While knee deep in debt, you may find it hard to manage all of your debt payments at the same time. So, you may need help of the debt help agencies to solve your debt problem. So, if you are knee deep in debt, try to find some authentic debt help agencies in order to pay down your debts. So, what are the different debt help options you can take help of?

Different debt help options

Some of the different debt help options that can prove to be of some real help for your debt situations are the likes of:

• Debt settlement program – Debt settlement program is the one in which the outstanding debt amount gets reduced. Thus, it becomes easier for you to pay off the debt. But, the greatest disadvantage of this option is that you are required to miss payments and this has a negative effect on your credit.
• Debt management program – Debt management program is the one in which the debt help company helps you with managing your debts. They negotiate with your creditors to lower the interest rate on your debts and help with easy debt pay off.
• Debt consolidation program – Debt consolidation is mainly about lowered interest rate and reduced number of debt. The number of debts you have gets reduced to only one. Thus it becomes really easier for you to pay off your debts.

These are the three main options that can help you with paying down the debts you have incurred till now.

But, in order to find an authentic debt help company, you will be required to check with different things. Like, it is important for you to consider if the company is accredited with the BBB or the Better Business Bureau; if they have a good ranking (from BBB) with regards to their services.

Then, you will also be required to check if they are licensed to do the business and for how many years they have been in the same business. You will have to check reviews (if any) on the company and will have to find out if the debt help company charges any upfront fees. If it does, you should avoid enrolling with such a company or agency. This is because, as per the rules by the Federal Trade Commission or FTC, no debt relief companies are supposed to charge any upfront fees from the debtor without actually helping them in their debt problems.

cop-sat2-300×179

For the past week, a team of Ode volunteers has been handing out free copies of our special “Solutions We Need Now” issue, which presents a series of inspiring and innovative solutions to the challenge of global warming. Our volunteers have given away thousands of copies, and received great enthusiasm in return. They were looking forward to meeting with many more people over the weekend as Copenhagen witnessed large demonstrations. Interestingly enough, their meetings with the “broad coalition of hundreds of environmental groups, human rights campaigners, climate activists, anti-capitalists and freelance protesters from dozens of countries,” as one report described them, were not nearly as successful as the meetings with the delegates, politicians and business leaders in and around the Bella Center, the main venue for the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen.

There was quite a bit of anger in the crowds on the streets this weekend. I’m not referring to the relatively few violent troublemakers, many of whom were arrested by the Danish police. Unfortunately, such radicals will always misbehave at these events. No, our experience was that the many participants in the largely peaceful marches were not interested in solutions—what Ode’s special issue is about. They wanted their anger and frustration with governments and their leaders to be heard. It seemed that they were not (yet) up for meeting the challenge and solving the problem. Or maybe they cannot believe governments will ever act the way these protesters hope.

I sympathize with that frustration. Many people from many organizations have worked tirelessly for years, if not decades, to raise awareness around the issue of global warming. And the political reaction, so far, has been largely disappointing. There is a radical challenge and we have seen nowhere near a radical response.

Yet at the same time, the one thing we don’t need is more discord. We need to close ranks and join hands. We are facing a unique global challenge and, I would argue, an even more unique and inspiring global opportunity. It occurs to me that we need two radical responses. One has to come from the world leaders who need to plan, swiftly, the transformation from our fossil-fuel-based economies to sustainable clean energy economies. The other must come from environmentalists who need to embrace all the people they fear stand in the way of the progress the planet needs: the politicians and industrial leaders.

I’m sure there are people out there who have but one focus: to protect their vested interests. Yet my point would be that these people have children and grandchildren, too. These folks would also like to live in a cleaner world and go to their offices without negotiating exhaust fumes in their congested cities. Ultimately, we share the same interests. Copenhagen is building momentum for radical climate action. That is very good news. “Old” anger and “old” frustration—understandable as these sentiments are—should not become obstacles.

I suggest that the environmentalist, who have led on the issue for so many years, step up once more and open themselves to the idea that those industrial leaders and politicians may be ready to join them, now more than ever. I think everybody may be surprised.
Share This Post
This entry was posted in Cop15. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
« Meat is the primary cause of global warming
Notes from Copenhagen »

Do the right thing

So the question is: when can one appropriately use a reference to slavery when it comes to important political issues? Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, has invited fierce criticism from Republicans with his comparison of opposition to health care reform with those who opposed the abolition of slavery. Given the outrageous response one could think that a reference to slavery is off limits in political debates. However as Paul Doro writes, politicians regularly refer to slavery to underscore their points. Reid is, for instance, in the good company of former presidential candidates Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee, who recently compared paying taxes (Paul) and abortion (Huckabee) to slavery.

