jagadees

Archive for 2009

Lithium battery with ten-fold increased energy capacity

In Battery, ToMl on November 9, 2009 at 3:44 am

Researchers in the UK are developing a rechargeable lithium-air battery that could deliver a ten-fold increase in energy capacity compared to that of currently available lithium-ion cells. The research work, funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), is being led by researchers at the University of St Andrews with partners at Strathclyde and Newcastle.

Lithium-air batteries use a catalytic air cathode in combination with an electrolyte and a lithium anode. Oxygen from the air is the active material for the cathode and is reduced at the cathode surface. An issue with Li-air batteries can be the accumulation of solid reaction products on the electrode, which blocks the contact between electrolyte and air.

The project addresses a number of the materials issues necessary to realize this high energy storage battery based on a non-aqueous O2 electrode. During the project, the team has so far more than tripled the capacity to store charge in the STAIR (St Andrews Air) cell.

The project is focused on understanding more about how the chemical reaction of the battery works and investigating how to improve it. The research team is also working towards making a STAIR cell prototype suited, in the first instance, for small applications, such as mobile phones or MP3 players.

- from greencarcongress

The long memory is the most radical idea in the world

In Music, ToMl on November 9, 2009 at 3:35 am

Over the span of nearly four decades, Utah Phillips worked in what he referred to as “the Trade,” performing tirelessly for audiences in large and small cities throughout the United States, Canada and Europe. His songs were performed by Emmylou Harris, Waylon Jennings, Joan Baez and Arlo Guthrie. He earned a Grammy nomination for an album he recorded with Ani DiFranco and was awarded a Lifetime Achievement Award by the Folk Alliance.

The legendary folk musician, peace and labor activist died on May 23rd of this year. He passed away in his sleep in Nevada City. He was seventy-three years old.

Born Bruce Duncan Phillips in 1935, he later adopted the name “Utah,” from where he grew up. The son of labor organizers, Utah Phillips was a lifelong member of the Industrial Workers of the World, known as the Wobblies. As a teenager, he ran away from home and started living as a hobo who rode the rails and wrote songs about his experiences. In 1956, Utah Phillips joined the Army and served in the Korean War, an experience he would later refer to as the turning point of his life. In 1968, he ran for the US Senate on the Peace and Freedom Party ticket.

In Nevada City, California, he started a nationally syndicated folk music radio show called Loafer’s Glory, produced at community radio station KVMR. He also helped found the Hospitality House homeless shelter and the Peace and Justice Center there.

When you have an engagement, at least in my world, the world that I create for myself, an engagement doesn’t begin when you hit the stage and end when you leave the stage. It begins when you hit the city limits, and it ends when you leave the city limits.

Utah Phillips talking:

There’s a whole lot going on in that town. My trade is like being paid to go to schools, and every town is its own teacher. Every town, that’s my university. And there are marvels and wonders. There’s Hobos from Hell, are from Santa Cruz. They’re young people riding on the freight trains, and they’re better at it than I ever thought I would be. You’ve got the Homeless Garden Project. You’ve got just an enormous rich community here.

I was involved some years ago in helping to organize a street singers’ guild in this town, and it—you got to beat the streets and learn from the people, and then you’ve got to get on their stage and, having done that and been with those people, let that audience know that you’re not just doing the show you did in the town the night before, you know. You’re no—you’ve got to know who you’re with and where you are. That’s very important to me. And they’ve got to know that I understand that, that I’m really there for them.

I was born in Cleveland, Ohio in 1935.

I left home. I went up to work in Yellowstone National Park during high school. I was going to make some summer money. I went up on the freight trains, and for the first time I rode the freight trains. And I worked on a road rating crew. And at that time, I was playing the ukulele and singing ersatz Hawaiian music—Johnny Noble, things like that, “Lovely Hula Hands,” “Malihini Melee.”

The other hands working on that crew, a lot of them were old, old alcoholics who could only shovel gravel. But they knew songs. And late at night, you know, there would be a fire. We would live in these clapboard shanties. They sang old songs, Jimmie Rodgers, and they sang old Gene Autry songs, songs I had never heard, but were much closer to the way I was living right there at that time, certainly a lot closer than as Hawaiian music. So they showed me how to turn my ukulele chords into guitar chords and taught me those songs.

And it’s right about then I started making songs in that mold, making songs of what I saw in the world around me, but using those tune models and those verse models that had endured for so long and will continue to endure simply because they work. So, you know, I’ve been making songs and stories for over fifty years now. It’s a way of life. It’s like breathing.

I joined the Army. Like old—as a string fellow said, some people learn things the hard way, but at least then you never forget it. I joined the Army and then got pipelined for Korea. I was there after Panmunjan, you know, after the treaty, right after the treaty there, the truce. Life amid the ruins—I mean, it was absolute life amid the ruins. Children crying—that’s the memory of Korea. Devastation. I saw an elegant and ancient culture in a small Asian country devastated by the impact of cultural and economic imperialism. And the impact of an army of young men given unlimited license for excess of every kind, of violence, sexual, booze, what have you, drugs—a blueprint for self-destruction. And I knew that if I endured that, I would perish, I would simply perish.

It was there in Korea in that situation around those kinds of experiences—and I was up—I was up on the Imjin River, and I wanted to swim in it, because I wanted to wash all that away, all that away. And I was told I couldn’t swim in the Imjin. And it was the young K orean there, Yoon Suk An [phon.], who explained to me why I couldn’t. He said, “When we marry, we move into our grandparents’, in with our grandparents, and—but the place is devastated. There’s nothing growing. It’s all dead. So when the first child comes, somebody has to leave, and it’s the old man. The grandfather will leave and go sit on the bank of the Imjin with a jug of water and a blanket until he dies and will roll down into the water.” He said, “You can’t swim in the Imjin, because those are our elders being carried out to sea.”

Well, that’s when I cracked. You know, that’s when I broke up. I said I can’t do this anymore. You know, this is all wrong. It all has to change. And the change has to begin with me. It was right then that I decided that the idea of manhood that I had been given, that blueprint for self-destruction, that my father had lied to me about manhood, my drill instructors, my Army sergeants, my scoutmaster, my gym instructor in high school. They had all lied to me about what manhood was, and it was up to me to begin to figure out what it really meant.

It takes a long time to shut up and listen. It takes a long time just to plain shut up and listen. I tell you, what I learned was—I decided that the great struggles, the wars that you’re talking about—it could be the Bosnian War, it could be the Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, it could be the Korean War, it could be the Iraqi War, whatever, it doesn’t matter—it’s all—every—the thing they all have in common is that it’s young men with guns doing it to everybody else. Women aren’t doing it. Kids aren’t doing it. Old people aren’t doing it. Disabled people aren’t doing it. It’s young people with guns, you know, that are doing it to everybody else. And we don’t have a problem with violence in the world. We’ve got a serious male problem. And I bought into it, so I know. And I’m buying myself out of it, you see. It’s terribly, terribly important for me for people to understand that and begin to shut up and listen. The most important movement in the world is the feminist movement. If we can really figure out what’s going on between men and women, the other problems will take care of themselves. I’m sure of it.

I was in Korea for eighteen months, and I extended for some months. I made it back to Salt Lake, and I was going into the post office, and there was an old man sitting under the bush out there, taking a water break. Well, that man was Ammon Hennacy, the great Catholic Worker, one of Dorothy Day’s people. And Ammon Hennacy had come to Salt Lake to open the Joe Hill House of Hospitality, one of the Catholic Worker houses. And Ammon took me in. And I was there with Ammon for about eight years at the Joe Hill House.

Ammon came to me one day and said, “You’ve got to be a pacifist.” And I said, “How’s that?” He said, “Well, you act out a lot. You use a lot of violent behavior.” And I was. You know, I was very angry, very angry person. “And you just act out a lot. And if you brought a lot, you’re not any good at it. You’re the one who keeps getting thrown through the front door, and I’m tired of fixing the damn thing. You’ve got to be a pacifist.”

He had a more fundamentalist way of looking at it. And I said, “What’s that?” He said, “Well, I could give you a book by Gandhi, but you wouldn’t read it. So”—but he said, “You’ve got to look at nonviolence like—your capacity for violence like an alcoholic looks at booze.” Alcohol—booze will kill an alcoholic, unless he has the courage to sit in a circle of people that are like that, put his hand up and say, “Hi. My name is Utah. I’m an alcoholic.” But then you can—once you own the behavior, you can deal with it. You know, you can have it defined for you by the people whose lives you’ve messed with, and it’s not going to go away. Twenty years sober, you’re not going to sit in that circle and say, “Well, I’m not an alcoholic anymore.” You’re going to put up your hand and say, “My name is Utah. I’m an alcoholic.”

He said, “It’s the same with violence. You acknowledge your capacity for violence, you see, and you learn how to deal with it every day, every instant, in every situation for the rest of your life, because it’s not going to go away. But it will save your life.” See, it’s a different way of looking at pacifism. I have to be a pacifist, you see.

So I said, “OK, I’ll do that, Ammon.” And he said, “It’s not enough.” And I said, “Oh.” He said, “You were born a white man in mid-twentieth century industrial America. You came into the world armed to the teeth with an arsenal of weapons, the weapons of privilege, economic privilege, racial privilege, sexual privilege. You’re going to be a pacifist. You’re not just going to lay down guns and fists and knives and hard angry words. You’re going to have to lay down the weapons of privilege and go into the world completely disarmed. Well, you try that.” I’ve been at it—Ammon died over thirty years ago, and I’m still at it. But if there’s one struggle that animates my life, it’s probably that one.

The name come in the Army. I was from Utah, and nobody ever heard of anybody from Utah. Had mail call out in the street, and they holler out “Utah!” and I’m the guy who says, “Here, sir.” So the name, you know, since—it’s like calling somebody Tex if they’re from Texas or calling them Louise if they’re from Louisiana maybe. I don’t know. So that name just stuck.

The “U. Utah”—I’ve always been known as “U. Utah Phillips,” and that comes—I guess I can say that now. That’s been a closely held secret for years. When I was in Utah there first learning the kind of music I love, my favorite singer was T. Texas Tyler. So my friend, Norman Ritchie, the traveling teenage sage, started calling me U. Utah Phillips.

In my union, the Industrial Workers of the World, this is my fiftieth year in the IWW, by the way, my proudest association. It is the only organization I’ve ever been—ever known of that didn’t break faith with its elders.

Well, when I hit the road, when I went out to try to find out who I really was, to reconstruct my life, when I left Utah, I found those elders and I sought them out. I never thought I would be able to say this, Amy, but my—most of my elders, most of my great teachers, were born the century before last. [inaudible] born in the 1890s. And I think of Fred Thompson and the elders that I’ve talked to that went through the First World War as unionists and endured the Espionage Act, endured the enormous persecution, and just kept at it and kept at it. That was an amazing thing, because that was the—one of the effects of the war—and the same thing happened in the Second World War, was to use that super patriotism and to use the enhanced governmental powers to break the back of the labor movement, especially the radical labor movement, the IWW, and pretty damn well, near succeeded. In spite of that, of that terrible oppression and that awful war, we came out of that war with the beginning of the eight-hour day, with mine safety laws, with child labor laws, you know? We were still winning all the time we were losing.

Industrial Workers of the World was started—grew out of the Western Federation of Miners. It started in 1905. The cornerstone of the IWW was the notion that people in the same industry should belong to the same union.

Big Bill Haywood there in Colorado, Big Bill, the true American, he was one of the founders of the IWW. His father rode for the Pony Express. His mother was a forty-niner who got off the wagon train in Salt Lake. Bill was born in Salt Lake. There in Colorado, he’d see how a mine would get struck. So they’d bring in scabs to bring out scab ore, and then it would be transported to the mill on the union train and milled at the union mill. He said all of the people in this industry should belong to one union, because that’s union scabbing.

So industrial unionism was born as an alternative to craft unionism, like the AFL, organized bodies of workers fighting against each other. And it wasn’t just industrial unionism; it was the One Big Union, the OBU, a union of all skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled workers in one big union, divided up into industrial departments, syndicalists, syndicalism, which would then replace the government; the means of production in the hands of the producers, produced for use instead of profit, create abundance for workers and nothing for parasites; an end to the wage system. Well, like John Greenway called the IWW a banzai charge on capitalism, and that was about right.

Well, of course, the union dwindled, you know, after the First World War, the Palmer Raids, which were so much worse than anything we’re experiencing now, but still survived. And now the union is growing, has been growing for quite a long time now.

Attorney General Palmer, that was the first Red Scare, the first big Red Scare. The Russian Revolution had been accomplished right at the, during the First World War. So the first big Red Scare happened when Attorney General Palmer caused thousands of unionists to be jailed and many, many immigrant workers to be deported without any kind of due process. And it was like an industrial war. And Palmer—they did their best to break up the IWW, but it never succeeded, because we have survived and we have persisted.

Comparing Palmer Raids and the Espionage Act with the time we’re living in now.

I think that we’re being frog-marched into a corporate fascist takeover of the country. And no fooling, I think that we’re in the Weimar Republic. And that’s another thing that I would encourage young people to understand, what—that was Germany before the Second World War, the rise of Hitler, the rise of Nazism. Why didn’t people do anything? You know, the big question that young Germans are asking their grandparents: “Why didn’t you do something?” Read about the Weimar, compare the rise of fascism in Germany from the 1920s to what’s happening right here right now.

The long memory is the most radical idea in America. That long memory has been taken away from us. Listen, you young people I’m talking to, that long memory has been taken away from you. You haven’t gotten it in your schools. You’re not getting it on your television. You’re not getting it anywhere. You’re being leapfrogged from one crisis to the next. You know, you can’t remember what happened last week, because you’re locked into this week’s crisis.

No, turn that off. walk away from that. Walk out your front door. Go find your elders. Go find your true elders. Go find your people that lived that life, who knew that life and who know that history. And get your hands down into that deep rich stream of our people’s history. We divided our culture up into a market for youngers, a market for young adults, a market for young marrieds, a market for older people, you know. It’s not that way. And mass media contributed to that by taking the great movements that we’ve been through and trivializing important events. No, our people’s history is like one long river. It flows down from way over there. And everything that those people did and everything they lived flows down to me, and I can reach down and take out what I need, if I have the courage to go out and ask questions. That huge river, you know, it’s like tributaries that flow down into the polluted river and purify it and purify it.

I’ll watch television once a year just to get kind of an idea of what is happening to people’s minds, or maybe I want to go see the World Series. The frequency of images is so fast that I can’t track it. If I don’t—I don’t have TV, and I don’t like them, so I can’t understand how people can watch them. The frequency of the images is just too fast. I can’t take it all in. we’re thinking differently. Television alters consciousness. If it didn’t, they wouldn’t use it. It’s intended to alter consciousness.

Me, the last TV set I had, I shot. I don’t know what commercial importunement drove me off of the pier, but I hauled it into the backyard. It was up in Spokane, Washington, and I got a—had an old Stevens shotgun. I tied a scarf around it for a blindfold and scotch-taped a cigarette to the front and lit it and let it burn an appropriate amount of time, and then I blew a hole through it with the shotgun. It was out there in the lilac hedge, which grew through it eventually. It was kind of pretty after a while. But I have not, I haven’t owned one of those foolish things since.

I think that abandoning children, to a television set—children are born with this bridge between world time and dreamtime. They wander back-and-forth over it at will, and you never know which side of the bridge they’re going to be standing at either. You’ve just got to be willing to stand with them at the dreamtime end of the bridge, instead of jerking them over the bridge into world time on the presumption that facts will save your butt. Have they? Well, they won’t.

Kids understand storytelling. They understand stories, and they understand that particular kind of magic. And they also understand innately that all the wonders of the mind need not be explicit. We’re robbing children of their imagination. We just said earlier that the glory of radio is that it unlocks the imagination, as my wife said, and television—because you create your own images—and television gives you the images. Also, television is there to say to these kids, see, kids—you can take a coffee can and turn it into a rocket ship, you see? You create the story. If you have the story and you want to act out, and then you create the object to act it out. Television turns that around backwards and says you can’t have this story unless you buy the object—the exact opposite of what we’re born to do. We have to fight like hell to turn ourselves back to our own best natural selves. And that’s part of what I’m doing.

Myles Horton was the world’s—the best educator the country ever had. And I knew Myles. He was a fine, remarkable man, good preacher, too. The Highlander principle was that any group of people in the community experiencing a problem, if they sit in a circle and spend a couple of days telling each other their life story, will eventually arrive at a solution to the problem. So the Highlander School was created for people to come together and do that.

So there’s food that’s prepared for them, a place to stay. And if you run into a knotty problem and you need a lawyer or you need an expert—and, you know, ex is a has-been, a spurt is a drip under pressure—you need an expert come in there, they’ll come in and tell you what you want to hear, and then they have to leave. You know how a lawyer can take over a meeting. And then you go back and just use the information, because it’s right in the hands of those people to do that.

And that’s where Rosa Parks was. Martin Luther King was there. Remember that billboard during the ’60s that the John Birch Society put up, said Martin Luther King at a communist training school? That was Highlander that he was at.

it was Myles’s idea, an extraordinary idea that works. Myles was a great organizer by himself. Myles Horton told me once, he said he was doing an organizing job in a little, small town, a coal mine job, and the thugs were in town, and they were going to try to break the union, you know, pretty violent. The preacher feared for Myles’s life and gave him a horse pistol to protect himself, but it was broken, and it didn’t have any ammunition. And Myles said he didn’t know how use it anyway.

Myles was looking out the front window down on the street from the rooming house, and a big black car pulled up and these three goons got out. And Myles opened the window and, dangling that pistol out the window, said, “Hey, you down there. Let me tell you something.” They looked up and said, “Horton, you can’t tell us anything.” He said, “Oh, yes, I can. You’ve got to get organized.” They said, “What do you mean?” He said, “You’re not organized.” “What do you mean?” He said, “Well, now, look. You’re going to come upstairs and try to kill me. You’re going to kick in my door. I’m going to shoot the first one inside the door, and I may get the second one. Third one will get me. But you’ve got to decide which one’s going to come in first. You’ve got to get organized.” Well, they talked to each other for a while and got in the car and drove away. Myles could do that.

One time he—Myles, he did a—he was invited to give a talk on leadership. And he showed up in town, and he couldn’t remember where he was supposed to go. He lost the piece of paper. So he walked up to the main part of town, and he saw a bunch of people going into a hall, so he followed them. And he went in there and saw his name on the reader board, and everybody sat down and he sat down. When they were all sat down, he got up and walked to the front onto the stage and said, “Leadership is finding a bunch of people that look like they know where they’re going and following them, and when they’re all sitting down, stand up and talk to them about leadership.”

Highlander, New Market, Tennessee. There’s a wonderful book about Highlander called Seeds of Change—Seeds of Fire, Seeds of Change. And I highly recommend it. And then, The Long Haul is Myles Horton’s autobiography, and that’s—I think that’s still in print, so… You want to find yourself a hero, folks, you know, read Myles Horton. Now that he’s passed—Ammon Hennacy said to me, “If you got to have heroes, make sure they’re dead, so they can’t blow it.” That’s just good advice.

“One of my favorite people to talk about is Idaho Blackie, Idaho Blackie up there in—I used to cut wood in his woodlot, one of those old Wobblies that I sought out and I like to talk about. He got told to work in the forest. He used to work in the forest for his living. Well, unfortunately, his little holding that he was going to build his cabin on was over there in Hayden Lake, Idaho. Now, Hayden Lake, you may recall, was the home of the Church of Aryan Nations, those neo-Nazis that moved into north Idaho, Reverend Butler and his crowd. Well, his place butted right up against the compound of the Church of Aryan Nations, and that was not a marriage made in heaven.

I went over there to see if he was still alive, and he was out there duck hunting from the front porch, too old to go into the forest. He used to go into the forest when he was young with a case of whisky and a shotgun and get so high he’d go duck hunting with a rake. Well, he was out there blazing away, and he had got the duck, but it fell into the compound of the Church of Aryan Nations. Well, he got up real—got up painfully. He was in advanced stages of crusty old farthood. And he walked around the edge of the fence, and there was the church. These neo-Nazis pretend to be Christians, but then most Christians do. And there was a school, grades one through eight, and the little fascist kids were out there playing with their Klaus Barbie dolls. I don’t make this stuff up.

And he went to lay hold of the duck, and out of the back of the church came Reverend Butler himself, no spring chicken himself. He was in his jackboots and his suntans and his sand-brown belt and armband, little 30 mission crush cap with a patent leather bill on it. And he laid hold of that duck and allowed, how as, whatever the Lord chose to deliver up on that patch of ground belonged to the Church of Aryan Nations. They altercated some—fun to watch—and it got to be rancorous, though.

And finally, Reverend Butler drew himself up in all of his Prussian majesty and announced they were going to settle this in the manner of true Aryan gentlemen. I’ll be delicate, because this is radio. He said, “We are going to take turns kicking each other in our magic parts”—each other’s magic parts, you catch my drift—“and the one left standing is going to keep this duck. And you, sir, as it was your shot that felled the bird, will have first crack at it.”

Well, Blackie tottered back three or four feet, reached down into some private recess of his soul for energy hoarded for just this occasion, flew forward, delivered a right smart kick to Reverend Butler’s magic parts, cast him to the ground in a fit of doom and vituperation, flopping around like a fish, blanched out, turning completely white—what he’d been trying to do all his life, anyway. Finally, he dug his heels into the ground, pushed himself up against a tree, levered himself to a standing position, rocking back, heel to toe, preparing to have at Idaho Blackie. Blackie turned to him and said, “It’s OK. You can keep the duck.””

Let’s see, you started out with what media has done to people. You know that better than I do. That’s why you do what you do. See, you’re doing an alternative media. And if we play our cards right and have enough time, then pretty soon it won’t be alternative media anymore. But then, we have a thorough understanding—don’t we, Amy—that they fight with money and we fight with time, and they’re going to run out of money before we run out of time. So we’ll just be patient, and you do your work, and I’ll do mine, and we’ll catch up and overtake them.

It’s a damn shame, though, that we have to be alternative. But then, we’re in a capitalist environment, we’re in a capitalist system that’s built on—that’s built on the least commendable features of the human psyche, greed and envy, rather than the best. We in community radio, in pirate radio, in alternative music distribution, we reach for the best in people, you know, we don’t—not lowest common denominators. And we are building a new world within the shell of the old.

I don’t feel pessimistic about that at all. There’s simply too many good people right here in this room, too many good people on the street, close to the street, doing too many good things for me to afford the luxury of being pessimistic. I’m going to—I’ll tell people that tonight, damn it. I’m glad it came up. If I look at the world from the top down, from FOX, God help me, or CNN or—there ought to be a CNN Anon to wean people from that idiocy. If I look at it from the top down, I get seriously depressed. The world’s going to hell in a wheelbarrow. But if I walk out the door, turn all that off, and go with the people, whatever town I’m in, who are doing the real work down at the street level, like I say, there’s too many good people doing too many good things for me to let myself be pessimistic about that. I’m hopeful, can’t live without hope. Can you?

The music industry, the music monster, well, I bailed on them. I was in New York, after I left Utah on a kind of blacklist, and I was a fish out of water. I had to be told I was singing folk music. And I wound up in New York City, and there was a fellow there that was going to manage me and Rosalee Sorrels. We were assured he was the most honest manager in New York City. It took me a year to figure out that “scrupulously honest” in New York City was a jailable offense elsewhere. And I bailed out on that, you know, and I realized that I would no longer own what I do. I was a good Wobbly. You need to own the means of your production. I would have to abdicate most of the creative decisions to non-artists, and I said I’m not going to do that.

I decided that I would learn the trade. The trade is a fine, elegant, beautiful, very fruitful trade. In that trade, I can make a living and not a killing, and that was very important to me, to make a living and not a killing, to live reasonably well. I found a world of folk music. I found folk music societies all over the country, little singer circles, a little program here, Spirit of the Woods, Manistee, Michigan, what have you. And these were people who part of their pattern of social responsibility was being committed to making sure folk music happened in their community, like you might work for United Fund or muscular dystrophy. And so, I would come into town to do a concert as a partner in that effort. So the past thirty-five years I’ve been in this trade, I had no bosses. That’s another part of it: no boss. I make all the creative decisions.

And then, this wonderful glorious movement, the most healthiest one that’s happening in this country, is organized folk music, people turning off those machines and getting together to sharing music and food as a holy activity, singer circles, folksong societies, campouts, things like that, take care of each other’s kids, potlucks. It’s—you find that town, town, city for city, all happening below the level of media notice. And that’s where I happen, that’s where I want to happen, below the level of media notice, off of their radar, and create this world that’s apart, but which, as I say, if we’re patient and continue to build and to do our work in place, we will no longer be the margin. We will no longer be the alternative.

John R. Cash once sent me a—well, no, he called me on the phone. There was a fellow named Paul Milosevich, used to paint a beautiful painting for outlaw country singers down in Austin, Texas. I discovered the difference between outlaw country music and Nashville country music was that in outlaw they had dirty hats and in Nashville they had clean white cowboy hats. And if you wanted to be an outlaw, you had to take it off and throw it under a truck at a truck stop and let it run over four or five times, then you could be an outlaw. I knew that.

Paul Milosevich had taken him a bunch of songs I had made up, and John R. Cash, Johnny Cash, said, “I’d like to record these songs.” And Paul said, “Well, you’d better talk to Utah first.” He could have demanded a license. You know, that’s the way the law is written, copyright laws. If they had already been recorded once, you could demand a license. But no, he’s a gentleman. He called me up and said, “I want to record these songs.” And I said, “I’d appreciate it if you didn’t do that.”

And we talked a good deal about that, you know. I think what I told him, I said, “I don’t want to contribute anything to that industry. I can’t fault you for what you’re doing. I admire what you do. But I can’t feed that dragon. I’m not going to feed that dragon.” And, of course, he and other people said, “Well, think of the money that you’d make. You could put it together in any cause you wanted.” And I said, “Mr. Cash, think about dollars as bullets. And the ragged band of revolutionaries meet on the field with the general of the army, and the general says, ‘We’re going to divide up the bullets. I’ll take seven, and you’ll take three. And then we’ll fight.’ Who’s going to win?” See, so—and a lot of people got on me. Melvina Reynolds was furious with me for not doing that, you know, for not making the deal. And I was on the edge of doing it, you know, any number of times.

