road kill

Ever had one of those experiences that shake you up from within? I had one of those this morning. Something shocking happened today morning as I was driving to office today morning. I was driving on the fast lane and saw something like a rag fluttering on the road in front of me. It took me a second to process the information; it definitely looked more animate than a rag. But instinct told me to turn my steering wheel enough to keep it from going under my wheels. As I looked in my rear view mirror my horror confirmed itself, it was a small yellow chested sparrow like bird that had probably been hit by the truck that had just passed from the other side of the road. I was probably doing 120 kmph so I could see it only for a few more seconds, but as long as I was looking at it, it was still alive and hadn’t come under anyone’s tires. it was just a few seconds of my partial attention, but the image is so vivid in my mind almost in slow motion, I could feel its pain, fright, and I also felt helpless ....helpless that I could not help it. I would have been too far from it by the time I crossed from the fast lane into the slow lane and found a safe place to stop on the hard shoulder. By then some other car would have killed it. I did not have to see the beautiful creature flattened.... I could not see it. So I drove on. Though I wish a miracle would save it. Somehow it would have the fabled nine lives of a cat and flutter away to safety. I have been fighting with myself ever since.....I was weak hearted, not willing to see it dead. The probabilistic chance of my effort to stop in the next 200 meters, walk back, stop the traffic travelling at 120kmph in a safe manner was impossible. But that is a practical thought, and I hate my practical mind in this situation.
I don’t know why I am thinking about this so much, I've seen road kill before, dead rabbits, squirrels, crows flattened on the road. my reaction then is also similar, my face winces, I think to myself "ooooh no" try to swerve so that my tire does not go over it....and drive on...I don’t think about it. I guess I'm thinking now because I saw it while it was still alive, trying to survive, and I wanted it to survive.
It’s just like reading the newspaper headlines "11 dead in a bomb blast" or "family dies in road accident", we read the headline think to ourselves..."that’s so bad" and turn the page. But I’m sure my response and action would be different if I was at the scene....if even one of the wounded was alive.
I don’t know why I’m writing this, I’m just stating obvious facts, but the image of that elegant, beautiful, delicate, yellow breasted sparrow sized bird fluttering clumsily is burning through my skull.
I wish I was god, or I was living in the matrix, I wish I could make time stop in that instant so that everyone would freeze in their tracks, I could have stopped within 5 meters of passing the bird. walked up to it, picked it up, without it fluttering away and hurting itself even more in its reflex to stay away from captivity, and then driven it to safety of a veterinary hospital.

food for thought: I tried searching statistics on this, strangely enough I could only get US figures and was even more shocked "Every year in the US alone experimenters kill 100 million lab animals, hunters kill 200 million "game" animals, and motorists kill nearly 400 million road animals."

Ghuncha koi

 

all credit to Mohit Chauhan for his original song ....this poem is only remotely correlated to the sense and feel of his song ... so I borrowed the title

 

Dheere haule kadmon se badhtee hui

Ek kali sakuchake khiltee hui

Sharmaee hui, gamaktee hui

Sochti hai, ki main is bhavre ko apni raunak dikhaoon ki nahi

Isko apne rang mein rang jaane doon ki nahi

Apne madhu ke ras mein madhosh ho jaane doon ki nahi.

 

Aankhen natkhat, phir bhi bholi si

Kuch paheliyon ko suljhati hui

Kuch rahasyon ko chupati hui

Muskurahat chanchal, phir bhi sheetal si

Apni hasee se manon ko mohti hui

Zindagi mein jaan phoonkti hui

 

Din bhar ki chintaon ko bhulati hui

Ek pari mere kandhon pe sar rakh kar soti hui

Masoomiyat se bhare is chehre ko dekhta hoon

Sochta hoon aur muskurata hoon

Sochta hoon ki kaise ise mehfoos rakkhoon

Har kathinai ko iske raste se door rakkhoon

 

Ek haath se uske sar ko sahara dete huye

Uski garm saason ko mehsoos karte huye

Uske narm baalon ko sehlate huye

Sochta hoon ki ek raat to kya

Apni hazar raaton ki neend kurbaan kar doon main

Agar dekhoon use har subah angdai lekar uthte huye

-DS

Alternative Energy News

 

Alternative Energy News

Oh buoy! California decision a blow for wave energy, and a Canadian developer

Posted: 24 Oct 2008 09:06 AM CDT

Finavera Renewables, a Vancouver-based wind and wave power developer, has enough troubles these days. The publicly traded company has shares trading at 5 cents and as an untested newcomer to the developer scene it's considered much riskier than more established rivals when it comes to raising money, whether that be equity or debt. Not good when you're staring in the face of the worst credit-crunch and financial-sector meltdown in at least a generation.

