Having achieved historic action with the healthcare bill passed last month, the Obama administration wasted no time re-focusing on new priorities. Last Friday, April 16th, leading conservationists, environmental groups, outdoor recreation advocacy organizations and industry representatives were invited to Washington DC, for the White House Conservation Conference.  During the event, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum establishing America’s Great Outdoors Initiative, a national effort to “promote and support innovative community-level efforts to conserve outdoor spaces and to reconnect Americans to the outdoors”.

For all its fanfare, the event did not mark an immediate shifts in policy, but rather the beginning of a dialogue.  In what has become a political hallmark of the Obama presidency, the commander-and-chief said that his first goal was to listen: “We’re not talking about a big federal agenda being driven out of Washington. We’re talking about how we can collect best ideas on conservation… we’re going to build on successful efforts being spearheaded outside of Washington”.  Sitting in the diverse audience were not only the expected players like the Sierra Club and the Nature Conservancy, but also representatives from the ranching and timber industries, the National Rifle Association, urban green-space initiatives, and a host of smaller advocacy groups that are typically left out of the Washington policy-making bubble.

As a committed rock and alpine climber, I was surprised to learn that even my own modest constituency had a voice: our man was Brady Robinson, executive director of the Access Fund.  Compared to the Sierra Club (membership: 1.3 million; annual budget: $44.6 million) the Access Fund is a small organization, with 10,000 members and an annual budget of roughly one million dollars – making it just the kind of grass-roots, beyond the beltway organization Obama seemed to be appealing to for fresh ideas. Yesterday, I got Brady on the phone for his take on the meeting.

“It was organized on extremely short notice,” Brady told me, “The press releases went out on March 26th, and invites went out around April 1st. For the Access Fund it was an honor to be included. It’s a sign of the times that human powered recreation is being taken seriously, that conservation and recreation go hand and hand.”  In fact, the Access Fund’s presence was thanks in part to a policy strategy it adopted four years ago, when it co-founded the Outdoor Alliance, a policy-advocacy group formed with the American Canoe Association, American Hiking Society, American Whitewater, International Mountain Bicycling Association, and Winter Wildlands Alliance.

Our man inside the beltway: Brady Robinson, Executive Director of the Access Fund

“For a longtime, human powered outdoor recreation groups weren’t very organized – undermining our own efforts,” Brady explained, noting that motorized, equestrian, and hunting /fishing communities have been well organized for years.  “With the Outdoor Alliance, we’ve worked out a joint policy platform and have a constant presence in Washington. Each organization may be relatively small, but if you take a look at who participates in our respective activities, we represent the recreational interests of 1 in 3 Americans. By combining our efforts, we have a lot more traction.”

So, with the President asking for fresh ideas, what did Brady propose? The conference, he was quick to say, was more of a rallying-call and networking opportunity than a serious policy workshop. However, in smaller breakout sessions after the main event, each representative was given a minute and a half to speak.  “Like others, I spoke of the need for full-funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and also more emphasis on low-impact recreation from the US Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. Unfortunately, we frequently find that the talk coming from Washington doesn’t always match the management practices on the ground. A lot of their time goes into resource extraction and other obligations versus consistent recreational land management.”

What direction the conservation movement will take in the twenty-first century is still to be determined, though opinions are already being voiced. Carl Pope, Chairman of the Sierra Club wrote of healing the divide between rural conservationists – farmers, hunters, and anglers – and urban environmentalists. Others noted that Obama, the first president in more than a generation to come from a truly urban home, would likely make green efforts in cities and close to large population centers a focus of the initiative.

And Brady spoke of money: “The budgetary crunch is obviously a huge issue right now, so it would be a mistake to expect a big influx of funding right away. But for me, the take away point was that the administration thinks conservation and access to outdoor recreation for all Americans is important. They want climbers and the human powered outdoor recreation community to be represented. We have a place at the table, and the ability to help set the agenda.”

Rescuers boarding a Black Hawk during a SAR in the winter of 2007. Although the New Hampshire Air National Guard volunteers their time for rescues, they are frequently deployed overseas and unavailable, necessitating more costly measures.

