Blog

Volt meeting goal of 40-mile electric range, GM says

The first Chevrolet Volt cars to roll off production lines at a General Motors Co. plant in Michigan are going 40 miles on a single battery charge as promised, the plug-in hybrid electric vehicle’s head engineer said yesterday.

“I’m very confident that the batteries are delivering the energy that they need to deliver and that the vehicle’s efficiencies are where it should be,” chief engineer Andrew Farah told the Detroit Free Press. “We’re still doing a few last-minute tweaks and tunes on the aerodynamics but, again, that’s just to stabilize some things.”

Pre-production of the Volt began about two weeks ago. The car is scheduled for launch in November.

Unlike the all-electric Nissan Leaf, also slated for launch late this year, the Volt is equipped with a gasoline engine to keep the car running once it uses up its electric charge. Total electric range varies depending on terrain and weather, but the car is meeting expectations, Farah said.

“This weekend alone, I had at least two cycles that were over 40 miles,” Farah said. “I think I drove one at 41.5 and another 42.5″ miles.

Green LEDs for Efficient Lighting

A new approach to fabricating light-emitting diodes (LEDs) could be used to increase their efficiency by 20 percent while yielding higher-quality light than conventional LEDs. Researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, CO, have demonstrated the approach by making a yellow-green LED that could soon be combined with other colored LEDs to yield white light. The new LED could help replace current, inefficient methods of generating white light.

LEDs, devices that emit photons when an electrical charge is applied to them, are more efficient and last longer than incandescent lightbulbs. By varying the composition of the semiconductor LEDs, materials scientists can coax the devices into emitting different colors. At the minimum, producing white light requires combining red, blue, and green, but so far, only red- and blue-light-emitting diodes are well developed. To produce green light, LED manufacturers typically apply one or more phosphor materials to blue LEDs. The phospors convert high energy blue spectrum light into lower-energy light through a process that reduces overall luminosity by approximately 20 percent.

To eliminate this loss of efficiency, researchers have tried to develop efficient green LEDs that don’t require phosphors. But a major stumbling block is that the different known semiconductor materials that can be combined to emit green light, typically indium and gallium nitride, have different-sized crystal lattice structures. For semiconductors to work efficiently, each layer of the device has to have a similarly sized lattice structure as the layer above or below it.

To get around the lattice-size mismatch, NREL researchers used a fabrication method that they had previously developed for building highly efficient multi-junction solar cells. Their method relies on using additional layers of other semiconducting materials with intermediate-sized lattice structures that bridge the gap between the disparate-sized semiconductors. “If you try to do it in one shot, the whole thing will be defective,” says Angelo Mascarenhas, team leader for solid state spectroscopy in the Center for Basic Sciences at NREL. “You have to grow a sequence of layers in a step-wise fashion.”

Big Coal’s “Stealth Mode” Campaign to Kill the Climate Bill

The coal industry includes companies that profess to support climate legislation but are in fact operating behind the scenes in “stealth mode” to deny climate science and thwart needed action on climate change.

Consider two of the coal companies that keep their heads down and yet still do a lot of damage: Peabody Energy Company, the world’s largest private-sector coal producer, and Arch Coal, the second largest U.S. coal producer.

Peabody claims to support climate legislation, but it has been identified as a key figure in opposition to climate legislation.

Climate change could raise cost of U.S. allergies

Climate change could push the cost of U.S. allergies and asthma beyond the current $32 billion annual price tag, conservation and health groups reported on Wednesday.

A warming planet makes for longer growing seasons that would produce more allergy-provoking pollen in much of the heavily populated eastern two-thirds of the United States, the National Wildlife Federation and the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America said in their report.

The cost of coping with allergies and allergen-driven asthma in the United States is at $32 billion in direct medical costs, lost work days and lower productivity, the report said.

“Climate change could allow highly allergenic trees like oaks and hickories to start replacing pines, spruces and firs that generally don’t cause allergies, exposing many more people to springtime allergy triggers,” said Amanda Staudt, a climate scientist at the wildlife federation.

Obama Seeks Local Action for Earth Day

President Obama today urged Americans to honor the upcoming 40th anniversary of Earth Day by acting to improve the environment around them and launched a Web site,  Whitehouse.gov/EarthDay, compiling citizens’ success stories.

In the video message above, Mr. Obama describes how the first Earth Day was prompted in part by vivid incidents like a fire on the pollution-stained Cuyahoga River in Cleveland. He listed that era’s suite of environmental laws, most of which were enacted under a Republican president in a time of environmental bipartisanship that long ago vanished from Capitol Hill.

Clearly with today’s Washington paralysis in mind, Mr. Obama notes that people shouldn’t count on elected officials to solve all environmental problems and “should take steps in their own homes and their own communities.” That’s always a fine message. Little acts are valuable, even in the face of planet-scale problems.

South Could Benefit From a Little Efficiency

That the American South is both a voracious consumer of energy and a laggard on implementing efficiency measures has long been a matter of some concern for policymakers and energy analysts.

A 2007 report by Forbes magazine, for example, ranked states according to a composite score in six categories: carbon footprint, air quality, water quality, hazardous waste management, policy initiatives and energy consumption.

Top honors went to states like Vermont, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Maryland, Connecticut and New Jersey. The first Southern state east of Texas listed was Florida — at number 20. And as noted at the time by Robert Hawley — then a renewable energy researcher at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory — Tennessee, Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama and West Virginia made up seven of the bottom eight on the list. (The were joined by Indiana.)

None of that would be a surprise to the authors of a study released Monday by researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology and Duke University. Among the chief conclusions: introducing aggressive efficiency measures to industrial processes as well as to the residential and commercial building sectors (transportation was not considered) could well offset the expected growth in energy demand in the South over the next 20 years.

In yesterday’s Wednesday column I looked at how Decatur is starting to move past its kid-friendly restaurant scene and into a livelier scene. What are your favorite Decatur restaurants?

Some unseen switch on the zeitgeist machine has been quietly flicked on in Decatur, and this little not-quite-suburb inside the Perimeter is poised to emerge as one of the metro area’s liveliest dining neighborhoods.

It has been a decade-long process that I’ve observed from my home near the town center. Soon after we moved here in the late 1990s, word began circulating that a new restaurant had opened up on the moribund and borderline-sketchy square. Called the Food Business, this spot distinguished itself from the handful of nearby cafes with an explicitly child-friendly policy. The brightly colored, three-level restaurant served a thoughtful kids’ menu along with its casual contemporary bill of fare, and stocked highchairs aplenty.

Others followed suit. Taqueria del Sol …

Looks like even Apple was caught off-guard a bit by how popular the iPad has been since the launch in the US, as the company announced earlier this morning that the international launch of the device has been delayed by a month. Apple says that more than 500,000 iPads have been sold in the first week of availability in the US, and to keep up with demand, Europe will now see the iPad in May, rather than the “late April” that was previously announced.