Nothing a prescription of Ativan can't deal with, right? But then the California Public Utilities Commission comes along and nixes a wave-energy power purchase agreement between Finavera and Pacific Gas & Electric, which agreed to buy electricity from the Canadian company's 2-megawatt wave project — the first commercial wave contract in the country, experts say. It was to use Finavera's AquaBUOY technology, devices that turn the kinetic energy of vertical wave motion into emission-free electricity.

Greentech Media has the messy details here. The bottom line is that the commission declared the power-purchase price too high and the technology too unproven to proceed. Finavera has since put on a brave face, saying it will focus its efforts on projects under development in Canada and Ireland. But as nobel or attractive or economic any of those projects could be, the sad reality is that in this market at this time there's not much wiggle room for setbacks.

UK and Australia Launching Electric Car Infrastructure

Posted: 24 Oct 2008 08:36 AM CDT

Great Britain and Australia are bent on giving this world a better plan by rolling out recharging infrastructure to support future electric cars. Both countries believe the immediate zero emissions future lay in encouraging consumers to buy electric cars when they first become widely available in the next 2 or 3 years.

On Monday, the UK is set to announce that it will be installing thousands of electric car charging points throughout the country. The UK Ministers will be announcing $158 million USD in tax breaks and corporate incentives to spur electric vehicles into the marketplace. Currently, there are only 3,000 such vehicles in the UK.

The Brits are well aware that the Renault-Nissan Alliance will be rolling out EV’s in 2011 that have over a 100 mile range. Cleaning up smoggy old London and other regions is still of great concern even after Mayor Boris Johnson cancelled an order of 60 hydrogen cars for his city this past August.

The UK is also keeping its eye on Israel and Denmark and the Better Plan program, which helps those who drive over 100 miles in their electric car swap out batteries at special stations in under 5 minutes. Australia has decided to be the third and largest nation getting in on the action with an investment of $676 million.

Both recharging spots and battery exchange stations will be added to the world’s sixth largest country. Getting the Aussies to give up their gas guzzlers may be a bit tricky, but the low cost incentives will be worth it in regard to the low recharging price and vehicle maintenance costs.

California has around 500 recharging stations that it has built up over the past decade or so, but the rest of the states are still pretty scarce when it comes to support for electric vehicles. What we need is “electric cities” to come onboard such as Lake Portland, Oregon that is putting up recharging stations in support of future EV’s and PHEV’s.

A little planning now will pay dividends a few years from now and won’t involve any nasty “crushing” incidents.

Former Imperium CEO Martin Tobias Going Kashless

Posted: 24 Oct 2008 06:45 AM CDT

We've been wondering what the former CEO of biodiesel company Imperium Renewables, Martin Tobias, was going to do next. When we interviewed the serial entrepreneur and angel investor back in May at the Future In Review Conference he said he was mulling over his options — including the intersection of Internet and green — and said he still had another company in him. Well, we caught up with Tobias this morning and he confirmed that he has founded and is running re-commerce company Kashless.org (noted here and here, and in this job posting).

Tobias won't say much about the company and the site is in private alpha right now. But Kashless is a return to the software/Internet side of green, and Tobias previously founded and ran streaming media company Loud Eye. And compared to running Imperium, which raised hundreds of millions and was at one time planning an IPO, Kashless sounds like a lot less capital-intensive way back into the entrepreneurial world.

According to the job listing sites Kashless is described as a:

ReCommerce community and platform enabling person to person product reuse, sharing, lending, trade and other “cashless” transactions. By increasing reuse, Kashless.org will divert a significant amount of waste from the landfill and extend the useful life of many products. The company is fully funded . . .

Tobias writes on his blog about a formative experience of cleaning out his garage and trying to sell old, but still good, stuff that lead to forming Kashless:

In the end I got rid of everything but it was WAY TOO HARD and took way too much time/energy/effort. Heck, I was trying to give something away for free!