It’s fair to say Scott Mason bit off a little more than he could chew.

In April, the Eagle Scout embarked on an ambitious one day traverse of the northern Presidential range in New Hampshire’s White Mountains. Early into his hike, he twisted an ankle, but chose to continue. A few miles later, Mason re-considered and opted for a quicker route back to the road, only to find the trail blocked by numerous streams swollen by spring snow melt.

While the young hiker settled down for an uncomfortable night without a sleeping bag, ensolite pad, or tent, a search effort was launched. His parents reported him missing, and soon New Hampshire Fish and Game officers, aided by an army of volunteers, were combing the mountains. A helicopter was brought in from neighboring Maine. Finally, after three long days and nights of difficult back-country travel, Mason reversed his route and rendezvoused with a search party not far from the summit of Mount Washington. When he was reunited with his parents, several network television crews and a phalanx of reporters were on hand to capture the drama.

It appeared that the Mason SAR had reached a happy conclusion. The boy was found, alive, and while he had certainly made a serious error in deciding to continue into a remote area after spraining his ankle, he also exercised some good judgment that allowed him to emerge from the experience unscathed. The embarrassment at making the A-section of the Boston Globe and being on the evening news seemed like the right dose of punishment to ensure that he would learn from his mistakes and mature to become a better prepared outdoorsman.  The New Hampshire Fish and Game Department, meanwhile, got to bask in some positive PR. And dozens of volunteers got to skip work for the day and play hero.

Then came the fallout: two weeks ago, Mason received a bill for $25,238 from the State of New Hampshire.  “It was his negligence that led to him getting into that predicament,” Major Tim Acerno of the New Hampshire Fish and Game recently said, adding that a helicopter used in the search significantly increased the cost of the mission. Mason has until August 9th to pay settle up or challenge the bill in a court of law. His family has declined to comment further on the matter.

In the meantime, the situation has ignited a minor firestorm that continues to smolder as the Mason family considers their options. Not only was the teen – who, at age seventeen, was a minor at the time of the rescue, but has since turned eighteen – suddenly saddled with a bill equivalent to a year’s tuition at a private college, but he was also subject to a second round of ruthless Monday morning quarterbacking.

“If you go to these isolated areas to be “away from people…” then be prepared to die or if we have to come rescue you then get ready to pay,” one online poster opined in the comments section of a Boston Globe article. “The kid lacked basic sense. Maybe this fine will discourage other macho stupidity,” a second wrote. “It’s about time these unprepared bozos pay,” said a third.  Everyone from newspaper columnists to experienced guides have been sounding off with their own opinions on what happens when the government attempts to regulate adventure.

With that in mind, I’ll offer a few thoughts of my own.  The following is just my private opinion.  It’s based on my own general experience as an outdoorsman and guide, but also on the fact that, as a volunteer rescuer, I participated in the search for Scott Mason. And moreover — by a combination of circumstance and plain luck — I was the person who happened to find him.

It turns out Scott Mason did not need to be rescued.  When I spotted him, he was approximately a mile below the top of Mount Washington, moving towards the summit at a steady pace. I have no doubt that he would have reached the observatory located there under his own power, irregardless of the massive search operation that was under way. (I don’t mean to imply that the search effort was inept. The same swollen creeks that had boxed Scott into the Great Gulf had boxed search teams out; for three days everyone was caught in a frustrating and inadvertent game of cat-and-mouse.) But regardless of the circumstances of his “rescue”, the State has held Scott liable due to his original decision to continue into a remote area with a sprained ankle. By the letter of the law in New Hampshire as things currently stand, that is probably true.

It sets a dangerous precedent when the government assumes the authority to regulate personal decisions made in the wilderness.  As Edward Abby wrote: “A venturesome minority will always be able to set off on their own, and no obstacles should be placed in their path; let them take risks, for Godsake, let them get lost, sunburnt, stranded, drowned, eaten by bears, buried alive under avalanches–that is the right and privilege of any free American.” I whole heartedly agree.  And having worked alongside many Fish and Game personel during SARs, I’m convinced they don’t want to have to police the backcountry for negligent hikers either.