And finally I said I’ve got to resolve this. I got a call from Santa Rosa. They were going to open a peace center, and they asked me if I’d come and sing. And I said, “Well, I think I can get there.” And they said, “By the way, Father Daniel Berrigan will be there.” I said, “OK,” and I went over there so I could do the show, but also so I could ask him, Father Berrigan, say, “What do I do in this situation? Would you have any advice?” And so, I told him the story backstage, and Father Berrigan said—all he said was “Oh, yeah. They’ll always tell you how much good you can do with dirty money.” And he walked away. So, OK, you know, I called and said, “No, no. Don’t do that.”

What I wound up doing was turning around, since there is mandatory licensing, is telling people who want to record those songs I make up, even if you’re a little label or you’re self-produced, you know, folk legacy, something like that, go ahead and do it, I just won’t sue you. And if somebody does demand a license, you know, and gets it, like the industrial-strength performers, I set up a non-sprinkling trust called the busker’s fund. And the money, I don’t even see it, just bypasses me and goes into there for people for medical relief for over-the-road folkies who can’t get health insurance.

I don’t want to make money writing songs. There are people who make money writing songs; I can’t fault that. I’m an anarchist. I don’t make rules for other people. I make rules for myself. And it’s also a kind of penance for what I saw and felt when I was in Korea. And that’s where we started, isn’t it?

I ran for the US Senate in 1968 on the Peace and Freedom ticket, took a leave of absence from state service—I was a state archivist—and ran a full campaign, twenty-seven counties. We took 6,000 votes in Utah. But when it was over, my job would vanish, and I couldn’t get work anymore in Utah.

So I hung on for about a year living on a cot in the back of a warehouse, keeping a little draft resistance center going. And, of course, by that time, we were dealing with deserters that didn’t want to go back to ’Nam, rather than, you know, the resisters. And I did some work with the Utah Migrant Council, started the Joe Hill House again, because Ammon had moved to Phoenix because he was too old to run it.

Finally, I had just run out of moves. I couldn’t find work, and that’s when people, friends like Rosalee Sorrels, suggested I leave Utah and try to make a living telling stories and singing songs, which seemed criminal or somehow unthinkable in Utah. But that’s when I went out and found—discovered this whole world.

I was an archivist, yeah. I handled 75,000 cubic feet of public records. For an information junkie, that’s heaven. Yeah, I loved studying archival science, and I still have a library in my home that I curate, my own little research library of popular antiquities. And that’s where my mind lives when I’m at home.

Archival science is in a serious—a serious crisis, and that’s because of electronic media, electronic storage and retrieval. A lot of hotshot, fancy, high-tech salesmen have gone to a lot of archives and archivists and sold them some bogus hardware and software. How many books has the Library of Congress lost? Millions of books, because the images have vanished, whatever the storage system is, electronic storage system is. It’s degraded to the point where the stuff is no longer usable.

In the Utah state archives, the best and most durable records are on paper, from the 1800s, the old Mormon Governor Brigham Young’s papers. Why? Because there was potassium in the water they used to make the paper in their own mill, and that’s a natural paper preservative. And that’s true, I think, of any archive in the country. You talk to the archivists; they’ll say the most durable resource they have is still on paper.

Well, what’s the shelf life of a CD? Is it about ten years, ten, twelve years? Congress won’t accept tape for archival purposes, because after about ten, fifteen years, it bleeds through, you see? That it—paper. You know, LPs, I have, what, over 150 John McCormack 78s from the early 1900s—my favorite singer, John McCormack—and I can play those and listen to those. Same with my LPs. The whole information is becoming more and more temporary. And you’re absolutely right. You know, it is terribly threatening to every archive to be bullied by technocrats into going that route.

Ammon never went to the polls, but you couldn’t tell him you hadn’t voted. He did vote. Ammon’s body was his ballot. And he cast it in behalf of the poor around him every day of his life. And he paid a terrible price for that. You couldn’t tell him he hadn’t voted. He said, “Yes, I did vote. I just didn’t assign responsibility to other people to do things. I accept responsibility and saw to it that something got done.” It’s a different way of looking at voting, isn’t it? And you can do that all the time. You could have your life. And that’s the way I live my life. My body is my ballot. It’s a lesson I learned from Ammon. That’s my way. That’s the vow I took, and I’m not going to break it. Right?

Given that, I can’t, of course, ask people to do something that I wouldn’t do, you know, but it does appear to me that these fascists that have taken over have got to get—we’ve got to get rid of them. They’re not Republicans, and they’re not Democrats up there. You know, they’re something else. They’re corporate fascists. And they got to be out of there. And the only organized force on the planet—in the country that I know of that can do that is the Democratic Party. God help us all. You know, it’s like buying a seat on the Titanic, the Democratic Party, but they’re the only force, organized force, that has the ability to do it. So it’s imperative that the entire progressive movement come together, like they did in the Great Depression at the time of the CIO.

Every progressive force in the country came together, gave them the window of opportunity, Roosevelt’s second term, and put their differences on the shelves, stopped hammering on each other. In the Great Depression. And we came out of that with Social Security and workmen’s compensation and a minimum wage, you understand? The whole progressive movement, from animal rights to the feminist movement to anti-nuclear—I don’t care what permutation—have got to saying, “This is my issue, this is my issue,” and join forces and once again create the united front, total united front, and take over the Democratic Party, and that’s the only way we’re going to be able to do this, to pull this off. We can’t do that—then, when we’ve done it, go back and hammer on each other, OK, but for right now, all the difference has got to be pushed aside. I am absolutely appalled at these Democratic candidates hammering on each other, you know, not recognizing the direness of our situation.

It is long since, since those people should have sat down in a room together and decided which one could be elected and put everything they had into that person. Time has long since passed. They’ve got to do it. And otherwise, we’re in for very much serious, more serious times than we’ve got now. It’s not that time has run out. It’s going to make it a lot harder on everybody else to try to make it better.

- from democracynow

Chernobyl legacy

In Nuclear, ToMl on November 3, 2009 at 2:50 am

Nearly 370 farms in Britain are still restricted in the way they use land and rear sheep because of radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl nuclear power station accident 23 years ago, the government has admitted.

Environmentalists have seized on the figures as proof of the enormous dangers posed by nuclear power as the UK moves towards building a new generation of plants around the country.

Dawn Primarolo, minister for health, revealed 369 farms and 190,000 sheep were affected, but pointed out this was a tiny number compared with the immediate impact of radioactive fallout from Ukraine.

“This represents a reduction of over 95% since 1986, when approximately 9,700 farms and 4,225,000 sheep were under restriction across the United Kingdom. All restrictions in Northern Ireland were lifted in 2000,” she added.

David Lowry, a member of Nuclear Waste Advisory Associates, said the figures demonstrated the “unforgiving hazards” of radioactivity dispersed into the environment, whether from Chernobyl in Ukraine, thousands of miles away and 23 years ago, or over decades from the Faslane nuclear submarine base in Scotland.

“Any breach of containment accident at Sellafield’s high activity liquid radioactive waste storage tanks would release many times the radioactivity released in the Chernobyl accident. And these tanks had an under-reported loss of coolant a month ago, so we have been warned,” he added.

12.05.09.chernobyl.sheep2

The Ukraine explosion and fire was the biggest nuclear accident ever. In its aftermath 237 people suffered from acute radiation sickness, of whom 31 died within the first three months. Accurate statistics on the wider health problems have been hard to ascertain because the Soviet authorities of the time refused to provide details.

More than 130,000 people were resettled from the immediate area and experts say there should be no farming there for at least 200 years. The Food Standards Agency said the release of radiocaesium-137 in upland areas of Britain is still able to pass easily from soil to grass and accumulate in sheep.

The European Commission imposed a maximum limit of 1,000 becquerels per kilogram (bq/k) of radiocaesium in sheep meat affected by the accident to protect consumers. Under a “mark and release” scheme in the restricted areas, a farmer wishing to move animals out of the area must have them monitored by a hand-held device.

Revelations about the continuing impact of the Chernobyl accident come weeks after three different sites were bought in auction by EDF and other power companies for building new atomic plants in Britain. The sites at Bradwell in Essex, Wylfa in Anglesey and Hinkley Point in Somerset were auctioned for £400m by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority.

A similar process is expected to start shortly for land near the huge Sellafield nuclear complex in Cumbria, as the government moves to put in place new electricity generating plants to provide relatively low-carbon power and bolster domestic energy sources at a time when old atomic stations are nearing the end of their lives.

- from guardian

12 reasons for bike to work

In Bicycle, Transportation on November 3, 2009 at 2:15 am

City bikers in San Francisco

  1. It’s easier to finance a new bicycle than a new car. Thanks to the recession, auto loans are hard to find these days — even if you have good credit. But for the price of a single car payment, you can buy a well-made bicycle that should outlast most cars. Add a few hundred dollars more for rain gear, lights, and accessories, and you have all-weather, anytime transportation.
  2. A bicycle has a tiny manufacturing footprint when compared to a car. All manufactured goods have environmental impact, but bicycles can be produced for a fraction of the materials, energy, and shipping costs of a car.
  3. Bicycles produce no meaningful pollution when in operation. Bikes don’t have tailpipes belching poisonous fumes into the atmosphere. They also eliminate the oil, fuel, and hydraulic fluids dripped by automobiles onto the road surface — which means less toxic runoff into local waterways.
  4. Bikes save taxpayers money by reducing road wear. A twenty pound bicycle is a lot less rough on the pavement than a two-ton sedan. Every bicycle on the road amounts to money saved patching potholes and resurfacing city streets.
  5. Bicycles are an effective alternative to a second car. Perhaps you’re not in a position to adopt a bicycle as primary transportation. But bikes make great second vehicles. You can literally save thousands of dollars per year using a bicycle for workday commuting and weekend errands in households which might otherwise be forced to maintain two cars.
  6. Using a bike for transportation can help you lose weight and improve your overall health. The health benefits of regular aerobic exercise are well known. Depending on your riding style and local road conditions, you could easily burn 600 calories an hour through brisk cycling. Most bike commuters report losing 15 to 20 pounds during their first year in the saddle without changing their eating habits.
  7. You can store a dozen bicycles in a single automobile-sized parking place. Parking lots have enormous environmental and financial impact, particularly in urbanized areas. The more bikes you can get on the road, the fewer parking spaces you need to build.
  8. Bicycles don’t burn gasoline. Fuel is cheap compared to last year, and the economic downturn is likely to keep a lid on petroleum demand for a while. But we’re not producing any more oil today than we were when it was more than $100 a barrel. A healthy bike culture will help ease pressure on supply once demand returns.
  9. Bicycling may be faster and more efficient than taking a car. We’re not talking about the crazy — and illegal — antics of New York bicycle messengers. But bikes are often faster than cars in urban areas, especially when city designers have set aside proper bike lanes. There’s nothing more satisfying as a bicycle commuter than breezing past a long line of gridlocked traffic.
  10. Bikes cost much less to maintain and operate than automobiles. You’ll never throw a rod on a bicycle, and dropping a transmission on a bike usually means replacing a bent derailleur hanger or worn-out chain. Bicycles do require service, but you can learn to perform most of it yourself. Even if you have a shop do things for you, costs will be trivial compared to a car.
  11. Bicycles provide mobility for those who may not qualify or afford to drive. Not everyone can get a driver’s license (or wants one), and the cost of purchasing, insuring, and maintaining a car is out of reach for a lot of people. Almost everyone can afford some sort of bike. Other than walking, bicycles are the most cost effective transportation on the planet.
  12. Studies show that bicycle commuters are healthier, more productive, and require less time-off at work. This is why most enlightened employers are eager to accommodate commuting cyclists. Healthy workers are better workers — and that’s good for the bottom line. Bikes are smart business.

May is Bike to Work Month. May 14 – 18 is Bike to Work Week. And May 18 is Bike to Work Day.

- from lighterfootstep

Electric Bus

In Electric Vehicle, ToMl on November 2, 2009 at 1:35 am

files.phpUQM Technologies, Inc. announced that Proterra’s EcoRide BE35 battery-electric transit bus will be equipped with a UQM PowerPhase 150 propulsion system.
The 35-foot BE35 battery-electric transit bus is being showcased on a four city California clean bus tour which began in San Jose on February 6th. After San Jose, the bus will make stops in selected California cities including Los Angeles, Sacramento, and San Francisco.

Proterra’s 35-foot EcoRide transit bus seats 37 passengers and features a lightweight composite body. The UQM® PowerPhase®150 electric propulsion system produces peak torque of 650 N-m and peak power of 150 kW (201 horsepower).

The system has a continuous torque rating of 400 N-m and a continuous power rating of 100kW (134 horsepower). The system also features optimized four-quadrant performance, dynamic torque, speed and voltage control, regenerative braking and system energy efficiency of over 90 percent across substantially its entire performance regime.

- TerraVolt Energy Storage System – the industry’s only system that can be fully charged in less than 10 minutes; and the longest lasting energy storage system available for heavy duty applications;
- Flexible ProDrive and vehicle control system that can operate in battery-electric mode or with any small auxiliary power unit (APU) to extend vehicle range when needed;
- All-electric components optimized through vehicle management systems to reduce energy usage throughout the vehicle’s operating cycle;
- Regenerative braking system utilizing the UQM® PowerPhase®150 that enables the EcoRide BE35 to recapture over 90% of the vehicle’s kinetic energy available during braking;
- Sophisticated battery management system operates at the ‘cell’ level to optimize energy efficiency and system life.

- from puregreencars

Indian stock market

In Economics, India, ToMl on November 2, 2009 at 1:25 am

FII took 500 million dollar from indian market. We dont know whether that money is took by US Fii or Mauritias Fii. We dont know whether its pention fund or hedge fund. FIIs are not homogenious. they are coming from 75 different countries. But we dont have any idea of them. And we are analysing the market without these knowledge.

Participatory Notes become 60% of the total FII money. The money in PN can be drug money, terrorist moeny. Oct 2007 SEBI tried to put some restrictions on PN to find source of the money. Reserve bank of india asked for a complete ban on PN. But finance ministry overruled that. PN is not transparent.

FII and FDI are different. FII is the floating money in the stock market. It did not create job or industry. FDI is direct investment from foreign investon in indian industry. It generates jobs.

FII can come with black money and pour it into our stock market. But an Indian citizen should have all the the documents about source of the income and tax paid etc to enter into market. This is a double rule on the stock market.

In PN the “non disclosed investers” number come down in last two years. One reason is that people who take domestic money by havala and put that money as PN in the market do not have faith in the market. So thay are not putting money into market. When the market goes up then the PN number will rise again.

SENSEX took 2 years to rise from 10000 to 21000 in early Jan 2007. Nine months after it collapsed to 10000. Again it started rising again in 2009. SENSEX is mirroring the way FIIs are pumping money.

in 2007 FII pumped 17.5 billion US dollars. in 2008 it withdraw 14.5 billion US dollars. in 2009 again FII pumping the money into the market.

Now fundamentals are not affecting the market. There is no justifiable reson why market went to 10000 to 21000 or why it crashed from 21000 to 8000. The fundamentals of the economy did not changed.

Stock exchange holds only 4% to 12% total saving of indians for the last few years. total number of investers are 3% of the india’s pupulation.

- Loksabha TV

Shooting Back

In Palestine, ToMl, war on October 31, 2009 at 10:14 am

Violence flared last week after Israeli riot police forcibly evicted some 250 settlers from a disputed Palestinian-owned home that the settlers had occupied last year. Tensions have been high ever since an Israeli High Court ruling last month that ordered the settlers to vacate the building.

Following Thursday’s eviction, settlers from the nearby Kiryat Arba settlement went on what the Israeli press has described as a “rampage” against Palestinians. They shot at Palestinians, set fire to homes, cars and olive groves, and defaced mosques and graves. Hebron resident Hosni Abu Seifan was among the Palestinian victims of settler gunfire.

HOSNI ABU SEIFAN: [translated] The settlers attacked us at the house and fired live bullets on us. With a handgun, they shot my father. Then, later, they set the house on fire. There was only a few meters between us, maybe one or one-and-a-half meters, and he probably had his hand on the gun, too, when he shot my father.

The shots fired by the settlers at Hosni Abu Seifan and his father were captured on video. The footage shows a settler firing a handgun at the two Palestinian men at close range. The video was shot by a family member of the injured men. He was using a camera distributed by the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem that has given more than a hundred video cameras to Palestinian families across the West Bank so they can record violence by settlers and the Israeli army.

The settlers caught on camera have reportedly turned themselves in to the Hebron police. But the footage caused a minor stir inside Israel, and outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert condemned the settlers’ actions, saying they constituted a “pogrom.”

Shooting Back is a project that B’Tselem has been running for the past two years. It’s basically a video distribution—camera distribution project. B’Tselem give out small video cameras to Palestinian civilians living in what they call hotspots, that is, next to settlements, next to checkpoints, next to military installations, next to the so-called separation barrier, basically areas where they know there are frequent human rights violations, but which usually go undocumented.

And the basic idea is to be able to inform the Israeli public, first of all, but also the international public, of what is happening in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. A picture is worth more than a thousand words. The success of this project can be measured at a time like this when a video clip filmed by one of the family members of the three Palestinians who were shot, Jamal Abu Seifan, he filmed the clip himself and was able to reach local media in Israel and international media.

The problem that the settlers are living in the heart of the city, that means they are living between, arround, 200,000 Palestinians who are living very close to the settlers. And the settlers, they don’t like the Arabs, who are very close to them. And the settler—the Palestinians, they see those settlers are occupying Hebron. So around, now, 500 settlers are living in all the city of Hebron. They are occupying some houses there.

The army are closing many roads because the settlers are there.

Many Palestinian houses, they use a ladder to go to their homes, because the main door is welded by the army. Many other Palestinian houses and families, they need to pass four or five checkpoints in 100 meters to go into their homes. So the daily life there, it’s very, very hard.

The people are suffering daily from the settlers’ presence in the city. They are not against a Jewish presence, but they are against the radical and the fanatic settlers who are living and declaring Hebron as an Israeli city.

There are two laws in Hebron. The Israeli government, they implement the military law on the Palestinians, and they civic law on the settlers, which means double standard.

And the settlers in Hebron, they are mainly armed with guns or with weapons. And it’s very, very important, you know, from the international world and from the Israeli people to say something about the settlers’ weapons. It’s very, very important to take off the weapons from them, especially because they are very, very violent people, and they believe in violence.

Issa Amro and Mich’ael Zupraner talking with Anjali Kamat and Sharif Abdel Kouddous

Issa Amro, B’Tselem field worker.
Mich’ael Zupraner, works with B’Tselem’s Shooting Back project and runs an experimental internet/TV channel called HEB2.

- from democracynow. 10 Dec 2008.

Cooperating corporates

In Social, ToMl, USA on October 31, 2009 at 10:10 am

The Coalition of Immokalee Workers reached an agreement last week with Subway, the third largest fast-food chain in the world and the biggest fast-food buyer of Florida tomatoes. Subway now joins other fast-food giants—McDonald’s, Taco Bell and Burger King—that have all agreed to pay farm workers at least another penny per pound of tomatoes they harvest and improve working conditions.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders hailed the agreement with Subway, describing it as “yet another blow to the scourge of slavery that continues to exist in the tomato fields of Florida.”

Coalition members are in New York this week for their Northeast Fair Food tour and will be honored tonight by the Small Planet Fund on the sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.

This agreement has an incredible importance for Coalition of Immokalee Workers movement, because it started as an idea to bring the biggest fast-food corporations to the table in order to improve the conditions that workers face in the fields every day, conditions that go from stagnant wages to slavery, in the most extreme conditions. And right now, with this agreement with Subway, workers could say that the most important representatives of the fast-food industry have already given their position on the situation, and they are in favor of a change. So now the question is for the supermarket industry and the providers of food to schools, like Aramark and Sodexo, that continue to benefit from the misery of communities like Immokalee Workers.

Basically, today, a farm worker has to pick two-and-a-half tons of tomatoes in order to make only the equivalent to the minimum wage of Florida. But that’s picking by piece. The tomato bucket of thirty-two pounds gets paid from forty to forty-five cents. That’s without any type of benefits nor protections. We work from ten to fourteen hours in a normal day, seven days a week, if there’s work, without receiving overtime pay.

Farm workers in most of the states of this country are excluded from the National Labor Relations Act that gives workers a right to organize. That’s why the agricultural industry have not paid attention to the demands that we had in the past. And asked questions, like, who’s benefiting the most from their poverty? How could they change the way that the agricultural industry, the corporate agricultural industrial, exists today in the United States? And it was by focusing on the big buyers, that are the ones who get more profit than anybody else.

the Tomato Growers Exchange is an entity that represents about 90 percent of the growers in Florida and goes to Tallahassee or D.C. to lobby on their behalf.

And what has happened ever since, more or less, we reached the agreement with McDonald’s is that the Growers Exchange has come out strongly opposing these agreements, first saying that they were un-American or saying that they’re possibly illegal, just saying that they didn’t want their members to participate in them. And so, they actually implemented a $100,000 fine against any of their own member growers who would be willing to fully participate in these agreements and allow the extra penny per pound to get through to the workers.

There are growers who are willing to do that, because for a couple of years after workers reached agreement with Taco Bell in 2005, the penny per pound passed through was working completely fine. It wasn’t until the growers put up this resistance that that was halted.

Today, one of the major corporations that workers have agreements with remain fully committed to carrying out those agreements. They’re still paying the extra penny per pound, but it’s going into a sort of neutral escrow account instead of getting to the workers. The money from that account will be disbursed to the workers very soon, possibly starting with this season.

Marc Rodrigues and Gerardo Reyes talking with Anjali Kamat and Sharif Abdel Kouddous

Marc Rodrigues, Co-coordinator of Student/Farmworker Alliance. That’s the national network of students in partnership with the Coalition of Immokalee Workers.
Gerardo Reyes, Farmworker and member of Coalition of Immokalee Workers.

- from democracynow. 10 Dec 2008.

Cleaning the Great Pacific Garbage Patch

In Environment, Ocean, ToMl on October 30, 2009 at 12:25 am

A high-seas mission departs from San Francisco next month to map and explore a sinister and shifting 21st-century continent: one twice the size of Texas and created from six million tonnes of discarded plastic.

The toxic soup of refuse was discovered in 1997 when Charles Moore, an oceanographer, decided to travel through the centre of the North Pacific gyre (a vortex or circular ocean current). Navigators usually avoid oceanic gyres because persistent high-pressure systems — also known as the doldrums — lack the winds and currents to benefit sailors.

Mr Moore found bottle caps, plastic bags and polystyrene floating with tiny plastic chips. Worn down by sunlight and waves, discarded plastic disintegrates into smaller pieces. Suspended under the surface, these tiny fragments are invisible to ships and satellites trying to map the plastic continent, but in subsequent trawls Mr Moore discovered that the chips outnumbered plankton by six to one.
In June the 151ft brigantine Kaisei (Japanese for Planet Ocean) will unfurl its sails in San Francisco. Project Kaisei’s flagship will be joined by a decommissioned fishing trawler armed with specialised nets.

The UN’s environmental programme estimates that 18,000 pieces of plastic have ended up in every square kilometre of the sea, totalling more than 100 million tonnes. The North Pacific gyre — officially called the northern subtropical convergence zone — is thought to contain the biggest concentration. Ideal conditions for shifting slicks of plastic also exist in the South Pacific, the Indian Ocean and the North and South Atlantic, but no research vessel has investigated those areas. If this exploratory mission is successful, a bigger fleet will depart in 2010.

- from timesonline. 2 May 2009.

Charge tax on Car adverts

In Car, ToMl, Transportation on October 30, 2009 at 12:09 am

Car adverts should carry prominent climate change “health warnings” akin to those on cigarette packets, according to a Labour MP who is critical of the government’s progress on climate change legislation.

Colin Challen MP, who is chair of the all-party climate change group, said that government warnings on car ads might force car companies to be more “honest”. He said many cars are promoted as being “greener” when they are actually environmentally damaging.

He said the car industry was spending £800m a year on UK advertising prior to the recession, while the government’s public education campaign ActOnCO2 cost just £12m over three years.

He added that it is “wholly counter-intuitive to expect people to change their behaviour when most of the daily messages they receive tell them it’s business as usual”.

Car promotions should carry climate change message, said Challen, who is a member of the Commons Energy and Climate Change select committee. “You maybe have 25 or 35% of the space of any promotional material given over to a health warning. These warnings would be graded depending on the emissions from the vehicle, with the worst gas-guzzlers carrying the most severe warnings. “It would have to counter the impression given by some manufacturers that their vehicles are greener,” Challen added.

The warnings would be based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 4th Assessment report, regarded as the foremost authority on the state of climate change science. The warnings would highlight the consequences of dangerous climate change such as sea level rise, increasing deaths, species extinctions, food and water security, and heightened regional conflicts.

Challen said he favoured a personal carbon trading scheme to get on top of emissions in which every citizen has an annual carbon allowance. Those who went beyond their carbon budget would need to buy carbon credits from people who had not. “It would be no more difficult to operate than a Nectar card,” he said, “Good behaviour would be rewarded. Bad behaviour would have to be paid for.”

- from guardian. 5 May 2009.

Actually we have to charge tax on car adverts too. Say some 25%. And use that money to improve public transport systems.

When you buy a nuke

In Nuclear, ToMl, USA on October 29, 2009 at 11:55 pm

Progress Energy said Friday it has pushed back by 20 months its schedule for bringing on-line two planned new nuclear reactors in Florida, after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said its review of the plant site will take longer than expected.

Progress also said it will spread out over five years certain early–stage costs for the new reactors that it could legally bill to ratepayers entirely in 2010, an apparent bid to tamp down customer anger over rate increases linked to the project that took effect earlier this year.

New nuclear plants are so expensive they are likely to provide electricity at some 15 cents per kilowatt hour — or possibly more than 20 cents/kWh. The precise answer — 50% higher than average U.S. electricity prices or more than 100% higher — is hard to know since it is all but impossible to find a utility willing to stand behind a firm price in a rate hearing.

When we last left Progress Energy in 2008, it had said the twin 1,100-megawatt plants it intends to build would cost $14 billion, which “triples estimates the utility offered little more than a year ago.” And that didn’t even count the 200-mile $3 billion transmission system utility needs, which brings the price up to a staggering $7,700 a kilowatt. Under Florida law, to pay for these nuclear power plants, Progress Energy can raise the rates of its customers a $100 a year for years and years and years before they even get one kilowatt-hour from these plants. Sweet deal, no?