As Tobias points out in his blog post, there are a variety of web sites out there that help sell and swap used goods online. Craiglist, Freecycle, lesser well known sites like SwapThing and several Facebook applications, come to mind. But it does still take a large amount of time and effort to get your stuff swapped or sold — perhaps Tobias has a better way.

---

The Conference for Video Entrepreneurs and Influencers (at special $450 rate)
Meet the creators of Heroes and CSI, the CEOs of Hulu and Netflix, and the digital VPs of ABC and FOX.

Holy Breaking Wind Turbines!

Posted: 24 Oct 2008 05:16 AM CDT

A Suzlon wind turbine in Wyanet, Ill., had one of its 140-foot long blades break off this week (via Environmental Capital). The Indian turbine maker is still investigating this turbine failure but it appears to be related to the blade recall announced in March which requires the retrofitting 1,251 (417 sets) blades, mostly in the U.S., because of a design flaw that leads to blade cracking. The recall problem has already cost the company millions in canceled orders.

Earlier this year, the dramatic self-destruction of a Vestas wind turbine caught on video prompted the Danish climate minister to launch an investigation into turbine failure rates. The wind industry is moving to remedy the increasingly high-profile problem with the formation of the Reliawind project, a consortium of wind energy companies who are working together to improve the reliability, availability and overall up-time of their turbines.

When we reported on the videotaped Vestas turbine explosion, the wind energy watchdog group Industrial Wind Action Group had a list of 36 turbine failures in the U.S. Today that list has grown to 51 recorded turbine failures. Across the pond, the British group Caithness Wind Farms, which tracks such global turbine accidents, says the number has jumped to

Alternative Energy News

 

Alternative Energy News

A New “Open Rotor” Jet Engine That Could Reduce Fuel Consumption

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 07:04 PM CDT

NASA and GE Aviation are testing a new “open rotor” jet engine with with a different design that puts the fan blades on the outside of the engine. The jet fuel consumption will be reduced by more than 30 percent.

Blacklight`s Free Energy Device Finally Verified by Rowan University

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 06:56 PM CDT

As far as I know from 7th grade, hydrogen is the only chemical element that has only one electron spinning around an atom. It seems, though things are going to change here, since a medical doctor from New Jersey has discovered a different reality on it. The company Randell Mills founded is called Blacklight Power, and it has been written all over the internet about it a few months ago, when they firstly announced their "free energy" device discovery.

T. Boone Estimates He’s Down $2B From Drop in Oil, Gas Prices

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 04:00 PM CDT

Yet another profile of wind crusader T. Boone Pickens aired Sunday night — this time on 60 Minutes — and it had the usual details about the 80-year-old former oil baron's plan to get the U.S. off its addiction to foreign oil. But 60 Minutes did score an interesting tidbit about how much Pickens and his investment firm BP Capital have lost since oil and natural gas prices started dropping in July: $2 billion!

The steep drop in oil and gas prices since July has cut the value of Pickens' hedge fund in half. . . Overall, Pickens and BP Capital are down a staggering $2 billion. . . Boone acknowledges that is serious money. Asked if he'll get it back again, he says, “Yeah, I'll get it back.”

At the end of September the Wall Street Journal estimated that Pickens' funds had lost about $1 billion this year, including $270 million of personal losses. “It's my toughest run in 10 years,” Pickens told the Journal. “We missed the turn in the market, there's nothing fun about it.”

But Pickens also told the Journal that he thought oil would finish the year around $120 or $125, barring a major global economic downturn. Well, the international economic downturn appears to be here. On Friday oil prices dropped to around $63. While it's pretty hard to predict oil prices these days, we're not sure it's set to double in 2 months.

UK's Carbon Trust Launches Algae Biofuel Development Project

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 01:00 PM CDT

10/27/2008 - The UK's government-funded, low carbon technology investor and grant provider Carbon Trust has launched a project to fund research and development into algae-based biofuel...

AWEA 3rd Quarter Report Predicts Another Record Year for Wind Energy

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 01:00 PM CDT

10/27/2008 - The U.S. wind energy industry installed 1,389 megawatts (MW) this quarter, bringing to 4,204 MW the total of wind power projects completed in what is expected to be another record year, the American Wind Energy Association announced recently in its 3rd quarter market report...