Let me add a comparison: the widespread resistance within governments and industry to seriously tackle global warming reminds me of the resistance to the abolition of slavery. It is the same fear. The economy of the early 19th century was built on the cheap labor that slaves provided. Without that cheap resource, many people saw their livelihoods greatly endangered. Moral values seemingly conflicted with economic needs. Seemingly. Because ultimately, the abolition of slavery triggered one of the most successful economic eras in history: the Industrial Revolution. In 1930, a century after slavery was abolished, humanity had found much better ways to create much more wealth for many more people, although there were obviously still many hurdles—colonialism for one—to overcome. The point is: Fear for the loss of economic gain should never stand in the way of doing the right thing, because the creativity of humankind will always lead to new opportunities and new solutions.

When we look at the way we treat the planet today, we should remember the struggle around the abolition of slavery. Today, the planet provides the cheap resources that fuel economic gain. Morally, that is less repulsive than enslaving another human being, but it is still very wrong. Wrong because it endangers the future of generations to come. Wrong because it terribly pollutes our own societies. Wrong because the effects hurt those most who are already struggling to survive. Wrong because it denies the fact that human beings are not the masters of the universe but part of the fabric of life.

We can fight global warming because we fear the rising seas. However, fear is never a good guide. On the contrary, we should perceive the challenge of global warming as another historic opportunity to unleash an era of unprecedented economic innovation and prosperity. Beyond the fear for change there are so many people and initiatives showing the way to a cleaner, greener, more sustainable, more just and more prosperous world, while adding meaning and fulfillment to our lives. That should be the message to the UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen. To inspire the debate, Ode Magazine is presenting a free digital issue full of innovative solutions to halt climate change.

This is not a moment to move by increments following politics as usual. As Bill McKibben writes: “It’s like nothing we’ve ever faced before—and we’re facing it as if it’s just like everything else. That’s the problem”.

We need big bold steps. We cannot let fear stand in the way of progress. In 1833 the abolition of slavery in Britain was just the right thing to do. Today, we have to change the way we treat the planet in the same radical way. That’s, once again, just the right thing to do.
Share This Post
This entry was posted in Cop15. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
An offer for Governor Schwarzenegger »

There is plenty renewable energy to fight global warming

By JurriaanKamp | Published: December 17, 2009

greenglobeThe shift from our current fossil fuel based economies to sustainable renewable energy economies is usually presented as a great challenge. That is also the message coming from the UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen. Oil companies tell us that it can be done but that we need decades to get there. The numbers tell a bit of a different story. Total world energy consumption is about 15 terawatts (2005). All that energy can be generated by today’s solar panel technology on a sunny piece of land of about 550 by 550 kilometers (340 square miles). That is for instance about 3% of the surface of the United States and China, 4% of the surface of Australia, 3.5% of Brazil and 9% of India. And we just need to capture about 20% of the solar energy that hits such an area. Of course the beauty of solar energy is that it can be generated locally. So we are not going to see such a centralized production. But the numbers clearly convey that the challenge is not as huge as it is often presented.

Another argument that is frequently used goes that renewable energy is not always available where it is needed. That is true. There are places where there is not enough sunshine, not enough wind etc. But again that challenge is not as big as it is made out to be. Scientific American recently calculated the renewable power available in readily accessible locations. The numbers are staggering: there is 2 terawatts (TW) hydro energy easily available, 40-85 TW wind energy and 580 TW solar energy. So there is about 40 times more clean energy available than we need for the present world consumption. All that energy can be captured with technology that already exists! From that perspective the generation of renewable energy is hardly the huge challenge that we are told it is.

The challenge that we do face is another one. There are deeply vested interests connected to the current fossil fuel based energy supply. The current leading energy companies need to undergo a huge transformation to be able to play in the very local energy supply world of the future. There is a big difference between oil refineries and big power plants and a few solar panels on a roof and a windmill in the garden. Such transformations are challenging and, no doubt, painful.

Governments can support the necessary transformation in two ways. They can support renewable energy development with taxation that punishes polluting and unhealthy power generation. That is the simplest and most effective way to stimulate the creation of the clean energy economy. At the same time they can help the current big energy companies re-structure and transform in the very same way as they have done in the past with farmers, shipping companies and most recently in Detroit.