Energy Daily (subs. req’d, quoted above) updates the Florida story. Let’s start with the cost to consumers:
As for project costs, Progress said it has filed with the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) for permission to add to customer bills next year an additional $6.69 per thousand kilowatt-hours (KWH) charge to cover the Levy County reactor costs as well as work to boost output at its existing Crystal River nuclear plant from 900 to 1,080 megawatts.

The costs of the Levy County project have already irked some Florida ratepayers who saw their bills jump 25 percent in January to cover early costs for the new reactors as well as increases in the cost of fuel Progress purchases to generate power.

From too cheap to meter to too expensive to matter.

For the record, “In 2007, the average monthly residential electricity consumption was 936 kilowatthours (kWh).” So we’re talking more than $70 a year added to the average customers bills for a long, long time before they even see a single kilowatt hour.

In reaction to customer anger, Progress in April began deferring some of the costs of the Levy County project.

Under the company’s new cost-recovery proposal announced Friday, Progress will bill ratepayers next year 30 cents per 1,000 KWH to pay for the power up-rate at Crystal River, $1.69 per 1,000 KWH to recoup deferred costs from 2009 for the Levy County project and $4.70 per KWH to cover costs for the new reactors incurred in 2010.

Actually, Progress said that to fully recover those costs in 2010 as allowed it would have to bill customers about twice that–$12.63 per 1,000 KWH. But Progress said it has instead proposed to spread the balance over five years of future billings to “[lessen] the impact yearly impact on the customer and [provide] some short-term customer price relief.

“The Levy County nuclear project continues to be the best baseload generation option for Florida taking into account cost, potential carbon regulation, fossil fuel price volatility and the benefits of fuel diversification,” said Progress in Friday’s press release.

Well, It is the best baseload generation option for Florida other than energy efficiency and biomass and a hybrid concentrated solar power and natural gas plant.

Heck, if you could forward bill customers for energy efficiency and do every energy efficiency measure that was cheaper than even $.10 a kilowatt hour, you wouldn’t need to build another nuclear power plant for a long, long time.

Progress Energy’s announcement that it is delaying these two nuclear reactors by at least 20 months is not entirely unexpected given the difficulties in obtaining financing for such a megaproject. The delay of 20 months, noted as “giving the economy time to recover”, will also likely push the project into a time period when annual cost escalations for power plant construction projects will again be robust. It is highly likely this delay and the accelerated cost escalations will push the total project costs well over the company’s initial projections. If the project was not already considered too expensive, wait for the other shoe to drop when these forces affect its costs.

A project that was already expected to take 10 years to complete is now moving into a 12-year horizon. If this is an example of how quickly nuclear power can help alleviate global warming, its not a good one.

Progress Energy is also deferring early cost recovery from ratepayers even though it seems from their announcement these costs were quite significant. These early cost recovery laws were enacted to shift the substantial economic risks of such projects from stockholders to ratepayers. I’d love to know what their shareholders think now about carrying that load on equity stakeholders for such an extended period.

- Severance, who is a practicing CPA, co-author of The Economics of Nuclear and Coal Power (Praeger 1976)

What do you get when you buy a nuke?
You get a lot of delays and rate increases.
And you catch the flu if the utility sneezes.
I’ll never buy a nuke again.
I’ll never buy a nuke again.

- from climateprogress. 5 May 2009.

Solar stove from used cds

In Solar on October 28, 2009 at 2:13 am

F2OV8Q0FU6LR9G3.MEDIUMFLZ0YV7FU6LR9LI.MEDIUM

- from instructables

Growing Himalayan Glaciers

In Global Warming, ToMl on October 28, 2009 at 2:06 am

Among legendary peaks of Mt. Everest like K2 and Nanga Parbat, glaciers with a penthouse view of the world are growing, and have been for almost three decades.

“These are the biggest mid-latitude glaciers in the world,” John Shroder of the University of Nebraska-Omaha said. “And all of them are either holding still, or advancing.”

When Shroder and a team of researchers examined satellite imagery of the region’s glaciers dating back to 1960, they found that 87 glaciers had surged forward during that time, sliding down into lower elevations. An analysis of gravity signatures in the region also suggests the glaciers are growing in mass, and have been since at least 1980.

The team’s work will be published in a forthcoming issue of Annals of Glaciology.

Surging glaciers are common and do not necessarily mean a glacier is growing in overall size. But the fact that dozens of them have all surged in the same region hints that larger climate forces are at work.

“It looks like it’s the Westerlies,” Shroder said, referring to strong jets of wind that pour from west to east in a belt around the planet. Though he can’t say for certain, the winds appear to be carrying more moisture from the warming Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea eastward.

If that’s true, some of the moisture would fall into the region around the Caspian Sea. But as the winds rise into Karakoram’s frigid heights, any remaining water would come down as snow, feeding the glaciers.

“We will see regional patterns like this developing as climate change alters precipitation,” said Andrew Fountain of Portland State University in Oregon.

Fountain said that similar trends were evident in some Scandinavian glaciers during the 1990s, which benefited from increased storminess and precipitation coming off the North Atlantic Ocean. Researchers have also found that glaciers on California’s Mt. Shasta have been growing for decades. And glacier recession has been blunted in the mountains of Oregon and Washington state because of increased moisture from the warming Pacific Ocean.

In the Karakorams, the uptick in glacier mass has come with a welcomed perk. The mighty Indus River, which flows out of China and nourishes northern India and much of Pakistan has experienced an increase in discharge.

But it’s not likely to last.

“As temperatures continue increasing, they will overtake additional mass provided by snow,” Fountain said. “The freezing level will keep rising, and glaciers will melt.”

- from discovery. 5 May 2009.

Leaked communication from the Finnish nuclear regulator STUK

In Nuclear, ToMl on October 24, 2009 at 2:28 am

This leaked communication between the Finnish nuclear regulator STUK and the constructor of Olkiluoto AREVA has revealed that there are severe problems with designing the control systems of the world’s largest, prototype nuclear reactor, the European Pressurised Reactor (EPR).

Helsinki, December 9, 2008

Anne Lauvergeon
Chief Executive Officer
AREVA
33, rue La Fayette
F-75442 Paris Cedex 09

Dear Mrs. Lauvergeon,

With this letter I want to express my great concern on the lack of progress in the design of Olkiluoto 3 NPP automation.

The construction of Olkiluoto 3 plant seems to proceed generally well but I cannot see real progress being made in the design of the control and protection systems. Without a proper design that meets the basic principles of nuclear safety, and is consistently and transparently derived from the concept presented as an annex to the construction license application, I see no possibility to approve these important systems for installation. This would mean that the construction will come to a halt and it is not possible to start commissioning tests.

I expressed my concern on this already in spring 2008, in a meeting with Mr. Xavier Jacob and TVO’s management. After that Areva organised a workshop at professional level in Erlangen on April 23-25, 2008. The goal of the workshop was to clarify the open technical issues. I was told afterwards that it was a successful event where our concerns were conveyed to your experts and were well understood by them. It was expecially encouraging to hear that after the workshop a group led by an expert of high repute, Dr. Graf, was given a task to make sure that the issues be addressed promptly.

Since then there have been several meetings among our experts but we have not seen expected progress in the work on Areva side. The systems with highest safety importance are to be designed by Areva NP SAS but unfortunately the attitude or lack of professional knowledge of some persons who speak in the expert meetings on behalf of that organisation prevent to make progress in resolving the concerns. Therefore, evident design errors are not corrected and we are not receiving design documentation with adequate information and verifiable design requirements. This is unfortunate because I am convinced that within your organisation there is enough competence to resolve all open issues. I wonder how this competence is actually being used in this project and whether an input by Dr. Graf and his group has been actually utilised.

I sincerely hope you could initiate some action in this area, in order to ensure bringing the construction of Olkiluoto 3 to a successful end.

With my best regards,

Jukka Laaksonen
Director General, STUK

- from greenpeace

Cheaper Solar Concentrators

In Solar, ToMl on October 24, 2009 at 2:12 am

Skyline Solar, a startup that today announced its existence to the world, has developed a cheaper way to harvest energy from the sun. The company’s solar panels concentrate sunlight onto a small area, reducing the amount of expensive semiconductor material needed to generate electricity.

Skyline Solar has raised $24.6 million to date and has been awarded $3 million by the Department of Energy to speed up production. It has also installed a pilot power plant that can produce 24 kilowatts of electricity, and has started production of its solar panels with the goal of selling them later this year. They are designed for commercial installations in the 1-to-10-megawatt range, such as on food-processing and water-treatment facilities at the edges of cities or in rural areas.

The startup isn’t the first company to attempt to reduce costs by concentrating sunlight onto smaller solar cells. But Skyline Solar says that it can better compete with other energy sources by combining two technologies that can be produced in high volume using existing equipment and that have been demonstrated in the field for decades: conventional silicon solar cells and reflective parabolic troughs, which are used now in solar thermal plants. In these thermal plants, the long, curved troughs concentrate light on tubes, heating up a fluid inside them that, in turn, is used to drive power-generating turbines. Skyline Solar has replaced those tubes with narrow solar panels, adding a heat sink to keep them from getting too hot. The troughs concentrate the light by about a factor of 10, increasing the power output of the panels by about the same amount as conventional solar panels without concentrators. (To compensate for the increased power output, the company has incorporated larger electrical contacts into the panels.)

- from technologyreview

The guilty secrets of palm oil

In Environment, Palm Oil, ToMl on October 24, 2009 at 12:59 am
000004759186_169015d

A fisherman surveys the scene as he steers his boat alongside a recently cleared area of forest

It’s an invisible ingredient, really, palm oil. You won’t find it listed on your margarine, your bread, your biscuits or your KitKat. It’s there though, under “vegetable oil”. And its impact, 7,000 miles away, is very visible indeed.

The wildlife-rich forests of Indonesia and Malaysia are being chain-sawed to make way for palm-oil plantations. Thirty square miles are felled daily in a burst of habitat destruction that is taking place on a scale and speed almost unimaginable in the West.

When the rainforests disappear almost all of the wildlife – including the orangutans, tigers, sun bears, bearded pigs and other endangered species – and indigenous people go. In their place come palm-oil plantations stretching for mile after mile, producing cheap oil – the cheapest cooking oil in the world – for everyday food.

Until now, the best estimate of the number of leading supermarket products containing palm oil (Elaeis guineensis) has been one in 10, the figure quoted by Friends of the Earth in its 2005 report, “The Oil for Apes Scandal”. After a two-month investigation, The Independent has established that palm oil is used in far greater quantities. We can reveal for the first time that it is confirmed or suspected in 43 of Britain’s 100 bestselling grocery brands (see box, right), representing £6bn of the UK’s £16bn annual shopping basket for top brands. If you strip out drinks, pet food and household goods, the picture is starker still: 32 out of 62 of Britain’s top foods contain this tree-felling, wildlife-wrecking ingredient.

It’s in the top three loaves – Warburtons, Hovis, and Kingsmill – and the bestselling margarines Flora and Clover. It’s in Special K, Crunchy Nut Cornflakes, Mr Kipling Cakes, McVitie’s Digestives and Goodfella’s pizza. It’s in KitKat, Galaxy, Dairy Milk and Wrigley’s chewing gum. It’s in Persil washing powder, Comfort fabric softener and Dove soap. It’s also in plenty of famous brands that aren’t in the top 100, such as Milkybar, Jordan’s Country Crisp and Utterly Butterly. And it’s almost certainly in thousands of supermarket own brands. Yet none of these manufacturers can prove their supply is “sustainable”.

What, then, is “unsustainable” palm oil? Step one: log a forest and remove the most valuable species for furniture. Step two: chainsaw or burn the remaining wood releasing huge quantities of greenhouse gas. Step three: plant a palm-oil plantation. Step four: make oil from the fruit and kernels. Step five: add it to biscuits, chocolate, margarine, soaps, moisturisers and washing powder. At breakfast, when millions of us are munching toast, we’re eating a small slice of the rainforest.

These rainforests are honeypots for flora and fauna, among the most biodiverse places on Earth. Consider the figures. Sumatra – the size of Spain, owned by Indonesia – has 465 species of bird, 194 species of mammal, 217 species of reptile, 272 species of freshwater fish, and an estimated 10,000 species of plant. Borneo – the size of Turkey and shared between Indonesia and Malaysia – is even richer: 420 birds, 210 mammals, 254 reptiles, 368 freshwater fish and around 15,000 plants.

All these species evolved to live in this unique forest environment. The Sumatran rhino is the smallest, hairiest and most endangered in the world; the Sumatran tiger is the smallest tiger. The black sun bear, with its U-shaped patch of white fur under its chin, is the smallest bear. Some of them are curious in the extreme: the bug-eyed western tarsier; the striped rabbit; the marled cat; and the tree-jumping clouded leopard, which feasts on pygmy squirrels and long-tailed porcupines.

Of all the animals, though, the most famous by far is the orangutan (or “man of the jungle”). With its orange hair and long arms, the orangutan is one of our planet’s most unusual creatures. And one of the smartest, too. The Dutch anthropologist Carel van Schaik found that orangutans could perform tasks which were well beyond chimpanzees, such as making rain hats and leakproof roofs for their nests.

The primatologist Dr Willie Smits estimates that orangutans can distinguish between 1,000 different plants, knowing which ones are edible, which are poisonous, and which cure headaches. In her book Thinkers of the Jungle, the psychology professor Anne Russon recalled that one orangutan keeper took three days to solve the mystery of who’d been stealing from the fridge. It turned out that an orangutan had been using a paperclip to pick the lock of its cage, then hiding the paperclip under its tongue.

Along with chimpanzees, gorillas and bonobos, orangutans are great apes, sharing 97 per cent of their DNA with humans, having split from us a mere 13 million years ago. They exist only in these forests of Borneo and Sumatra, and it is their arboreal nature that leaves them so vulnerable to deforestation. Between 2004 and 2008, according to the US Great Ape Trust, the orangutan population fell by 10 per cent (to 49,600) on Borneo and by 14 per cent (to 6,600) on Sumatra. As the author Serge Wich warned: “Unless extraordinary efforts are made soon, it could become the first great-ape species to go extinct.”

Indonesia is trying to crack down on illegal foresting, but corruption is rife hundreds of miles from Jakarta. Satellite pictures show logging has encroached on 90 per cent of Borneo’s national parks – and according to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP): “New estimates suggest 98 per cent of [Indonesia's] forest may be destroyed by 2022, the lowland forest much sooner.”

In its own way, palm oil is a wonder plant. Astonishingly productive, its annual yield is 3.6 tonnes a hectare compared with half a tonne for soy or rapeseed. Originally found in West Africa, palm oil is uniquely “fractionable” when cooked, meaning its properties can be easily separated for different products. Although high in artery-clogging saturated fat, it is healthier than hydrogenated fats. For manufacturers, there is another significant benefit. At £400 a tonne, it is cheaper than soy, rapeseed or sunflower.

Some 38m tonnes of palm oil are produced globally, about 75 per cent in Malaysia and Indonesia. Borneo’s 11,000 square miles of plantations produce 10m tonnes a year while Sumatra’s 14,000 square miles yield 13m tonnes.

Since 1990, the amount of land used for palm-oil production has increased by 43 per cent. Demand is rising at between six and 10 per cent a year. China’s billion-plus population is the biggest consumer, importing 18 per cent of global supply. About 16 per cent arrives in the EU.

In the UK, almost every major food manufacturer uses palm oil, among them Kellogg’s, Cadbury, Mars, Kraft, Unilever, Premier Foods, Northern Foods and Associated British Foods (ABF). Companies typically say they are working to source sustainable supplies – and insist their use is “small”, “very small” or “minute”.

The US household giant Procter & Gamble, which uses palm oil in detergents, shampoos and soaps, says: “P&G uses very little palm oil – about 1 per cent of a worldwide production of palm and its derivatives.” One per cent of global production is 380,000 tonnes a year. P&G says it hopes to source a sustainable supply by 2015 – six years’ time.

Right now no multinational can vouch that its supply is sustainable. The Anglo-Dutch household giant Unilever, the world’s biggest user of palm oil, is swallowing up 1.6m tonnes a year, 4 per cent of global supply. It admits the product causes huge damage, but believes it has a solution. Together with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Unilever set up the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) in 2004. For its first four years – to the frustration of green groups – the RSPO talked, devising eight principles and 39 practical criteria designed to protect native peoples, plantation workers, small farmers and wildlife.

The best plantations can obtain RSPO certification for sustainability – but only 4 per cent of global supply (1.5m tonnes) is currently certified sustainable. The first shipment arrived in Rotterdam last November and costs about 35 per cent more than normal supplies. Another scheme, Green Palm, is already bringing prices for RSPO supplies down further, adding just 5 per cent to the cost.

Unilever has publicly committed to sourcing only certified palm oil by 2015. Premier Foods has a date of 2011, United Biscuits 2012. Most companies, however, including Cadbury, Kellogg’s, Nestlé, Mars and Heinz, have given no commitment to switch to an RSPO-certified supply. They merely say that their suppliers are members.

In its “Cooking the Climate” report, Greenpeace calculated that the burning of South-east Asia’s peat forests – largely for palm-oil plantations – spewed 1.8bn tonnes of greenhouse gas into the atmosphere: 4 per cent of global climate-change emissions from 0.1 per cent of Earth’s land. According to Greenpeace forest campaigner James Turner, “The destruction of these forests is a really serious cause of climate change, but some companies are still trying to look the other way. It’s time for them to cancel contracts with the worst suppliers, because purchasing power is a highly effective tool in changing this industry.”

Deforestation causes 18 per cent of Co2 emissions, according to British government figures – a key element in the rising temperatures that in coming decades will alter our world for ever. No one can be exactly sure what climate change will bring but, in Britain, we can expect more flooding and winter gales, drier summers, water shortages, and more food poisoning and skin cancer. The sea will not just sweep over Bangladesh and the Maldives, but possibly threaten low-lying parts of Britain, such as London, too. Meanwhile, millions of people in developing countries with failing agriculture could migrate to northern Europe.

The wealthy Western countries who have already felled their own forests (woods once covered Britain from Cornwall to Caithness) may have to pay more and more to protect those that remain in other parts of the world. At the Copenhagen summit in December, Britain and other countries will press for REDD (Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Degradation) – essentially a scheme for funding jungles in developing countries.

In the meantime, forest campaigners hope that big companies will come under increasing scrutiny over palm oil. The Unilever-backed RSPO wants them to commit to a sustainable supply. Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace say palm-oil use should be reduced or phased out altogether. A few have already done so – PepsiCo, for instance, is phasing out palm oil from its remaining two products. United Biscuits says it has reduced palm oil in Digestives by 65 per cent and in McCoys by 76 per cent since 2005.

Palm oil facts

90 per cent of Sumatra’s orangutan population has disappeared since 1900. They now face extinction
90 per cent of wildlife disappears when the forest is replaced by palm, creating a biological desert
98 per cent of Indonesia’s forests may be destroyed by 2022 according to the United Nations
43 of Britain’s 100 top grocery brands contain or are thought to contain palm oil

- from independent. 2 May 2009

Nisoor Square massacre

In ToMl, USA, war on October 24, 2009 at 12:41 am

The indictment is built largely around the testimony of a sixth Blackwater operative who has already pleaded guilty to two charges as part of an agreement to testify against his colleagues. The guard, Jeremy Ridgeway, described how he and the other Blackwater operatives used automatic rifles and grenade launchers to fire on cars, on houses, a traffic officer and a girls’ school.

The indictments represent the first time in more than five years of the Iraq occupation that the Justice Department has brought criminal charges against armed private contractors for crimes committed against Iraqis. Blackwater, as a company, faces no charges in the case.

This is very significant. The fact is that no armed contractors have ever been prosecuted under any legal system, not under Iraqi law, not under US military law and not under civilian law. The Nisoor Square massacre, was the single greatest massacre committed by private US government forces in Iraq during five years of the occupation. So the fact that these men who are alleged to be responsible for that are being criminally prosecuted and could potentially face a mandatory minimum of thirty years in jail, if they’re convicted, is significant.

However, Erik Prince, the owner of Blackwater; Condoleezza Rice, the Secretary of State; George Bush, the President—they’re not being held responsible for this. And the fact is that, once again, the US government is rolling out this “bad apples” narrative to describe the actions of Blackwater and saying that the company as a whole is a good company, a responsible company, but just these few guys did some bad things. And the fact is that this is a five-year pattern of misconduct and this kind of activity by Blackwater forces. What we’re going to see is a token prosecution of a handful of Blackwater guys, when it’s the system of the radical privatization of war that needs to be taken on forcefully.

the first victims that day, shortly after noon on September 16th, 2007, were a young Iraqi medical student named Ahmed Haitham al-Rubaye and his mother Mehasin. And the Blackwater guys have said that they believed that their car posed some kind of a threat or was potentially a suicide bomber, and they shot Ahmed Haitham al-Rubaye in his head as he drove that car and then launched some kind of a projectile at the vehicle, blowing it up and killing his mother Mehasin inside. Blackwater forces have said that it was a defensive measure.

But the bottom line here, is that the company is not going to be held accountable, except lawsuits like that brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights, where they are suing Blackwater as a company, Erik Prince as an individual, trying to hold them accountable for the conduct of the men on the ground. These guys, like at Abu Ghraib, will take the fall for an entire system, and the reality is that they are five bad actors in a filthy, rotten system that needs to be confronted head on.

There’s no greater symbol of the lack of true change in US foreign policy than Barack Obama retaining the man that George W. Bush chose to be the Defense Secretary at the Pentagon. this is a kettle of hawks that have been assembled in the White House to run US foreign policy. Jim Jones and his connections to Chevron and Boeing. Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, it’s a very hawkish cabinet.

On the Blackwater issue, though, Gates, obviously has been much, much better than Donald Rumsfeld, in the sense that he has realized that these contractors are out of control and pose, a threat to US troops and Iraqi civilians alike. And the issue that Gates has zeroed in on is the fact that these Blackwater forces are paid much more than regular US soldiers and that they’re not held accountable under the same legal system.

Barack Obama does not have a great position on Blackwater and other private forces. In fact, he says that he cannot and will not rule out using them in Iraq. He has also said that there’s going to be a continued role for contractors in the private war industry, in the US national security apparatus.

Interestingly, Hillary Clinton was only the second person to sign onto legislation to ban Blackwater. As Secretary of State, that would technically be her area of operations. So it’s going to be interesting to see if Hillary Clinton follows through and actually tries to implement some kind of a ban, which she’s on paper supporting.

Jeremy Scahill talking with Amy Goodman.

Jeremy Scahill, Democracy Now! correspondent and author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army.

- from democracynow. 9 Dec 2008.

Sweden: second-largest weapons exporter per capita in the world

In Sweden, ToMl, war on October 24, 2009 at 12:37 am

Institutions like the Nobel Prize have helped link Sweden’s international reputation to peace and reconciliation. But few people know Sweden is also one of the world’s top exporters of weapons. Sweden is among the world’s top arms exporters in per capita terms. Its clients include the United States and Britain, with shipments more than doubling since 2000.

Alfred Nobel established Bofors company in Karlskoga for the weapons industry. One of its group is now owned by British Aerospace (BAE), Europe’s biggest weapons company. And the other group went into Saab, Bofors Dynamics, which is another company owned by—Swedish-owned, by Saab. General Motors owns Saab in the United States, the automaker, and Ford owns Volvo, another Swedish company. Saab is Sweden’s biggest weapons manufacturer.

There are protest against weapon export from sweden. Apart from more traditional political methods activists of ofog and avrusta do disarmament actions too. Using an ordinary hammer, starts the disarmaments by disabling parts of weapons or weapons, so that they can’t be used to kill or hurt anybody.

Swedish citizens doesn’t know about Sweden being one of the top ten largest arms producers in the world. But there’s also these laws that permit the weapons export and stop people from protesting against it, because then they will get fines and be put into prison.

A lot of people feel that quite radical action needs to be taken, also with this government, because there will be, next year probably, a new proposal for new regulations, guidelines for the weapons export, which then risks to be much more liberal than those that we have today. So it’s important to act at this moment.

Annika Spalde and Cattis Laska is going to trial and will be sentenced to prison. Its funny to know that at the time of the celebration of the Nobel Peace Prize in honor of Alfred Nobel peace activists of Sweden are going to prison.

Annika Spalde and Cattis Laska talking with Amy Goodman

Annika Spalde, Activist with the Avrusta (“disarm” in Swedish), which aims to stop Swedish arms exports to countries violating human rights.

Cattis Laska, Activist with the Swedish Christian peace network, Ofog.

- from democracynow. 9 Dec 2008

Workers gettig attension in US

In Social, ToMl, USA on October 24, 2009 at 12:27 am

For the past six days, hundreds of union workers have refused to leave the plant, staging a factory sit-in seldom seen in this country since the 1930s. The workers say they won’t leave until the factory is reopened or they receive severance pay and accrued vacation time. The factory was closed last week after the factory owners said Bank of America cut off the company’s line of credit. On Monday, Governor Blagojevich ordered state agencies to stop doing business with Bank of America until it uses some of its federal bailout money to keep the factory open.

On Tuesday, the Republic Windows & Doors factory won a victory: Bank of America offered loans to the firm to resolve the pay dispute. In a statement, the bank said it was “prepared to provide a limited amount of additional loans to Republic to help fund a comprehensive resolution of Employee Claims.” Labor organizers say the sit-in will continue until a resolution is reached. The factory sit-in has attracted attention and renewed a discussion about the federal government’s bailout of the banking industry. On Sunday, civil rights leader Jesse Jackson met with the laid-off workers.

the plant has become a magnet now for the labor and progressive movement from around the city and actually from the Midwest, as people come to visit and to show support, bring supplies to the workers, food, a truckload on Monday night of toys that were brought for the workers for their children for Christmas.

And it’s gotten enormous attention in the media, both nationwide and here, a sympathetic criticism, for the most part, as—because not only Bank of America, but also JPMorgan Chase—it hasn’t gotten as much attention, but JPMorgan Chase invested several million dollars in the plant in early 2007 and actually had a member on the board of directors until just this past summer. So two of the major banks that have benefited from the federal bailout have been—have connections and involvement with this plant.