Cascade Launches Oh-So-Quiet Rooftop Wind Turbine

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 01:00 PM CDT

Plastic parts maker Cascade Engineering is bringing a small rooftop wind turbine called the SWIFT to North America. The company says the SWIFT is significantly quieter than traditional small wind turbines — less than 35 decibels, compared with 40 to 50 decibels for competing products. The tiny turbine is already available in the UK, Belgium, New Zealand and the Netherlands through its Scottish designer, Renewable Devices. Cascade has licensed the technology to bring it to the U.S.

Several cities, including San Francisco and New York, have called for more small wind systems to be installed on city buildings, so perhaps the Grand Rapids, Mich.-based Cascade could be a hit with urban planners concerned about noise pollution from wind turbines. Renewable Devices says the SWIFT is “the quietest wind system currently available,” due to a ring that connects the outer edges of the blades, which causes air to move silently off the rotor.

In North America, Cascade is targeting both commercial and residential building owners, and the company will first offer the product in the Northeast and Great Lakes states. While the company is targeting home owners, it isn't a DIY product — it requires a professional installer and costs $10,000 to $12,000. For that price, customers get a wind turbine that produces 1.5 kW, or up to 2000 kWh per year, and has a blade diameter of 7 feet.

In the U.S., the market for small-scale wind is still tiny, and most of the wind turbines that get installed are for large wind farms that will sell the power to utilities. But there are still a variety of startups looking to develop products, as the trend of small-scale distributed renewable energy has started to gain momentum. Some of the startups we've covered include Quiet Revolution, Mariah Power, Marquiss Wind Power, Helix Wind, and Southwest Wind Power (round up here).

---

Television is being revolutionized.
What are the business opportunities for you in net video? Attend NewTeeVee Live (at special $450 rate) to find out.

Cobalt Biofuels and GOTV

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 11:47 AM CDT

This week saw only one announced cleantech venture deal.  Things have gotten suddenly very sloooowwww out there… And this week’s deal requires a mandatory: (self-promotion alert)… Cobalt Biofuels, a developer of technologies for the production of biobutanol, announced a $25mm Series C co-led by LSP and Pinnacle Ventures, and including participation by new investors Harris and [...]

Australian Scientists Create World’s Most Efficient Solar Cells

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 03:11 AM CDT

Scientists at the University of New South Wales have set a new world record by creating the first silicon solar cell to achieve 25% efficiency.

Team leader, Prof. Martin Green of the university’s ARC Photovoltaic Centre of Excellence, says their world-beating solar cell is now a massive six per cent more efficient than the next best technology. The record edges the current generation of solar cell technology closer to the theoretical limit of 29% efficiency.

Alternative Energy News

 

Alternative Energy News

Can Cap and Dividend Really Save the Economy or the Planet?

Posted: 18 Oct 2008 09:00 PM CDT

A clean energy economic stimulus plan could truly be climate advocates' "Trojan horse," as columnist Eric Pooley writes. But NOT if they follow Pooley's advice about how to formulate that plan and advance a full-on, economy-wide Cap and Dividend program next year.

The economy is all that matters now, and climate advocates - and the next President - would be wise to develop a strategic "Trojan horse" to advance their ecological goals within the framework of economic recovery. That's the thesis of "Save the Economy, Save the Planet," an article appearing in Slate last week by Eric Pooley.

Pooley gets the political analysis right, accurately diagnosing the potentially incurable political malady that dooms the chances of expansive carbon regulation in today's economic climate. But when it comes time to prescribe the remedy, Pooley is off-the-mark, arguing that a Cap and Dividend proposal is just what the doctor ordered.

Sorry, but that's the wrong answer. Unfortunately, Pooley is not alone in his prescribed solution, and it's time we took a close look at the obstacles to climate action and see just how far Cap and Dividend gets us (hint: it's not very far...)

Pooley, a longtime financial editor and columnist and a current Shorenstein Fellow at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, starts his column with an accurate analysis of the political situation:

"[A]t this moment of deep economic distress, warnings about future climate impacts aren't going to [be politically popular]. That much has been clear since June, when $4-a-gallon gasoline helped snuff the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act and the nation's hopes and dreams began shifting from save the planet to "drill, baby, drill." Opponents of Lieberman-Warner claimed it would jack up energy costs, throw people out of work, and kill the U.S. economy; supporters responded that its impact wouldn't be that bad. Not that bad is not that good a strategy, and green leaders realized then that if they were ever going to break the political logjam, they had to drive home a more optimistic economic message."