But even an adventure libertarian like me must acknowledge that rescues cost money, and our personal decisions can carry greater social repercussions that demand all outdoorsman assume responsibility for their actions. In the midst of a recession, land management agencies at the local, state, and federal level are all experiencing severe cash shortages.  Scott’s 25,000 dollar bill was a re-imbursement, not a penalty or punishment. The simple fact is his search cost a lot of money, far more than 25,000 dollars, and someone needs to pay the bill.

While the dispute may be headed to court, lost in the controversy is the fact that a third option does exist. If you’re in a car accident without car insurance, or get sick without health insurance, you are likely to face big financial problems whether it’s your fault or not. One can also purchase rescue insurance.  Though not commonly carried in the United States, that is the standard in Europe, and even here in the US some organizations like the American Alpine Club offer its members a basic policy. Just as I think it’s irresponsible for anyone who can afford it to not have a minimum catastrophe health insurance, outdoorsmen who choose to engage in risky adventures should make sure they are covered in the event they need help.

Nobody – not outdoorsmen, not tax payers, not the land managers themselves – wants government to be in the business of regulating adventure. But it’s clear through rising special user fees and search and rescue repayment laws that that is the direction we are headed in if the outdoor community doesn’t take responsibility on its own. Organizations like the Appalachian Mountain Club and the Sierra Club should offer their members rescue insurance. Adventurers should also have more choices for purchasing a rescue/evacuation rider on their existing health insurance plans (many do already exist). These kinds of improvements would protect the individual from big fees like the one Scott Mason currently faces, but also help prevent government agencies from applying rigid legal definitions like “negligence” to wilderness situations in their effort to re-coup costs and stay under budget.

In the meantime, be warned: if you choose to roll the dice by continuing into the wilderness with a sprained ankle and no insurance – you may unfortunately have to pay the price.

K2: The Savage Mountain

Charles Houston/Robert Bates, McGraw-Hill 1954; Lyons Press 2009

Brevity is one quality frequently lacking in modern adventure stories – yet this book succeeds in recounting the epic American 1953 K2 expedition in a snappy 140 pages. In decided contrast to the big European siege assaults of the era, the trip was a lightweight venture undertaken by a tightly knit and well organized group of friends. K2 was unclimbed at the time, and they succeeded in establishing a high camp within spitting distance of the summit, only to be struck by a powerful storm.  The ensuing descent quickly became an all out fight for survival. Houston and Bates alternatively narrate most of the story (a device that works brilliantly when Houston is knocked unconscious and suffers a concussion in the midst of the descent), and two other team-members contribute individual chapters as well – a reflection of the low-key, humble attitudes that made the expedition so successful. The story is a powerful reminder of how hard 8,000 meter climbing was in the age before SAT phones, gortex, or specialized forecasts, but the clear-eyed voices that speak from each page harken back to a more innocent time.  K2: The Savage Mountain is a fitting testimate to a true high watermark of American Himalayan climbing.

Young Men and Fire

Norman Maclean, University of Chicago Press 1972, 1993

Clearly, novelist Norman Maclean knew a thing or two about how to tell a good story. In Young Men and Fire, he does not try to keep the reader in suspense. Rather, he begins his tale by taking the reader on a walk through the burned-out landscape of Mann Gulch, the day after a forest fire killed thirteen smoke jumpers in an unexpectedly violent blow-up. By acknowledging the “what” so early on, Maclean frees himself to concentrate on the “why”, and the following account of his thirty year obsession with the tragedy becomes as much a musing on his own mortality as it is a search to reconstruct the final moments of the young men’s lives (the meticulous research into the science and physiology of fires begs comparison to The Perfect Storm). But the reader should not be surprised if, by the end of the book, they are more concerned about the fate of their narrator than the “thirteen lonely crosses”: this is non-fiction of the highest order.

