The Bloom is off the rose

My nemesis has struck again. Alfalfa and his well connected team of VCs got CBS to air the Bloom Box on 60 Minutes last Sunday. I have been inundated with hundreds of emails to comment on the veracity of the so called Bloom Box. The Green Machine certainly has an opinion on this. The Bloom is already off the rose. In fact this Betamax would not have budded if not for all the cash Alfalfa’s team have put into it. The box is more like a thorn than a bloom. A rather prickly subject for the Green Machine – it is the subject of fool cells. Yes the Bloom Box is a fool cell and although they have couched it in mystery it is most probably a solid oxide fool cell. 60 Minutes used to expose hype now they assist hypers. This is the perfect storm, Alfalfa has convinced Colin Powell to sit on the board of Bloom. Reminds of the prelude to the US invasion of Iraq except now we are being told the enemy has “weapons of mass combustion”.

Solid Oxide fool cells are an improvement over PEM fool cells as they operate at higher temperatures and are therefore not dependent on platinum for catalysis of the fuel. As they operate at higher temperatures they can be feed hydrocarbon fuels and do not need pure hydrogen. They still emit carbon dioxide and the nonsense on 60 Minutes of the box being emission free and being able to run on solar energy is simply untrue. A company traded on the NASDAQ as FCEL called FuelCell Energy Inc. has been trying for ten years to commercialize solid oxide fuel cells and has lost six hundred million dollars in the process. United Technologies has been trying to commercialize this technology for fifty years.

I have cost data from a proposal that Bloom has made to a local institution. These data show that the Box is one expensive piece of equipment with only a slight efficiency advantage over a natural gas fired engine coupled to a generator set that one can buy from Caterpillar or several other well established electric gen set manufacturers. The Bloom Box has a thermal efficiency of 50% and the Caterpillar engine 41% when both a fired on natural gas. The Caterpillar gen set can be installed for $1,000 per kilowatt of capacity, the Bloom box for over $10,000 per kilowatt of capacity. Natural gas will need to increase 15 fold to $120 per mmbtu for the Bloom Box to use its energy savings to pay for the additional first cost. But your government is coming to the rescue to stop the Bloom from rapid natural death. Our mighty but bankrupt State and Federal governments will pay half of the upfront cost of this money waster and will allow companies to rapidly depreciate the fool cell. Perhaps that is where Arnie the Gangrene Governator and Alfalfa got together to help Bloom and screw you out of your tax dollars.

Let’s compare the carbon emission from the fool cell and the Cat engine. The carbon dioxide emissions per kilowatt hour of electricity generated are 0.84 pounds for the fool cell and 1.02 pounds for the Cat engine. The planet will save 0.18 pounds per kilowatt hour of power generated if generated on the fool cell. At a cost difference of $9,000 per kilowatt of installed capacity that is amortized over five years and is operated for 8,500 hours a year the saved emissions cost the consumer $1.17 per pound. This translates to $2,340 per ton of carbon dioxide. Old Alfalfa who flies around in his private jet and buys carbon credits for his Sasquatch sized footprint only pays some $15 a ton for these credits. Perhaps the way to kill Bloom and get Alfalfa to fly in coach on a scheduled commercial flight is to charge him and his VC and political buddies $2,340 per ton of carbon dioxide emissions for their cap and trade. The carpet bagging eco opportunist emits about 400 pounds a year of carbon dioxide by the simple act of breathing so let’s charge him $600 dollars a year as a living tax. I have often said he makes me puke and my barf has more chance of becoming a bio fuel and greening the planet than the junk science he promotes as a convenient untruth. I hope this blog put this thorny matter to rest.

Goodbye Hummer

Perhaps the happiest day in my life. Hummer is history. I certainly predicted this in 2003. Now what will Arnie do? Perhaps he too will disappear soon.

Hummer faces shutdown after Chinese sale collapses
Hummer sale collapses; GM brand, scorned by greens but loved by loyal fans, facing shutdown


By Dan Strumpf, AP Auto Writer , On Wednesday February 24, 2010, 8:19 pm
NEW YORK (AP) -- Hummer, the off-road vehicle that once symbolized America's love for hulking SUVs, faces a shutdown after its sale to a Chinese heavy equipment maker collapsed.