Raul Flores said:
When we get out of the work on Friday, we went home. When we came back on Monday, one whole line of production was gone. All the machines, everything was gone. So we said, if this time we get out of the building, on Monday, when we come to pick up our checks, nothing’s going to be here.

they just told us last Tuesday that they will now shut down the company. And on Friday, when we got there, they just told us that there were no money for us, that our vacation that we already earned, that we’re not going to get paid for that. So we said, “That’s our money. We already worked for that money. They still owe us a week of work.” So we decided to stay, because we say, “That’s our money. We worked for that money. We’re here to make our jobs. We’re not going to steal nothing from nobody. We’re just here to work.”

one of the great things about this struggle is how people all over the country have taken it on as their own. And so, the entire labor movement here in Chicago organized a protest for today at noon downtown, outside of the bank. There’s another protest—there are other protests around the country happening, as well.

- from democracynow. 10 Dec 2008.

Sweden: welfare state

In Sweden, ToMl on October 22, 2009 at 2:34 am

the reasons for Sweden’s reputation as a progressive paradise, the strongest labor movement in the world with 87 percent of workers unionized, creating over many decades the strongest welfare state, the one that on the UN Human Poverty Index has the least poverty in the world. And then, what we’ve seen over the last twenty years, but particularly since the 2006 election, is a move away from all of that.

After being elected, Fredrik Reinfeldt, one of his first major visits abroad was to George Bush in the White House, this in spite of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, a visit that many people thought shouldn’t have happened, his coalition then getting—bringing over Karl Rove for advice and support—Karl Rove, the architect of President Bush’s electoral victories.

They brought Karl Rove this past summer. Because he can offer good advice on how to win the 2010 election. According to his website, it’s his only foreign consulting, for the Moderate Party of Sweden.

The first piece to notice is really in the electoral campaign, when he tried very hard to appeal to working-class voters, described his party as the new workers’ party. And after one speech, he was asked by a journalist if it wasn’t a speech inspired by Bush’s “compassionate conservatism.” And he answered that it was, to some degree. Bush was so successful at winning the white working class, especially in 2004, where white working-class voters favored him by 23 percent. Reinfeldt brought over only a small percent of working-class voters to his coalition, but enough to tip the balance.

And then, we have a real kind of silent war on the labor movement, where it’s been made much more expensive to be part of a union, where the legal prerogatives of unions have been made much less. dramatic change in the tax system, abolishing the inheritance tax and property tax—most property taxes, cutbacks in social welfare institutions, some changes that will be very hard for future regimes to undo.

That was in his book, The Sleeping People, from 1993, where he wrote “We do not want to see a society where people starve, but beyond that, no particular standard should be guaranteed by tax money.” And then he was asked on television after the book’s publication what he meant by that, and he said the boundary for social support should be the starvation boundary. That’s, of course, not his policy now, but it shows the danger of electing someone who is a great admirer of Margaret Thatcher to the highest post in the land.

As the United States deals with greater unemployment, the crisis of healthcare. Sweden has a social welfare system where healthcare is free in Sweden.

Many small changes to, in some way, make it harder for the general welfare state to function—for example, creating—allowing the creation of a private children’s hospital in Stockholm only for paying customers and people.

who will pay the full cost of their children’s care, or people who have private insurance to do that. What this will do is start to create this kind of thing, will start to create groups of middle-class people who no longer have such a stake in the general welfare system, because they feel, well, I’m buying it anyway privately, and that will gradually erode middle-class support for the general welfare system that up to now has had very high levels of support from the middle class.

Health insurance companies are very, very eager for this business. And it’s a tremendous irony that, just at a moment when Americans, some of them discussing Michael Moore’s film Sicko, see the very unethical behavior of different kinds of health insurance and health management companies, many of those same companies are getting the opportunity to buy pieces of Swedish healthcare clinics, parts of hospitals—according to a new law, even entire university hospitals can be sold out to private companies—so that as Americans have mostly become skeptical of these companies, they’re being invited to Sweden to do damage here.

Brian Palmer talking with Amy Goodman

Brian Palmer, professor of social anthropology at the University of Uppsala in Sweden and a former professor at Harvard University. He got Levinson Prize for teaching.

- from democracynow. 9 Dec 2008.

Mercury Emissions

In Environment, Pollution, ToMl on October 20, 2009 at 2:18 am

A new landmark study documents for the first time the process in which increased mercury emissions from human sources across the globe, and in particular from Asia, make their way into the North Pacific Ocean and as a result contaminate tuna and other seafood. Because much of the mercury that enters the North Pacific comes from the atmosphere, scientists have predicted an additional 50 percent increase in mercury in the Pacific by 2050 if mercury emission rates continue as projected.

Water sampling cited in the study shows that mercury levels in 2006 were approximately 30 percent higher than those measured in the mid-1990s. This study documents for the first time the formation of methylmercury in the North Pacific Ocean. It shows that methylmercury is produced in mid-depth ocean waters by processes linked to the “ocean rain.” Algae, which are produced in sunlit waters near the surface, die quickly and “rain” downward to greater water depths. At depth, the settling algae are decomposed by bacteria and the interaction of this decomposition process in the presence of mercury results in the formation of methylmercury. Many steps up the food chain later, predators like tuna receive methylmercury from the fish they consume.

In the United States, about 40 percent of all human exposure to mercury is from tuna harvested in the Pacific Ocean, according to Elsie Sunderland, a coauthor of the study. Methylmercury is a highly toxic form of mercury that rapidly accumulates in the food chain to levels that can cause serious health concerns for those who consume the seafood. Pregnant women who consume mercury can pass on life-long developmental effects to their children. That is why in 2004 EPA and FDA issued the landmark Joint Guidance on the Consumption of Fish specifically targeted towards pregnant women and nursing mothers. Previous studies show that 75 percent of human exposure worldwide to mercury is from the consumption of marine fish and shell fish.

- from sciencedaily

Crude Impact

In Movie, ToMl on October 19, 2009 at 1:49 am

Crude Impact is a 2006 film written and directed by James Jandak Wood. It is a documentary about the effect of fossil fuels on issues such as global warming, the environmental crisis, society and the questionable practices of oil companies

The film was shown at the Cleveland International Film Festival in 2007.

Science works with testable ideas

In Science, ToMl on October 19, 2009 at 1:41 am

For an idea to be testable, it must logically generate specific expectations — in other words, a set of observations that we could expect to make if the idea were true and a set of observations that would be inconsistent with the idea and lead you to believe that it is not true.

For example, consider the idea that a sparrow’s song is genetically encoded and is unaffected by the environment in which it is raised, in comparison to the idea that a sparrow learns the song it hears as a baby. Logical reasoning about this example leads to a specific set of expectations. If the sparrow’s song were indeed genetically encoded, we would expect that a sparrow raised in the nest of a different species would grow up to sing a sparrow song like any other member of its own species. But if, instead, the sparrow’s song were learned as a chick, raising a sparrow in the nest of another species should produce a sparrow that sings a non-sparrow song. Because they generate different expected observations, these ideas are testable. A scientific idea may require a lot of reasoning to work out an appropriate test, may be difficult to test, may require the development of new technological tools to test, or may require one to make independently testable assumptions to test — but to be scientific, an idea must be testable, somehow, someway.

If an explanation is equally compatible with all possible observations, then it is not testable and hence, not within the reach of science. This is frequently the case with ideas about supernatural entities. For example, consider the idea that an all-powerful supernatural being controls our actions. Is there anything we could do to test that idea? No. Because this supernatural being is all-powerful, anything we observe could be chalked up to the whim of that being. Or not. The point is that we can’t use the tools of science to gather any information about whether or not this being exists — so such an idea is outside the realm of science.

A SCIENCE PROTOTYPE: RUTHERFORD AND THE ATOM

Before 1910, Ernest Rutherford and many other scientists had the idea that the positive charge and the mass of an atom were evenly distributed throughout the whole atom, with electrons scattered throughout. You can imagine this model of the atom as a loosely packed snowball (the positive mass of the atom) with a few tiny grains of sand (the electrons) scattered throughout. The idea that atoms are arranged in this way can be tested by firing an alpha particle beam through a piece of gold foil. If the idea were correct, then the positive mass in the gold foil would be relatively diffuse (the loosely packed snow) and would allow the alpha particles to pass through the foil with only minor scattering.

- from berkeley

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3

Does High Speed Rail is a solution?

In Rail, ToMl, Transportation on October 19, 2009 at 1:32 am

There is something quite seductive about speed. It sounds good, and economists cling to the misleading idea that saving time saves money and produces an economic bonus that the whole of society can share. The supporters of HSR argue that it will increase the capacity of the rail system to move people and freight, stimulate the economy, steal passengers from domestic aviation and reduce greenhouse gases.

High-speed rail will indeed increase capacity, especially if it proceeds on German and French models and produces new lines across open countryside. But what is not addressed is why we need the increased capacity, and whether or not this is the right way to go about it.

Capacity is routinely increased in mainland Europe by using double-decker trains for passenger travel. Trains in and out of Zurich or Paris are frequently double-decked and give passengers a non-cattle truck ride that we can only dream about in south-east England or on Manchester-bound platforms at Leeds railway station at 5pm on a weekday. Capacity can be increased by running night passenger trains, as is common in Germany.

We could even have a policy about developing strongly independent cities, such as those in Germany. The “need” to travel to London is a result of decades of public and private policy and cash to centralise functions there and to avoid the idea that Newcastle upon Tyne, Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham and Liverpool could operate as high-level attractive financial, cultural, corporate HQ and media centres, just as Frankfurt, Munich and Hamburg do in Germany. We do need to move more freight around the UK by means other than road, but the links with HSR and better rail opportunities for freight are tenuous. Alternatives to HSR include reopening lines closed in the 1960s for normal rail running, using coastal shipping, inland waterways and even planning our industrial and logistic sites so that they were located near to ports, waterways and rail logistic centres.

The HSR plan is a large and expensive sledgehammer to crack a modestly sized nut. We could stimulate the economy by building 1,000 miles of HSR, but the sums would not stack up in terms of how many jobs this would create per £100,000 spent.

If we really want to create jobs in all local economies, rather than drain them away along a very fast railway line, we could insulate 20m homes; make every house a mini-power station to generate and export its own electricity; sort out extremely poor quality commuter railway lines around all our cities; improve inter-regional rail links; and build 10,000 kms of segregated bike paths to connect every school, hospital, employment site and public building to every residential area.

These projects would deliver real jobs on a large scale in every city region and local authority, but do not have the high-speed sexiness of new railway lines. HSR is promoted as something that can sort out nasty carbon-producing aircraft on domestic routes. It has done this on the Paris-Lyon and Madrid-Seville lines, but this ability to trash a single air route should not be interpreted as something than can dent the growth of air travel. Germany has one of the largest HSR systems in the world, yet has seen an explosion in internal air travel.

HSR does not reduce the fuel consumption of domestic aviation or reduce annual carbon emissions from aircraft.And it produces twice as much CO2 per passenger kilometre as a non-high speed train. If we are serious about reducing our carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, we should not move towards higher speed, more carbon intensive forms of transport and a policy of increasing the mass of travel.

Supporters of HSR talk about a total bill of £11bn from public funds. This is likely to be a considerable underestimate, but even if correct it is a huge commitment to something regressive. HSR is used by high-income passengers, and the £11bn would be a public investment from all taxpayers to encourage wealthy individuals to travel to and from London more often and at a higher speed. This is far less important than sorting out local travel in all cities, commuter travel around all cities, and inter-regional travel.

Switzerland offers a vision of what a rail system in the UK could look like if it celebrated all our cities, reflected the need to offer attractive rail services to all social and income groups, and set out to avoid cattle-truck conditions. The double-decker trains running from Zurich to Basle 60 times a day offer comfort, reliability, and a pleasant journey on a major commuter route.

This could be the future on the Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds route, and on many routes in the south-east of England, but there appears to be no well-oiled machine lobbying for these passengers.

This is an occasion when a referendum would be useful. Hands up those in favour of providing an £11bn subsidy from taxpayers for very rich people to travel very quickly to London – and hands up those who would prefer something like the Swiss have.

• John Whitelegg is a research leader at the Stockholm Environment Institute, York University

- from guardian. 29 Apr 2009.

Big Boy Rules: America’s Mercenaries Fighting in Iraq

In Iraq, ToMl, USA, war on October 15, 2009 at 2:01 am

The pact recently approved by the Iraqi cabinet that allows 150,000 US troops to stay in Iraq ’til 2011 could have a significant impact on the role of private military contractors deployed in the war. According to the Wall Street Journal, the draft Status of Forces Agreement, known as SOFA, appears to end immunity from local Iraqi law for private military contractors. If the pact is approved by the Iraqi parliament, contractors would fall under the jurisdiction of Iraqi courts and would be subject to prosecution.

This comes as top Justice Department prosecutors are reportedly reviewing a draft indictment against six Blackwater security guards who opened fire in a crowded Baghdad square more than a year ago, killing seventeen Iraqi civilians. The Associated Press reports senior Justice Department officials are said to be considering manslaughter and assault charges against the guards. The indictments would mark the first time armed private contractors from the United States face justice.

Meanwhile, the State Department is reportedly preparing to hit Blackwater with a multi-million-dollar fine for allegedly shipping as many as 900 automatic weapons to Iraq without the required permits.

From the beginning, this case has been extremely problematic. When the Nisour Square shootings occurred, the FBI took two weeks before it arrived in Iraq to investigate the case. There was limited immunity that was granted to some of the Blackwater contractors in the immediate aftermath by the State Department. And then, the larger question is, exactly how do you prosecute these cases? Under what law? It’s never been clear exactly what law applies to private security contractors in Iraq. That’s the biggest problem.

The Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, which would be the law under which these guys would be prosecuted, requires the prosecution to take place in the state in which the person who’s accused resides. So, if in fact we’re talking about six separate indictments, we could be talking about six separate prosecutions occurring in six different states. And then, of course, there are issues with evidence. There are issues with exactly what the charges are going to be. There are questions of interviews and witnesses and how exactly do you do this. So it’s extremely problematic.

STEVE FAINARU: “Big boy rules” is an expression that I first heard when I was reporting on a story in which a private contractor who worked for a company called Triple Canopy, which shares a State Department contract with Blackwater, one of their contractors announced to three of his colleagues, who were traveling with him that day, that he really wanted to shoot someone. And that day, according to these three colleagues, they were traveling on the airport road in Baghdad, and while they were passing a civilian taxi, this contractor, according to these three guys, fired into the windshield of this passing civilian taxi. When that happened, there was no real legal mechanism by which to deal with the situation. And as I was reporting the case, I heard from other contractors that they used this expression “big boy rules.” And what it really meant was that there were no rules for private security contractors in Iraq, and they operated under basically their own system of justice.

When you look at the Geneva Conventions and the definition of “mercenaries,” we’re talking about people who are not part of the armed force that’s participating in the conflict. They are people who are—their primary motivation is money. They’re being paid to take place in—to take part in hostilities. And so, the practice clearly falls under that definition.

The term “private security contractors” never really has done justice to exactly what the scope of what’s going on in Iraq with these people. We’re talking about tens of thousands of hired guns who are running around Iraq in a war zone. They are being fired upon. They’re returning fire. They’re killing people, and they’re being killed. And the term “private security contractor,” it could apply to anybody. It could apply to a Brink’s guard. It could apply to somebody who’s standing in front of a 7-Eleven. it obfuscated. it obscured the reality of what was happening.

while I was working for the Washington Post, we wanted to find out what this culture was and why these people were there, who they were. And so, I embedded with a private security company called Crescent Security Group that operated out of Kuwait City. I traveled into Iraq with these people. We were—their primary mission was to protect supply convoys on Iraq’s main highway. And so, I traveled into Iraq. We traveled up to Nasiriyah, and then we traveled back to the Iraq-Kuwait border. I interviewed them. I found out what they were about.

And one of the things that was most striking about this company was—you know, in the book, I call it basically the Kmart of private security, where, you know, if you have Blackwater sort of at the high end of the security spectrum—traveling in heavily armored vehicles, working for the State Department, paying their contractors $20,000 a month—you had companies like Crescent Security Group, who were paying their contractors $7,000 a month, they had a lot less experience, there were enormous problems with the company.

I came home. Before I had even written my story, the people that I had spent time with were kidnapped on the same highway where we had been traveling. They were missing for sixteen months, and last April their bodies turned up in southern Iraq.

First, their fingers were delivered to the air base in Basra as evidence that—from an informant, that he knew where the bodies were. And then, about a month later, the bodies were delivered to the air base at Basra.

Everybody had their own sort of story about why they should be in Iraq. The primary motivation was money. Everybody was there—that was the number one reason for being there. But when you got sort of beyond that, there were all kinds of other other issues that were in play.

The main character of the book, Jon Cote, had been in the 82nd Airborne, and he had done a tour in Afghanistan and Iraq. And when he got out, he enrolled at the University of Florida to study accounting. He was like the least likely accounting major in the history of accounting. And what he found—when he got out, he found that he just simply could not cope, that his experience in the military had put him in a sort of a place in his life where he just couldn’t adapt to civilian life. He clearly had post-traumatic stress. And so, one of his—his scout leader from the Army offered him a job to make $7,000 a month driving supply convoys—guarding supply convoys in Iraq. And he took the job, just thinking that, you know, this was some way—this was a way for him to get more money for college. He had financial problems. And so, he went back.

He realized very quickly that he had gotten into a situation that he simply was not prepared for. The company that he was working for was corrupt. They were smuggling weapons and liquor back and forth across the Iraq-Kuwait border. They were fabricating military IDs that they were using on their—that they were giving to their Iraqi employees to get onto US military installations. They were traveling in these pickup trucks in, you know, an extremely dangerous environment. And he decided to go home, after a couple of—three months. He decided he had enough and had told his friends and his family that he was planning to go home. But before he could, it was too late.

Other guys, simply thrived on the life. They were adrenaline junkies. They lived for this stuff. There was another guy that I met, John Young, who was forty-four years old. He had been in the Army in the 1980s. When he got out of the Army, he sort of drifted around to different jobs, never really feeling like he was totally content. He tried to reenlist in the military and injured himself during basic training. And so, when this job came along, he did it. And even after nearly getting shot in Baghdad, he still felt like—he said, “This is me. You know, this is what I do.” And I think there were a lot of people like that in Iraq, you know, who were drawn by the opportunity. They were making maybe ten times as much money as they could have made in the United States. They were addicted to the action, and they took the job.

The story of one guy from, Triple Canopy, is chilling. He announced to his three colleagues that he wanted to kill someone, and then he went out on Baghdad’s airport road and fired into the windshield of a taxi. Then they simply drove off.

The car, according to the witnesses, sputtered to a stop on the side of the road. The witnesses saw bullet holes in the windshield. When they got back to the base, there was a lot of confusion about what to do. Ironically, there was a Fijian guy who was on this team who was paid a tenth of what the American contractors who were in the same vehicle were being paid. He went to a Fijian supervisor and told him about what had happened, because he was disgusted. But the Fijian supervisor basically was afraid to go to his American supervisors and tell them what had happened. And so, the other two guys were also not sure what to do. They were afraid to come forward. Finally, after two days, they came forward, and they told the company what had happened. And the company’s response was to fire not only them, but the man who was accused of firing into this taxi.

One of the things I think that case points up is that there was no legal mechanism to pursue it any further. Nor was there any incentive for the company, really, to pursue it any further. The company, Triple Canopy, went to the director of security for the Green Zone and basically told him in a very vague way, what had happened: there was a questionable shooting incident that took place on Baghdad’s airport road. And that’s really basically all they told him. And when I interviewed him, he told me basically that he said to the company, you know, “Look, this is not my job. You know, this is not something that I deal with.” He brought in a JAG officer, and, the case was simply not pursued.

The two guys who were fired ultimately sued in Fairfax County Circuit Court, arguing that had been fired for essentially reporting a criminal act. Triple Canopy argued that the reason they were fired was because they had not reported this incident immediately. A jury upheld the company’s contention that, on technical grounds, they were within every right to fire the two guys who reported the incident, but at the same time the jury condemned the company for what it said was its business practices and the way it conducted its investigation.

One was the enormity of it. When I had been covering the military for fourteen months, and I’d see these guys around. And when I finally—when I started reporting it, you realize that there were hundreds of companies like Blackwater that were running around Iraq. I think the other thing that was really striking was that the Bush administration, because of its failure to provide enough troops, had essentially farmed out the responsibility for deciding who can kill and die for our country to private companies that were there and who had been created simply to make money off the war.

Steve Fainaru, with Amy Goodman.

Steve Fainaru, foreign correspondent for the Washington Post, where he covered the Iraq war from 2004 to 2007. He won the 2008 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting for his stories on private military contractors. His new book is Big Boy Rules: America’s Mercenaries Fighting in Iraq.

- from democracynow. 19 Nov 2008.

What is Science

In Science, ToMl on October 14, 2009 at 1:47 am

Science as a collective institution aims to produce more and more accurate natural explanations of how the natural world works, what its components are, and how the world got to be the way it is now. Classically, science’s main goal has been building knowledge and understanding, regardless of its potential applications — for example, investigating the chemical reactions that an organic compound undergoes in order to learn about its structure. However, increasingly, scientific research is undertaken with the explicit goal of solving a problem or developing a technology, and along the path to that goal, new knowledge and explanations are constructed. For example, a chemist might try to produce an antimalarial drug synthetically and in the process, discover new methods of forming bonds that can be applied to making other chemicals. Either way (so-called “pure” or “applied” research), science aims to increase our understanding of how the natural world works.

The knowledge that is built by science is always open to question and revision. No scientific idea is ever once-and-for-all “proved.” Why not? Well, science is constantly seeking new evidence, which could reveal problems with our current understandings. Ideas that we fully accept today may be rejected or modified in light of new evidence discovered tomorrow. For example, up until 1938, paleontologists accepted the idea that coelacanths (an ancient fish) went extinct at the time that they last appear in the fossil record — about 80 million years ago. But that year, a live coelacanth was discovered off the coast of South Africa, causing scientists to revise their ideas and begin to investigate how this animal survives in the deep sea. could be revised if warranted by the evidence.

Despite the fact that they are subject to change, scientific ideas are reliable. The ideas that have gained scientific acceptance have done so because they are supported by many lines of evidence. These scientific explanations continually generate expectations that hold true, allowing us to figure out how entities in the natural world are likely to behave (e.g., how likely it is that a child will inherit a particular genetic disease) and how we can harness that understanding to solve problems (e.g., how electricity, wire, glass, and various compounds can be fashioned into a working light bulb). For example, scientific understandings of motion and gases allow us to build airplanes that reliably get us from one airport to the next. Though the knowledge used to design airplanes is technically provisional, time and time again, that knowledge has allowed us to produce airplanes that fly. We have good reason to trust scientific ideas: they work!

A SCIENCE PROTOTYPE: RUTHERFORD AND THE ATOM

Ernest Rutherford’s investigations were aimed at understanding a small, but illuminating, corner of the natural world: the atom. He investigated this world using alpha particles, which are helium atoms stripped of their electrons. Rutherford had found that when a beam of these tiny, positively-charged alpha particles is fired through gold foil, the particles don’t stay on their beeline course, but are deflected (or “scattered”) at different angles. Rutherford wanted to figure out what this might tell him about the layout of an atom.

- from berkeley

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3

1 Bus = 50 Cars

In Car, ToMl, Transportation on October 14, 2009 at 12:38 am

ecoadvertising_flybussarna

Swedish advertising company, Acne, put together a rather eye-catching advertising campaign for Flygbussarna, an airport coach bus service, to inspire individual car drivers to take the coach bus instead. An installation made up of 50 wrecked cars resembling a Flygbussarna coach bus was placed next to the highway leading to the Swedish airport. Acne used 50 cars to emphasize that a coach bus can seat up to 50 people whereas, on average, an individual car has only 1.2 people. Consider that with the fact that a coach bus releases no more carbon than 4 cars.

- from inhabitat

Bird death because of wind farms

In ToMl, wind power on October 14, 2009 at 12:25 am

US wind farms kill about 7,000 birds a year, according to a recent study. Other studies of individual wind farms suggest a higher toll on bats and birds, who crash into towers, blades, power lines and other installations. Estimates from a single wind farm in Altamont, California showed as many as 1,300 birds of prey killed each year – or about three a day.

Such direct threats to wildlife, and concerns for habitats, have increasingly pitted conservationists against the renewable energy industry. A handful of wind power projects in the US have been shelved because of wildlife concerns.

But new radar technology now in use at the Peñascal wind farm in Texas claims to have found a balance between competing environmental concerns – taking action against global warming and protecting wildlife – by protecting migrating birds at times of peak danger.

The 202MW farm, operated by the Spanish firm, Iberdrola Renewables, is the first in the world to use radar systems to enable it to shut down automatically if bad weather hits in peak migration times.

The installation, which opened late last month, uses radar systems originally developed for Nasa and the US Air Force to detect approaching birds from as far as four miles away, analyse weather conditions, and then determine in real time whether they are in danger of flying into the rotating blades.

If they are, the turbines are programmed to shut down, restarting once the birds are safely on their way, said Gary Andrews, the chairman of DeTect, Inc, the Florida company that developed the technology.

The system spots the birds and assesses their altitude, numbers and the visibility. “With all these pieces coming together properly … the turbines will shut down,” said Andrews.

Conservationists however are sceptical of such an easy fix. They argue that wind farms should still be sited away from migration routes in the first place, and that the technology does nothing to solve the problem of installations that disturb bird and animal habitats and nesting grounds.

The Peñascal wind farm is located on the Central Flyway, a main route for migratory birds in the Americas.

Millions of birds funnel through the narrow air corridor during the semiannual migration. A study in the autumn of 2007 found 4,000 birds an hour passing overhead.

In ordinary circumstances, the birds would be thousands of feet above the wind farm, passing the turbines without incident. But that can change dramatically in a sudden storm.

A sudden cold snap, like the legendary Texan “Blue Northern”, can prove fatal for migrating birds, bringing strong head winds and fog. The birds, which typically fly at night, become disoriented and exhausted, elevating the risk they will lose altitude and crash into 400ft wind towers along their route, wildlife experts say.

Conservationists are reserving judgment. “The wind energy industry makes bold claims, and they need to prove them,” said Andrew Kasner, director of bird conservation for Audubon Texas.

- from guardian. 1 May 2009.