The Long Walk

Slavomir Rawicz, Lyons Press 1956, 1997

Epic is a word thrown around a lot in on the covers of adventure non-fiction these days. For a true definition of the word, I suggest reading Slavomir Rawicz’s The Long Walk. A Polish cavalry officer on the eve of World War II, Rawicz was captured by the Russians and sent to labor camp in Siberia. Before long, he and a small band of compatriots hatch a plan to escape… and walk to India. His journey across Asia, including the Siberian arctic, the Gobi desert, and the Himalayas is nothing short of incredible. It would be tempting to revel in the undeniably grim circumstances of the venture, but with World War II raging beyond the horizon, Rawicz never forgets that it is a far better fate to be a man battling nature than a man battling men. The Long Walk is a refreshing triumph of simple human dignity and courage.

It’s all that, plus they kill a deer with an axe.

One day last spring it was discovered that several anchor stations at Cathedral Ledge’s popular north end practice slabs had been removed.  Furthermore, the party responsible had left behind an unsightly mess of bent studs and battered hangers.  The rock surrounding this carnage was chipped from visible hammer blows, and – most alarmingly – a two word warning was scrapped into the rock at the base of the crag, just to the right of the start of Henry Barber’s famed route Recluse:  “NO BOLTS”.  An immediate reprisal was mounted by several local guides, who re-installed the bolts within twenty-four hours of their violent departure.  These new fixtures were promptly bludgeoned as well.

North Conway’s climbing community has always enjoyed a feisty ethical discourse.  Bolts are periodically added and removed from the cliff.  When the action gets too hot,  disputes are settled in the true New England tradition with a town meeting.  But say what you will about chopping bolts, there seemed to be little rationale for doing such a bad job of it.  Past choppers have been good enough neighbors to fully remove the hanger and stud, taking care not to damage the surrounding rock.  A few pebbles and a speck of glue later, and the hole was never there.  But this was different. This was a crime of passion.  And an inability to understand the other side of the argument often leads to a more violent reaction against it.

A likely perpetrator, well known on the local coffee shop circuit, was identified.  Indeed, this individual readily implicated himself in a string of self-damaging and baffling posts on an area internet site.  Tensions mounted.  A few leftist firebrands suggested a second wave of retaliation bolting, several conservative commentators called for this to be the start of a general cliff-wide cleansing of retro-bolts.  Most sensible-minded folk merely rolled their eyes and waited for cooler heads to prevail.  Perhaps we just all needed to sit down and work this one out.  Regretfully, there was no attempt at holding a local forum, nor was there any attempt to open a dialogue with the perpetrator.

A small group of offended locals did take action, however, and the incident was quietly brought to the attention of State authorities.  A case was built, and by summer’s end, misdemeanor charges were filed against the perp for committing acts of “vandalism” within a state park.  In an interesting twist, these developments were kept quiet from the general community.  The majority of climbers in the Mount Washington Valley never knew that their local climbing ethic was about to be decided by a county judge down in Ossipee.  The defendant waited quietly for his date with justice, and when it came, the swift arm of the law delivered a 360 dollar fine upon him.

And suddenly the vandal enjoyed a stunning change of fortune.  Word finally got out, almost overnight.  His status in the local community went from amateur hack to celebrated martyr.  A collection was taken up.  Those who had been against the bolts contributed.  Those who had been in favor of replacing the bolts contributed.  All sides were suddenly united in their belief in the right to self-government.  17 individuals committed twenty dollars each, reducing the vandal’s loss to an equal twenty dollar share.  Local consensus may tolerate the odd bolt chopping,  but it certainly does not abide the odd tattle tail.

It’s early January now as I write this, and I’m still not sure exactly what kind of statement the vandal was trying to make by chopping those bolts, nor do I know if anyone’s bothered to replace them yet.  Nor do I really care.  It’s ice climbing season now, and hey, live free or die.

Originally published in Alpinist Magazine.