Sichuan Tengzhong Heavy Industrial Machines Co. said Wednesday it pulled out of the deal to buy the company from General Motors Co. Tengzhong failed to get clearance from Chinese regulators within the proposed timeframe for the sale, the Chinese manufacturer said.

GM said it will continue to honor existing Hummer warranties.

"We are disappointed that the deal with Tengzhong could not be completed," said John Smith, GM vice president of corporate planning and alliances. "GM will now work closely with Hummer employees, dealers and suppliers to wind down the business in an orderly and responsible manner."

GM has been trying to sell the loss-making brand for the last year and signed a deal with Tengzhong in October. However, resistance from Chinese regulators, who have been putting the brakes on investment in the fast-growing Chinese auto industry, created difficulties from the start.

As recently as Tuesday, private investors were trying to set up an offshore entity in a last-minute effort to complete the acquisition ahead of a Feb. 28 deadline. That plan, along with other options, was unsuccessful, according to a person close to the situation. The person declined to be identified in order to speak more freely.

"There's no way forward with that," this person said. "We're out of time."

GM spokesman Nick Richards said the automaker would still hear last-minute bids for the brand, which employs about 3,000 people who make and sell Hummers in the U.S.

"In the early phases of the wind-down, we'll entertain offers and determine their viability, but that will have to happen in pretty short order," he said.

Hummer, which traces its origins to the Humvee military vehicle built by AM General LLC in South Bend, Ind., acquired a devoted following among SUV lovers who were drawn to the off-road ready vehicles. But they drew scorn from environmentalists and sales never recovered after gasoline prices spiked above $4 a gallon in the summer of 2008.

Sales peaked at 71,524 in 2006. But in December 2009, only 325 Hummers were sold, down 85 percent from the previous year, according to Autodata Corp.

Sticker prices start at more than $42,500 and run to about $63,000, according to data posted at the Hummer.com Web site. The H3, the most fuel-efficient vehicle in Hummer's lineup, averages about 16 mpg. The vehicles are built at GM's factory in Shreveport, La.

Under the initial agreement to sell Hummer, Tengzhong would have received an 80 percent stake, while Hong Kong investor Suolang Duoji, who indirectly owns a big stake in Tengzhong, would have gotten 20 percent. The investors would also have owned Hummer's nationwide dealer network.

Financial terms of the sale were not disclosed, although a person briefed on the deal at the time said the sale price was around $150 million. GM's bankruptcy filing last summer said that the brand could bring in $500 million or more.

Beijing had been cool to the acquisition. Tengzhong lacks a government permit to manufacture cars, and the Chinese government has been seeking to streamline and slow investment in the fast-growing auto industry rather than to attract newcomers.

Richards said the collapse of the sale does not change earlier plans to close the Shreveport facility by 2012. The plant also builds the Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon and is currently operating on a single 10-hour shift, he said. Hummer production was idled in January.

The plant once employed about 3,000 people, but that payroll has been reduced to about 950.

Plant worker Alex Santana, a 17-year veteran of the Shreveport operation, said the end of Hummer "is going to hurt a lot of people."

"There's a lot of jobs going down the drain," he said.

Doug Ebey, president of the United Auto Workers Local 2166 and a 28-year worker at the plant, said the proposed Hummer deal "was a little glimmer of hope we had."

"It's going to be tough for the city of Shreveport," Ebey said. "I wish there was more of a public outcry. This place will be missed once it eventually closes. It provides good-paying, union jobs."

Hummer is the second brand after Saturn that GM has failed to sell as part of its restructuring. GM sold Swedish brand Saab to Dutch carmaker Spyker Cars NV earlier this year. Pontiac is being discontinued.

GM is focusing its efforts on its four remaining brands: Chevrolet, GMC, Cadillac and Buick.

AP Business Writer Alan Sayre contributed to this report from New Orleans.