Food Shortages Bring Down Civilization

In Food, ToMl on October 14, 2009 at 12:15 am

Fedora rpm source setup

In Fedora, Gnu, Software on October 11, 2009 at 2:09 am

There are some softwares that are not compatible with Fedora and Gnu’s GPL licenses. Rpms of those packages are available at rpmfusion.org. It can be setup to yum, the package manager using following command

su -c ‘rpm -Uvh http://download1.rpmfusion.org/free/fedora/rpmfusion-free-release-stable.noarch.rpm http://download1.rpmfusion.org/nonfree/fedora/rpmfusion-nonfree-release-stable.noarch.rpm’

Please dont forget to remove those non free packages once it true free versions available.

Construction of the Callaway II suspended

In Nuclear, ToMl, USA on October 10, 2009 at 2:03 am

Construction of the Callaway II Nuclear Power Plant has been suspended indefinitely.

The company issued a request for the sponsors of the Construction Work In Progress bill, or CWIP, to withdraw it because the bill does not contain the necessary financial stability Ameren UE says it needs to build the plant.

Right now, energy companies in Missouri aren’t allowed to raise their electricity rates to pay for new construction due to a law passed in 1976 after the first Callaway nuclear plant was built. All construction costs have to be financed by investors, bank loans and other sources.

Those opposed to the bill, which would have allowed electricity rate increases to help pay for the cost of the plant said that it would increase the cost of electricity too much and passes the risk of a failed construction project onto the consumer. Passing the CWIP bill would have allowed Ameren UE to increase its rates to pay for the financing costs of the project.

- from komu. 23 Apr 2009

Passive house

In Housing, ToMl on October 10, 2009 at 1:53 am

Passive houses are airtight buildings that use heat from appliances and even the occupants’ bodies for warmth. They have thick insulation, are oriented to maximize winter sun and use a heat exchanger to warm outside air that circulates throughout. The result is a house that needs little or no extra energy for heating, even in very cold climates. While they are increasingly popular in Germany and Scandinavia, passive houses have yet to make inroads in the United States. Here is one approach.

0430-spj-HOUSE-web-1

- from nytimes

List of liars

In Climate Change, Economics, ToMl on October 10, 2009 at 1:41 am

On April 23, Andrew Revkin of the New York Times published a story proving conclusively that the so-called Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels, knew that they were lying when they ran “an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming.”

List of members of the so-called Global Climate Coalition, who tried for so long to mislead us.

* Air Transport Association
* Allegheny Power
* Aluminum Association, Inc.
* American Automobile Manufacturers Association
* American Commercial Barge Line Co.
* American Farm Bureau Federation
* American Forest & Paper Association
* American Highway Users Alliance
* American Iron and Steel Institute
* American Petroleum Institute
* American Portland Cement Alliance
* Amoco
* Association of American Railroads
* Association of International Automobile Manufacturers
* Atlantic Richfield Coal Company
* Baker Refineries
* Bethlehem Steel
* BHP Minerals
* Chamber of Shipping of America
* Chemical Manufacturers Association
* Chevron
* Chrysler Corporation
* Cinergy
* CONRAIL
* Consumers Energy
* Council of Industrial Boiler Owners
* CSX Transportation, Inc.
* Cyprus-Amax
* Dow Chemical Company
* Drummond Company
* Duke Power Company
* DuPont
* Eastman Chemical
* Edison Electric Institute
* ELCON
* ExxonMobil
* Fertilizer Institute
* Ford Motor Company
* General Motors
* Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
* Greencool
* Hoechst Celanese Chemical Group
* Illinois Power Company
* Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp.
* McDonnell-Douglas
* Mobil Corporation
* National Association of Manufacturers
* National Lime Association
* National Mining Association
* National Ocean Industries Association
* National Petrochemical and Refiners Association
* Natural Rural Electric Cooperative Association
* Norfolk Southern
* Northern Indiana Public Serv. Co.
* Ohio Edison
* Parker Drilling Company
* Process Gas Consumers
* Shell
* Society of the Plastic Industry
* Southern Company
* Steel Manufacturers Association
* TECO Energy Inc.
* Texaco
* U.S. Chamber of Commerce
* USX Corporation
* Union Carbide
* Union Pacific
* Virginia Power
* Western Fuels Association

- from noimpactman. 29 Apr 2009

Boycott these companies.

Abandon village

In Climate Change, Indigenous people, ToMl on October 10, 2009 at 1:30 am

The indigenous people of Alaska have stood firm against some of the most extreme weather conditions on Earth for thousands of years. But now, flooding blamed on climate change is forcing at least one Eskimo village to move to safer ground.

The community of the tiny coastal village of Newtok voted to relocate its 340 residents to new homes 9 miles away, up the Ninglick River. The village, home to indigenous Yup’ik Eskimos, is the first of possibly scores of threatened Alaskan communities that could be abandoned.

Warming temperatures are melting coastal ice shelves and frozen sub-soils, which act as natural barriers to protect the village against summer deluges from ocean storm surges.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has estimated that moving Newtok could cost $130 million. Twenty-six other Alaskan villages are in immediate danger, with an additional 60 considered under threat in the next decade, according to the corps.

The village crisis is taking place as more than 400 indigenous people from 80 nations gather 500 miles (800 kilometers) away in Anchorage, Alaska, at the first Indigenous Peoples’ Global Summit on Climate Change.

Climate change, conference delegates say, is threatening the traditional lifestyles of indigenous peoples around the world. Specific environmental threats include droughts, sea level rise, warmer temperatures; lack of rainfall, flooding and loss of biodiversity, climatologists say. The specific combination of threats varies by region.

For example, in the island nation of Papua New Guinea, an increase in population growth coupled with rising sea levels is decreasing the amount of crop land making farming very difficult for the indigenous people of the region, according to the U.N.

In the African nation of Kenya, the Samburu tribe is on the verge of a food and economic crisis, the U.N. said, as lengthy droughts kill livestock that provides income and sustenance for the community.

In Mexico, highland Mayan farmers are fighting to survive amid decreasing rainfall, unseasonal frost and unprecedented changes in daytime temperatures, the U.N. reported. These conditions are forcing the farmers to plant alternative crops and to search for other sources of irrigation.

“Climigration” refers to the forced and permanent migration of communities because of severe climate change effects on essential infrastructure. This differs from migration caused by catastrophic environmental events such as hurricanes and earthquakes. The concept of “climigration” implies that there is no possibility of these communities returning home, said Alaskan human rights lawyer Robin Bronen, who coined the term.

- from cnn. 28 Apr 2009

Science checklist

In Science, ToMl on October 7, 2009 at 2:28 am

The term “science” applies to a remarkably broad set of human endeavors, from developing lasers, to analyzing the factors that affect human decision-making. To get a grasp on what science is, we’ll look at a checklist that summarizes key characteristics of science and compare it to a prototypical case of science in action. This checklist provides a guide for what sorts of activities are encompassed by science, but since the boundaries of science are not clearly defined, the list should not be interpreted as all-or-nothing.

1. Focus on natural world.
Science studies the natural world. This includes the components of the physical universe around us like atoms, plants, ecosystems, people, societies and galaxies, as well as the natural forces at work on those things.

In contrast, science cannot study supernatural forces and explanations.

A SCIENCE PROTOTYPE: RUTHERFORD AND THE ATOM
In the early 1900s, Ernest Rutherford studied (among other things) the organization of the atom — the fundamental particle of the natural world. Though atoms cannot be seen with the naked eye, they can be studied with the tools of science since they are part of the natural world.

- from berkeley

Page 1
Page 2

What is science?

In Science, ToMl on October 7, 2009 at 2:16 am

For a scientist, every day holds the possibility of discovery — of coming up with a brand new idea or of observing something that no one has ever seen before.Vast bodies of knowledge have yet to be built and many of the most basic questions about the universe have yet to be answered:

What causes gravity?
How do tectonic plates move around on Earth’s surface?
How do our brains store memories?
How do water molecules interact with each other?

We don’t know the complete answers to these and an overwhelming number of other
questions, but the prospect of answering them beckons science forward.

Scientific questions can seem complex (e.g., what chemical reactions allow cells to break the bonds in sugar molecules), but they don’t have to be. You’ve probably posed many perfectly valid scientific questions yourself: how can airplanes fly, why do cakes rise in the oven, why do apples turn brown once they’re cut? You can discover the answers to many of these “everyday” science questions in your local library, but for others, science may not have the answers yet, and answering such questions can lead to astonishing new discoveries. For example, we still don’t know much about how your brain remembers to buy milk at the grocery store. Just as we’re motivated to answer questions about our everyday experiences, scientists confront such questions at all scales, including questions about the very nature of the universe.

Discoveries, new questions, and new ideas are what keep scientists going and awake at night, but they are only one part of the picture; the rest involves a lot of hard (and sometimes tedious) work. In science, discoveries and ideas must be verified by multiple lines of evidence and then integrated into the rest of science, a process which can take many years. And often, discoveries are not bolts from the blue. A discovery may itself be the result of many years of work on a particular problem, as illustrated by Henrietta Leavitt’s stellar discovery.

STELLAR SURPRISES

Astronomers had long known about the existence of variable stars — stars whose brightness changes over time, slowly shifting between brilliant and dim — when, in 1912, Henrietta Leavitt announced a remarkable (and totally unanticipated) discovery about them. For these stars, the length of time between their brightest and dimmest points seemed to be related to their overall brightness: slower cycling stars are more luminous. At the time, no one knew why that was the case, but nevertheless, the discovery allowed astronomers to infer the distances to far-off stars, and hence, to figure out the size of our own galaxy. Leavitt’s observation was a true surprise — a discovery in the classic sense — but one that came only after she’d spent years carefully comparing thousands of photos of these specks of light, looking for patterns in the darkness.

The process of scientific discovery is not limited to professional scientists working in labs. The everyday experience of deducing that your car won’t start because of a bad fuel pump, or of figuring out that the centipedes in your backyard prefer shady rocks shares fundamental similarities with classically scientific discoveries like working out DNA’s double helix. These activities all involve making observations and analyzing evidence — and they all provide the satisfaction of finding an answer that makes sense of all the facts. In fact, some psychologists argue that the way individual humans learn (especially as children) bears a lot of similarity to the progress of science: both involve making observations, considering evidence, testing ideas, and holding on to those that work.

- from berkeley

Page 1

Wind Energizer

In ToMl, wind power on October 7, 2009 at 2:02 am

wind_energizerLeviathan Energy has completed initial testing on their Wind Energizer unit and is reporting gains in wind turbine output in the ballpark of 30% — and as much as 150% at lower wind speeds.

The principle theory at work is that by placing passive objects around a wind farm it will change the circulation around a large wind turbine. The advancement is not in the turbine itself, but rather in the area around it, as such, units can be adapted to any wind turbine from any manufacturer.

The Wind Energizer is a donut-shaped structure made from steel and plastic, but the exact dimensions of it depend on site-specific data, like the tower height, length of the blades, prevailing wind direction and intensity, etc. As determined in the customized modeling process, Farb said that the structure may not even make an entire circle (as is depicted in the images).

- from cleantechnica. 29 Apr 2009.

Air-cooled condenser

In ToMl, technology on October 7, 2009 at 1:24 am

Deutsches Zentrum fur Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V. (“DLR”), a German government research agency, presented a study in 2007 comparing a particular dry cooling technology, the Heller system, with wet cooling for CSP plants in Spain and in the California desert. Water consumption was reduced by 97%, and the performance impact was quite minimal. Indeed the impact on performance in the higher desert temperatures of California was overwhelmed by the benefits of better annual insolation. They also noted that the potentially negative impact of high daytime temperatures is mitigated by the use of thermal storage, which uses energy collected during peak daytime insolation to produce electricity when temperatures are considerably lower. One interesting aspect of the DLR study was their focus on Heller systems over more familiar (at least in the US) direct dry cooling systems, and that is worth a closer examination.

Two basic types of dry cooling systems have long been employed where necessary -– “direct” air cooling (usually called an “air-cooled condenser” or “ACC”) and “indirect” air cooling (often referred to as the “Heller system”, after Laszlo Heller, the Hungarian thermodynamics professor who pioneered this approach in the 1950s). In ACC systems, the saturated steam from the steam turbine exhaust is carried directly to a very large array of A-framed fin-tube bundles, where large mechanical fans force air over the tubes, convectively condensing the steam.

ACC system

In Heller systems, the steam is condensed by spraying water directly into the exhaust flow in a ratio of about 50:1 (called “direct contact jet condensing”), creating a large volume of warm water, some of which is pumped back to the boiler as the working fluid and the rest of which is pumped to bundles of tubes arrayed at the base of a natural-draft hyperbolic cooling tower. The warm water circulating around the base of the tower and the cooler air at the top of the tower, combined with the tower’s hyperbolic shape, stimulate a powerful updraft that draws ambient air over the tube bundles, thereby convectively cooling the water before it is returned to the condenser. Both are closed systems.

Heller system

While the Heller system has been widely used elsewhere, there are none in the US. This is probably because the much lower auxiliary power requirements of Heller systems come with the visual impact of a large hyperbolic cooling tower (typically 150m high and 120m in base diameter), often a difficult sell given that most fossil power stations are located in the vicinity of the populated demand centers they’re intended to serve. The auxiliary power required to run an ACC system is roughly twice the power required run a Heller system, and the Heller system is considerably quieter, but these have apparently been considered prices worth paying for the lower profile (a typical ACC system can be 40m high), particularly when it was cheap coal-fired power. Simple lack of familiarity could be another factor in the hidebound world of US power utilities.

The Electric Power Research Institute has kicked off a comparative study of indirect dry cooling (due to be completed in mid 2010), on the theory that it is the most economic dry cooling solution for large-scale thermal applications. The prospect of large amounts of CSP being built in the world’s deserts calls for a reconsideration of the relative merits of these two approaches, since it would require dry cooling to be deployed in a different application and to a far larger extent than has ever been the case.

They also note that the footprint of an ACC system is larger than that required for a Heller system, though specific data is not offered. Overall system efficiency of a Heller system is in the range of 2% better than an ACC system. That performance improvement meant one thing in a fossil power plant in the bad old days of cheap dirty power, but when it means 2% less land area covered by solar collectors, and lower auxiliary consumption of much more costly power, it takes on a much greater significance. The same sources note that since the Heller systems are mechanically far simpler than ACC systems, maintenance is much less of an issue and system availability is significantly greater. In the remote areas where these plants will be located, and given the large land areas over which they will spread, these are far more significant considerations than they were for compact fossil power plants located close to the populations they served. Another factor noted in these sources is that an ACC must be located next to the steam turbine it serves, because of the cost of transporting saturated steam over any distance, whereas the Heller system has much more flexibility in where the cooling tower is located. This will be much more important to CSP, where one can envision clusters of power tower complexes in a given area each with its own steam turbine, than it was with fossil plants. And finally, the feature that most worked against Heller systems in US fossil plant applications – visual impact – should be far less of an issue in remote desert sites, especially with solar power tower complexes where the central towers will likely be of similar height.

- from climateprogress. 29 Apr 2009.

Global warming What you believe

In Global Warming, ToMl, USA on September 30, 2009 at 1:20 am

warming This chart, adopted from a very interesting new survey (.pdf) of 2,164 American adults on climate policy, reveals part of the problem that advocates of more aggressive measures to curb climate change may be encountering as they seek to push forward initiatives like cap-and-trade.

The survey, conducted by George Mason University’s Center for Climate Change Communication, reveals that Americans are concerned about global warming in the abstract — but perhaps only in the abstract. Just 32 percent of Americans think global warming will harm them “a great deal” or a “a moderate amount” personally. The further we get out from the individual, however, the more impactful people think climate change will tend to be: more impactful on their families than themselves; more impactful on their communities than their families; more impactful on their country than their communities; more impactful than other counties than on the United States; more impactful on future generations than the present one, and finally, more impactful on plants and animals than on humans.

These beliefs are not necessarily irrational. Climate change probably will have more impact on the developing world than the developed one, and it almost certainly will have more impact on our children than it does on ourselves.

Nevertheless, the fact that fewer than a third of Americans are worried about the effects that climate change will have on them personally strikes me as significant. Although more aggressive policy responses on climate change generally poll fairly well, they are also often the first things to be sacrificed in Americans’ minds when something else intervenes, such as a recession or higher energy prices. Advocates of cap-and-trade may need to find ways to personalize the terms of the debate.

- from fivethirtyeight. 26 Apr 2009

First Superconductor Power Cable

In Energy, Grid, Super Conductivity on September 30, 2009 at 1:11 am

American Superconductor Corporation, a leading energy technologies company, today announced at Hannover Fair 2009 that LS Cable Ltd. (LS Cable) has ordered approximately 80,000 meters (50 miles) of 344 superconductors, which is AMSC’s proprietary brand of second generation (2G) high temperature superconductor (HTS) wire. LS Cable will utilize the wire to manufacture a 22.9 kilovolt (kV) cable system that it will install in Korea Electric Power Corporation’s (KEPCO) commercial power delivery network near the city of Seoul in 2010. Founded in 1962 and based in Anyang, South Korea, LS Cable is Korea’s largest power cable manufacturer with nearly 8,200 employees worldwide and annual sales in excess of US$6 billion. This is the single largest commercial order for 2G HTS wire in the world.

This project builds on the success Korea’s Development of Advanced Power Systems by Applied Superconductivity technologies (DAPAS) program, which has provided more than $100 million in funding for the development and commercialization of superconductor systems. In 2006, LS Cable and the Korea Electrotechnology Research Institute (KERI) successfully tested a 30-meter, 22.9kV superconductor cable. In 2007, LS Cable and KERI completed testing of a 100-meter, 22.9 kV superconductor cable system. Both of these projects were powered by AMSC’s first generation HTS wire and funded by the DAPAS program.

- from phx.corporate-ir. 20 Apr 2009

Fishing ban

In Fisheries, ToMl on September 30, 2009 at 1:01 am

A third of the world’s oceans must be closed to fishing if depleted stocks are to recover, scientists and conservation groups have warned. Such a measure could “set the clock back 200 years” and reverse the decline in fish populations, after which responsible fisheries management could regenerate the industry.

Callum Roberts, Professor of Marine Conservation at the University of York, has reviewed 100 scientific papers identifying the scale of closure needed. “All are leaning in a similar direction,” he says, “which is that 20 to 40% of the sea should be protected.” Friends of the Earth, the Marine Conservation Society and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds all support the idea of a 30% closure. “What we would see is a flourishing of life,” Roberts says. “In 20 years, we could get to a point where a lot of species are in a far more productive state.”

The proposal comes in the wake of a green paper calling for radical reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, which EU ministers admit has failed. It reveals that 88% of EU stocks are overfished (against a global average of 25%) while 30% are “outside safe biological limits” – meaning they cannot reproduce as normal because the parenting population is too depleted. In the North Sea, 93% of cod are fished before they have had a chance to breed.

The European Commission suggests a reduction in fleet size and a dramatic cut in fishing effort among its raft of measures, but Roberts believes these will not work without the creation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). “Just cutting fishing effort is not enough,” he says. “If we are ever going to have sustainable fisheries, MPA networks are an essential, indispensable part of any rational management package.”

In Iceland, Canada and the US, the creation of MPAs has “brought real increases in fish populations and real recovery of seabed habitats”, Roberts says. “Populations of exploited species have increased five-, 10- or even 20-fold within five, 10 or 20 years.”

The most convincing example is New England, where stocks of ground fish were “in a dreadful state” in the 1990s. Off Georges Bank, an area of nearly 20,000 square kilometres – a quarter of the fishing grounds – was closed to vessels, and fishing effort was reduced by “a draconian 50 per cent”. In the past 10 years, Roberts says, there has been “a spectacular recovery” of key economic species.

As stocks within MPAs recover, the eggs and larvae of fish are carried on ocean currents to fishing grounds, Roberts explains. This helps replenish commercial fisheries. Fish also leave the protected areas, emigrating to places where they can be harvested legally.

Off Lundy Island in Devon, one of only three No-Take Zones (similar to MPAs) in British waters, the lobster population is eight times higher within the reserve. “We have already seen benefits in the lobster fishery immediately outside it,” says Giles Bartlett, fisheries policy officer at the environmental charity WWF. In the Isle of Man, where a No-Take Zone for scallops has been created, “there have been significant increases in catches on the boundary of the reserve”, he adds. “There, a limited size of reserve is supporting the whole fishery. If you scale those reserves up, you are going to see similar results for demersal [bottom-dwelling] fish stocks. We feel European seas would benefit from this kind of management.”

The fishing industry is less convinced, saying pressure on stocks just outside a protected area can “mitigate against the impact” of the MPA. “It almost creates a bull’s-eye for fishermen, who know the area on the periphery isn’t protected,” says Tom Rossiter, research and development manager at Seafish, the UK seafood industry body. “If you shut off an MPA, it will move the fishing effort somewhere else.”

Phil MacMullen, head of environment at Seafish, says a distinction must be made between MPAs created to conserve habitats and biodiversity, and those created for fisheries management purposes. “If you are very lucky, you may find an area designated for conservation also gives you fisheries benefits,” he says, but the likelihood is low. Seasonal closures at spawning times, and around specific areas such as nursery grounds, are already used effectively by fishermen.

Currently, there are 4,000 MPAs covering just 0.8% of the world’s oceans. New Zealand has already closed 30 per cent of its Exclusive Economic Zone – offshore fishing grounds – to trawlers and Australia is considering a similar move. Under the Marine Bill, the UK Government has committed to designating a coherent network of new Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) by 2012, though there is no mention of a percentage target.

- from guardian. 26 Apr 2009

Hidden truth

In Automobile, Climate Change, Global Warming, Oil, ToMl on September 25, 2009 at 1:35 am

For more than a decade the Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels, led an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming.

“The role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood,” the coalition said in a scientific “backgrounder” provided to lawmakers and journalists through the early 1990s, adding that “scientists differ” on the issue.

But a document filed in a federal lawsuit demonstrates that even as the coalition worked to sway opinion, its own scientific and technical experts were advising that the science backing the role of greenhouse gases in global warming could not be refuted.

“The scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied,” the experts wrote in an internal report compiled for the coalition in 1995.

The coalition was financed by fees from large corporations and trade groups representing the oil, coal and auto industries, among others. In 1997, the year an international climate agreement that came to be known as the Kyoto Protocol was negotiated, its budget totaled $1.68 million, according to tax records obtained by environmental groups.

Throughout the 1990s, when the coalition conducted a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign challenging the merits of an international agreement, policy makers and pundits were fiercely debating whether humans could dangerously warm the planet. Today, with general agreement on the basics of warming, the debate has largely moved on to the question of how extensively to respond to rising temperatures.

Some environmentalists have compared the tactic to that once used by tobacco companies, which for decades insisted that the science linking cigarette smoking to lung cancer was uncertain. By questioning the science on global warming, these environmentalists say, groups like the Global Climate Coalition were able to sow enough doubt to blunt public concern about a consequential issue and delay government action.

The coalition disbanded in 2002, but some members, including the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Petroleum Institute, continue to lobby against any law or treaty that would sharply curb emissions. Others, like Exxon Mobil, now recognize a human contribution to global warming and have largely dropped financial support to groups challenging the science.

- from nytimes. 23 Apr 2009.

Right Livelihood Award

In Social, ToMl on September 25, 2009 at 1:24 am

How did Right Livelihood Award begin?

It about breaking silences. I was always wondering, why do we live with problems we can solve? Why are there solutions, but they’re not taken seriously? I was always interested in the question of, solutions and how do you get taken seriously. Now, if you grow up in Sweden, you realize that, suddenly in October, when the Nobel Prizes are announced, then there are these people who get taken seriously, not just in their own areas. Suddenly, if you win a Nobel Prize, you can pronounce on anything, and you get taken seriously and you’re listened to.

And these awards were created in a very different age, when the belief in progress and technology were still sort of unlimited. There was no problem with a so-called third world. There was no ecological problem. And so, there was a gap. And strangely enough, only one gap was filled in these hundred years. The Nobel Committee created one new award not started by Alfred Nobel himself, namely the one for economics. And I said, well, that’s a bit strange. There are very important other gaps here.

So I proposed to the Nobel Foundation an award for environmental work and for human development, and I offered to provide some money to start this from the sale of my business. Obviously I’m not as wealthy as Alfred Nobel, so it wouldn’t have funded the award in the long term. But it was to try to get them to take this seriously. And I received a polite reply back saying that they had decided not to introduce any more Nobel awards. And so, I then felt, obliged to try it myself. So I went back to Sweden, where I hadn’t lived since I was a child, and I sent out an announcement. I found through my network two very good recipients.

The first year, I was told that it was debated in the Swedish media whether this was a KGB plot or a CIA plot to discredit the Nobel Prizes. This was still in the Cold War. But one member of the Swedish parliament believed so much in this that in five years of work, she managed to convince enough colleagues from all the political parties to invite us to present these awards in the Swedish parliament, which has now happened, happening for over twenty years. So that, in brief, is the story.

It’s grown, the award, into other areas, because it’s a very open and democratic award. Nobel Prizes, only a certain very small group of people can nominate for a Nobel Prize. And with our award, anybody can nominate anybody, except, of course, themselves or their own organization. So we get nominations from all over the world. We knew that the environment remains, a very important issue. But we also realize that even in the areas where there are Nobel Prizes, like economics even, like medicine, like physics, only a certain group of people get these. Nobody from another medical tradition but modern Western medicine would ever get a Nobel Prize for medicine. No physics prize, no Nobel physics prize has ever gone to a solar energy physicist.

So we honored the most successful photovoltaic—solar photovoltaics researcher in the world, an Australian, Martin Green, a few years ago. And we’ve honored economists like Professor Herman Daly, who is now at University of Maryland, the pioneer of ethical ecological steady-state economics, because although he would deserve it in any objective world, he is very unlikely ever to get a Nobel Prize in economics. We have had a few other pioneers: Manfred Max-Neef from Chile, Leopold Kohr from Austria, highly recognized economics, but they were teaching the wrong kind of economics.

We gave an award to Wangari Maathai, the initiator of the Green Belt reforestation movement in Kenya, twenty years before she won the Nobel. That was kind of interesting, that we gave the award to her in ’84, which was the first year we had an all-women panel of recipients, and then exactly twenty years later, she won the Nobel Peace Prize.

awarded Munir, the great Indonesian human rights activist, who later died. He was poisoned when he was taking a plane out of Indonesia.