The flame’s ascent to the 29,028 foot apex of the world’s highest mountain on May 8th was a singular triumph for the Communist Party of China’s propaganda machine. Spring is the traditional season to climb Everest, and typically the mountain’s northern (Tibetan) and southern (Nepali) sides swarm with an international mix of expeditions vying for the top. Would-be summiteers pay peak fees of 5,000 – 10,000 per person to each respective government for the right to climb Everest. Moreover, they are a vital source of money for the local economy, through the hiring of cooks, porters, and logistical services. This spring, however, the rules of the game changed. Citing several reasons, including “increased environmental pressures”, the Chinese Tibet Mountaineering Association issued a ban on all expeditions until after May 10th. The CTMA “requested” that their Nepali neighbors to the south do the same.

Poor Nepal. It’s not easy being a landlocked country in Asia — especially when you’re sandwiched between two aspiring hegemons like China and India, and have to deal with the public humiliation of being the only country in the twenty-first century to undergo a communist revolution. How embarrassing. The Nepali government appeared to waffle for several weeks in March, during which time the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Tourism made conflicting statements and as many as thirty different expeditions waited in Katmandu for a definitive decision. By early April, the Ministry of Tourism announced that it would be issuing permits for Everest, but with a few strings attached. All expedition leaders were forced to sign a document stating that “the team shall not carry and exhibit any things like flags, banners, stickers, pamphlets or any audio visual devices that may harm bilateral relationship between Nepal and China.” It went on to specify that until after May 10th, all electronic equipment – satellite phones, computers, and video cameras – was to be temporarily held by the police in base camp and no climbers would be allowed beyond Camp 2 at 21,000 feet onto the upper mountain. All news reports broadcast from base camp first had to be approved by the Ministry of Tourism. To enforce these rules, a garrison of soldiers was dispatched to the mountain.

As spring progressed, rumors of censorship and escalating tension on Everest flew through the global mountaineering community: Nepali soldiers were cleared to use deadly force on any climber interfering with the torch’s ascent, Chinese security guards and plain clothes policemen were flooding base camp, snipers were stationed at Camp 2. A few voices in the mountaineering community criticized the media censorship surrounding the Olympic torch’s Everest climb and China’s blatant meddling in Nepal. Reinhold Messner, the grandfather of modern Himalayan climbing and a former member of the EU Parliament decried the ascent as an insult to the people of Tibet. The prestigious French organization, the Groupe de Haute Montagne issued a statement calling on all mountaineers to condemn the ascent.

What’s truly remarkable, however, is the degree to which Everest climbers willingly submitted to these strong arm tactics. Hardly any major expeditions voluntarily canceled their plans to climb Everest from Nepal on moral grounds, and there was virtually no talk of boycotts or organized protest in the Everest climbing community. So far there’s only been a single report of a climber being arrested for civil disobedience: a twenty-six year old from Virginia was forced to leave the mountain and given a two year ban on climbing in Nepal for carrying a small flag that reportedly read: “Free Tibet / fuck China”.

The Himalayan climbing community’s tacit acquiescence to the will of corrupt Asian regimes is nothing new. In 2006, a young Tibetan nun attempting to flee into Nepal was murdered by Chinese soldiers at advance base camp on nearby Cho Oyu, the eighth highest mountain in the world. Despite the fact that tens of Western climbers were on hand to witness the murder in broad daylight, it took days before the story was reported to the international media.

The changing demographics of Himalayan climbing has something to do with this appalling sort of abdication of moral responsibility. Once the domain of a few iconoclast, counter-culture adventurers, the Himalayas of today are overrun by commercial expeditions, with wealthy cliental paying a premium to be escorted all the way to the summit by a small army of high altitude Sherpas and western guides. Expedition leaders, anxious for a smooth, hassle-free climb, are highly conscious that they are obliged to cooperate with the government’s demands. Today Mount Everest means big business, and few appear willing to put their livelihoods on the line for political conviction.

Others are quick to point out that the dollars they bring to the local economy are the best possible thing for the impoverished people of the region. After all, Nepal isn’t hosting the Olympics and it isn’t occupying Tibet, so why should it be punished for the actions of its bullying neighbor? The essential point here – engagement over isolation – parallels wider western attitudes towards the Olympics this summer. With the Games only ten weeks away, talk of boycotting the event has been largely deflected by those scheduled to compete or attend. Many athletes have publicly stated that they are against a boycott and will compete in the Games, not as any endorsement of China’s policies, but as a statement that athletic excellence and global unity should transcend politics.