Tags:
apple,
ipad,
ipad europe,
ipad international delay,
slates,
tablets,

My wife and I have talked for years about putting solar panels on the roof of our small Valley floor bungalow, at least she has.

It would complement her organic farm in the front yard and her cactus garden in the back yard and make us feel better about ourselves for doing the right thing, she says.

But somebody has to be financially responsible and on this rare occasion it’s my job to point out we would never get our money back because the DWP refuses use AB 811 and legitimate feed-in tariffs that would help amortize the costs in a way that makes financial as well as environmental sense.

You have to understand why the DWP has operated the way it has to understand why it’s efforts to get their hands on billions of dollars in ratepayer money through Measure B and now the mayor’s Plan B for Measure B  have failed in the face of massive public resistance.

David Freeman, as general manager of DWP a decade ago, announced the largest solar initiative in U.S. history a decade ago. He squandered tens of millions of dollars on dirty giveaways of the public’s money and 10 years later achieved a negligible amount of rooftop solar.

It was all hot air because the IBEW fought it every inch of the way. The union has only come to support green energy after extorting commitments that thousands of more overpaid jobs would be added to the DWP payroll and its membership roster no matter what the cost to the public.

There are other ways and an online friend of mine Sheila Bowers, who lives both here and in the desert and fought successfully to stop DWP’s wasteful and environmentally destructive Green Path North powerline project, has offered a primer to understanding how we can get green energy at a price that we can afford.

She points to Paul Gipe’s recent report at his website wind-works.org where green energy developments are closely followed and she has been posting in the comments section here intelligent and informed explanations of how we can get solar energy at a price we can afford and create real jobs in the private sector at the same time. If you want to understand the issues involved, read her primer on solar energy:

The truth is that DWP could EASILY hit their 40% FOR FREE if they
weren’t dead set on monopolizing, recentralizing and destabilizing the
grid using remote, destructive Big Solar and Big Wind.

Los Angeles has enough solar insolation to be a NET EXPORTER OF PEAKER
POWER from its rooftops alone, yet the city bakes and sprawls
endlessly, while imperialist adventures to outlying communities waste
time and money.

If LA would simply fund its AB 811 loans (no risk loans because city
takes first lien on property), expand its net metering program and
implement a basic Feed in Tariff (so property owners are PAID fairly
for producing more clean energy than they use), LA could have all the
solar power it needed and then some, at NO NET COST TO RATEPAYERS!!!

This is not funny math, this is simple.  Ratepayer generators will net
out the cost of their systems by a combination of offsets (net
metering), amortization of loans (AB 811 is 20 years), and FITs (to
encourage oversizing where it makes sense).  They will also see
increased property values immediately without increased property taxes.

Loans cost the city nothing and can even make it a small amount in
interest if it administers funds carefully.  Net metering costs the
city nothing because it greatly decreases demand for the most costly
power, and fuel/delivery costs are offset.  FITs for the tiny amount of
power produced above that used that is then re-sold at peaker rates
costs virtually nothing.

THIS is what all utilities are afraid we will realize.  That we can not
only “green the grid” but that we can stabilize and democratize it
using point of use solutions within our built environment.  These
clowns are panicking that we will learn the truth, but they hardly need
worry since the media REFUSES to report on this simple paradigm that
could save the economy, property values, our wilderness and our planet.
 It’s horrifying that people are ignoring this!!

We need to push for $250 million/year in AB 811 funding so we can
install efficiency upgrades and solar panels on our homes and
businesses.  We need to push for Feed in Tariffs for those who produce
clean power above and beyond what they use.  We need to publicize this
FREE and FAIR way to clean our grid, and STOP the destruction of our
beautiful wilderness (Pine Tree Wind and Owens Valley are 2 great
examples).
___________________________________

AB811 is not a subsidy, it is a loan program that costs ratepayers
NOTHING.  Every MW of clean solar generation installed using an AB811
loan could add to the RPS at NO COST to ratepayers (if RPS is ethically
and realistically calculated).  This is in stark contrast to Big Wind,
Big Solar and Big Transmission, which will cost ratepayers a FORTUNE
and destroy our wilderness areas and deplete water sources.

Ratepayer generators should not be penalized for installing solar on
their roofs – it should not be a “sacrifice.”  We should be allowed to
net meter to the amount of power we use and to be paid fairly (Feed in
Tariff) for any amount we produce and do not consume.  Net metering
costs other ratepayers NOTHING, because it reduces grid congestion and
fuel consumption.  So all that clean, local, solar power?  FREE.  Free
to ratepayer-generators.  Free to non-generating ratepayers.

With AB 811 loans, ratepayer generators can zero out their system costs
on an annual basis using net metering and FIT payments, amortized
across 20 years.  FIT-purchased power is RESOLD by the DWP for close to
purchase price, and only the tiny incremental costs between resale
price (say, 30 cents for peaker) and FIT paid price (50 cents), and
only for that power above and beyond net metering (say 5% of the gross
solar power produced) is passed on to ratepayers.  It will not even
register on utility bills.

The system I propose is cheaper to us than the German system, where
they buy 100% of the power at the premium price (about 80 cents)
instead of net metering first, and it makes rooftop solar within reach
of every single home and business owner in the City who has a sunny
roof.

Personally, I don’t have much faith in DWP to handle the city-property
solar affordably or competently, but as long as WE get the programs WE
need, and WE are counted in the RPS calculations as full generators,
rather than as “demand reduction,” the City can do what it wants with
its rooftops as long as the CITY pays for it out of their existing
budget (just like us).  They need to get costs down so that energy
savings offsets pay for their rooftop systems, JUST LIKE US.

_____________________________

Firstly, the loan is not “subsidized” by anyone.  Money is lent, then
it is repaid with modest interest that covers administration costs.  No
subsidies at all.  There are dozens of ways to raise the money, from
ARRA funds, muni bonds, private investors, etc.  Lots of information
out there on this program already and lots of other counties and cities
are already funding it.

Secondly, most homes will net out (after current rebates and tax
credits) in the under $20K range, unless they are doing massive
retrofits for efficiency upgrades at the same time as PV or unless we
start getting fair payment for producing more power than we need.
Nobody’s going off-grid here, so people can size conservatively.

1BOG is securing pricing in the $6/watt range, before rebates and tax
credits, which should knock another 50-60% off, putting us in the $2 –
$3/watt range after all is said and done.  Average homes are installing
3.5 kW systems, which would then net out at about $10,500.  Repaid via
AB 811 over 20 years, that’s gonna be $600/year with interest, or
$50/month to produce ~80% of total power.  Entire cost will be offset
by reduction in bill (and/or FIT).

2. I am not sure where you get “over 2800 MW” as a 33% RPS in a system
that peaks at 6,000 MW.  33% is the state number.  40% is just a
childish one-upsman number from a grandstanding mayor, but it is still
completely do-able even without ripping off ratepayers and decimating
outlying communities and ecosystems.

