairly crazy, and straight out of some third-rate self help book, it has really helped me. One ground rule that I often keep at the back of my head is “responding and not reacting to situations, and evaluating if the situation falls in the 10% category or the 90% category.”
I have seen this principle being adopted (in some form or fashion) by various spiritual groups (such as the Art of Living; which prescribes that people should smile in every situation, and react with a calm mind), management leaders (several self-help books prescribe a quick root-cause analysis of situation to evaluate if that merits your energy), and gurus (who advise that people count up to ten, think about the problem, and then react accordingly).
For the current generation however I think the mathematical version works the best – we should be on a lookout for those “10% situations” before stressing out and letting someone or something ruin our day.
I work for an organization where the average age is to the south of 30 years (I skew the average in the wrong direction though). Every day I witness young 20-something folks (and often much older and much more experienced colleagues!!) cursing and complaining about their manager being rude to them, inadequate compensation hike, getting a "ding" at the recent promotion interview, general work environment, delayed cabs, traffic on the road, etc. I can see people generally getting stressed about everything around them. Though I don’t consider myself a “monk” who is at total peace with himself (I am sometimes grumpy, and have bouts of anger once in a while; ask my close friends and wife about it), I think I am generally happy about life and work if I compare myself with the majority of people around me (I am confident my colleagues at work can vouch for that). One mantra that has helped me bring more sanity to my life is the 90/10 principle. Though I read about it only recently, I have believed in the concept for several years now.
The principle is simple – 10% of life is made up of what happens to you, 90% of life is decided by how you react.
Let me double-click on it. People have no control over the 10% of what happens to them. We can not stop the manager from having a bad day at work (and therefore becoming his punching bag), the cab guy starting out late, it being really hot outside (therefore the air-conditioning not being effective). We have no control over this 10%.
The other 90% is different. We determine that by our reaction. Do we get upset about the cab guy not showing up at work and then due to frustration pick a meaningless argument with a cab-mate on the way. And therefore come to work with the grumpy face, and generally feeling bad about everything. Do we get upset about sloppy air conditioning, and say something silly (that we may repent later) to the administration person in the office, that gets reported to the office head. We can not control red light, traffic on the road, rising mercury, but we can certainly control our reaction.
Though I know the principle seems fairly crazy, and straight out of some third-rate self help book, it has really helped me. One ground rule that I often keep at the back of my head is “responding and not reacting to situations, and evaluating if the situation falls in the 10% category or the 90% category.”
I have seen this principle being adopted (in some form or fashion) by various spiritual groups (such as the Art of Living; which prescribes that people should smile in every situation, and react with a calm mind), management leaders (several self-help books prescribe a quick root-cause analysis of situation to evaluate if that merits your energy), and gurus (who advise that people count up to ten, think about the problem, and then react accordingly).
For the current generation however I think the mathematical version works the best – we should be on a lookout for those “10% situations” before stressing out and letting someone or something ruin our day.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Small News, Big Message
A news item that caught my attention this morning was the announcement that Harish Hande has been selected as the Social Entrepreneur of the year. Unfortunately though, the news was hidden on the 21st page in the newspaper (Hindustan Times)! The 2007 Social Entrepreneurship Award has been conferred on Harish for his firm’s (SELCO) social contribution through dissemination of solar energy in the villages in Karnataka and Kerala, while operating in the profit-oriented mould.
Having been a renewable energy person in my earlier life and having worked in a non-profit organization (NPO) for several years, I have tremendous respect for Harsih Hande and his single-minded focus to provide solar lighting in rural India. Harish has a top quality tech mind (PhD from MIT in solar energy), astute business sense (he has figured out a way to make money in the renewable energy arena; the "holy-grail" of renewable energy), and a wonderful and humble persona (met him a couple of times during my tenure in the NPO).
In 1993, Harish co-founded SELCO, the first rural solar service company in India. With its headquarters in Bangalore, SELCO has 25 branches in Karnataka and Gujarat. Harish has pioneered access to rural solar electrification for below-poverty-line families through a combination of customized home lighting systems, innovative doorstep financing, and an understanding of market needs of different user groups (for example, solar lights on miner caps for mid wives and rose sellers). Newspaper reports highlight that thus far the company has reached out to 80,000 families (mostly in the remotest of villages) across Karnataka, Kerala and Gujarat. In these villages, solar electrification has led to everything from better education outcomes for children who can now study at night to increased livelihoods from night time vegetable vendors.
This is not the first award for Harish/SELCO (and hopefully not the last), but the message that this award sends is extremely important – that enterprises can make money while serving the society. Hopefully this will encourage more young business-people to take up projects that help the down-trodden, projects that really make a difference in rural India.
Hats-off to you Harish!!
Having been a renewable energy person in my earlier life and having worked in a non-profit organization (NPO) for several years, I have tremendous respect for Harsih Hande and his single-minded focus to provide solar lighting in rural India. Harish has a top quality tech mind (PhD from MIT in solar energy), astute business sense (he has figured out a way to make money in the renewable energy arena; the "holy-grail" of renewable energy), and a wonderful and humble persona (met him a couple of times during my tenure in the NPO).
In 1993, Harish co-founded SELCO, the first rural solar service company in India. With its headquarters in Bangalore, SELCO has 25 branches in Karnataka and Gujarat. Harish has pioneered access to rural solar electrification for below-poverty-line families through a combination of customized home lighting systems, innovative doorstep financing, and an understanding of market needs of different user groups (for example, solar lights on miner caps for mid wives and rose sellers). Newspaper reports highlight that thus far the company has reached out to 80,000 families (mostly in the remotest of villages) across Karnataka, Kerala and Gujarat. In these villages, solar electrification has led to everything from better education outcomes for children who can now study at night to increased livelihoods from night time vegetable vendors.
This is not the first award for Harish/SELCO (and hopefully not the last), but the message that this award sends is extremely important – that enterprises can make money while serving the society. Hopefully this will encourage more young business-people to take up projects that help the down-trodden, projects that really make a difference in rural India.
Hats-off to you Harish!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