But this argument does little to absolve those climbing on Everest this spring of some small share of complicity in China’s human rights violations, and its systematic attempts to cover up those abuses. The Olympics are a chance for global athletes to come together and compete on an even playing field regardless of their race, nationality, or background. These principles stand in rank contrast to current cost of doing business on Mount Everest, where enough money, and a willingness to sacrifice a few ideals along the way, can buy you a place at the top.

Originally published on the Huffington Post on May 27th, 2008.

With the recent economic hardships affecting Americans everywhere, it makes sense that there should be a renewed national impulse towards thriftiness. And what is more thrifty than a localized recycling of goods? For the seller, yard sales offer a low-overhead, non-taxable income source. For the buyer, they are the perfect way to pick up everyday household consumer products at bargain basement prices. And for the environment, yard sales provide a means of saving the landfills and reducing the heavy, fossil-fuel laden footprint of global manufacturing and shipping.

Nevertheless, the skeptic can’t help wondering: do we as Americans really have it in our national spirit to spend our holiday weekends cruising the land for used mattresses and old stereo equipment? Will the easy consumption of big box stores prevail, endlessly spewing out more Chinese-manufactured cheap plastic goods, destined for the landfill in less than three years’ time? In my home state of New Hampshire, I took to the back roads on a sunny Memorial Day afternoon to investigate.

“Nobody’s around”, said Tim Baker of Albany, New Hampshire. “The parking lots are empty. If people don’t travel, money doesn’t flow.” As we chatted, a man approached with a large plastic wall clock bearing the logo for Schlitz beer. He liked the clock, but didn’t have enough cash with him to pay the twenty dollar asking price. “How much you got?” Tim asked. “Twelve dollars? Fine. It’s yours. Hey, you interested in this garage tent?”

Just a little way up the road in North Conway, Bob and Jackie Goode had several tables of items set up on their driveway. Jackie offered a more nuanced analysis of the market: “It’s been hit or miss… There are some low bids, but then other folks will come along and pay the price.” Jackie said they held a yard sale twice a year, each spring and fall. Were yard sales going out of fashion? “Not in this day and age!” Jackie responded. As proof of the flourishing yard sale economy, she pointed to the success of internet sites like eBay and Craig’s List.

The couple’s children had all moved out, so yard sales made practical sense as a means to downsize the family clutter. But it was also clear that Jackie loved the thrill of the bargain hunt. “These days, people are digging for good deals. If you keep looking, you can find anything. See that hat?” She gestured to a friend wearing a handsome leather cowboy hat. “I found that for three dollars at the flea market in Old Orchard Beach last weekend – three dollars!”, she told me proudly.

Others, I soon discovered, see the yard sale business as a sheer philanthropic necessity. Later that afternoon, I followed signs advertising a “Huge Lawn Sale” down a dead-end street with cracked pavement. I parked my truck in front of a driveway packed with dusty piles of children’s clothes, boxes of books, and tables of electronic goods. A man with a far-away look in his eyes and an impressive tattoo of a Scottish coat-of-arms on his neck greeted me.

“Do you need a stroller or any baby clothes?” he asked. He didn’t wait for a response, but kept right on talking in soft, slightly resigned mono-tone statements. I don’t think he was being rude or impatient – it just seemed that he could tell at a glance that I probably wasn’t going to take any of the junk he had neatly arrayed around him.

The weekend had been pretty good, he said. “This has been my first lawn sale in two years, and I got plenty of stuff to get rid of.” In fact, most of the stuff he would give away, for free. He just wanted to make sure that it got used. Times were hard and he knew there were people who couldn’t afford things. He began to point out various items he had saved: Four baby strollers, a walker, a couple of boxes of Christmas decorations.