Since solar produces generally at peak times, and since 50-55% of the
total power in the city is consumed during those 4-6 peak hours, it
seems all we would need for 33% is just under 2,000 MW, and that
assumes no reduction in energy consumption, which is unlikely if
current trends continue.

If the average home installation is 3.5kW and the average industrial
is, say 25kW, and there are 1.4 million electrical connections in the
DWP system, I feel like it would absolutely be achievable to secure
2,000 MW from private rooftops alone.  Don’t forget that LA is a major
industrial center with lots of baking, sprawling, single-story
buildings.  If a million of those are homes and apartments, and only
1/3 of them put “average” solar up, we’d have ~1200 MW.  If the other
400,000 were business connections and only 20% of them installed a 25
kW system, we would have ~2,000 MW.  These are just a few random
illustrations.

And hey, if the City wanted to fund their own panels and contribute to
the RPS just like us, using it’s own offsets to repay itself for the
cost of the panels, like I said, I would be fine, delighted, as long as
the program offers real, human ratepayers a clean, fair shot at
participating, and the City didn’t stick us with the bill both coming
and going.  They can play on the same field as us.

Parking lots, brownfields, you name it, they should definitely do it –
on their own dime, for the same reasons we do it, because it’s the
right thing and it makes environmental and economic sense.  They should
not do it to strengthen their chokehold over ratepayers and small
communities like Owens Valley.  They should not do it as a backdoor tax
to fund City programs.  They should not do it to greenwash an otherwise
devastating environmental mess.

3.  If you want to complain about the RPS system, and how unreliable
solar will be, that’s not my trip – that’s a political game these guys
play that has nothing to do with what is needed.  I could care less if
their soundbyte number is 25%, 80% or 50% – we need to max out the
built environment with efficiency upgrades and point of use generation
before we start slaughtering wilderness – that’s my point and it should
be a no-brainer.

Obviously we need improved storage solutions and load balancing and we
need to keep the gas peakers online so they can jump in – just like
they do now – to compensate for shortfalls.  But the timing of Big
Solar and local solar production is identical, so rooftops completely
defeat the need for Big Solar and its Big Transmission.  Can we agree
on that?

3 (again).  I think I’ve been pretty clear how I would change the
system.  AB811 loans and feed in tariffs.  Democratic not monopolistic
ownership of solar and microwind generation.  Removal of all caps on
system sizes.  Favorable business climate for clean energy
manufacturers and installers.  No dead wilderness and species, no water
depletion (geothermal, solar thermal), no SF6-spewing powerlines
(29,000 times more potent GHG than CO2, emitted by powerline
infrastructure), no eminent domain, improved property values,
well-paying local jobs, and healthy open spaces we can all still enjoy.
 All for much less cost to us than the current boondoggles they have
planned.  That’s all i want.  is that too much to ask?

A few weeks back the New York Metropolitan Transit rejected a proposal from the Working Families Party that would post imitation subway service advisory signs carrying the not-that-cryptic messages of “WTF?” and “OMFG.” But that didn’t stop Working Families from printing up similarly themed t-shirts.

So if you feel like voicing your objection to MTA fare hikes and service cuts in shirt form, Working Families is giving them out to folks who donate at least $14.

The Solar Impulse HB-SIA, a solar-powered aircraft under development for an emissions-free around-the-world flight, had its maiden flight on April 7. Bertrand Piccard, the adventurer who first flew a balloon non-stop around the globe, is the chairman of the Solar Impulse project. The plane was flown to an altitude of 4,000 feet during its 87 minute test flight in Switzerland.

The single-seat plane has the wingspan of a 747 covered with nearly 12,000 solar cells which provide the power for the four electric motors. Further tests, including longer duration flights to test batteries and verify the ability of the plane to fly through the night will be the next step for this project. Solar Impulse plans a flight to cross the Atlantic in 2012 in preparation for an eventual non-stop, around the globe flight.

video link: Solar Impulse

via: EERE News

Previous Solar Impulse articles on EcoGeek

Cancer Research Technology (CRT), the commercialization arm of the U.K. research charity, has signed an exclusive agreement with Cephalon, Inc., to develop small molecule inhibitors of the protein kinase C superfamily of cell signaling proteins. The collaboration will advance lead compounds discovered at CRT’s Discovery Laboratories to the selection of preclinical candidates. Protein kinase C plays a pivotal role in cell signaling and the control of processes, including cell growth and division.

Under terms of the agreement, CRT will be entitled to significant up-front and milestone payments as well as royalties on product sales. Cephalon will contribute substantial resources for the work, which will take place at CRT’s Discovery Laboratories in London and Cephalon’s R&D facility in West Chester, PA. The agreement with Cephalon represents a major milestone for CRT’s Discovery Laboratories as the first of its small molecule discovery programs to partner with an international biopharmaceutical company, according to Keith Blundy, chief executive of CRT.

Source:  BioSpace

The global financial crisis has once again put the International Monetary Fund at the center of news and — once again — eclipsed the World Bank. That’s natural given the job of the IMF, which is to douse financial flames with a blanket of money. The World Bank is the business of long-term development.

But an analysis by the World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group, an in-house watchdog, says it’s the World Bank that’s really providing the bulk of the cash. While the IMF committed about $170 billion to fighting the global financial crisis between July 2008 and December 2009 through loans to troubled countries — about twice the total of the World Bank — the World Bank has actually spent more money.

According to the IEG, the Bank actually disbursed $59.9 billion in loans, while the IMF disbursed $50.7 billion. One reason for the discrepancy may be that some IMF commitments were for lines of credit to Poland, Colombia and Mexico, which those countries never tapped.

“These data highlight the rise in (World Bank Group) financial flows…relative to the past and relative to other” international financial institutions, said the IEG.

The University of Mississippi (UM) and the Agricultural Research Service — the principal intramural scientific research agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA-ARS) — have licensed the rights for a botanical compound to Irvine, CA-based ChromaDex Corp. The company plans the commercial development of pterostilbene, a compound found in blueberries, grapes, and other small fruits as well as the bark of some trees. In laboratory tests, the compound shows promise for improving cardiovascular health, glucose levels, and cognitive function. “Pterostilbene has the potential to be one of the most significant new ingredients the dietary supplement field has seen in a long time,” says Frank L. Jaksch, Jr., co-founder and CEO of ChromaDex. The company plans to launch the first commercial application of the compound, marketed as pTeroPure pterostilbene, in the coming weeks.

Pterostilbene is chemically related to resveratrol, a compound that is plentiful in the skins of red grapes. Resveratrol is thought to be at least partly responsible for the health benefits attributed to red wine, which include cardiovascular health and cancer prevention. Agnes Rimando, PhD, a research chemist for the Natural Products Utilization Research Unit in the USDA-ARS at UM’s National Center for Natural Products Research, first encountered pterostilbene when she was a graduate student at the University of Chicago. Since 2003, Rimando and colleagues at UM and the USDA-ARS have collaborated on studies of the compound, targeting a particular protein found in cells that is involved in fatty acid metabolism and transport.