A worthwhile meeting

Yesterday, I met with Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey and two of her senior staff members. The meeting far exceeded my best expectations. While I have previously blogged in negative fashion about my lack of representation vis a vis energy policy, I am pleased to report both the Congresswoman and I have turned a new page. A week ago I communicated to the Congresswoman’s staff my expectation of the meeting and had sent a PowerPoint deck that illustrated the limitations of bio-fuels, and the painfully slow learning rate photo-voltaic cells, lithium batteries, and fuel cells will enjoy in the future. I suggested that we institute the position of Engineering General of the United States. I also suggested that we rely much more heavily of diesel cars and dual fuel cars but not plug ins with a range greater than 10 miles. I suggested we institute a carbon value added tax at a sufficiently large rate (perhaps as high as $100 per ton of carbon dioxide) on all items manufactured in the USA. Food would be the only item excluded from the carbon value added tax. Imported items would also have a duty imposed on them that is proportional to the carbon emissions in their manufacture abroad and the carbon emissions in their transportation to the United States. No subsidy for the items manufactured in China with their heavy reliance on coal, in fact the duties on Chinese made items would be the highest because of the heavy usage of coal in that country. French manufactured items that used nuclear power would enjoy the lowest duty.

As an example let’s discuss the manufacture of bio ethanol (a pet peeve of mine). The conversion of corn to ethanol requires some 50,000 BTUs of external energy per gallon. If these BTUs are derived from natural gas this equates to approximately 55 cubic feet of natural gas and the carbon dioxide emissions in the process of manufacturing ethanol approximately equals 6.3 pounds per gallon. At $100 per ton or 5 cents per pound the carbon value added tax on ethanol would be 31.5 cents per gallon. I would scrap the 50 cent per gallon subsidy that ethanol now enjoys and this would mean an 81.5 cent per gallon increase in the wholesale cost of ethanol. All transportation fuels would also have a carbon value added tax levied on them. This would be in the form of a fuel tax at the pump. Gasoline and ethanol should be taxed at about one dollar per gallon. Diesel, propane, and compressed natural gas would be taxed at a lower rate of say thirty cents a gallon. A friend of mine in New Zealand has told me that diesel sells for 50 Kiwi cents a liter less than gasoline. The New Zealand government levies far higher taxes on gasoline than on diesel. A significant fraction of the personal cars in New Zealand are diesel. While the Kiwis are really wrong on nuclear power they are certainly right on diesel.

I closed the meeting with the Congresswoman that I would write a policy essay that details my ideas and also details why advanced batteries and cellulosic bio ethanol is destined to be a waste of tax payer money. The Congresswoman will then take my policy essay to the Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Energy that she sits on. My ultimate expectation is to be invited to testify before the committee and go on record with the laws of thermodynamics. The members of the committee may in fact be refreshed to hear this rather than the junk big oil, big ethanol, and the once big three have lobbied for as energy policy that only serves their special interest and simply prevents real policy to be adopted. I must say I felt proud to be a citizen of the United Sates after the meeting and do thank the Congresswoman and her staff for listening to me. While I have been harsh on Lynn Woolsey, I do believe she is a person with principle and passion and is no doubt very honest. Kind of like the Green Machine except like my Kiwi friends she keeps to the left when she drives. The Green Machine drives on the median and is therefore always crashing.

A meeting is set with Congresswoman Woolsey

The Green Machine received some mighty good news this week. I have been granted a meeting with my Congresswoman. The meeting will occur on Friday February 19th. Of course I will blog about the meeting after it happens. I have been thinking of the things I want to discuss with my Congresswoman. Of course I will discuss the wasted funds that are being given to myriad Betamax technologies and their sponsoring companies. Fisker, A One, and Tesla will top this list. Of course I will tell her that photovoltaic cells will remain for all intents and purposes too expensive to really make a dent in our electricity supply. I will tell her that it is plan dumb and stupid that the bridges over the San Francisco Bay are going to charge tolls to carpools during peak rush hours this coming June. I will tell her the Feds should help out the bridge districts with this rather than giving funds to gangrene and fake prophets of sustainability (e.g. fuel cells, cellulosic ethanol, algae biodiesel).

I will tell her why PV cells and Lithium Batteries simply cannot have substantially lower costs based on economies of scale when these technologies have underlying physics that prohibit rapid learning rates. I will tell her that Mother Nature did not intend photosynthesis to propel 245 million vehicles in the USA. Actually 2009 was a good year for Mother Nature even though it sucked for all of us economically. In 2009 5 million more private vehicles were scrapped than were sold. In the USA. For the first time the number of private vehicles out there in the good old USA dropped. Yes the figure dropped from 250 million in 208 to 245 million. My prognostication is that this decline will continue and that by 2015 we might have 230 million vehicles. OK so we have 5 million fewer vehicles parked in garages, driveways, yards, and on the streets. So how come parking spaces in San Francisco are still so difficult to find?