Ron, as he eventually introduced himself, just couldn’t stand throwing away items that were still useful. As a last resort, he would take things to the thrift store at the local dump, but they often charged him 5 dollars to leave a working refrigerator or lawn mower. “How about that?” he asked. “Having to pay somebody else to take your stuff…” He shook his head sadly.

In all, Ron said that he had probably made around forty dollars that weekend. But financial success was a secondary concern. Ron had two rented storage units filled with more stuff that he was going to clean out that week. If he didn’t get rid of the stuff in his garage this weekend, he would have no place to put the new junk coming in from the storage units.

“I just don’t understand it… I’m willing to give this stuff away, and people still won’t take it.” His voice drifted off. I stood there in silence with him for a few moments, then took my leave. The drive home took me past the local Wal-Mart, and I couldn’t help noticing that the parking lot was full, bustling with eager Memorial Day shoppers.

One thing’s for certain: the yard sale economy has plenty of room to grow.

Originally published on the Huffington Post on June 6th, 2008.

Don’t get me wrong: Steve isn’t a blue-suit corporate type. He’s the kind of guy who rolls up his sleeves and get dirty. For three generations, the small fleet of trucks belonging to Frechette Oil and Backhoe Service have been a familiar sight around the towns and villages of Carroll County, chortling off purposefully to do their work of keeping the community warm all winter long. When his grandfather first got into the business, they delivered coal. In 1967, his father decided to make the change to oil. And now, some 41 years later, Steve’s moving the family business into solar heating. Like most Yankees, it’s important to him that he practices what he preaches. Steve’s first gig? Installing a solar water heater at his own home.

Steve’s decision couldn’t be more timely. The region currently faces nothing less than a full blown crisis driven by heating oil prices that have nearly doubled in the past 12 months. Last year, the federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program provided 25 million dollars to 33,000 New Hampshire families. At a meeting of New England governors in Boston last week, New Hampshire Governor John Lynch said that double that amount was needed for the coming winter. Even if Washington provides that much funding, the crunch will be acutely felt — especially by middle class families who don’t qualify for federal assistance. Might solar be the answer?

While we waited for the concrete truck to arrive and pour the footings, Steve led me into his basement, bounding down the stairs two at a time. He dove into the basics of the system. An eight foot by five foot solar collector made up of evacuated tubes captures energy from the sun and uses it to heat a closed loop system that is pumped to a heat exchanger in his basement, where it warms the household supply of potable water. A computerized controller regulates the temperature and flow through the use of pumps, and an electric heater stores the hot water and functions as a back up. “In summer, this will produce 100 percent of our hot water, and in winter, probably about 80 percent,” Steve told me. Ironically, the biggest problem is having too much hot water, which must be drained off via a relief valve.

Steve estimates that his solar water system will save around 250 gallons of heating oil a year (heating oil currently costs $4.69 in the area… you do the math). Depending on the size of the house, a system runs between 7,000 and 11,000 dollars. “BUT — that’s before the tax rebates”, Steve added with the mischievous sparkle of a salesman. Considering the federal tax incentive (a 30 percent rebate), and many state rebates stacked on top of that (in NH, another 25 percent), a system might pay for itself in only three or four years.

Even to someone who sells oil, this makes a lot of sense. Of course, Steve also sees business opportunity: nobody else in the local community installs solar water systems like this. I asked Steve why more people in the industry haven’t come around to solar technology. “I think a lot of guys were skeptical when it first became available, back in the late 70′s and 80′s,” he answered. “And that was bad technology, with lots of maintenance involved.” He adds that many tradesmen are still wary of installing new, unproven technology — and then backing their work with a twenty or thirty year guarantee. Furthermore, new systems mean taking time off from work to learn how to properly install and maintain them. And finally, you have to be able to sell them. That’s no sure thing in rural New England, where the average income is 37,000 dollars.

Five dollar a gallon gas might be the best thing to ever happen to the green revolution, but there are still plenty of reasons to stay on the sidelines, especially if you happen to be a rural tradesman trying to support a family in middle of the worst economic slump in a generation. Why stick your neck out and make the leap to alternative energy? Steve may be the most optimistic guy in the whole county. And winning the hearts and minds of more guys like Steve — the heating experts who keep you warm, the electricians who wire your house, the mechanics who fix your car — should be the green revolution’s top priority.