Source:  Neutraceuticals World

Phillips Farevaag Smallenberg, a leading landscape architecture firm, is working with The Planning Partnership to create a new underpass park, which will be located near the firm’s hybrid park / water treatment facility now under development (see earlier post). The degraded area beneath the highway overpass in Toronto’s West Don Lands will become a 2.5-acre park. The underpass park adds another piece to the ambitious Waterfront Toronto redevelopment. 

John Campbell, president and CEO of Waterfront Toronto, said the park “is a crucial step in delivering on our promise to revitalize the West Don Lands into Toronto’s next great neighbourhood. Influenced by the massive overpass structures, the park’s design transforms the derelict and underused space into a bright, fully accessible urban neighbourhood amenity that will contribute to the success of the developments being built in the community.”

The park will feature athletic courts, recreation areas for seniors, community spaces, cafes, and playgrounds, as well as lots of trees and community gardens. Greg Smallenberg, ASLA, partner, Phillips Farevaag Smallenberg, said: “The design takes full advantage of the existing site’s eccentricities and its free-for-the-taking weather protection, transforming something that might otherwise be incidental into a delightful urban patch.”

To make pedestrians who use the park feel safe at all times, lighting has been carefully thought-out. According to Daily Commercial News and Construction Record, the park is lit by a  ”combination of LED lighting on the columns, shielded in-ground and in-wall lights and illuminated concrete ribbons at the seating areas. The more than 50 overpass columns will be lit using diffuse LED spotlights.”

The landscape is also designed to be sustainable. Daily Commercial News adds the park will feature the application of sustainable materials, including granite cobblestones reclaimed from an avenue, and recycled rubber. The landscape architects will plant more than 50 trees, adding green areas to the spaces between the ramps. The plant system is designed for minimal irrigation.

The park budget is $5.3 million, and includes site preparation, demolition and soil remediation, design and construction costs and public art. Waterfront Toronto is aiming for LEED-ND Gold.

Learn more about the new Underpass Park, and see images, fact sheets and context maps.

In related news, Ken Greenberg, a prominent Toronto urban planner, has resigned from the Lower Dons Land redevelopment project. The Toronto Star writes: “A prominent Toronto urban designer has resigned from a contract to integrate a controversial sports complex and hockey arena into the city’s east waterfront area, charging that the vision for the neighbourhood has been ’squandered.’ The resignation of Ken Greenberg is sure to ignite debate over the future of Toronto’s urban renewal.”

The Devour is Motorola’s second Android smartphone for Verizon and the carrier’s first to feature Motoblur. What improvements has Motorola made since they launched the Droid last year? The uninformed consumer might think the Devour is a better phone since it is newer, but they are in for a big surprise.

Build

Form factor: The Devour features a similar form factor to the Droid with a few minor tweaks. Weighing in at 5.89 oz, the Devour is one of the heaviest Android phones to date. It is also one of the bulkiest Android phones measuring 61.0 x 115.5 x 15.4 mm.

Texting fans will enjoy the four-row slide out QWERTY keyboard. Each key is now raised up, as opposed to the flat keyboard of the Droid. This provides more feedback when typing, but it results in smaller keys. I found the Devour keyboard too cramp for my taste and I actually prefer the Droid’s.

Located on the front of the phone are three capacitive touch buttons for Back, Home, and Menu. Mysteriously missing is a search button, which is heavily used on Android phones. The Devour also features a touch pad on the front of the phone which doubles as a clickable button. The remaining buttons on the side of the phone include volume control, camera, screen lock, and voice command.

The Devour charges via a micro USB port and includes a 3.5 mm jack for your favorite pair of headphones.

Styling: My favorite part about the Devour is its overall looks. The front of the phone is covered by an aluminum finish and it feels very nice in the hand. Bright blue accents around the speaker, camera, and battery door are nice additions to the black and silver colors used on the phone.

Hardware

Motorola claims the Devour features “one of the most enhanced processors of any smart phone”, but that is kind of misleading when you compare it with the current high-end Android phones. Powering the Devour is the 600 MHz Qualcomm MSM7627 processor. This CPU is based on the ARM11 family which is the same as what was used in all first generation Android phones.

More powerful phones like the Droid or Nexus One now include ARM Cortex-A8 based processors, which are the successor to the ARM11 family. In Motorola’s own words, the Cortex-A8 processors offer twice the speed of the leading competitor (ARM11).

The main benefit of the Qualcomm MSM7627 used in the Devour is its 200 MHz dedicated graphics processor. We thought this might allow the Devour to play some of the more advanced games designed for the Droid and Nexus One, but this was not the case. I tried loading Raging Thunder 2 and the framerate was unplayable. Other games designed to run on first gen phones (like Homerun Battle 3D) performed flawlessly.

On the memory side, the Devour features a 512 MB flash ROM and 256 MB of RAM. These are the same specs as found in the Droid and other recent Motorola Android phones.

The screen used in the Devour is a 3.1 inch HVGA (320 x 480 pixels) capacitive touch display. I had a better experience with the touch screen than the Motorola CLIQ, but I still had the occasional missed touch. Motorola routinely offers software updates to improve the performance of the touch screen and I expect that will be the case with the Devour.

For a complete rundown of all the tech specs, visit the official Motorola site.

Software

OS: Even though the Devour is a new Android phone, it ships with the Android 1.6 firmware that was released in the middle of last year. This is an improvement over other entry-level Motorola phones which feature Android 1.5, but we would have like to seen Android 2.1 used (like the Droid).

Motorola just released their latest timeline for Android 2.1 upgrades and the Devour is listed as “under evaluation”. This means customers could be waiting till Q3 or later before they eventually receive Android 2.1.

Bundled Apps: The Devour includes the standard Verizon apps like V-Cast Music and Videos which allow the user to download ringtones and movies for a fee. Verizon also included their VZ Navigator which we tested and found it was horrible. Thankfully users can access the built in Google Maps Navigation which provides the best GPS navigation service I have used.

The one notable bundled app is the new Motorola Phone Portal. This allows users to easily connect their phone to their PC over WiFi or USB. See the video review below for a quick overview.

As with other recent Android phones, many of the bundled apps can not be easily uninstalled. Android phones are notorious for their limited internal storage space for apps, so it is disappointing to have someone else dictate how that gets used. At least Verizon limits the number bundled apps as opposed to AT&T which includes their full suite of bloatware.

Camera

The Devour includes a 3 megapixel camera without flash or auto focus. Taking still photos with the Devour produced average results. Because the Devour has a fixed focal length lens, users may experience issues when attempting to scan barcodes.

Sample pictures:

Sample video:

The Devour captures video at 23 fps with 480×360 resolution.

Full Video Review

Check out our previous post for the Devour unboxing video.

Conclusion

The Devour is a nice Android phone, but I have to question the timing of its release. Verizon launched it several months after the Motorola Droid, which is a clearly superior phone. If you purchase from a Verizon Wireless store, the Devour is priced at $149 with 2 yr contract vs $199 for the Droid.