I will tell her how Germany went ape on PV cells with subsidies. PV provides 1% of Germany’s electric needs yet 7% of Germany’s electric costs are associated with these PV electrons. This shows you how government subsidies can cause scarce funds to go into the wrong investments. I will use the last part of the meeting to tell her what alternates do work. Subsidizing buses, carpool, and vanpools. She should steer public policy in the US so that consumers buy more diesel cars and smaller cars. Hybrids with small batteries and smaller engines are a solution. Other dual fuel systems that make small engines perform as well as large engines are also possible. A national recycling law on all plastic, glass and aluminum containers is needed. Abandoning the mandate to reach 20 billion gallons a year of biofuels should also be an adopted policy. She should support wind and geothermal energy projects that are well engineered and appropriately located.

She should help establish an Engineering General for the USA. This position like the Surgeon General (medicine), Attorney General (Law) should have high prestige in matters that relate to energy and science. This officer of the US government must prevent waste on gangrenous project that get promoted by all sorts of greedy green wannebees. I will tell her we are fortunate that nuclear energy can be a source of cleaner energy and that natural gas is preferred option over coal and oil. I will tell her carbon sequestration will always remain expensive and illusive and that conservation is the best way to sequester carbon in fossil fuels we do not use. This should be a great meeting and I am going into it with the expectation that this is the beginning of her metamorphosis to becoming a true green thermodynamically informed butterfly. It is up to her to change from a caterpillar and maybe the Green Machine can perform some magic. If the meeting is a bust I could make her disappear from Congress in November.

How to feed and save the world at the same time

This week I applaud the work of a high school chum named Ronni. She lives in Sydney Australia and she started an organization called OZ Harvest. Ten days ago the prime minister of Australia hailed Ronni as a Hero. I have not seen Ronni in forty years as we graduated in 1969.

OZ Harvest is doing an amazing job of providing meals to the less fortunate in Sydney and Canberra. The food that was previously wasted and dumped in landfills is now collected and distributed to the needy through multiple charities. OZ harvest provides the logistics for the collection and distribution of the wholesome and fresh meals that are unsold or unused by restaurants, stores or institutions. Without OZ Harvest these perfectly nutritious meals would have simply wound up in the garbage and would have been left to rot in a land fill. OZ Harvest has been recognized by the Prime Minister of Australia for the wonderful accomplishment of providing over four and three quarter million meals since the organization began their operation back in 2004.

The operation started with a single delivery van and has now grown to six delivery vans making daily trips to and from restaurants and stores to the charities OZ Harvest serves. The current operation is set to deliver approximately one and a half million meals in 2010. When I first heard about the wonderful work being done by OZ Harvest, my heart was of course warmed by the provision of food to the needy. But immediately after this thought, it dawned upon me that the world was also being saved from tons of carbon emissions by food being used for its rightful purpose and not simply rotting in a land fill. I contacted OZ Harvest last week and told them if they provided me with their information on the number of meals, the calorie content and make up of the meals, and the quantity of diesel and electricity they use, I would model their negative carbon footprint. Yes OZ Harvest has a negative carbon footprint that I will explain further.

First one has to understand the composition of food and how food is carbon rich. We measure nutritional value in Calories. A Calorie of food value is actually a kilocalorie of energy. This is the amount of energy to heat a liter of water one degree centigrade. Just as natural gas burns on your stovetop to provide heat to boil water in your kettle, food burns within our body to provide heat and nutrition to our muscles, organs, brains and blood. The meals OZ Harvest provides weigh 300 grams and have a typical nutrition value of 800 Calories. These Calories of food nutrition come from the breaking down of the chemical in the food. These chemicals are fats, proteins, and carbohydrates. Food also has moisture and fiber that do not provide chemical energy. Fats are typically composed of 80% carbon, proteins around 50%carbon and carbohydrates and fiber are approximately 40% carbon. In our bodies we use oxygen to react with our food and besides the energy we gain from the food we exhale carbon dioxide and moisture. In a land fill the food is broken down by either one of two methods. Aerobic breakdown that is similar to our bodies where oxygen and the food combine to yield carbon dioxide and moisture. But much of the food in the land fill does not contact oxygen and the food then rots without air or is anaerobically digested. In this case the gas emitted from the land fill is methane. Methane is a wonderful cooking fuel but when emitted from a land fill it is a terrible greenhouse gas with twenty one times the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide.