That was one of these great tragedies, that we have had other cases where we have not been able to save people, but other cases where we have saved them. I mean, in Nigeria, Ken Saro-Wiwa was still executed, but his closest collaborator told us that he felt that if we hadn’t given the award to their organization, they would have killed him, too. In another case from Guatemala, a human rights activist whose sister had been murdered in a political assassination told us that the chief of police actually told her when she came back from the award presentation that “Now you’re untouchable,” as he put it. “Now you’re so well known internationally that they won’t dare to kill you.” And fortunately, she’s still in good health.

Helen Mack, her sister Myrna Mack, who died September 11, 1990 at the hands of Guatemalan security forces, an anthropologist.

How the title Right Livelihood Award came

I was looking around, and I felt that it should symbolize the whole life, in a way. it’s a Buddhist term. I’m not a Buddhist, but I liked this idea of saying that, it isn’t just what you do, it’s how you live your life. And interestingly enough, it also challenges people to think. The name is too judgmental: “You’re saying that there are wrong livelihoods.” And so, of course there are wrong livelihoods. Otherwise, you wouldn’t be in the mess you’re in.

And another aspect, of course, is being that because it’s very difficult to translate “right livelihood” into many languages, the award has become known—in the German-speaking world, for example, it’s entirely known as the Alternative Nobel Prize. And I think that helps the recipients. It’s not an anti-Nobel Prize, you know, but it is certainly a prize which ties in with what Alfred Nobel wanted to do. His award was very progressive in those days, to have an international award in a very nationalistic age. And he said, “I wanted to honor those who have brought the greatest benefit upon humanity.” And in a very different world today, I think that’s what we are trying to do. And that’s why it’s sort of interesting that even the family of Alfred Nobel sympathized with us. A senior member of Alfred Nobel’s family in Sweden is actually on our advisory council, because they are so outraged about the Nobel Foundation introducing the economics prize. because they think it was totally inappropriate. If you have an economics prize, then why not have a prize for ecology, for architecture, etc.? And I think they’re also quite unhappy with the choices. But their main reason is, of course, that they object to this prize being presented as a Nobel Prize when it has nothing to do with Alfred Nobel. It was established by Swedish national banks. Probably the Nobel Foundation felt that they couldn’t refuse it. The official name is sort of slightly different, but if you then get the book, the publication every year called Nobel Lectures, there are the—the economics lecture is also in there, so they’re playing a sort of double game.

why not choose somebody like Herman Daly, whose name is now being voted again and again as the kind of economic order is sort of being seen as increasingly bankrupt? He told us many of these things ten, twenty years ago. He wrote a book with a theologian, James Cobb, called For the Common Good, but especially his book on steady-state economics is highly up-to-date.

A stamp collector since I was nine, but I was a stamp dealer. So it was actually my business, which—when I sold that, which enabled me then to provide the initial funding for the award for the first five years. I funded it from the sale of my stamp business.

My father was a pacifist. And so, when I was nine years old, one day he offered me to exchange all of my toy guns, my water pistols, for a stamp collection. And I decided to accept the offer.

Interview with Jakob von Uexkull, the founder of the Right Livelihood Award.

- from democracynow. 8 Dec 2008.

Solé Power Tile

In Solar, ToMl on September 25, 2009 at 12:57 am

sole-tile3_oK5sq_69SRS Energy, a developer of sustainable solar roofing systems, is launching Solé Power Tile this month, bringing the first building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) roofing product to curved roofing systems.

The Solé Power Tile can help to provide for some of the energy needs of a house without installing solar panels, which may detract from the visual appeal or not be allowed due to regulations in HOA covenants. The tiles integrate seamlessly with clay tile roofs, making it easy to upgrade a curved tile roof to a power-generating platform.

According to SRS, the thin film solar technology generates more energy than comparable products in the harsh roofing environment, and the Solé Tile is backed by a full product warranty to ensure reliability for both designers and their clients. The tiles can be installed just like traditional clay tiles, but need to be installed by an authorized Solé Tile contractor.

- cleantechnica. 20 Apr 2009.

Cost-effective tidal power

In ToMl, Wave Power on September 25, 2009 at 12:48 am

nasa-jpl_jwAQv_69Researchers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory have developed a cost-effective way to harness ocean tides and convert them into useful electricity in a more efficient manner. While conventional tidal generators work by using tidal wave to power an underwater turbine, this new system uses tidal turbine to generate a high pressure fluid, which is then used to run an onshore turbine.

According to the researchers, the system is based on the use of a special substance known as a phase change material that changes from a solid to a liquid as the temperature changes from cold to warm. Since the temperature inside an ocean keeps on fluctuating, it changes the shape of the phase change material and expands it. When this material expands, it increases the pressure of the fluid inside the pipes, which is then used to generate electricity.

Currently the technology is in its infancy and the researchers need to answer a few issues before commercial variants can be brought to the market. Initially the researchers have to find a way electricity will be transported to the shore, which might be miles away from the generators. Moreover, the system will demand the use of special wires that can withstand the extreme conditions present underwater.

- from ecofriend

New solar power plant in Arizona

In Solar, ToMl, USA on September 23, 2009 at 2:23 am

Albiasa Corporation, subsidiary of Spanish based Albiasa Solar, has chosen Arizona as the new location for the renewable energy firm’s development headquarters and has selected a site near Kingman as the future location of its 200 megawatt (MW) concentrating solar power (CSP) plant.

The Albiasa project uses parabolic CSP technology similar to that at the SEGS I-IV power plants in the California Mojave Desert. These plants have reliably operated since the 1980s using the sun to generate electricity via parabolic collectors.

Albiasa Solar has worked for years in Spain to improve the parabolic trough technology, making overall operation and cost of CSP more efficient. The Albiasa trough collector has been assessed as the most efficient parabolic trough system in the world.

“The Albiasa Kingman project involves over $1 billion capital investment and will generate annually, with molten salt thermal storage, more than 665,000 MWh of renewable solar energy when completed in 2013,” said Albert Fong, Albiasa Corporation’s Chief Project Engineer.

- from azcommerce.

China’s investment in green economy

In Energy, Renewable, ToMl on September 23, 2009 at 2:16 am

China’s leaders are investing $12.6 million every hour to green their economy.

So writes Ben Furnas Research Associate at the Center for American Progress Action Fund
Furnass notes that “China is a leading manufacturer of photovoltaic (solar) cells, second only to Japan, and is set to be the world’s leading manufacturer of wind turbines by the end of 2009″ — not exactly low-tech, low-cost production.

A February analysis by HSBC Global Research in Hong Kong projects that nearly 40 percent of China’s proposed $586 billion stimulus plan—$221 billion over two years—is going toward public investment in renewable energy, low-carbon vehicles, high-speed rail, an advanced electric grid, efficiency improvements, and other water-treatment and pollution controls.

This stimulus is on top of historic levels of government spending and private investment in renewable technology, energy efficiency, and low-carbon growth all across China.

This massive stimulus plan will spend over 3 percent of China’s 2008 gross domestic product annually in 2009 and 2010 on green investments—more than six times America’s green stimulus spending as a percentage of our respective economies. This is about $12.6 million every hour over the next two years. In the United States, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act invests $112 billion in comparable green priorities over the next two years, about half as much as China, according to HSBC. This represents less than half of one percent of our 2008 gross domestic product.

China’s renewable energy industries are already huge and expanding rapidly. China is a leading manufacturer of photovoltaic (solar) cells, second only to Japan, and is set to be the world’s leading manufacturer of wind turbines by the end of 2009.

Take the photovoltaic (solar power) industry. In the 1990s, the United States led the world in the development of solar energy technology. From 1994 to 1998, our burgeoning solar energy industry produced more photovoltaic cells than Japan, China, or all of Europe. But then, in the early 2000s, as the Bush administration stifled global warming data and blocked a renewable energy portfolio standard, America stumbled and fell staggeringly behind.

In a series of energy bills in 2001, 2003, and 2005, the Bush administration plowed billions of dollars into dirty energy—oil, coal, and nuclear—while neglecting clean renewable energy industries. The 2001 energy bill gave 80 percent of its value to tax breaks for oil, gas, nuclear, and coal companies. The 2003 energy bill, drafted in secret with Vice President Dick Cheney and members of the oil, gas, coal, and electric industries, gave $23.5 billion to dirty energy and loosened environmental regulations. Finally, while the 2005 bill contained a token level of investment in renewable energy, it also provided even more support for dirty energy, offering $27 billion in subsidies for coal, oil, and nuclear energy.

The European Union has committed to 20 percent of final energy coming from renewable sources by 2020. China is working to have 16 percent of its primary energy come from renewable sources by 2020. Sixty-six other countries worldwide have committed to nationwide standards. But in the United States, the federal government has set no national standards.

– Ben Furnas climateprogress. 21 Apr 2009

Oceanic dead zones

In CO2, Environment, Ocean, ToMl on September 23, 2009 at 1:46 am

Concentrations of carbon dioxide are increasing rapidly in the Earth’s atmosphere, primarily because of human activities. About one third of the carbon dioxide that humans produce by burning fossil fuels is being absorbed by the world’s oceans, gradually causing seawater to become more acidic.

However, such “ocean acidification” is not the only way that carbon dioxide can harm marine animals. In a “Perspective” published in the journal Science, Peter Brewer and Edward Peltzer combine published data on rising levels of carbon dioxide and declining levels of oxygen in the ocean in a set of new and thermodynamically rigorous calculations. They show that increases in carbon dioxide can make marine animals more susceptible to low concentrations of oxygen, and thus exacerbate the effects of low-oxygen “dead zones” in the ocean.

Brewer and Peltzer’s calculations also show that the partial pressure of dissolved carbon dioxide gas (pCO2) in low-oxygen zones will rise much higher than previously thought. This could have significant consequences for marine life in these zones.

For over a decade, Brewer and Peltzer have been working with marine biologists to study the effects of carbon dioxide on marine organisms. High concentrations of carbon dioxide make it harder for marine animals to respire (to extract oxygen from seawater). This, in turn, makes it harder for these animals to find food, avoid predators, and reproduce. Low concentrations of oxygen can have similar effects.

Currently, deep-sea life is threatened by a combination of increasing carbon dioxide and decreasing oxygen concentrations. The amount of dissolved carbon dioxide is increasing because the oceans are taking up more and more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. At the same time, ocean surface waters are warming and becoming more stable, which allows less oxygen to be carried from the surface down into the depths.

In trying to quantify the impacts of this “double whammy” on marine organisms, Brewer and Peltzer came up with the concept of a “respiration index.” This index is based on the ratio of oxygen and carbon dioxide gas in a given sample of seawater. The lower the respiration index, the harder it is for marine animals to respire.

Brewer provides the following analogy, “Animals facing declining oxygen levels and rising CO2 levels will suffer in much the same way that humans in a damaged submarine would suffer, once the concentrations of these gasses reach critical levels. Our work helps define those critical levels for marine animals, and will enable the emerging risk to be quantified and mapped.”

In the past, marine biologists have defined “dead zones” based solely on low concentrations of dissolved oxygen. Brewer and Peltzer hope that their respiration index will provide a more precise and quantitative way for oceanographers to identify such areas. Tracking changes in the respiration index could also help marine biologists understand and predict which ocean waters are at risk of becoming dead zones in the future.

To estimate such effects in the open ocean, the MBARI researchers calculated the respiration index at various ocean depths, for several different forecasted concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide. They found that the most severe effects would take place in what are known as “oxygen minimum zones.” These are depths, typically 300 to 1,000 meters below the surface, where oxygen concentrations are already quite low in many parts of the world’s oceans.

Previously, marine biologists have assumed that the effects of increasing carbon dioxide in the oceans would be greatest at the sea surface, where most of the gas enters the ocean. Such studies have predicted a doubling of pCO2 (from about 280 to 560 micro-atmospheres) at the sea surface over the next 100 years. Brewer and Peltzer’s calculations suggest that the partial pressure of carbon dioxide will increase even faster in the deep oxygen minimum zones, with pCO2 increasing by 2.5 times, from 1,000 to about 2,500 micro-atmospheres.

Previous studies have indicated that such oxygen minimum zones may expand over the next century. Brewer and Peltzer’s research suggests that the effects of this expansion will be even more severe than previously forecast.

According to coauthor Peltzer, “The bottom line is that we think it’s important to look at both oxygen and carbon dioxide in the oceans, rather than just one or the other.” The impact of these chemical changes may be minimal in well-oxygenated ocean areas, but as the authors point out in their paper, “We may anticipate a very large expansion of the oceanic dead zones.”

- from sciencedaily. 18 Apr 2009

Permaculture

In ToMl, agriculture on September 19, 2009 at 9:40 pm

Permaculture is a essentially a set of principles for sustainable living, an approach to life based on observation and design. It was first developed in Australia in the 1970s, by Bill Mollison and David Holmgren, as a reaction to the industrialization of agriculture and forestry.

he way we farm in the developed world is hugely energy-intensive and ultimately unsustainable. In so-called primitive societies, farming takes place on a much smaller scale and causes no damage to ecosystems, while delivering higher yields. The ‘forest gardens’ that the indigenous peoples of Indonesia or the Philippines create can be farmed in perpetuity, for thousands of years – it is permanent agriculture.

Learning from this kind of gardening, Mollison and Holmgren drew out a number of over-arching principles for creating low-impact, productive ways of life. There are a number of different formulations of these principles.

Work with nature, rather than against it
By observing a piece of land, you can work out what it naturally wants to do. (Most of the UK defaults to woodland, if left along for long enough.) Work with the natural tendencies of the land, tweaking it to your needs, rather than imposing and then constantly enforcing a human vision for it.

Everything gardens
Every living thing intervenes in its environment in one way or another to benefit itself, or ‘gardens’ it’s immediate surroundings. It may be a big change like a beaver building a dam, or a tiny change, like a plant fixing nitrogen in the soil. By working out what each plant or animal does, beneficial relationships can be created. (See companion planting)

The problem is the solution
If something isn’t working, the clues to the solution will be inherent in the problem itself. A creative solution may make the ‘problem’ into a positive. If your garden has slugs, that’s bad news for your vegetables, but it would be good news for ducks.

Make the least change for the greatest possible effect
By getting elements of a system working together, work can be done without any further intervention. Permaculturists famously don’t dig their plots, but get worms to naturally turn and aerate the soil.

The yield of a system is only limited by the imagination of the designer
Elements of a natural system have multiple effects, and they can all be used. A chicken, for example, lays eggs. But it also produces manure, scratches the soil, eats bugs and pests, and generates body heat. How can you put all of those ‘yields’ to good use?

Permaculture works through close observation, seeing the way various things work together, and creating synergies. Although the examples above are agricultural, the principles can be applied to many areas of life, in town planning, architecture, design, or forestry. Because it deals with systems as a whole, and incorporates values such as energy conservation and zero-waste, it offers a useful set of tools for a society facing climate change and peak oil.

KPackageKit is clearing the cache

In Gnu, ToMl on September 19, 2009 at 9:34 pm

KPackageKit is the default package manager front end on Fedora 11. Its back end is Yum. After installation when I checked /var/cache/yum there was nothing saved.
There is one file /etc/yum.conf
In that file there a line keepcache=
It was initially 0, means do not keep the cache rpm files.
I set it 1. Now I got the rpm files after installation. This is required to install packages that don’t have internet connection. also avoid re-download in case of re installation. Save the cache is some other media.

The Carbon-Free Home

In Book, ToMl on September 19, 2009 at 9:09 am

The Carbon-Free Home
36 Remodeling Projects to Help Kick the Fossil-Fuel Habit
by Rebekah Hren, Stephen Hren

Having weaned themselves completely from fossil fuels in their conventional 1930s urban house, Rebekah and Stephen Hren provide a map for others to do the same. Their book shows first how to reduce energy consumption, then to retrofit existing homes to obtain all heating, cooling, cooking, refrigeration, hot water, and electricity from renewable sources. The Hrens also provide advice on renewable methods of transportation and home gardening. These practical approaches fit anyone’s budget and can be implemented over time to progressively liberate a home from fossil-fuel dependency.

Stephen and Rebekah Hren live in Durham, North Carolina, where they are both actively involved with renewable energy, natural building, and edible urban gardening. Rebekah works with Honey Electric Solar, Inc., as a professional designer/installer of photovoltaic systems and domestic solar hot-water systems. Stephen is a professional restoration carpenter, focusing on antebellum houses. He teaches natural-building classes and workshops at the local community college, and in any spare time works with Bountiful Backyards, an edible-landscaping cooperative.

1970s lifestyle is safer

In Climate Change, Food, ToMl, UK on September 17, 2009 at 4:59 pm

The rising numbers of people who are overweight and obese in the UK means the nation uses 19% more food than 40 years ago, a study suggests.

That could equate to an extra 60 mega-tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions a year, the team calculated.

Transport costs of a fatter population were also included in the International Journal of Epidemiology study.

Dr Phil Edwards, study leader and researcher at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said they had set out to calculate what the UK energy consumption would be if the weight of the population was put back a few decades.

A “normal” adult population, where only 3.5% are classed as obese, was compared with a population where 40% are obese.

These populations reflect the proportions of overweight and obese people living in the UK in the 1970s – and what is predicted for the UK in 2010, the researchers said.

In addition to calculating the increased food costs of the heavier population, the team worked out how much additional fuel would be needed for transportation of modern-day UK compared with the 1970s version.

Greenhouse gas emissions from food production and car travel in the fatter population would be between 0.4 to 1 giga-tonnes higher per 1bn people, they estimated.

And people are generally bigger than they were three decades ago.

Between 1994 and 2004, the average male body mass index (BMI) in England increased from 26 to 27.3, with the average female BMI rising from 25.8 to 26.9 which equates to about 3 kg – or half a stone – heavier.

“This is not really just about obese people, the distribution of the whole population is what’s important,” said Dr Edwards.

“Everybody is getting a bit fatter.”

“Staying slim is good for health and for the environment.

“We need to be doing a lot more to reverse the global trend towards fatness, and recognise it as a key factor in the battle to reduce emissions and slow climate change.”

It is not just a UK issue – in nearly every country in the world, the average BMI is rising.

Professor Alan Maryon-Davis, president of the Faculty of Public Health said shifting the population weight distribution back to that of the 1970s would do quite a lot to help the planet.

“In the 1970s we had bigger portions of vegetables and smaller portions of meat and there’s been a shift in the amount of exercise we do.

“All these things are combining to hurt the planet and this is a calculation that deserves a bit more attention,” he said.

- from bbc. 20 Apr 2009.

Foods From 5,000 Miles Away or More

In Food, ToMl, Transportation on September 16, 2009 at 1:45 am

Hawaiian Pineapple=5,000 Miles
Pineapple is native to southern Brazil and Paraguay and had spread to the Caribbean by the time Columbus arrived, who brought it back to Europe. By the beginning of the 19th century it was introduced into the Philippines, Hawaii, Zimbabwe and Guam. On Hawaii commercial cultivation began in the 1880s. Today Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire and the Philippines dominates world cultivation.

One of the common variety found in US grocery stores is Smooth Cayenne, which originated in Hawaii.

Chilean Wine=5,500 Miles
It may have come a long way to get to your NYC wine merchant, but wines from Chile sent by boat have far lower transportation emissions than sending them on a truck the 3,000 miles from Napa or Oregon.

Wine has been produced in Chile going back to the 16th century, when Spanish conquistadors brought grape vines with them to plant. By the mid 18th century, French varietals were introduced. But it wasn’t until the late years of the 20th century when the Chilean wine industry really began to expand—between 1995 and 2005, the number of wineries increased six-fold. Chile now is the fourth largest exporter of wines to the United States.

Ethiopian Coffee=7,000 Miles
Coffee was first discovered and in Ethiopia in the 9th century, from where it spread northwards to Egypt and Yemen, and on through the Muslim World to Europe, Indonesia and the Americas.

Today, Ethiopia is the fifth largest coffee exporter in the world, producing about 1.7 million tonnes of beans per year. That amount is dwarfed by the world’s largest producer, Brazil, which produces about 17 million tonnes per year. Globally, over one hundred million people in the developing world are dependent on coffee as their primary source of income.

Korean Ramen=7,000 Miles
I confess that I have a soft spot for instant ramen. Perhaps not the most nutritionally sound thing to eat with great frequency, but every once and a while it seems to be the perfect thing to eat. My personal favorite is Shin Ramyun, produced in South Korea. This spicy ramen has been produced in South Korea since 1986, is exported to 80 different countries and the highest selling brand of instant noodles in Korea.

Again, probably not the best thing for you in any great quantity, and there’s a lot of packaging containing those dried noodles, spice packet and dehydrated vegetables.

Indian Papadum=7,200 Miles
I have yet to meet a person that once they’ve been introduced to papadum. These thin lentil or chickpea flatbreads, crackers, wafers (call them what you will) are seriously tasty. Whether plain or dipped in chutney you really can’t go wrong.

In New York you can get ones imported from the UK and India and while both are good, somehow the ones I’ve had from India are just a little bit better.

Thai Jasmine Rice=8,500 Miles
There are plenty of rice varieties around the world that are plenty tasty in their own way, but one which really stands out for me is Thai Jasmine rice. Though you can probably find jasmine rice grown closer to New York City than 8,500 miles away in Thailand, the Thai rice just seems to cook up a better and have better flavor. Terroir influences wine taste and no doubt influences rice taste as well.

What you may not know is that Jasmine rice, officially known as the Kao Horm Mali 105 variety, wasn’t discovered (named is probably more accurate) until 1954.

Madagascar Vanilla=8,500 Miles
Vanilla is really a great example of how the world has had a globalized economy (albeit in a different and slower form) for quite a long time. Derived from orchids originating in Mexico, vanilla was introduced to Europe in the early 16th century by the Spanish. Due to the way that vanilla orchid is pollinated though (by a particular bee) attempts to grow it outside its native land proved futile until the 1840s. It was then that a French-owned slave on the island now known as Réunion in the Indian Ocean discovered how to hand-pollinate the plant.

Today to majority of the world’s vanilla is grown on Madagascar and Indonesia, with the former producing 6,200 tonnes per year (59% of world supply). Due to the labor intensive production of vanilla—the women in the photo are grading vanilla beans—it is the second most expensive flavoring in the world, after saffron.

Sri Lankan Tea=8,700 Miles
Like dog people and cat people, I’m pretty sure there are tea people and coffee people. Personally, while I do like coffee and drink it fairly often, if it came down to a desert island decision of one or the other, it’s tea all the way. (I’d also choose a cat, by the way…)

Ceylon tea (called such after the former name of Sri Lanka) is one of my favorite black teas—though I admit to having many favorites. The interesting historical thing about it is that it wasn’t until the 1850s, when a fungal outbreak ruined coffee production on the island and the British landlords thought it high time to diversify into tea. From 1880 to 1890 tea production on the island increased from 23 pounds to 22,900 tons.

Sri Lanka is currently the world’s third largest exporter of tea, with 19% of the global market.

New Zealand Lamb=9,000 Miles
From New York, New Zealand is just about as far away as you can get, right up there with western Australia and part of Indonesia for being on the backside of beyond. Though I don’t personally eat lamb, New Zealand does make a big deal of the quality of its lamb so here it is:

Sheep top all other livestock raised in New Zealand, with some 45 million being raised. Cattle come in a distant second at 9 million. The main thing that sets apart New Zealand lamb from other places is that all of the sheep raised there are grass fed, rather than being raised in concentrated animal feeding operations.

While this is undeniably a better use of resources than using massive fossil fuel inputs to raise corn and grain to feed to animals, then killed for their meat, I highly doubt it outweighs sending that grass-fed meat around the world on planes. Ship might be another story.

- from treehugger. 17 Apr 2009

If possible Buy local. Eat seasonal. Eat organic.

Clean Air Act

In Environment, Greenhouse gas, ToMl, USA on September 15, 2009 at 2:41 pm

Background

On April 2, 2007, in Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), the Supreme Court found that greenhouse gases are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act. The Court held that the Administrator must determine whether or not emissions of greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make a reasoned decision. In making these decisions, the Administrator is required to follow the language of section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. The Supreme Court decision resulted from a petition for rulemaking under section 202(a) filed by more than a dozen environmental, renewable energy, and other organizations.

Action

The Administrator signed a proposal with two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act:

  • The Administrator is proposing to find that the current and projected concentrations of the mix of six key greenhouse gases-carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)-in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. This is referred to as the endangerment finding.
  • The Administrator is further proposing to find that the combined emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, and HFCs from new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines contribute to the atmospheric concentrations of these key greenhouse gases and hence to the threat of climate change. This is referred to as the cause or contribute finding.

This proposed action, as well as any final action in the future, would not itself impose any requirements on industry or other entities. An endangerment finding under one provision of the Clean Air Act would not by itself automatically trigger regulation under the entire Act.

- from epa

India’s 9/11

In India, Terrorism, ToMl on September 14, 2009 at 4:55 pm

Why the terrorist attack on Mumbai is called India’s 9/11

Right when this was occurring, the relationship between 9/11 and Mumbai began to be made by the media.
Its become something of a cliché now. Anytime there is any attack they start to say this is our 9/11. You know whether it is the attack in London or the attack and Indonesia, everybody claims a terrorist attack now as their 9/11. There is something ominous about this. It means the state has to then follow the playbook laid out by the Bush Administration right after it experienced of course its 9/11. Which is to say you then go and start a war against an adversary that you claim did the attack and simultaneously, you begin to create a security apparatus inside your state to restrict the civil liberties of all people who live within that country.

So 9/11 or branding something as 9/11 has come to have these two aspects. One, go to war against somebody without any kind of full police investigation that is decisively shown us who has done the act. So one, a foreign war, secondly, what you might even consider to be a war against your own population. Where you start to restrict civil liberties far in excess of anything necessary. And of course, always fighting the last terrorist attack. So you build up this enormous apparatus of restrictions which is dealing with the previous attack against population and not trying to forecast the safety of the population into the near future. That is why the media started to talk about Mumbai’s 9/11.
The third reason is, the media had not really called any of the other attacks in Mumbai, and there have been many since 1992, 9/11, precisely because most of those attacks the have taken place in areas which afflicted the working poor, working-class, and middle-class people. This attack, for the first time, targeted places of the top elite. Very expensive hotels, leading restaurants, and this therefore, brought this kind of assault into the bedrooms, into the restaurant of the elite. And they found then that this is their 9/11. The other attacks were not called 9/11. There were the kind normal conditions of suffering borne by ordinary people in places like Bombay. So for these reasons, the media ratcheted up the rhetoric about this being Mumbai’s 9/11.
- Vijay Prashad

Who Sonal Shah is

Sonal Shah is a second-generation, South Asian, Indian American, who has just been picked, as you said, by the Obama team, as part of the transition team. There has been a severe controversy in the United States around her choice of even being on the transition team, and the primary reason is because she has two different lives. One life is as a liberal part of the whole Podesta establishment, etc., of the Democratic Party, and the other, which is still now unknown in the broader American public sphere, is that she has significant connections to the Hindu right wing, which Teesta, for instance, has referred to, etc.