One might save a little money up front, but the vast majority of the total cost of ownership comes from the calling plan and required $29.99 data add-on. If you look around online (or visit your local Best Buy), chances are you can find the Droid at the same price or cheaper.

If you wish to purchase a Motorola Android phone on Verizon, I suggest getting the Droid.

The Droid offers the following advantages over the Devour:

• Android 2.1 (vs Android 1.6)
• Stock Android (vs Motoblur)
• 3.7 inch display (vs 3.1 inch)
• Faster TI OMAP3430 processor (vs Qualcomm MSM7627)
• 5 megapixel camera with flash (vs 3 MP)
• 16 GB microSD card (vs 8 GB)

Motorola Devour Gallery

Related Posts

• Review roundup: Verizon Motorola Devour
• Motorola Devour gets official, headed to Verizon in March
• Motorola Droid Devour (Android phone) to feature same CPU as Palm Pixi
• Motorola Devour unboxing (video and gallery)
• All U.S. Android phones to receive Android 2.1, but some will require a wipe

Writing on the blog Broken Symmetry, Michael F. Martin, senior attorney in the IP practice group at Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP in San Francisco, posts his response to the recent Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Request for Information (RFI) to work with tech transfer stakeholders, including universities, companies, federal research labs, entrepreneurs, investors, and nonprofits. The most important and difficult obstacle to commercializing university research is the financing gap between curious exploration and venture capital start-ups, Martin maintains. “Because new businesses provide the only sustainable mechanism for the United States to create jobs and wealth, this is also the most important and difficult problem for the United States to solve in its long-term bid to compete in the global economy,” he writes.

To increase the flow of inventions from universities and laboratories into commerce, academics must have more contact with — and more dependence upon — people in commerce, he argues. “Although intellectual property rights can and do facilitate multilateral agreements among universities, researchers, and industry, we must never forget this basic fact of nature,” Martin says. Given that fact, what is the biggest obstacle to increasing communication between universities and industry? In Martin’s view, an obsolete cultural norm impedes these relationships. “This obsolete cultural norm holds that academics must be independent from and disinterested in the consequences of their research,” he writes. “This norm is an ideal, which has never been realized in practice. But even as an ideal it is obsolete.”

Martin encourages the OSTP to bear in mind the extensive negative influence of this cultural norm in evaluating the merits of the various proposals to reform the technology transfer system. “What do all promising practices and successful models of technology transfer have in common?” he asks. “High-bandwidth feedback loops between the university and industry, promoted by fast, easy negotiations with technology transfer offices over intellectual property rights.” The most successful models seem to be subscription-based, nonexclusive licenses of IP, sometimes sweetened for the university with back-ended payments, such as warrants or reach-through royalties, Martin adds. If this model works, why does it not rule at most universities? In Martin’s view, university culture often forces faculty and students to choose between the institution and industry. “With limited administrative resources, inventors avoid the hassle either by ignoring their intellectual property rights or leaving to pursue them without interference by the university,” he writes.

The latter claim might sound incredible, Martin admits, but rough estimates show that universities realize only a fraction of the potential value of their research through IP licensing or spinoffs. Top research universities that employ thousands of researchers who publish thousands of papers file only a few hundred invention disclosures with their TTOs. The same universities spend billions on buildings and equipment, pay only modest salaries, and see only about 2% or 3% come back through licensing revenue. “Comparison against for-profit benchmarks suggests that this percentage could be doubled, tripled, or quadrupled with no additional capital expenditures,” he writes. “Public universities ought to pay attention to these numbers, given the impending credit crisis for many state and local governments.”

Perhaps only the federal government has the authority necessary to bring about large-scale radical changes, Martin suggests. “When universities are easy to deal with, investors will risk money, and entrepreneurs time, to complete the customer discovery work necessary to identify commercial opportunities,” he writes. “There is no one-size-fits-all answer to the question of how research can be commercialized. Rather, commercializing research is an iterative process of asking and answering that question over and over again.”

Source:  Broken Symmetry

264 of you entered last week’s Shooting Challenge. I’d love to crush that number for this week’s admittedly tough topic. The theme? Stage a narrative in a photo—the opposite of capturing a candid. More »

Years ago, downtown hipster boutiques in Manhattan started selling handbags made from old license plates—cute, but a real bitch if it starts a run in one’s chiffon dress. Recycled fashion recently got another boost with the 2009 debut of a Vassar, Mich.-based family outfit called Cangles, which, as the same suggests, makes bangle bracelets out of aluminum cans. (Finally, the perfect solution for those who hate the taste of Mountain Dew: Now you can wear the stuff without having to drink it.) Cangles is one of those green startups that’s not only found a plausible use for some of the 36 billion cans that end up in landfills each year but also gives a hefty percent of its profits to Michigan-area charities. It’s also given us a new marketing wrinkle: eco co-branding. The jewelry company got together with the Save the Earth Foundation, which now features its Earth logo as a charm on the recycled bracelets. (A portion of sales will go to benefit the foundation’s educational and research efforts.) So, ladies, now you don’t have to feel as guilty about buying jewelry, because it’s not shopping, it’s recycling.

—Posted by Robert Klara

Eric Holder stepped into the Dirksen building this morning an embattled man facing Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee fiercely critical of his desire to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 conspirators in federal court. He left three hours later having defused some of his critics; conceding little; sticking up for his department’s role in counterterrorism; and placing back onto the table the prospect of a New York trial for the man known as KSM.

For months, Holder and his Justice Department have been at the center of conservative ire at the Obama administration’s national security policies. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called Holder out in a caustic February speech for playing an unduly influential role in counterterrorism, evidenced by Holder’s contentions that KSM and would-be Christmas bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab should be tried in civilian courts. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa.), both Judiciary Committee members, have portrayed administration lawyers who defended Guantanamo detainees as possessing shadowy, un-American loyalties, and an ad building on their statements dubbed the lawyers “the al-Qaeda Seven.” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has spent months working on a deal with the White House to trade GOP support for closing the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in exchange for overriding Holder and trying KSM before a military commission.

But Holder did not appear under fire during his first Senate testimony since the KSM controversy swelled. More often, it was his critics who backed down, conceded rhetorical territory or disagreed among themselves. “There’s been a lot of misinformation placed out there,” a confrontational Holder testified. “Without casting aspersions on anyone in this room, there’s been a lot of unnecessary politicization of national security issues that I don’t believe has benefited this country.”

Holder reminded the committee that civilian courts have convicted “close to 400″ individuals on terrorism charges, compared to three in military commissions — though Holder, adapting a phrase of Graham’s, said he would be “flexible, pragmatic and aggressive” in keeping both the commissions and the civilian courts as options for terrorism trials. That caused Sessions, who sought to portray Holder as an enemy of the commissions, to assert: “It’s pretty clear to me you made a firm decision to go the other way, with civilian courts with all these other cases.” Holder replied that he had referred more terrorism cases — six, to be specific — to the military commissions than he had to the civilian courts. Similarly, when Sessions attempted to get Holder to say he’d favor reading Miranda rights to Osama bin Laden, Holder answered that there would be no need, since the government has more than enough information at present to convict bin Laden of terrorism crimes.