This is the conversation that should take place in Copenhagen. And we should talk about the many inspiring renewable energy solutions that are already in the works. Ode Magazine presents a nice selection in a special Copenhagen issue that is available for free here. We have many problems in our world but the generation of renewable energy to fight global warming is certainly not among those.
Share This Post
This entry was posted in Cop15. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
« Global warming was not created by developing countries
The biochar solution to global warming »

pharox-led60Agreements between countries “would never do enough,” California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said today at the Climate Conference in Copenhagen. Yes, these negotations are important, but Schwarzenegger rather puts his faith in people, not international laws. “I believe in the power of the iconoclast, the entrepreneur and the indivuals,” he said, adding scientists, capalists and activists to the list. After all, each great movement begins with people not governments, he says: the labor movement, women’s suffrage, civil rights, the Vietnam anti-war movement.

Schwarzenegger did not give many examples, but he could have refered to the makers of the Pharox, the LED bulb produced by Dutch technology firm Lemnis Lighting that uses at least 90 percent less energy than a 40-watt regular bulb, and lasts for more than 50,000 hours—that’s more than 30 years. Consider that 20 percent of the world’s energy bill is spent on lighting, and you don’t need to be a genius to realize how enormous the environmental and energy savings from LED bulbs could be.

No government rule urged these entrepreneurs to make such an efficient bulb; they just saw the opportunity for a huge market. Now, it requires other people—consumers—to pick up on this.

Ode wrote about the LED bulb in the special edition on climate solutions, which you can download for free here.

Invictus and Global Warming

By MarcoVisscher | Published: December 12, 2009

Photo: Flickr image by idiolector

I’m not saying the delegates should be smoking pot (though I’d like to say that), but if the ever-controversial hemp plant could enter the climate debate for a moment, it would quickly obvious that it’s a perfect alternative fuel.

Hemp grows almost anywhere, and can be used for everything from clothing and rope to ice cream and cosmetics. In 2007, Virginia farmer Grayson Sigler completed a 40-city tour in a 1983 Mercedes Benz powered by hemp oil. He only needed to swap his rubber hoses for synthetic ones, because hemp oil doubles as a solvent. That was the only modification he needed to get his Hempcar on the road.

Though numbers vary widely, it is estimated the fuel yield per acre of hemp is around 1,000 gallons. That’s quite a bit more than ethanol can offer—and it doesn’t drive up food prices a bit.

As Craig Cox shows in his article in the free digital issue of Ode Magazine on solutions to climate change, hemp is not the only unconventional crop that holds promise. Switchgrass and especially algae are even more efficient.

Invictus and Global Warming

By MarcoVisscher | Published: December 15, 2009

flank-steak-ck-614032-xI wonder what’s on the menu for the Copenhagen delegates. One thing I’m pretty sure of: It will include meat. For a conference that aims to halt climate change that should be seen as a pretty controversial choice. More than all the airplanes that flew the delegates there, it’s eating meat that is the biggest cause of global warming.

While livestock farming is responsible for “only” 9 percent of total CO2 emissions, it’s mainly its contribution to other greenhouse gases that are leading the meat-eaters to lead the list of climate polluters. Nitrous oxide and methane respectively contribute 300 and 23 times more to the greenhouse effect than CO2—and livestock is responsible for 65 percent of nitrous oxide emissions and 37 percent of methane emissions.

These numbers come from a 2006 United Nations report, “Livestock’s Long Shadow.” The authors concluded that the livestock industry accounts for 18 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions. That’s more than is produced by the various forms of transportation combined. In addition, 265 gallons (1,000 liters) of fossil fuel are needed to produce the meat consumed annually by the average family of four. When this fuel is burned, according to Jeremy Rifkin, author of Beyond Beef, more than 2.5 tons of extra CO2 enters the atmosphere—as much as the average car emits in six months.

Consumers are told to conserve by switching to energy-efficient light bulbs, to take public transportation more often, to turn off the TV when they’re not watching. Why aren’t environmental organizations telling them to eat less meat? Perhaps environmental organizations do not want to scare off their meat-eating members and funders, suggest Liz O’Neill of the UK’s Vegetarian Society in an article in Ode’s special edition with solutions to climate change. “The issue of vegetarianism makes them a little nervous,” she says. “But these numbers are really shocking.”

Well, if you want more numbers, here goes. A plant-based diet leads to enormous energy savings. An acre of grain yields five times as much protein as an acre used for meat production. Legumes provide 10 times as much; leafy vegetables, 15. Looks like we need vegetarianism to top the priority list in Copenhagen—and the menu list too.