I developed a spreadsheet that analyzed and calculated the mass of carbon in the food that would have been wasted, the mass of carbon that remains as a solid in the land fill and the respective mass of methane and carbon dioxide that would have been emitted from the food decomposing in the land fill. I then calculated the carbon emission of OZ Harvest’s fleet or trucks and the corresponding carbon emissions for the electricity generation for the electricity that OZ Harvest purchases and after a series of tedious mathematical manipulations I can independently vouch that at a minimum OZ harvest has had a negative carbon footprint of 3,400 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. This is equal to taking off some 1,044 cars that drive 20,000 kilometers with a fuel consumption of 7 liters of petrol per 100 kilometers. In 2010 with the expected number of meals provided to reach 1.5 million, OZ Harvest will have a negative carbon footprint of some 1,074 metric tons of carbon dioxide. This corresponds to removing 330 mid sized cars off the road for the year.

I applaud the work of the team at OZ Harvest for keeping two birds alive with one stone. These birds are humanity and the planet that humanity occupies.

MPG Miles Ponzi Gullibility

The Green Machine is livid. I have heard of Z cars. For my readers in the UK, South Africa, Canada, Australia and New Zealand us Yanks pronounce the letter Z as Zee not Zed. Datsun Nissan has high performing Z car that first came out as the mighty 240 Z. The 1969 Camaro Z 28 was perhaps GMs finest muscle car even though it was Gangrene and not Green. I loved the shape, style, and performance of that year’s Camaro as I was just finishing high school and we went to the moon that year. Enough nostalgia I want to report about a new group of Z cars. These are The Pon Z cars. After Burn in Hell Madeoff hit the news the world was again alerted to financial Ponzi Schemes. My task as the Green Machine is to alert the average Joe or Jane of Thermodynamic Ponzi Schemes. This task would normally fall to the US EPA or US DOE but both bureaucracies are DOA (dead on arrival) or even worse DAU (don’t ask us).

Our major villain this week is Fisker Automotive the wannabe company Alfalfa Gore and Joe Biding His Time are backing with millions of our tax dollars. Fisker claims a fuel efficiency of 100 miles per US gallon for their Karma. Their sleek Karma rode over my Dogma Pon Z car has a mass of 4,650 pounds. I have estimated based on the most efficient generation of electricity in a brand new state of the art combined cycle natural gas power station the behemoth Karma will at best achieve 33 miles per gallon. I will make these calculations available to anyone who wishes to check my math. So how does Fisker make the claim? They do this through miraculous math provided to them by none other than the US EPA. The EPA is the guardian of the mileage stickers on new cars and therefore should accurately reflect the conversion of fuel to electricity and then to automotive fuel efficiency in plug in or pure electric vehicles. However, some moron in the EPA has established that electricity on a gasoline equivalence basis has three times the actual energy it really possesses and now Fisker can claim three times the MPG for their plug in.

The financial news on Fisker and their battery supplier A One is that A One has raised money from the public in their stock sale, and A One will now invest some of that money in their customer Fisker so that Fisker can show the US government they have enough cash to qualify for the loans to build their factory in old Joe’s backyard in Wilmington Delaware. Of course the whole deal was sold to us on the basis that Fisker’s cars get 100 MPG using the nonsense math the US EPA uses. Of course my Congresswoman who is a thermodynamic neophyte thinks her vote is doing good. Let’s wake up and realize this makes Burn in Hell Madeoff look like he could have got away if only he had said the money was being invested in a new advanced battery automobile company.

Tesla is another company who announced they wish to have an IPO some time in the future and they too are at the trough of government loans. Tesla on their home web page claims their Roadster is twice as efficient as a Prius. This is hog wash and the Roadster is a highly priced high performance car that does not need to attract customers on efficiency. This high efficiency claim it is good PR for their fund raising for the future “affordable” sedan that I doubt will ever be economical and our tax dollars will likely be lost supporting its development. My estimate of the real fuel efficiency of the Tesla Roaster is 57 MPG. Tesla has spent over $300,000 to produce each of the 1,000 roadsters it has sold for $100,000. I got this data from the shelf registration Tesla Motors filed for their potential IPO. This 3 to 1 ratio is reminiscent of the fiction the US EPA uses to calculate electric vehicle MPGs. Perhaps MPG really does mean My Pathetic Government and old Woolsey over your eyes is just the tip of an iceberg.