“I acknowledge that’s possible,” Sessions said.

That set the tone for Republican parrying with Holder. Grassley said he never intended “to call into question the integrity of any employee of the department” when requesting the names of department lawyers who represented Guantanamo detainees. Holder called the “al-Qaeda Seven” ad “reprehensible, and said that he would not participate in an effort to “tarnish the patriotism” of attorneys who “did what John Adams did” by defending hated clients. Grassley did not press the issue.

Graham found himself more in agreement with Holder than with Sessions. He portrayed himself as a Republican who doesn’t “reject all [civilian] courts” for terrorism cases, an implicit knock at his GOP colleagues. After Holder conceded that 48 detainees from Guantanamo Bay were “not feasible to transfer [and] too dangerous to prosecute,” the two men found themselves in substantial agreement over designing a system of indefinite detention with annual administrative review in addition to permitting detainees to receive habeas corpus hearings before federal judges. Notably, while Sessions contended that military commissions could better protect classified information than civilian trials, Graham — as of February, a leading proponent of that view — did not. It was easy to forget that Graham and Holder have spent months on either side of the issue of whether Khalid Sheikh Mohammed deserves a civilian trial.

On that issue — one in which both civil libertarians and conservatives have awaited Holder’s testimony to see if he would accept a military commission — Holder did not give any ground. “No final decision has been made about the forum in which Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants will be tried,” Holder said, predicting a decision would not be made for “a number of weeks.” Pointedly, he added that “New York is not off the table” as a possible location for a trial, even though many New York politicians have objected to the trial and called for it to be moved — objections that in January raised the prospect of scuttling civilian trials for the 9/11 conspirators altogether. When Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) urged Holder not to hold the trial in New York, Holder said the Obama administration would “take into consideration, obviously, the expressions of the political leadership” in the state but indicated those objections aren’t decisive, adding that it would also consider “what we are able to glean from the population” about support for the trial.

Holder’s steadfastness on the trial won him plaudits from civil libertarians. “I was glad to see Holder standing strong against the Republicans trying to beat the administration over the head with closing Guantánamo and using civilian trials,” Vince Warren, the executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, said in a statement. “If the U.S. is ever going to regain credibility in the world, the administration can’t let itself be bullied by fear mongers with their eyes on midterm elections rather than the law.”

But Holder’s embrace of military commissions and indefinite detention without charge cast a pallor on their enthusiasm. “I’m not sure about Holder. Some of the folks I know and respect at DOJ think very highly of him,” said ret. Air Force Col. Morris Davis, the former chief prosecutor of the military commissions at Guantanamo Bay, in an email. “On the other hand, what I’ve seen on the national security front — basically adopting the same Bush-Cheney policies candidate Obama was firmly against — has been disappointing. I used to get perturbed when the ‘flip-flop’ accusation got thrown around, but it’s hard to argue that the label doesn’t fit the administration’s waffling view that military commissions are bad, no they’re good, no they’re bad again, oh wait maybe they’re good after all approach.”

Democrats on the committee rallied to Holder’s defense. “I’ve come to the conclusion that some of the attacks are to diminish you, and you should remain strong,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), a former Rhode Island attorney general and federal prosecutor, tacitly compared Holder’s critics to a mob, a resonant image after The New Yorker recently reported that a January New York rally of conservatives against the KSM trial featured someone yelling, “Lynch Holder!”

“The emblems of American justice,” Whitehouse said, are “the blindfold and the balance, and not the torch and the pitchfork.”

Salida Capital is launching a natural resource-focused private equity fund to capitalize on opportunities its current funds cannot. The alternative investment management firm said the fund’s official marketing period will start in May and continue for six to eight months, or until its investment target is reached.

“We manage our funds within a disciplined risk management framework that has predetermined limits on the percentage of privates that can be held in a fund,” Salida’s president and CEO, Courtenay Wolfe said in a statement. “It’s an area we’ve been planning on venturing into for a while, and we are pleased to announce that we have already secured a $100-million seed investment for the fund prior to its official launch.”

That anchor investment comes from Bill Gallacher, president and CEO of Western Canadian merchant banking firm Avenir Capital Corp. He is also chairman and founder of recently public Athabasca Oil Sands Corp.

“My relationship with Salida goes back many years,” Mr. Gallacher said. “I’m a huge supporter and friend of the firm and am optimistic about the future of this relationship.”

Brad White, portfolio manager and co-founder of Salida, will be moving to Mr. Gallacher’s asset management team as part of the transition. Mr. White currently manages the Salida Multi Strategy Fund and the Global Energy Fund.

Salida founder and CIO, Danny Guy, will take over the Multi Strategy Fund, while Brian Trenholm will run the Global Energy Fund. Salida manages approximately $650-million in assets.

Jonathan Ratner

Photo: Courtenay Wolfe, CEO & President of Salida Capital, in her Toronto office on July 8, 2009 (Jim Ross for National Post)

Phyllis Schlafly, the attorney and conservative political activist, has published a piece arguing against the United States’ progressive tax structure, in which around half of Americans will pay no federal income tax this year. In the piece, she writes:

The outright cash handouts include the earned income tax credit (EITC), which can amount to $5,657 a year to low-income families. Financial benefits can include child tax credits, welfare, food stamps, WIC (women, infants, children), housing subsidies, unemployment benefits, Medicaid, S-CHIP and other programs. This is a massive transfer of wealth and a soak-the-rich racket.

I’ll repeat: She argues that programs such as WIC — which provides food to “low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, and to infants and children up to age five who are found to be at nutritional risk” — is a “soak-the-rich” racket. Schlafly’s is the most radical iteration of a common conservative talking point, that America’s low-income wage-earners are pulling a fast one on wealthier wage-earners by shirking income taxes. David Leonhardt at the New York Times offers an excellent, levelheaded refutation today:

The 47 percent number is not wrong. The stimulus programs of the last two years — the first one signed by President George W. Bush, the second and larger one by President Obama — have increased the number of households that receive enough of a tax credit to wipe out their federal income tax liability.

But the modifiers here — federal and income — are important. Income taxes aren’t the only kind of federal taxes that people pay. There are also payroll taxes and capital gains taxes, among others. And, of course, people pay state and local taxes, too. Even if the discussion is restricted to federal taxes (for which the statistics are better), a vast majority of households end up paying federal taxes. Congressional Budget Office data suggests that, at most, about 10 percent of all households pay no net federal taxes. The number 10 is obviously a lot smaller than 47.

Furthermore, the rich have their tax breaks too — none more egregious than the carried interest rule, which allows people like hedge fund managers to pay a 15 percent capital gains tax, rather than the standard 35 percent income tax, on certain earnings. That rule is currently undergoing Congressional scrutiny.