Invictus and Global Warming

By JurriaanKamp | Published: December 15, 2009

1013518.largeLast night I went to see the new movie Invictus and I learned an important lesson about the challenge of global warming. That may seem an unexpected experience as the movie is about rugby in South Africa. The film tells the true story of the world championships rugby in South Africa in 1995, about a year after the Nelson Mandela had been elected president for the first time by the black majority of the country. After Mandela’s party, the African National Congress (ANC) had come to power Mandela resisted pressure to change the name and colors of the national rugby team, the Springboks. The Springboks had become a much-hated symbol of the Apartheid policies of the white minority in South Africa. Against the deeply felt sentiments of his black supporters Mandela took a huge gamble to let the Springboks keep their name and colors. More so he aligned himself with the captain of the Springboks, François Pienaar and inspired him to lead South Africa against many odds to the world championship. Mandela realized that he would alienate the white minority by taking ‘their’ Springboks away. He also saw in the rugby world championships a great opportunity to unite his country behind a common national goal. His gamble brilliantly paid off as South Africa took the championships and the vent triggered national celebrations never seen before indeed bringing together South Africans. It is a beautiful film with Morgan Freeman (Mandela) and Matt Damon (François Pienaar). And it’s a lesson in statesmanship. As Freeman says in the film to his angry black supporters who don’t understand why he wants to keep the Springboks (and Mandela might have well said the same): “You elected me to lead you. Now let me lead you”. Mandela withstood vested interests and built a new nation.

That’s exactly what government leaders around the world now need to do as well in response to the challenge posed by global warming: withstand vested interests and build new clean energy economies. It is hard to expect the oil industry with all its related political interests to easily and happily join in the transformation of the economy. However politicians representing the interests of the people at large should, like Mandela, point the way and make the shift to clean energy happen. Their “gamble” is hardly as risky as Mandela’s was. South Africa was an outsider to win the worlds championships in 1995. Mandela and Pienaar could have so easily lost. However the nations who dare to transform their fossil fuel based economies into sustainable renewable energy economies first will almost certainly gain a lot. Germany is leading in solar power and German industry—and employment—is already benefiting from that. The world is moving in the clean energy direction anyway and early leaders will be rewarded.

But to reap these rewards we need much more than, for instance, the initiative of US senators John Kerry, Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham. This is a perfect example of a careful step-by-step approach that almost never leads to big victories. As the architect of the successful German renewable energy policies, Bundestag member Hermann Scheer, says in an essay in a special edition of Ode Magazine on solutions to global warming (click here for your free digital copy): “Fear of revolutionary change is the motivating factor behind widespread resistance to renewable energy. It is necessary to overcome this resistance. There can be no environmental revolution in energy supply without creative destruction of the existing conventional energy industry. In the end, this is a question for politicians elected by the people. They have to decide what is more important: taking care of the future interests of the conventional power business or taking care of the future of society.”

Mandela would have known the right answer. We should hope that the world leaders that will be coming together in Copenhagen later this week will find some of his inspiration for their talks and meetings.

And, by the way, read the poem Invictus by William Ernest Henley that inspired Mandela during his many years in prison and that gave the movie its name. It’s a truly beautiful and inspiring poem.

The biochar solution to global warming

By JurriaanKamp | Published: December 18, 2009

BiocharThe Ode team that is distributing our special issue with solutions to global warming in Copenhagen ran into an old friend. We featured Thomas Harttung in our November 2008 issue. Harttung established an organic produce delivery service in Denmark that now has 45,000 members (about 1% of the Danish population) and annual revenues of about $55 million. Time recently named him a “hero of the environment”.

Harttung had come to Copenhagen for various meetings around the current UN Climate Conference. He has an interesting story about a solution to global warming. His new solution is, in fact, a very old one: biochar. Biochar is a charcoal-like product made from organic waste. It has been used for thousands of years to create rich, fertile soils in the Amazon by the natives there. “Terra Preta de Indio” or black earth of the Indians in Portuguese, was made by the Pre-Columbian Indians. They produced it by setting fire to organic waste, then piling earth on top of it and allowing it to smolder. Today, the biochar that they created is still in the earth. Evidence from soil sampls in the Amazon shows large concentrations of biochar remaining ater they were abandoned thousands of years ago. Moreover the tests show that the biochar has retained its ability to store nutrients and water.

The great thing about biochar is that it is good for both the soil and the climate: it fertilizes the soil and it captures carbon. In fact, it is probably the best method for carbon sequestration. A common estimate is that the CO2 that is captured is stored for centuries. Furthermore: biochar can be created from different sources of organic waste, so it can practically be made everywhere.

Thomas Harttung is producing biochar on his organic farm and he had come to Copenhagen to tell the story about this successful global warming solution. There is an International Biochar Initiative. Harttung’s story about the modern promise of ancient biochar is just one more example of the solutions that are available to fight global warming and clean up the planet. Whatever challenge global warming poses, there is really no lack of solutions.