I did write an email to Congresswoman Woolsey this week after watching the State of the Union address, and hearing President Obama discuss a deficit of trust. I am sharing that email with you

The President hit the nail on the head tonight in his State of the Union address. There is a deficit of trust between the people and their "representatives" in Washington DC. Of course there would be more trust if those who are in Congress would actually meet those who they represent in Congress. Ironically, above the President on the podium these words are inscribed "In God We Trust" Let me tell you those words ring true as I have zero, I repeat zero confidence in Congresswoman Woolsey ability to understand thermodynamics. Perhaps the Congresswoman should take note of the president's words and more so of the inscription above the podium.

I remain a citizen simply requesting the opportunity to meet my Congresswoman. I do this because I do trust in the power of the American people to demand representation and improve their own lot.

Pulling The Wool Over Our Eyes

My blog this week is about the wonders of wool. No doubt that wool can do more to save energy than my Congresswoman. Donning a wool sweater or wrapping oneself in a wool blanket allows one to turn down the thermostat several degrees. For an example of energy savings let us assume the outside temperature is 40 degrees F (5 degrees C) and we keep our house at 68 degrees F (20 degrees C) if we wear a nice wool sweater. If you do not wear that sweater you will keep the house at 72 degrees F (22 degrees C). The heat loss through the windows, walls and roof of the house is proportional to the difference in temperature inside the house minus the temperature outside the house (called the delta T). In our example in case 1 with the sweater on the Delta T is 28 degrees F and in case 2 where we wear no sweater the Delta T is 32. The furnace inside the house has to make up for the heat loss and in our examples the furnace will have to operate at an increased rate of (32-28)/28 when no sweater is worn. This means the furnace will have to work 4/28 or about 14% harder to keep the higher temperature home heated with the implication that your heating bill will be 14% more expensive.

The thermodynamics of heating is a simple proportional and linear relationship between heat loss and Delta T. Driving a car at a faster speed does not increase gasoline use in a simple proportional or linear manner. The rolling resistance of a vehicle is proportional to the velocity but the aerodynamic drag (resistance to passing through the air) is proportional to the third power (cube) of the velocity. Hence the work the engine has to perform and correspondingly the fuel the engine consumes is far greater than 14% when the velocity you travel increases by 14%. This brings me to my main point of the blog that relates to the wonders of wool for our Congress and in particular my Congresswoman. They believe the material is best used for the purpose of pulling it over our eyes. The saying pulling the wool over your eyes goes back almost 200 years and came to us from the Milwaukee Sentinel and Gazette in October 1839 "And we ask one question that they dare not firmly answer, whether they are not now making a tolerable attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of the people." http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/pull-the-wool-over-your-eyes.html

The origin of the phrase may well have come from woolen wigs worn by people in olden days and pulling their wigs over their eyes prevented them from seeing what is going on. Well Congresswoman Woolsey my hair is natural and you can’t trick me. I know that you voted to give away my tax dollars for Betamax energy projects that will neither turn down the thermostat nor lower the velocity of travel of the vehicles. All they will do is line the pocket of a few “alternate energy proponents”. Perhaps the Congresswoman and her leadership will take note of this week’s Senatorial election in the Bay State where folks had their eyes wide open and realized the turning right on red may yet save the country some fuel. It is time for the Bay Area to follow the Bay State and realize that after riding a Donkey for sixty years has taken us nowhere. I am not sure an Elephant is any better to ride so let’s get energy independence by being independent. This July 4 will be the 234 anniversary of declaring independence from the King who wore a woolen wig. I expect it is also the beginning of a new era of the American people waking up and realizing that folks in wool suits in DC heat our House of Representatives with hot air that comes from their mouths. I am still waiting to meet with my Congresswoman and seek representation in my House of Representatives. I have been promised by her staff that this year she will be home more often than last. Guess what it is an election year of course she will. Her election catch line may be “Pull the Woolsey Over Your Eyes”. Perhaps I will run against her and mine will be “Be Green Vote Leveen”. I will get one vote for sure.