When Ford released the new 2011 SVT Raptor pick-up truck I wasn’t too sure how it was going to be received. It seems though that it has been met with resounding fanfare and because of this it’s rumored that Ford is going to dish out a Super Crew version for us. The Raptor, in standard form is a wicked looking machine with it’s bulged out fenders and rear bed. Power wise the standard SVT Raptor makes do with a 5.4-liter 320 HP V8. Right around the corner though is the new 6.2-liter V8 with 411HP / 434 ft-lb of torque – now that’s more like it. Combine that with a possible crew cab design and Ford should be selling these things like there’s no tomorrow.

*BTW – the pic is photoshop, so don’t get all nutty.

Source: Insideline.com

Twitter will soon give developers access to streams of user activity on its system, and allow them to create their own annotations to send along with tweets, Twitter’s director of platform Ryan Sarver said at the company’s Chirp conference in San Francisco today.

“It’s important that we do keep agile, but as much as I can, we want to be explicit about where we’re going with these things,” Sarver said, nothing that Twitter has fostered more than 100,000 registered applications, up from 50,000 in December.

Twitter’s new location feature, Places, will give developers a structured and curated database of places from around the world. That will allow tweets to be associated with the actual location they originated from, in a way that’s more decipherable and interesting than lat-long coordinates. It’s not necessarily a direct competitor to Foursquare or Gowalla, but it serves much of the same purpose for noting your location and broadcasting your comments about it in context.

Next, a new User Stream API will give developers access to a feed of user actions on a more granular level than just tweets. The user stream includes mentions, friending and favoriting (the kind of stuff you’re used to seeing in Facebook’s news feed). The API will be available to developers to play with at Twitter’s Chirp Hack Day (which actually starts tonight).

On the concept of metadata, Sarver previewed an Annotations feature that will be launching “next quarter” that gives developers much more flexibility around the context of a tweet. The feature will allow developers to “add any arbitrary metadata to any tweet in the system.” So, just like a tweet can today be transmitted along with information about which other tweet it was in reply to, or what location it came from, or what application it was created on, now Twitter will allow developers to make up new stuff. Twitter is looking to see how developers use Annotations before it creates any sort of taxonomy for them, Sarver said.

Lastly, Twitter is launching a central developer resource site at dev.twitter.com later today. It includes such features as documentation that’s generated from code, rather than hand written (this won applause from the Chirp audience), a way to securely build and reference API calls, an official WatchMouse monitor for the Twitter service, and search across all the repositories of Twitter developer information.

(photo by Lynn Sweet)
Mrs. Obama delivering speech at Universidad Iberoamericana

Click below for prepared remarks…

AS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY***

EMBARGOED UNTIL TIME OF DELIVERY

Remarks of First Lady Michelle Obama
Youth Forum at Universidad Iberoamericana
April 14, 2010

Good afternoon. Thank you so much. Thank you, Jaime, for that very kind introduction.

It is such a pleasure and an honor to be in this beautiful country, at this great university, with so many outstanding young people from all across Mexico.

Let me start by thanking your First Lady, Mrs. Margarita Zavala, for her tremendous kindness to me and my family.

We’ve had a wonderful time together, both here in Mexico and during her visits to the United States – and I look forward to welcoming her and President Calderon to Washington for a state dinner next month.

I also want to recognize the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, Ambassador Pascual.

And I want to thank the Rector of this school, Dr. Jose Morales Orozco, for his leadership and for hosting me here today.

Finally, I want to thank all the people of this country for your incredible warmth and hospitality on my visit here.

From the moment I arrived, I felt like I was entre amigos – which is only natural given the close and enduring friendship between our two nations.

Mexico is home to more U.S. citizens living abroad than anywhere else in the world – and tens of millions of Americans trace their roots to this country.

For generations, Mexico and the U.S. have been bound together not just by a shared border, but by shared values and aspirations – a devotion to family and faith; a willingness to work hard and sacrifice for our children; a commitment to democracy rooted in struggles for independence that have defined our nations.

So when it came time to decide where to make my first solo international trip as First Lady, the choice was clear: Mexico, por supuesto!

And there’s a reason why I wanted to come here to the Ibero and speak with all of you.

It’s the same reason why, when my husband travels abroad to talk about the challenges we face – from extremism to nuclear weapons; from poverty and hunger to climate change and pandemics – he doesn’t just meet with presidents and prime ministers.

He doesn’t just visit palaces and parliaments.

He goes to schools and universities and meets with young people like you.

This isn’t an accident. Today, we’re seeing what has come to be called a “youth bulge” – an explosion of the youth population in nations around the world.

Here in Mexico, nearly half the population is under the age of 25 – in the Middle East, it’s sixty percent.

And young people between the ages of 15 and 24 alone now make up twenty percent of the world’s citizens – the largest group in history making the transition to adulthood.

And the fact is that responsibility for meeting the defining challenges of our time will soon fall to all of you.

Soon, the world will be looking to your generation to make the discoveries and build the industries that will fuel our prosperity and ensure our well-being for decades to come.

We’ll be looking to your generation to seize the promise of clean energy to power our economies and preserve our planet for your kids and grandkids.

We’ll be looking to your generation to find the courage and patience to resolve the conflicts and heal the divides that plague our world.

And I’m here today because I believe that all of you – and your peers around the world – are more ready than ever to meet these challenges.

More than any generation in history, you all are able to access information and connect with one another in ways that my generation could never have imagined.

With the click of a button, you can exchange thoughts on any issue with people just about anywhere in the world.

You have an unprecedented ability to organize and mobilize to challenge old assumptions, to bridge old divides, and to find new solutions to our toughest problems.

It is because of this immense promise that I intend to focus my international work as First Lady on engaging young people just like you all around the world.

My husband and I know all too well that meeting the challenges we face will depend on whether we effectively tap your God-given potential – whether we fully benefit from the industry, and the energy, and the perspectives of young people from every background and every nation.

We know that ambition and ability are found in every corner of the globe – and the question is, how do we ensure that opportunity is too?

Now, my husband and President Calderon are working hard to rebuild our education systems, and to revive our economies, and to create new opportunities for young people in both our nations.

But leaders and governments can’t shoulder this responsibility alone.

Ordinary citizens must share the responsibility as well – and this includes young people themselves.

And it isn’t enough to just change laws and policies – we must also change our perceptions about who can and can’t succeed.

We must confront wrong and outdated ideas and assumptions that only certain young people deserve to be educated…that girls aren’t as capable as boys…that some young people are less worthy of opportunities because of their religion or disability or ethnicity or socioeconomic class.

Because we have seen time and again that potential can be found in some of the most unlikely places.

My husband and I are living proof of that.

We both came from modest backgrounds. Our families weren’t wealthy. My parents never went to college.

My husband never really knew his father and was raised by a young single mother who struggled to pay the bills.

Like many kids with backgrounds like ours, we faced many challenges: the sting of low expectations; the constant doubts about whether we could succeed – and whether we were even worth the effort.

Back when we were young, no one could have predicted that we would one day become the President and First Lady of the United States of America.