She, herself, there’s documentary evidence that she served on the governing council of an organization called the Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America, which is kind of a sister organization for the Hindu right-wing nationalists violent organization back in India, here in the United States, from the period 1998- 2001. She then went on to coordinate the national—became a national coordinator for the Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America for the earthquake relief operations in 2001. And we know that the funds generated from there were used in an extremely discriminatory fashion back in India wherein villages being reconstructed after the earthquake were broken up into Hindu villages and Muslim villages, where earlier they were integrated villages. Lower-caste villages and upper-caste villages, where earlier there were integrated villages. So, she has a record for a certain period of time that’s very easily traced

She has issued a statement and said her quote, personal politics have nothing in common with the views espoused by VHPA or any other such organization, that she’s always condemned in the politics of division of ethnic or religious hatred or violence and intimidation as a political tool.

That may be true, but when she says something like—if that statement had been preceded by a line which said that I have participated in this organization, etc., etc., etc., then one would say, “ok, maybe there is a particular way in which we can read it, we can give this person a second chance, etc., etc.” But to obfuscate the fact that she’s had significant involvement with this group in the past, immediately puts the needle of doubt back on again. Especially because the first statement wasn’t issued by her, the first statement was issued by her family, which came out and said that the family as a whole didn’t ever have anything to do with this politics. In other words the family—and she herself defended her family saying that her family, again, has nothing to do with these politics, that they’re only involved with religious and cultural organizations, whereas her father has been out on election campaigns for the Hindu right-wing party. I mean, when Modi, “the butcher of Gujarat,” came to the United States the last time, the time before he was denied a visa, he stayed with them. The point is very simply that her statement is a good statement, but I think it is important to note that even within that good statement there’s a fair amount of obfuscation.
- Biju Mathew

Vijay Prashad, Chair of South Asian History and Director of International Studies at Trinity College, in Hartford, Connecticut and a regular contributor to Counterpunch and Frontline India. His latest book is “The Darker Nations: A People’s History of the Third World.” His article on the Mumbai attacks comes out in Counterpunch today.

Biju Mathew, New York City based activist with the Campaign to Stop Funding Hate and the Coalition Against Genocide. He is a co-founder of the New York Taxi Worker Alliance and is the author of “Taxi! Cabs and Capitalism in New York City.” His latest article is published in Samar magazine dot org. its called “As the Fires Die: The Terror of the Aftermath.”

- from democracynow. 1 Dec 2008.

Mandela and Obama

In Politics, ToMl on September 14, 2009 at 4:49 pm

These two people first of all in their personal histories who obviously had to work very deeply upon themselves. Mandela said his major political work was done upon himself when he was in prison all those years. How to move from, say a nationalist leader to a national leader, how to move from historical revenge to reconciliation, to nation building- this is one of the easy things. I think in some ways it has to do with constructing one’s own identity, it has to do with constructing one’s own ethical guidelines. I think that’s what Mandela did and what Obama done also. But they come to power carried on a huge wave of popular expectation. You know, what I find painful at the moment it seems to me of course one doesn’t know because it’s at a very early stage – its that it seems to be kind of a discarding of what this national mandate actually means that brought Obama to power.

When, one to see the way the new administration is being constructed, it seems like Washington is continuing the way it always has. And that he would be locked in or be spun in a particular web of people who probably may even been very, very concerned, may even be very honest and serious, but do have vastly different interests from the people who put him in power, who voted for him. And I think this happened to some extent to Mandela as well. It’s nearly as if having achieved that kind of historical emblematic capacity of being able to bring such vastly different components of society together then somehow seems to incapacitate you, to be able to carry further that which historically really needs to be done.

- Breyten Breytenbach

Breyten Breytenbach is the exiled South African poet, writer, painter, outspoken activist for justice. Born to an Africaaner or white South African family in 1939, he moved to Paris in the early 1960’s, became deeply involved with the anti-apartheid movement. He married a French woman of Vietnamese descent and faced the prospect of being arrested if he returned to South Africa because of laws banning interracial marriage. After a brief visit in 1973, Breyten Breytenbach founded an anti-apartheid group with other exiled white South Africans. In 1975 he returned secretly to South Africa under a false passport. He was arreted, charged with terrorism and imprisoned for more than seven years. One of his most famous books was based on his experience in prison, called The True Confessions Of An Albino Terrorist. Today, Breyten Breytenbach divides his time between the Goree Institute in Senegal and New York University, where he teaches creative writing. He’s the author of dozens of books of poetry, essays and has won numerous prizes and worldwide recognition for his writing and painting. His latest book is called All One Horse, and his most recent essay is published in the December issue of Harpers Magazine. It’s an open letter to Nelson Mandela called “Mandela’s Smile.”

- more at democracynow. 26 Nov 2008.

Solana: The world’s largest solar plant

In Solar, ToMl, USA on September 13, 2009 at 6:05 pm

Location: Gila Bend, near Phoenix, Arizona.

Type of proyect : 280 MW, CSP trough plant with storage.

At Abengoa Solar, we have signed an agreement with Arizona Public Service (APS), the largest electric company in Arizona, to build and operate what will be the largest solar power plant in the world.

For us, this contract will represent the construction of the first concentrating solar power plant for producing electric power in the United States.

The plant will be installed approximately 100 kms southeast of Phoenix, near Gila Bend. Solana features thermal storage-equipped parabolic trough technology with 280 MW of power output capacity. Once operational, it will have the capability of supplying 70,000 homes and will prevent the emission of 400,000 t of CO2.

Solana will operate like Solnova, with the addition of storage capacity as shown in the diagram below.nproyectos20

This thermal storage allows the system to send power to the grid even when the sky is overcast and allows Solana to generate electricity even after the sun goes down.

The plant will have an area of 1,900 acres and will create 1,500 new jobs during its construction. Once completed, there will be around 100 positions for qualified personnel over the course of its life.

- from abengoasolar.

So low carbon make you happy

In CO2, Social, ToMl on September 13, 2009 at 5:48 pm
20090415-per-capita-emissions-happiness

This chart, focusing on 10 countries, was created by taking data from the World Values Survey (the orange lines) and comparing it against per capita carbon emissions (the green lines). It's worth noting that all of these places perceive themselves as happy--and with the exception of El Salvador and Colombia have equal or better living standards--with a much lower carbon footprint.

Although it may come as a surprise, research shows a larger carbon footprint doesn’t lead to happiness. While the United States ranks near the top of both per capita and aggregate carbon emissions, it’s not in the top 10 when it comes to happiness. In fact, many nations ranked happier than the U.S. also tread much more lightly on the planet. Read on to find out where the U.S.’s carbon emissions come from and which countries are doing it right.

Though the U.S. doesn’t have the highest per capita carbon emissions in the world, it’s pretty close to the top at roughly 20.4 tonnes of carbon dioxide on average per person. It should be noted that the recession is currently reducing this figure, and that it is the national average, meaning some states have much lower emissions: New York and California for example. Others, such as Wyoming and Louisiana (due to the types of industry there more than anything else) have much higher emissions.

In terms of the Human Development Index, the U.S. does pretty well (15th in the world). Life expectancy is a healthy 78 years and 99% of people are literate.

The U.S. not only uses a lot of energy–2.3 million thousand tonnes of oil equivalent, a weird term, but that’s what the IEA uses–but also generates most of its electricity from coal (48%=bad) and natural gas (20%=less bad but not good); and uses a disproportionate amount of energy in the transport sector when compared to other nations.

Breaking down U.S. energy use by sector, the U.S. uses 41% of all its energy for transportation (nearly all oil), 18% by industry (mostly natural gas), 16% in residential used (mostly electricity and slightly less natural gas). The rest goes to commercial and public service use, a whole array of unspecified use, and a mere 1% in agriculture, fishing and forestry.

Compare that to Denmark and at least part of the reason why U.S. per capita emissions are so high becomes clear. The way the nation’s civic infrastructure has been constructed (large spaces, low density development and next to no public transportation) directly leads to a higher percentage of energy needed for transport.

1. Denmark: Lower Emissions, Higher Happiness
Denmark is widely hailed as an increasingly green place. It certainly generates a lot of electricity from wind power, has great public transit, and, apart from the weather, is a great place to bike or walk around. It has identical life expectancy and literacy figures to the U.S. and ranks higher than the U.S. in terms of human development. So how are the carbon emissions of the average Dane less half those of the average American at 9.8 tonnes of CO2 per person?

Transport still is the number one consumer of energy in Denmark, and like the U.S., most of it comes from oil. Yet the Danes use only 34% of their total energy on transport–statistically more in line with the rest of the world, by the way. Following that is residential usage at 28% (with heat coming from biomass and natural gas being most of that); industry is the third place sector at 18%. Commercial usage is identical and agricultural usage more than the United States.

In terms of electricity usage, more coal is used in Denmark than the U.S. (54%), but 22% comes from wind power and biomass. Combined with the fact that Denmark uses energy much more efficiently per capita, you can start to see how Danes can have higher human development, standards of living and, well, happiness.

2. Switzerland: Low Carbon Electricity is the Key
Up in the mountains of Switzerland, they really know how to keep the per capita emissions down–5.5 tonnes per person, lower than even the best states and cities in the U.S.–while still having an amazingly high standard of living. In this case, it all comes down to generating energy from mostly low or no-carbon sources.

Transport in Switzerland still makes up the largest single part of overall energy usage at 34%. Most of that still comes from oil, but 4% does come from electricity so that’s a start in the right direction. Residential comes after that at 29% (with oil as half of that usage and a quarter electricity); industrial use is 19% (but nearly half of that is electricity).

3. New Zealand: Low Carbon Electricity Makes Up For Transport Emissions
New Zealand is an interesting case. Like the U.S., transportation energy usage comprises a disproportionate amount of overall demand (44%) and virtually all of that is from oil. But per capita carbon emissions are relatively low, at 7.8 tonnes per person. In terms of human development, New Zealand is a highly developed country (20th in the world), with higher life expectancy than most nations (80 years). So what’s their secret?

It’s all in the electricity: 65% of it comes from low carbon sources (mostly hydro, but not insignificant amounts of geothermal, plus some wind and biomass). And then consider that electricity makes up four-tenths of industrial usage and three-quarters of residential usage, and the bigger picture starts taking shape.

Greening transportation would really take a bite out of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions. Switching a significant amount of transportation to low carbon fuel sources could make a huge difference, considering so much energy goes into that sector.

4. Colombia: Green Electricity, Warmer Climate Help Out
Colombia is the oddball in this group, in that its per capita carbon emissions are seriously low: 1.2 tonnes of CO2 per person. Columbia is considered to have a medium level of human development: Life expectancy is still over 72 years and there is 92% literacy. It also happens to be, at least as surveyed, a very happy nation. A small increase in energy usage could probably help increase the human development stat, while still keeping per capita emissions down.

A couple of energy factors contribute to this low number: Very little heating is recorded for Colombia, so the warmer climate comes into play. It also happens to have very green energy, with about 80% coming from hydropower.

Other than that, it uses energy slightly less efficiently than Denmark or Switzerland, but much better than the U.S. The way overall energy usage is divided between end-use sectors is much in line with Europe: 32% for transport (mostly oil, but 7% natural gas and biofuels); 29% goes to industry (mostly combustible renewables, natural gas and electricity); 20% residential (other than about 20% natural gas, coming from green-ish sources).

The per capita Gross Domestic Product of Colombia may be low per person, but it’s still doing something right: Literacy, life expectancy and happiness are high; per capita emissions are ecologically sustainable. In terms of human development, there are more “developed” places, but there are plenty of places that are worse off, at least statistically.

- from treehugger. 15 Apr 2009.

First biomass plant in China

In Biofuel, China, ToMl on September 13, 2009 at 5:34 pm

China’s Baotou Kaidi Sunshine Energy Investment announced plans for the country’s first biomass plant to be powered by the native shrubs of hippophae rhamnoides and caragana.

Baotou Kaidi is expected to spend RMB 1 billion ($147 million) to build the plant in Damao Banner, a section of Baotou, which is the largest city in Inner Mongolia.

The plant is expected to generate 150 million kilowatt-hours of electricity per year by consuming 130,000 tons of hippophae rhamnoides and caragana. The plants are expected to replace 80,000 tons of coal annually.

Hippophae rhamnoides, more commonly known as sea buckthorn, is a rugged plant that reaches maturity in about four to five years. It has thorny branches and edible berries, which can be used to make medical oils. The mature plant can be cold-, wind-, salt-, and drought-tolerant.

Caragana, also called the Siberian peashrub, is also a fast-growing shrub tolerant of cold temperatures and drought.

- from cleantech. 15 Apr 2009

Increasing CO2

In CO2, Global Warming, Greenhouse gas, ToMl on September 12, 2009 at 2:38 am

Emissions in the US keep on risin’, according to the EPA’s new Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report. Greenhouse gas emissions totaled 7,150,000,000 tons in 2007, showing a 1.4% increase from 2006—bringing the overall rise from 1990 levels up to 17.2%. If that rise keeps constant, we’re likely to see a 20% increase by 2010—not exactly good news for many who’d hoped we’d be on a path to emissions reduction by now.

The spike in emissions came mostly from fuel and coal-produced electricity consumption, so it may be the case that we see emissions level off in 2008 because of the high gas prices that year. Then again, perhaps not—more than fossil fuels burned from driving in 2007, the biggest factors were increased heating and cooling demands. According to the report, the three biggest changes from 2006 to 2007 were:

(1)increased demand for heating fuels and electricity due to cooler winter and warmer summer conditions in 2007 than in 2006; (2) increased consumption of fossil fuels to generate electricity; and (3) a significant decrease (14.2 percent) in hydropower generation used to meet this demand.

So American energy consumption habits aren’t changing, and CO2 levels are still on the rise—no big surprise there. But still, it’s disheartening. Which is why we need climate legislation, and to start cracking down on coal now more than ever.

- from treehugger. 15 Apr 2009.

Germany Bans Cultivation of GM Corn

In Genetically modified Food, Germany, ToMl, agriculture on September 8, 2009 at 5:19 pm

The sowing season may be just around the corner, but this year German farmers will not be planting gentically modified crops: German Agriculture Minister Ilse Aigner announced Tuesday she was banning the cultivation of GM corn in Germany.

Under the new regulations, the cultivation of MON 810, a GM corn produced by the American biotech giant Monsanto, will be prohibited in Germany, as will the sale of its seed. Aigner told reporters Tuesday she had legitimate reasons to believe that MON 810 posed “a danger to the environment,” a position which she said the Environment Ministry also supported. In taking the step, Aigner is taking advantage of a clause in EU law which allows individual countries to impose such bans.

Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth Germany (BUND) both welcomed the ban. Greenpeace’s genetic engineering expert, Stephanie Töwe, said the decision was long overdue, explaining that numerous scientific studies demonstrated that GM corn was a danger to the environment.

However the ban could prove costly for the German government. Experts in Aigner’s ministry recently told SPIEGEL that it will be hard to prove conclusively that MON 810 damages the environment, which could enable Monsanto to win a court case opposing the ban and potentially expose the government to €6-7 million ($7.9-9.2 million) in damages.

Monsanto said Tuesday that it would look into the question of whether it would take legal proceedings as quickly as possible. Andreas Thierfelder, spokesman for Monsanto Germany, said the matter was very urgent as the planting season was just about to start.

Aigner has recently come under pressure from Bavaria to ban GM corn. Bavaria’s Environment Minister Markus Söder wants to turn Germany into a “GM food-free zone.” Environmental groups have long called for a ban on GM crops in Germany, arguing that they pose a danger to plants and animals.

However, supporters of genetic engineering argue that a ban could prompt research companies and institutes to pull up stakes and leave Germany. Wolfgang Herrmann, president of Munich’s Technical University, has said that a prohibition risks precipitating “an exodus of researchers.”

MON 810 was approved for cultivation in Europe by the European Union in 1998 and is currently the only GM crop which can be grown in Germany. The plant produces a toxin to fight off a certain pest, the voracious larvae of the corn borer moth. The crop was due to be planted this year on a total area of around 3,600 hectares (8,896 acres) in Germany. The cultivation of MON 810 is already banned in five other EU member states, namely Austria, Hungary, Greece, France and Luxembourg.

- from spiegel. 14 Apr 2009

Wiping out Atlantic blue fin tuna

In Fisheries, Food, ToMl on September 7, 2009 at 5:37 pm

Overfishing will wipe out the breeding population of Atlantic bluefin tuna, one of the ocean’s largest and fastest predators, in three years unless catches are dramatically reduced, conservation group WWF said on Tuesday.

As European fishing fleets prepare to begin the two-month Mediterranean fishing season on Wednesday, WWF said its analysis showed the bluefin tuna that spawn — those aged four years and older — will have disappeared by 2012 at current rates.

The fish, which can weigh over half a ton and accelerate faster than a sports car, are a favorite of sushi lovers. Demand from Japan has triggered an explosion in the size of the Mediterranean fleet over the past decade and many of those boats use illegal spotter planes to track the warm-blooded tuna.

Illegal fishing is also rife for the bluefin, the dried, dark red meat of which once fed Roman armies on the march.

Growing numbers of restaurants and retailers including Carrefour’s Italian supermarkets are boycotting it.

WWF said that analysis of official data showed the average size of mature tunas had more than halved since the 1990s and that this has had a disproportionately high impact since bigger fish produced many more offspring.

The bluefin can only be saved by a complete halt to fishing in May and June as the fish rush through the Straits of Gibraltar to spawn in the Mediterranean, WWF and other campaign groups say.

- from reuters. 14 Apr 2009.

Thank you for not/reduced eating of fish.

Interview with Muhammad Yunus

In Economics, Social, ToMl on September 7, 2009 at 5:30 pm

The financial crisis not happened till now in Bangladesh. We are waiting for the sunami to hit us. Migrant worker are coming back. But in small numbers compared to the total number of the workers. Some day it will be a large problem. Recesion is still rising. Its not declined yet. Export orders are declining. Exports are not declined yet. But we have some advantage. Bangladesh have the cheapest wage in the world. So works are shifting from china and vietnam to Bangladesh. We dont know when will the sunami hit us hard.

Financial crisis and climate change
We all talk about financial crisis. Front pages, editorial coverage are all on financial crisis. Its not the one crisis going on. There is food crisis going on which is pushed away from the front page. There is environmental crisis. There is evergy crisis where price went to the roof and it is not disappeared. All these are combined that is happening right now. These are not seperate pieces. These are the fundamental problem in the system.

Capitalism is based on market and self correcting mechanism of market is not working.
Is this a defining moment in the history of human kind. We saw great depression of 1930, and a generation later another great depression. We dont want 3rd world war to solve this issue. How will be the future of capitalism?

The current crisis is much worse than Great Depression. Because Great Depression had only financial part. This is a combination of many may issues. It is a big crisis and at the same time it is an opertunity for the human beings. To address in a different way to the design of the system. If things are moving well you dont need to fix it, you dont need to touch the system at all. Now the engine collapsed. It is a good time to open it up, fix it and redesign the system so that we can go back without these problems that we created by ourselves. Thats why we need to fix the problem of the capitalistic system that we are all belong to.

Capitalistic system is basically faulty. It is based on only one element of the human being. Maximization of the profit.

Shrinking of govt.

The whole system that have is a half way done system. Here human beings are presented as one dimensional thing. All they do is maximizing the profit. But real human being are not one dimensional. human being are selfish. But theoritision took selfishness and build whole theory out of that and called it capitalistic system. Adom Smith wrote two books. One is the Wealth of Nation and other is “Theory of Moral Sentiments”. That second book nobody paid any attension. There he talking about other dimansions of human beings. Human beings are also have selflessness. What about having bussiness out of that? Why dont we create a world with two businesses. One is selfish business which is about making money, which is good and other one social businesses.

Muhammad Yunus, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta
- from Loksabha TV.

It is more than sympathy. Its the only way we can provide sustainability. Gnu and Free Software is one example of such system.

Shipping pollution

In Pollution, Ship, ToMl, Transportation on September 7, 2009 at 2:15 am

Britain and other European governments have been accused of underestimating the health risks from shipping pollution following research which shows that one giant container ship can emit almost the same amount of cancer and asthma-causing chemicals as 50m cars.

Confidential data from maritime industry insiders based on engine size and the quality of fuel typically used by ships and cars shows that just 15 of the world’s biggest ships may now emit as much pollution as all the world’s 760m cars. Low-grade ship bunker fuel (or fuel oil) has up to 2,000 times the sulphur content of diesel fuel used in US and European automobiles.

Pressure is mounting on the UN’s International Maritime Organisation and the EU to tighten laws governing ship emissions following the decision by the US government last week to impose a strict 230-mile buffer zone along the entire US coast, a move that is expected to be followed by Canada.

The setting up of a low emission shipping zone follows US academic research which showed that pollution from the world’s 90,000 cargo ships leads to 60,000 deaths a year in the US alone and costs up to $330bn per year in health costs from lung and heart diseases. The US Environmental Protection Agency estimates the buffer zone, which could be in place by next year, will save more than 8,000 lives a year with new air quality standards cutting sulphur in fuel by 98%, particulate matter by 85% and nitrogen oxide emissions by 80%.

The new study by the Danish government’s environmental agency adds to this picture. It suggests that shipping emissions cost the Danish health service almost £5bn a year, mainly treating cancers and heart problems. A previous study estimated that 1,000 Danish people die prematurely each year because of shipping pollution. No comprehensive research has been carried out on the effects on UK coastal communities, but the number of deaths is expected to be much higher.

Cars driving 15,000km a year emit approximately 101 grammes of sulphur oxide gases (or SOx) in that time. The world’s largest ships’ diesel engines which typically operate for about 280 days a year generate roughly 5,200 tonnes of SOx.

Shipping emissions have escalated in the past 15 years as China has emerged as the world’s manufacturing capital. A new breed of intercontinental container ship has been developed which is extremely cost-efficient. However, it uses diesel engines as powerful as land-based power stations but with the lowest quality fuel.

The calculations of ship and car pollution are based on the world’s largest 85,790KW ships’ diesel engines which operate about 280 days a year generating roughly 5,200 tonnes of SOx a year, compared with diesel and petrol cars which drive 15,000km a year and emit approximately 101gm of SO2/SoX a year.

Shipping by numbers

The world’s biggest container ships have 109,000 horsepower engines which weigh 2,300 tons.
Each ship expects to operate 24hrs a day for about 280 days a year
There are 90,000 ocean-going cargo ships
Shipping is responsible for 18-30% of all the world’s nitrogen oxide (NOx) pollution and 9% of the global sulphur oxide (SOx) pollution.
One large ship can generate about 5,000 tonnes of sulphur oxide (SOx) pollution in a year
70% of all ship emissions are within 400km of land.
85% of all ship pollution is in the northern hemisphere.
Shipping is responsible for 3.5% to 4% of all climate change emissions

- from guardian. 9 Apr 2009.

Please dont buy imported products.

Aerosols warming the Arctic

In Global Warming, ToMl on September 7, 2009 at 2:10 am

Though greenhouse gases are invariably at the center of discussions about global climate change, new NASA research suggests that much of the atmospheric warming observed in the Arctic since 1976 may be due to changes in tiny airborne particles called aerosols.

Emitted by natural and human sources, aerosols can directly influence climate by reflecting or absorbing the sun’s radiation. The small particles also affect climate indirectly by seeding clouds and changing cloud properties, such as reflectivity.

A new study, led by climate scientist Drew Shindell of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, used a coupled ocean-atmosphere model to investigate how sensitive different regional climates are to changes in levels of carbon dioxide, ozone, and aerosols.

The researchers found that the mid and high latitudes are especially responsive to changes in the level of aerosols. Indeed, the model suggests aerosols likely account for 45 percent or more of the warming that has occurred in the Arctic during the last three decades. The results were published in the April issue of Nature Geoscience.

Though there are several varieties of aerosols, previous research has shown that two types — sulfates and black carbon — play an especially critical role in regulating climate change. Both are products of human activity.

Sulfates, which come primarily from the burning of coal and oil, scatter incoming solar radiation and have a net cooling effect on climate. Over the past three decades, the United States and European countries have passed a series of laws that have reduced sulfate emissions by 50 percent. While improving air quality and aiding public health, the result has been less atmospheric cooling from sulfates.

At the same time, black carbon emissions have steadily risen, largely because of increasing emissions from Asia. Black carbon — small, soot-like particles produced by industrial processes and the combustion of diesel and biofuels — absorb incoming solar radiation and have a strong warming influence on the atmosphere.

In the modeling experiment, Shindell and colleagues compiled detailed, quantitative information about the relative roles of various components of the climate system, such as solar variations, volcanic events, and changes in greenhouse gas levels. They then ran through various scenarios of how temperatures would change as the levels of ozone and aerosols — including sulfates and black carbon — varied in different regions of the world. Finally, they teased out the amount of warming that could be attributed to different climate variables. Aerosols loomed large.

The regions of Earth that showed the strongest responses to aerosols in the model are the same regions that have witnessed the greatest real-world temperature increases since 1976. The Arctic region has seen its surface air temperatures increase by 1.5 C (2.7 F) since the mid-1970s. In the Antarctic, where aerosols play less of a role, the surface air temperature has increased about 0.35 C (0.6 F).

That makes sense, Shindell explained, because of the Arctic’s proximity to North America and Europe. The two highly industrialized regions have produced most of the world’s aerosol emissions over the last century, and some of those aerosols drift northward and collect in the Arctic. Precipitation, which normally flushes aerosols out of the atmosphere, is minimal there, so the particles remain in the air longer and have a stronger impact than in other parts of the world.

In the Antarctic, in contrast, the impact of sulfates and black carbon is minimized because of the continent’s isolation from major population centers and the emissions they produce.

Aerosols tend to be quite-short lived, residing in the atmosphere for just a few days or weeks. Greenhouses gases, by contrast, can persist for hundreds of years. Atmospheric chemists theorize that the climate system may be more responsive to changes in aerosol levels over the next few decades than to changes in greenhouse gas levels, which will have the more powerful effect in coming centuries.