As for Steve, he cautions that solar water systems like the one he’s installing can only do so much. “Some of these 5,000 – 6,000 square foot homes that are being built are ridiculous. Even 3,000 square feet is pretty big. People need to start building smaller, and they need to build for maximum southern exposure, not the best view.”

Of course if you’re not interested, Steve will be happy to sell you heating oil, delivered right to your door step, at the going rate of 4.69 a gallon.

Originally published on the Huffington Post on July 13th, 2009.

The cost of home heating oil has increased 80 percent in the last year, and many rural communities are in dire economic shape already. There’s a real possibility that low income families will not be able to afford enough oil to last them through the coldest months, and will have to choose between food, medicine, or a warm home.

Right now there’s no relying on the federal government. For 2009, the White House slashed the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program’s budget by 22 percent, to 1.9 billion dollars. Although a cadre of New England senators have introduced bills to more than double LIHEAP’s funding, additional support is far from assured. On Friday, Senator Judd Gregg proposed legislation that would provide an additional 2.5 billion dollars to LIHEAP, as well as funding for weatherization and home energy tax credits for the middle class. The effort promptly stalled on Saturday when the Senate voted against moving to consider the bill.

Expect to hear a lot more from Washington on this important issue — but the Congressional debate is far removed from the front line communities that are struggling to prepare for what may well be nothing short of a small-scale humanitarian crisis. Locally, town officers and state representatives are beginning to meet with charitable foundations, non-profits organizations, local church groups and home heating professionals. They’re planning public forums, organizing fundraisers, and discussing how to best allocate money. And they have a staggering amount of work to do.

At one such meeting, held in a local fire station, twenty community leaders gathered in a conference room just behind two bright ladder trucks that sparkled in the cool darkness of the station garage. The back door was propped open to facilitate airflow in the muggy July weather, and many in attendance sipped cold soft drinks, but an icy reality undercut the gathering.

The town manager spoke first. She said, by way of introduction, that the town currently has a 1,500 dollar contingency fund for heating aid — about enough money to provide 3 households with 100 gallons of heating oil each. Next, a representative from the county-wide Community Action Programs, the organization that distributes LIHEAP funds, reported to the group. She said that they had already begun to process applications for assistance in a bare bones, women-and-children-first fashion. Those deemed “most vulnerable” — the elderly, the disabled, and those with children under the age of five — could apply for aid now. After September 1st, the gates will be opened to all other households that qualify according to the low income guidelines. But the CAP won’t know until December 1st how much money they actually have to distribute from LIHEAP, leading to considerable concern about enabling people to expect support before the money is secure.

Most of the meeting centered around coordinating local organizations to raise and distribute money as a safety net for those who LIHEAP has to turn away, or who use up their assistance money and still need additional help. It seemed that there were more questions then answers. Would the Rotary Club be willing to act as a clearing house for money raised through donations and fundraisers? Would the funding be limited to residents of the town, or available to the entire county? What about needy families who live just across the border in Maine? Would the money be designated strictly for heating aid, or could it also be used to help buy food? Somebody mentioned that in the nearby village of Sandwich, the three town selectmen had each contributed 500 dollars to create ad-hoc emergency heating fund. As soon as money is taken out of the fund to help a needy member of the community, a new donor is approached to make a contribution, thereby always maintaining a 1,500 balance. Another person asked if town land could be made available to provide free firewood to those who need it. After all, dry hardwood is being advertised on the front page of the local paper for 300 dollars a cord — that itself is a record high price.

The last comment reminded me that despite the dark circumstances currently facing many Americans in the northern US, heating crises are nothing new in this part of the world. As the meeting continued, it struck me that this is what New Englanders have done for hundreds of years — come together town by town, under one roof, to figure out how they will make it through another winter. And in the end, regardless of Congressional stalling or the generosity of Hugo Chavez, that may be what gets us through the winter of 2009.

Originally published on the Huffington Post on July 27th, 2008.