But we were lucky and blessed.

We had families who believed in us, and teachers who pushed us, and universities that saw our potential and gave us scholarships.

And we worked as hard as we could; and we learned as much as we could; and as a result, we were prepared and poised to pursue our dreams.

And our stories are not unique.

They’re the stories of countless young people in Mexico, in the U.S., and around the world who’ve worked hard and defied the odds.

They’re the stories of young people throughout history who’ve succeeded not because of their trust fund, or pedigree, or test scores, but because of challenges that tested and motivated them and made them who they are…and because someone somewhere believed in them – and helped them believe in themselves.

When he was orphaned at a young age, and sought work as a servant, no one could have imagined that Benito Juarez would one day become one of Mexico’s greatest presidents.

But thanks to a Franciscan friar who helped him join a seminary and get an education, he was able to realize his gifts.

One of my country’s greatest presidents, Abraham Lincoln, was born in a one-room log cabin in the woods – but was lucky enough to have a teacher who taught him how to write and debate.

Joan of Arc was the daughter of a peasant farmer who tried to persuade anyone who would listen that she could rescue the French army from defeat. And when a prince finally believed her, that’s exactly what she did.

Throughout our world history, it has often been that unlikely hero…that unusual perspective…that improbable journey that has been the key to our progress.

So when we dismiss any of our young people…when we fail to tap their potential…we risk losing their promise.

And think of the inventions and cures that are never discovered…the great works of art and literature that are never created…the great acts of courage and leadership that never grace this world.

But this isn’t just about discovering those few extraordinary folks who will change the course of history.

It’s also about breaking down barriers across the globe so that all our young people can learn and work and be productive members of our societies.

It’s about seeking the perspectives and experiences of young people from every background – the new ideas that make our businesses more productive, our cultures more vibrant, and our governments more open and free.

And in order to do this – in order to open up opportunities for more young people – those of you who already have a seat at the table must do your part to make room for others who don’t.

Young people around the world must reach out to help others realize their talents and make their voices heard.

Now, I understand that in these difficult economic times here in Mexico, in the U.S., and around the world, many people are struggling, and nothing is guaranteed.

And even young people like those of you who have the privilege of attending a university may be feeling a bit uncertain about your future.

Some of you may be worried about whether you’ll be able to build careers of your own.

And you may be tempted to focus solely on your individual success – to take your diploma, get the best job you can, and never look back.

But before you do that, I hope that you’ll think, just for a moment, about the mission statement of this university – to prepare students, and I quote, “…to engage in service to others and develop and spread knowledge to achieve a free, fair, united and productive society…”

I hope you’ll think of those words from the Bible – that to whom much is given, much is required.

And I hope you’ll think of all those who’ve shaped our history by heeding these words.

Imagine if Mahatma Ghandi had led a comfortable existence as a lawyer instead of leading the struggle for the rights of his countrymen and his nation’s independence – work he started when he was in his twenties.

Imagine if Nelson Mandela had chosen a life of leisure as the son of a tribal chief instead of joining the ANC at the age of 24, and enduring decades behind bars to end Apartheid.

Imagine if Mother Teresa had never answered her calling and ventured into the streets of Calcutta to tend to those in desperate need.

Now, I’m not saying that you have to take a vow of poverty or lead a movement.

But I am asking you to do something – whether through your career, or as a volunteer – do something to ensure that other young people have the opportunities they deserve.

That’s what folks like you are doing every day across the globe, and right here in Mexico.

Alberto Salvador from Guanajuato was born deaf and was at first denied admission to elementary school because of his disability.

But he completed high school with high honors, got a degree in the United States, and returned here to Mexico where he mentors deaf children and will soon be starting a job as a teacher.

Mariana Vazquez del Mercado, who’s finishing law school at Universidad Panamericana, spends hours volunteering in a free legal clinic and directs an organization that builds housing for struggling families.

Of her work, she says: “The goal is to show that despite being young, we are sufficiently responsible and aware.”

Alberto Irezabal, who graduated from the Ibero last year, used his service project to help an indigenous community in Chiapas better produce and sell their locally grown coffee.

Of his work, he says: “I believe we have a responsibility to see that our projects succeed, not just for ourselves, but for our country…”

Each and every one of these young people is working to break down barriers and open doors.

Each of them is giving others the chances they’ve had to succeed.

But let’s be clear – I’m not just talking to the university students here today.

I’m also talking to young people here in Mexico, and in the U.S., and around the world who feel like they have no place at universities like this.

I’ve met so many young people in so many places who have so much to offer, but because of where they’re born, or the family they’re born into, or the circumstances of their lives, they begin to doubt themselves.

They begin to feel like they don’t belong, or they’re not prepared, or they won’t measure up – so they shouldn’t even try.

While I was fortunate to have so many opportunities in my own life, I can certainly understand those feelings.

When I first went to college, I was filled with self-doubt.

I was convinced that everyone else was smarter than I was – and I felt like I just didn’t fit in.

But I soon realized that I was just as capable, and had just as much to contribute, as my classmates.

All I needed was a little confidence in myself to make that happen.

Now, it’s true that some of you might have to work a lot harder to get what you want.

You might face more obstacles and setbacks.

But I want you to know that you belong in places like this just as much as anyone else.

You have just as much to offer as anyone else.

And if you believe in yourself – if you refuse to give up – then there is nothing – nothing – you can’t accomplish.

And I hope that all of you, when you encounter hardships, when you start to get discouraged, I hope that you’ll think about young people like you around the world who’ve toiled in laboratories and libraries, in factories and fields – who’ve marched and fought and bled to make our world a better place.

I hope you’ll think about the young people two centuries ago who risked everything they had for Mexico’s independence.

I hope you’ll think about the young people in America who fought to ensure that all citizens, no matter their gender or the color of their skin, were treated equally under the law.

You and I are here today because of them.

And finally, I hope you’ll think about young people like Sonia Kim, who I met yesterday on my visit to Haiti.

Sonia works at the U.S. embassy in Port au Prince. And like so many people in Haiti, she’s been working around the clock on the earthquake relief efforts.

I want to read you an email she sent to my office. This is what she wrote:

“We are exhausted, traumatized and heart-broken. But we choose to stay here and work.

We choose to stay because we love Haiti and its people.

We choose to stay because we believe in our duty to help the people here in their greatest hour of need.

We choose to stay because we believe in our mission.

We choose to stay because we still hold out hope…for recovery and renewal…and for a Haiti built back better than before.”

I hope that every single one of you, and young people all across the globe, will take up that work – the work of helping others in need…the work of building stronger nations and a better world.

Because if we’re going to tackle the challenges of our time – if we’re going to make our world safer, healthier, more prosperous and more free – we’ll need the passion, the daring, and the creativity of every last one of you.

We’ll need you to work as hard as you can, and do as much good as you can, driven by that belief that has always summed up the spirit of our youth – three simple words: Si, se puede – Yes, we can. Yes, we can.

Thank you and God bless you.