With the economy dominating the political arena, arguing within an economic revitalization framework is a huge opportunity - perhaps the only opportunity - to advance policies that will drive the key solutions to the climate crisis: the massive deployment of clean energy technologies and a dramatic increase in end-use energy efficiency. A clean energy economic stimulus plan could truly be climate and clean energy advocates' "Trojan horse," as Pooley puts it.

But not if they follow Pooley's advice about how to formulate that plan: continue to advance a full-on, economy-wide cap and trade program raising "$100-600 billion annually" (which translates into a CO2 price of $15-100 per metric ton at today's emissions levels). Pooley recommends that $15 billion or so per year would go to clean energy R&D, but he argues that the vast bulk of the funds should be sent right back to energy consumers in the form of dividend checks "to make sure the fix doesn't cost too much."

These dividend payments, designed to cover the increased costs of energy under the carbon pricing scheme, will some how make this bill magically possible, Pooley claims. Sorry, but this strategy, known as Cap and Dividend, is the wrong answer.

In order to succeed, any strategy to advance climate policy must overcome several very real obstacles. Unfortunately, adding dividends to the mix while advancing the same old cap and trade scheme doesn't help overcome any of them. Let's look at the facts...

Obstacle One: Public Opinion

Support for action on climate change is considered wide but notoriously shallow, and that's where Cap and Dividend is supposed to excel.

As Pooley writes:

"Yes, putting a price on carbon, whether through a tax or cap-and-trade, will drive up household energy costs in the short and medium term before reducing them in the long term, as alternative energy comes on line. Still, receiving an annual check from the climate bill's allowance auctions might persuade some to support it."

So how many people need persuading?

Sadly, only eighteen percent of the American public expressed strong belief that global warming is real, that it is caused by humans, and that it is harmful, according to a poll released last week and commissioned by the Alliance for Climate Protection (Al Gore's folks) and a coalition of environmental groups. Eighteen percent!

The poll found a stark partisan divide among respondents as well, with just 54% of Republicans polled even confirming that global warming is happening, let alone that it is human-caused and requires action.

That's a long way from the strong public support needed to make high carbon prices politically sustainable, and that means there's a lot of heavy lifting for those dividend checks to do.

Surprisingly, Cap and Dividend advocates are hard-pressed to find any concrete evidence - beyond anecdotes about Alaska's popular oil royalty-funded annual rebate checks - to support the assertion that the proposal is popular with the public. If anyone has hard numbers on Cap and Dividend's public appeal, I'd love to see them, especially since this is the crux of the argument for a dividend scheme.

Unfortunately, the only public opinion numbers I've seen don't look good for Cap and Dividend.

Those numbers come from a 2007 study [PDF] the Breakthrough Institute commissioned with the Nathan Cummings Foundation to test the public appeal of several approaches to the climate crisis, including a Cap and Dividend proposal. Barely 51 percent of respondents supported Cap and Dividend when it was tested. Furthermore, that support dropped to just 31 percent after respondents heard likely arguments against Cap and Dividend (respondents were told that the proposal would likely raise energy prices and result in a new government entitlement program).

So is Cap and Dividend the heavy lifter with the public we need? It doesn't look like it.

In contrast, polls have found consistent and deep support for actions to address economic insecurity, foreign energy dependency and increasing energy prices. The same 2007 study found that 85% of those polled supported a $300 billion, ten year investment to develop low-cost clean energy technologies and industries. Support stayed at 54% even after arguments were made against the Apollo-project style clean energy investment plan (respondents were told that there was no plan to pay for the proposal, increasing either taxes or deficit spending, and that despite spending hundreds of billions, the proposal wouldn't require polluting industries to reduce emissions).
At a time of economic recession, wouldn't public investment programs designed to directly stimulate the economy with investments in clean energy technology draw significantly greater public support than an effort to sugar-coat a carbon pricing program with dividend checks?

Obstacle Two: Elite Opinion (aka the "Technology Sixteen")

As we reported last week, sixteen Democratic senators we've dubbed the "Technology Sixteen" are aligning themselves to take control of the climate debate. These sixteen Democrats have all voiced substantive concerns with the cap and trade approach advanced by climate advocates this summer and indicated that they would have voted No on the failed Lieberman-Warner bill. Given the fact that this new gang of senators represents almost one third of the Democratic caucus in the Senate, the concerns of the Tech Sixteen must be addressed if climate policy has any hope in the United States Senate.

That presents a big problem for Cap and Dividend advocates.

To start with, the Tech Sixteen are far more concerned about the impacts of carbon pricing on their business, industry, labor and ag constituencies than they are with the cost to end-use energy consumers. That's why the Tech Sixteen are primarily concerned with cost-containment, technology development and deployment, and perks for the special interests in their districts (i.e. eligibility for ag sector offsets, incentives for utilities and manufacturing, etc.) - not on securing dividends for consumers.

The "Tech Sixteen" want to see a low carbon price and more spending on efforts to make clean energy cheap. So tell me how we get this critical block of senators to support a Cap and Dividend proposal designed to enact the highest carbon price possible and rebate nearly all of the revenue to consumers, leaving very little to spend on clean technology development and deployment (let alone their special interest constituencies)?

In short: it's hard to see how Cap and Dividend will sweeten the pot at all with the critical Tech Sixteen.

Obstacle Three: Effectiveness (aka the Market Fundamentalist Myth)

Finally, all this talk about Cap and Dividend is premised on the argument that we simply need a high price on carbon to correct market failures, driving the deployment of clean energy technologies and increased end-use efficiency that is the end goal.

Unfortunately, this is simply a market fundamentalist myth.

The "carbon pricing will save us" myth ignores the critical role government frequently plays in deploying enabling infrastructure (just consider for a moment the effects of rural electrification and the interstate highway system on the economy we take for granted today); driving technology innovation (while the Apple I may have been soldered together in Steve Wozniak's garage, the technologies that enabled the personal computer and the internet revolution were all developed in government labs); and supporting strategic emerging industries (e.g. incentives for emerging biomed and nanotechnology industries).

And just how high a price would you need to drive major increases in end-use efficiency or conservation?

Well, you'd need to have a CO2 price of $113 per ton to increase gasoline prices by just $1 per gallon. In the past two years, we've seen prices skyrocket by $2 dollars per gallon and yet have seen just a tiny dent in gasoline consumption (and emissions). So you have to ask yourself, what price will be sufficient to drive deep emissions reductions in the transportation sector?

Again, wouldn't it be smarter to focus directly on incentives to electrify transportation and get Americans and their stuff out of cars, planes and long-haul trucks? We could make investments to help Detroit retool to produce the most advanced vehicles in the world, support the mass development and deployment of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and build new high-speed electric rail and functional mass transit systems, and reinvest in efficient freight rail. And that's a strategy with direct economic benefits.

All this argues not for higher carbon prices but for more investment ... and again, that's a function not very well served by Cap and Dividend.

Conclusion

This economic crisis does present a key opportunity to advance critical investments in clean energy and energy efficiency. But a Cap and Dividend scheme is still a non-starter in the halls of the U.S. Senate - not to mention with the US public.

Today, we face an urgent moment: a new political climate is unfolding, a new president will soon be elected, and a ticking clock of climate feedback loops is winding down. We simply cannot afford another run through the U.S. Senate with a climate bill doomed to failure from the start.

For those who feel the urgency of our climate crisis as I do, we now face a critical time to (re)assess the current political climate and seize on any opportunities to advance real solutions it may present.

Our best hope would seem to be to advance a package of strategic investments framed explicitly and primarily about economic recovery and job creation.

If a clear economic imperative exists, we are apparently willing to put $700 billion (and counting) of taxpayer

You and I

You are the darkness in the light
You are the leftness in the right
You are the courage in the fight
You are the scene in the sight

I am the rightness in the wrong
I am the music in the song
I am the goodness in the bad
I am the saneness in the mad

You are the stranger's lonely glance
You are the Hero's only chance
You are the lines on my hand
You are a handful of sand.....

I am the half-truth in the lie
I am the next roll of the die
I am the why not in the why
I am the sun in the sky...

You are a child’s sweet desire
You are the warmth in the fire
You are the sound you'll never hear
You are the truth my dear