NASA’s upcoming Glory satellite is designed to enhance our current aerosol measurement capabilities to help scientists reduce uncertainties about aerosols by measuring the distribution and microphysical properties of the particles.

- from sciencecodex. 8 Apr 2009.

Japanese killer

In Japan, Poaching, ToMl, Whale on September 6, 2009 at 2:17 am

Japan’s whaling catch in its latest Antarctic hunt fell far short of its target after disruptions by anti-whaling activists, the Fisheries Agency said. Japan, which considers whaling to be a cherished cultural tradition, killed 679 minke whales despite plans to catch around 850. It caught just one fin whale compared with a target of 50 in the hunt that began in November.

Some ships in its six-ship fleet have returned home after clashes with the hardline group Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, including a collision that crushed a railing on one of the Japanese ships.

A Fisheries Agency official said ships could not carry out whaling for a total of 16 days because of bad weather and skirmishes with the activists.

Japan officially stopped commercial whaling after agreeing to a global moratorium in 1986, but began what it calls a scientific research whaling program the following year. Whale meat can be found in some supermarkets and restaurants.

The agency has declined to comment on a recent report that Japan is considering reducing the number of whales it catches each year.

Japan has a moratorium on catching humpback whales, a favorite with whale watchers, after international criticism.

- from reuters. 13 Apr 2009

Dear Japanese people dont eat whale. Also wild animal products such as ivory etc.

Oil Spill Surface Cleanup

In Accident, Fisheries, Oil, ToMl on September 6, 2009 at 2:08 am

Birds are the most high-profile victims of oceanic oil spills, but fish suffer from these messy accidents, too. Even worse, a new study suggests, the chemicals commonly used to clean up oil spills make oil far more toxic to fish, particularly for eggs and young fish.

Oil and water don’t normally mix. So, when a truck, train, or ship accidentally dumps its cargo into a lake, stream or sea, the oil sits on top of the water and spreads across its surface. The slick substance then flows with the currents and tides, poisoning the animals it encounters along its way.

Another way to get oil off the surface is to use a chemical dispersing agent. These detergent-based substances cause oil to bead up into tiny droplets that can mix into the water and disperse into deeper layers. Underwater currents can then theoretically dilute the oil and its risk to the environment.

Dispersion spares surface-dwelling animals, such as birds and otters. But as oil drifts downward, it falls on fish and on the eggs that are stuck to surfaces or buried in the sediment.

To find out just how dangerous dispersed oil might be to fish, Peter Hodson, a fish toxicologist at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario and colleagues performed a series of laboratory experiments with beakers that were meant to simulate contaminated lakes. In all of the beakers, the scientists mixed water with diesel oil, then added newly hatched trout embryos. In some beakers, the scientists added a dispersing agent.

Their analyses, published in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, showed that dispersants greatly increased the amount of hydrocarbons that could affect fish. In turn, that extra dose of exposure made the oil 100 times more toxic to the animals. Toxicity was measured as an elevated enzyme response in the livers of the fish.

Exposure to dispersed oil doesn’t kill a lot of fish, Hodson added. Instead, it either kills eggs before they hatch or leads to damage or deformities in juvenile fish. Compared to the horrifying appearance of oil-drenched birds on beaches, it can be hard to catch the attention of the public — or even of cleanup managers — with such subtle and hidden health effects.

- from discovery. 10 Apr 2009

Future light

In LED, Lighting, ToMl on September 6, 2009 at 1:59 am

the European Commission formally adopted new regulations that will phase such bulbs out in Europe by 2012. America will do so by 2014. Some countries, such as Australia, Brazil and Switzerland, have got rid of them already. When a voluntary agreement came into force in Britain, at the start of the year, people rushed out to buy the last 100-watt light bulbs. Next to go are lower-wattage bulbs.

But what will replace the light bulb? Although obtaining illumination by incandescence (ie, heating something up) goes back to prehistory, it was not until 1879 that Thomas Edison demonstrated a practical example that used a wire filament encased in glass. Modern bulbs, the descendants of that demonstration, are cheap (around 50 cents) but inefficient, because only about 5% of the energy they use is turned into light and the rest is wasted as heat. A typical bulb also has to be replaced every 1,000 hours or so.

Without changing light fittings, the cheapest direct replacement for an incandescent bulb at the moment is a compact fluorescent light (CFL). These use up to 75% less power and last ten times longer, but they cost around $3 each. That price puts some people off, which explains part of the hoarding of incandescent bulbs. But others object not to the price but to the quality of the light, which has a different spectrum from the one they are used to. CFL bulbs can also be slow to reach maximum illumination. And some people worry that they may be bad for the health. Fluorescent lights use electricity to excite mercury vapour. This produces ultraviolet light that causes a phosphor coating inside the bulb to glow. The lights can flicker, which could set off epileptic fits, and badly made ones might leak ultraviolet radiation, and may thus pose a cancer risk. There are also concerns about the disposal of the toxic mercury.

The most promising alternatives are light-emitting diodes (LEDs). An LED is made from two layers of semiconductor, an “n-type” with an excess of negatively charged electrons, and a positive “p-type” which has an abundance of “holes” where electrons should be but aren’t. When a current is applied across the sandwich, the electrons and holes team up at the junction of the two materials and release energy in the form of light. The colour depends on the properties of the semiconductor, and these can be tuned to produce light that is similar to natural daylight but with virtually no ultraviolet or heat.

Light-emitting diodes have progressed from simple red indicators on electronic products to become torches, streetlights and car headlights. Now the first mains-voltage LEDs designed as direct replacements for incandescent bulbs are arriving on the market. Some, such as the Philips Master LED range, promise energy savings of up to 80% and a working life of 45,000 hours. But they are not cheap: around £40 ($56) in Britain.

Even so, LEDs can still be economical. Only a quarter of lighting is domestic. Businesses and public organisations are more aware of running costs than householders are—and besides the electricity bill they also have to pay people to change bulbs that have failed. For the bulbs to be embraced by households, though, LED costs will need to come down.

the biggest cost reduction will come from breakthroughs like that recently made by the Centre for Gallium Nitride at Cambridge University, England. Gallium nitride is a semiconductor used to create bright-blue LEDs. These can be made to emit white light by coating the device with a phosphor compound that absorbs part of the blue light and re-emits it as yellow. When combined with the rest of the blue this forms a cool, white light. Most of the white LEDs now on the market are based on gallium nitride.

At present these LEDs are made in machines similar to those used to make silicon chips, by depositing layers of gallium nitride on sapphire-based wafers. Sapphire is robust enough to withstand a process that first heats it to 1,000°C and then cools it to room temperature without causing cracks and other defects. It is, however, quite expensive. What Colin Humphreys and his colleagues at Cambridge have come up with is a reliable way to deposit gallium nitride on much cheaper silicon wafers, which they estimate could cut production costs to a tenth of what they are at the moment.

Because the atomic lattice structure of gallium nitride is better matched to sapphire than it is to silicon, making LEDs on silicon without distortions has proved extremely tricky. The technique used at Cambridge involves depositing additional layers of gallium nitride-based materials, one as a “compression layer” to provide greater resilience and another as an ultra-thin mask that increases the accuracy of fabrication. The important measure of success is the internal quantum efficiency, which shows just how good an LED is at making light. A gallium nitride LED on sapphire has a typical internal quantum efficiency of around 70%. In the past year, Dr Humphreys’s team has improved its silicon-based ones from 15% to 45%.

They will get better still, reckons Dr Humphreys. Yet even at this early stage he thinks gallium nitride-on-silicon LEDs would make commercial sense. Besides the lower cost of silicon, the process could also use larger and more economical six-inch (15cm) wafers and be carried out with more common fabrication equipment.

A number of companies are working with Dr Humphreys to commercialise the process. The techniques employed might also help to improve LEDs that produce white light by mixing red, green and blue emitters. These can be modified to produce different colours of light, too, but they have not taken off quickly because they can be hard to package. It is also difficult to maintain consistent outputs from the different LEDs so light from the devices tends to drift into off-white hues.

Developments like the use of cheap silicon make the case for switching to LED lighting even more compelling. About 20% of the world’s electricity is used for lighting. America’s Department of Energy thinks that, with LEDs, this could be cut in half by 2025, saving more than 130 new power stations in America alone.

Low-cost LEDs would also bring light to new areas. Philips, for instance, is planning to launch a small solar-powered LED reading light for Africa, where an estimated 500m people live without electricity. The simplest version, which it hopes to sell for less than $15, is designed to allow children to do their homework in the evenings without a candle or smoky kerosene lamp. Bringing down the cost of LEDs this way really will let in the light.

- from economist

A £1bn nuclear white elephant

In Nuclear, ToMl, UK on September 5, 2009 at 3:20 am

A controversial nuclear recycling plant, approved by the Government despite warnings over its economic viability and reliance on unproven technology, has racked up costs of more than £1bn and is still not working properly.

Backers of the plant at Sellafield, which promised to turn toxic waste into a useable fuel that could be sold worldwide, had claimed the plant would make a profit of more than £200m in its lifetime, producing 120 tonnes of recycled fuel a year. But after an investigation by The Independent, the Government admitted technical problems and a dearth in orders has meant it has produced just 6.3 tonnes of fuel since opening in 2001.

With construction and commissioning costs of more than £600m, the facility, known as the Mox plant because of the mixed oxides (Mox) fuel it is designed to produce, has cost more than £1.2bn, confirming its status as the nuclear industry’s most embarrassing white elephant and one of the greatest failures in British industrial history, losing the taxpayer £90m a year. Green campaigners and opposition MPs are now calling for the plant to be closed immediately, and a minister who fought its construction at the time has called for a public inquiry into how the plant was ever given the go-ahead.

The revelations are a blow to the Government as it plans to lead Britain into a “nuclear renaissance”, pinning its hopes on nuclear technology to help meet its ambitious targets on reducing carbon emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. A spokesman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change said the performance of the plant was “clearly disappointing”.

The Government had tried to keep details of the plant’s losses private. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), the publicly funded body which owns the plant, initally refused to release details of the losses, citing confidentiality agreements in commercial contracts. But in a table published by the Government on the day of the G20 summit, the embarrassing extent of the plant’s losses was finally disclosed.

Michael Meacher, who tried to block approval for the plant as Environment minister, said: “This waste of taxpayer’s money is unforgivable. The construction of the plant was resisted for years. But that was overridden by Tony Blair on the basis of assurances from the nuclear industry that the Mox plant would be cost-effective and a market for its fuel would develop.

“These claims have proved illusory. But even the most pessimistic judgement never predicted that the first decade of its operations would fritter away two-thirds of a billion pounds on generating no more than 4 per cent of its target production. There should be a public inquiry into this scandal and those responsible should be held to account.”

Speculation has now grown that Ed Miliband, the Climate Change Secretary, is preparing to bite the bullet and close the plant, which has faced five public consultations, legal challenges and safety concerns. The NDA admits the future of the plant is “under review”.

Opposition MPs slammed the performance of the facility. “The Mox plant at Sellafield has proved to be a costly white elephant and a black hole for taxpayers’ money,” said Simon Hughes, the climate change spokesman for the Liberal Democrats. “This is a prime example of Labour’s misguided and hugely expensive continuing love affair with nuclear power. Building a new generation of nuclear power stations is throwing billions of pounds of good money after bad. They are never built on time or on budget and they will not solve the UK’s energy needs.”

The plant has had an unhappy history. As soon as it was proposed in the 1990s, Greenpeace raised concerns about the safety of reprocessing used uranium and plutonium, and then transporting the weapons-grade material to customers around the world. Scientists, economists and MPs also questioned the financial viability of the project. Though the Government approved the plant on the basis that it would return a profit of about £216m over its lifetime, that figure did not take into account the £500m construction costs.

The plant was dealt a further blow in 1999, when The Independent revealed that workers at Sellafield had falsified quality-control data on Mox fuel. Unsurprisingly, customers in Japan, the country that the Government believed would provide the bulk of orders for the fuel produced by its new plant, lost confidence. It left a gaping hole in the Mox plant’s order book which has never been filled.

Since it opened in 2001, the plant’s complex recycling procedure has also been dogged by breakdowns and on-going difficulties. At present, production problems are being experienced in making “fuel assemblies”, the final stage of production in making the fuel. Despite the problems, the Government refused to acknowledge difficulties at the plant. Even after serious issues had emerged by 2004, it still argued that the economic and environmental case for the plant was as “strong as ever”. Campaigners believe the final bill for the plant will be even higher by the time it is closed, because decommissioning the facility will also cost millions. “This is a staggering waste of taxpayers’ money, and we doubt that these will be the full costs of this sorry saga,” said Nathan Argent, head of Greenpeace’s energy solutions unit.

“Just imagine what the renewable sector could have done with a subsidy like that. The spectacular failure of the Mox plant is just another reminder of why the nuclear industry has become notorious for making wildly misleading financial claims.

“For years, we urged the Government to treat the industry’s predictions with the scepticism they deserved, but our pleas fell on deaf ears. Once again the same tired old lines about sparkling new equipment are wrapped in make-believe financial forecasts, and ministers are swallowing it hook, line and sinker.”

- from independent. 7 Apr 2009

Wasted time for power

In Nuclear, Olkiluoto on September 5, 2009 at 2:47 am

- from Greenpeace

Another middle east

In Congo, Neo-colonialism, ToMl, war on September 4, 2009 at 12:55 pm

The so-called “forgotten war,” the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo, is threatening to explode once again, away from the glare of any international media attention.

The fighting between Nkunda’s forces and the Congolese army has increased since August, in part over the government’s alleged alliance with Hutu militias from Rwanda. Nkunda claims to be defending ethnic Tutsis in the area, and the Rwandan government has accused the DRC of supporting militias responsible for the 1994 genocide of Tutsis. Rwanda has invaded the DRC three times in the past twelve years, twice sparking civil wars.

The latest round of fighting has seen a dramatic rise in the number of rapes, and some 200,000 people have been displaced since August, according to the World Food Program. That’s in addition to the nearly 1.5 million people already displaced from this part of the country since 2007.

Bringing attention to the dire situation in the Congo and the role of Western corporations in fueling the conflict was the focus of Congo Week, an awareness-raising week of events last week across the country on campuses.


The really main important things that people should know that is the war in the Congo is directly connected to the United States, as far as resource exploitation is concerned. What we wanted to do, coming out of Congo Week and—is to show that connection, as well as be able to provide enough information to the world community and the US-based universities on how they can help support the Congolese to regain the sovereignty on the land, understanding that the conflict in the Congo is based on resource exploitation, which we’re seeing in the later years from the invasion of Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi in the eastern part of the Congo.

There are numerous firms. Dan Rather report that just came out last month about “All Mine.” Freeport-McMoRan, out of Phoenix, Arizona, they are exploiting the copper out of the Congo. Dan Rather did a wonderful job showing how Freeport-McMoRan is doing so. Cabot Corporation out of Boston, Massachusetts, is another company that was mentioned in the UN report of 2001 and 2003 on the exploitation of coltan, and coltan being a resources that’s found in virtually every electronic device, such as cell phones, laptop, DVD players.

And understanding that the root cause of the conflict in the Congo is the scramble for Congo’s mineral resources is what actually is making us, the youth of the Congo, to go out to the world and be able to connect with people a good way, of letting them know that the strife is not more so of an ethnic strife, but more so of the scramble for Congo’s mineral resources.

The rapes are a direct result of the war. We’re seeing it—the latest spasm that we’re seeing right now has been going on since ’96. The rapes, the murders, they all are being done as a way of mass displacement, if you have to put it in the context. As one person is brutalized in a community, the people in the neighborhood will be afraid, and that will cause them to be displaced. As you mentioned, we have about 1.5 million people internally displaced in the Congo. As this strategy has been used in the eastern part, we’re seeing masses of people being displaced from the villages, from the cities, simply because they live in a area rich of minerals. Now we’re seeing it very clearly, The Virunga Park was taken over yesterday, simply because there are resources that Laurent Nkunda exploit into the Virunga Park.

So, to end the rape, you must end the conflict. And to end the conflict, you must stop the resource exploitation of the Congo, thus creating a platforms for the Congolese people to be sovereign and free. And a few prescriptions that I may mention would be to put pressure on Rwanda, because we do know that Rwanda is supporting proxy forces in the eastern part of the Congo. And we can use such people who have Kagame’s ear, such as Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Cindy McCain, Rick Warren, to put pressure on Kagame to make sure that not—we do not see another nearly six million people dying in the eastern part of the Congo simply because of a blessing of land. The people who are exploiting those resources are cursed, as they continue to create the conflict at the detriment of the Congolese people.

What we have asked people to do to show the connection with coltan is to turn off their cell phone last week on Wednesday, October 22nd, and change their voice mail, because we believe that people will call their phones still, and explaining why their phone is off during that day. Our aim, really, during the cell phone boycott, is to raise awareness about what’s happening in the Congo, and using the cell phone as a messaging tool was very, very successful. We had students in New Zealand, a high school in Avonside, that actually did that perfectly, getting the whole high school to participate in that. So, our aim into the cell out, as well as Congo Week, is basically to end the conflict and provide support to the Congolese people in their quest to regain sovereignty of their land.

Discussion: Kambale Musavuli, Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez

Kambale Musavuli, Congolese engineering student at North Carolina A&T University. He helped coordinate Congo Week with the group Friends of the Congo.

- from democracynow. 27 Oct 2008

The problem with middle east also same. Resource full land.
When will the rich become satisfied?
Please reduce oil use. Reduce travel.
Please reduce buying new electronic gadgets. Reuse old ones.

Working Class in US

In Social, ToMl, USA on September 4, 2009 at 12:41 pm

we started out calling them the working poor, and we found that really it wasn’t the best term, because we want to work in a way that engages people in the process, and when—nobody wants to be poor. Nobody wants to be called poor or low-wage. So when we started out talking about the working poor or low-wage workers, we came, in the course of conversations with these workers, to understand that maybe it would be better to find another way to talk about it. So that’s why we came up with this formulation “economically distressed,” which really talks about the content of their lives, rather than something which might get turned into an epithet.

these economically distressed workers are people whose incomes are so low that they can’t get out of the bottom of their own housing market in their area for a family of their size without spending more than 30 percent of their income to do that. And the federal standard is 30 percent. You shouldn’t spend more than 30 percent of your income on housing. Otherwise you won’t have enough money for everything else that you need. So that’s how we look at the problem.

And we found that in the United States, it’s almost 21 percent of the labor force are people who are in this economically distressed status, and it varies. In metropolitan areas, it’s higher. Here in New York, it’s in New York metropolitan area, 29.4 percent of the families and households in the New York metro area are economically distressed. And it goes as high as—in Miami, it’s 32.4 percent. So, in Los Angeles, it’s 31 percent. So we’re talking about really a lot of people who are in a very, very serious situation.
-Michael Zweig

the phrase “working class” is kind of forbidden from political talk in the United States, because it’s—people are going to be accused of being class warriors. So, unfortunately, that phrase is rarely used. But I think, you know, the catch phrase is the middle class, and they’re both focusing on the middle class. But we have this ever-expansive definition of what the middle class is: people from $20,000 a year to $200,000 a year.
Washington was ignoring the squeeze on the nation’s workers.
- Steve Greenhouse

there is a discussion, of course, of class war; every time anybody talks about redistributing income down, “Oh, that’s class warfare.” Well, yes, it is class warfare to redistribute the income up. We’ve been living for thirty-five years in a period of intense class warfare, except the working class has been losing. And part of that class warfare is to deny that there are classes and to deny that any of this dynamic is actually happening, so that people’s attention are shifted elsewhere. And that’s why I think that it’s so important to keep talking about and bringing back into focus what is actually happening with working people in this country.
-Michael Zweig

sort of remedy that was provided by the New Deal in 1935, through passage of the National Labor Relations Act, which labor is trying to amend now through enactment of the Employee Free Choice Act, and that is a strengthening of workers’ collective bargaining rights.
- Steve Early

It seems that there’s been almost an unwritten agreement among both candidates and the media not to ask Obama or McCain about their immigration policies since the primaries. Once the primaries were over, the debate is over, in terms of the national debate.

They don’t need to get into it. And each has enough in them in their backgrounds and in their programs that Lou Dobbs and that whole militant anti-immigrant crowd is going to be dissatisfied with both of them, so why get into it?
I will say that in the immigration situation, whatever happens, we want to make sure that there isn’t a two-tier labor force that we have in this country, where the immigrants, in whatever form they’re here, as guest workers or in whatever guise we sort of allow them to come into America, that they are some second-class labor citizen.
-Michael Zweig

You look back at the history of labor law reform efforts over the last thirty years, under Clinton and Carter, a lot of disappointment and a record of failure. It’s going to take a tremendous grassroots movement, now and then, by organized workers to keep the pressure on Obama and the Democrats to make this long overdue change so that workers can organize more freely without management interference. It’s not a done deal. And I think Obama would prefer to avoid a knockdown, drag-out fight with corporate America over this issue right out of the box.
- Steve Early

Discussion: Michael Zweig, Steven Greenhouse, Steve Early, Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez

Michael Zweig, Professor of economics and director of the Center for Study of Working Class Life at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. His most recent book is What’s Class Got to Do with It?: American Society in the Twenty-First Century.

Steven Greenhouse, labor and workplace reporter for the New York Times, and author of the new book The Big Squeeze: Tough Times for the American Worker.

Steve Early, Boston-based labor journalist and the author of a forthcoming book for Monthly Review Press called Embedded with Organized Labor: Journalistic Reflections on the Class War at Home. For twenty-seven years, he was an organizer for the Communications Workers of America.

- from democracynow. 27 Oct 2008

Reversal of Fortune

In Social, ToMl on September 4, 2009 at 9:54 am

Reversal of Fortune
By Bill McKibben

for most of human history, the two birds More and Better roosted on the same branch. You could toss one stone and hope to hit them both. That’s why the centuries since Adam Smith launched modern economics with his book The Wealth of Nations have been so single-mindedly devoted to the dogged pursuit of maximum economic production. Smith’s core ideas—that individuals pursuing their own interests in a market society end up making each other richer; and that increasing efficiency, usually by increasing scale, is the key to increasing wealth—have indisputably worked. They’ve produced more More than he could ever have imagined. They’ve built the unprecedented prosperity and ease that distinguish the lives of most of the people reading these words. It is no wonder and no accident that Smith’s ideas still dominate our politics, our outlook, even our personalities.

But the distinguishing feature of our moment is this: Better has flown a few trees over to make her nest. And that changes everything. Now, with the stone of your life or your society gripped in your hand, you have to choose. It’s More or Better.

Which means, according to new research emerging from many quarters, that our continued devotion to growth above all is, on balance, making our lives worse, both collectively and individually. Growth no longer makes most people wealthier, but instead generates inequality and insecurity. Growth is bumping up against physical limits so profound—like climate change and peak oil—that trying to keep expanding the economy may be not just impossible but also dangerous. And perhaps most surprisingly, growth no longer makes us happier. Given our current dogma, that’s as bizarre an idea as proposing that gravity pushes apples skyward. But then, even Newtonian physics eventually shifted to acknowledge Einstein’s more complicated universe.

1. “We can do it if we believe it”: FDR, LBJ, and the invention of growth

it was the great economist John Maynard Keynes who pointed out that until very recently, “there was no very great change in the standard of life of the average man living in the civilized centers of the earth.” At the utmost, Keynes calculated, the standard of living roughly doubled between 2000 B.C. and the dawn of the 18th century—four millennia during which we basically didn’t learn to do much of anything new. Before history began, we had already figured out fire, language, cattle, the wheel, the plow, the sail, the pot. We had banks and governments and mathematics and religion.

And then, something new finally did happen. In 1712, a British inventor named Thomas Newcomen created the first practical steam engine. Over the centuries that followed, fossil fuels helped create everything we consider normal and obvious about the modern world, from electricity to steel to fertilizer; now, a 100 percent jump in the standard of living could suddenly be accomplished in a few decades, not a few millennia.

In some ways, the invention of the idea of economic growth was almost as significant as the invention of fossil-fuel power. But it took a little longer to take hold. During the Depression, even FDR routinely spoke of America’s economy as mature, with no further expansion anticipated. Then came World War II and the postwar boom—by the time Lyndon Johnson moved into the White House in 1963, he said things like: “I’m sick of all the people who talk about the things we can’t do. Hell, we’re the richest country in the world, the most powerful. We can do it all…. We can do it if we believe it.” He wasn’t alone in thinking this way. From Moscow, Nikita Khrushchev thundered, “Growth of industrial and agricultural production is the battering ram with which we shall smash the capitalist system.”

Yet the bad news was already apparent, if you cared to look. Burning rivers and smoggy cities demonstrated the dark side of industrial expansion. In 1972, a trio of mit researchers released a series of computer forecasts they called “limits to growth,” which showed that unbridled expansion would eventually deplete our resource base. A year later the British economist E.F. Schumacher wrote the best-selling Small Is Beautiful. (Soon after, when Schumacher came to the United States on a speaking tour, Jimmy Carter actually received him at the White House—imagine the current president making time for any economist.) By 1979, the sociologist Amitai Etzioni reported to President Carter that only 30 percent of Americans were “pro-growth,” 31 percent were “anti-growth,” and 39 percent were “highly uncertain.”

Such ambivalence, Etzioni predicted, “is too stressful for societies to endure,” and Ronald Reagan proved his point. He convinced us it was “Morning in America”—out with limits, in with Trump. Today, mainstream liberals and conservatives compete mainly on the question of who can flog the economy harder. Larry Summers, who served as Bill Clinton’s secretary of the treasury, at one point declared that the Clinton administration “cannot and will not accept any ’speed limit’ on American economic growth. It is the task of economic policy to grow the economy as rapidly, sustainably, and inclusively as possible.” It’s the economy, stupid.

2. Oil bingeing, Chinese cars, and the end of the easy fix

except there are three small things. The first I’ll mention mostly in passing: Even though the economy continues to grow, most of us are no longer getting wealthier. The average wage in the United States is less now, in real dollars, than it was 30 years ago. Even for those with college degrees, andlthough productivity was growing faster than it had for decades, between 2000 and 2004 earnings fell 5.2 percent when adjusted for inflation, according to the most recent data from White House economists. Much the same thing has happened across most of the globe. More than 60 countries around the world, in fact, have seen incomes per capita fall in the past decade.

For the second point, it’s useful to remember what Thomas Newcomen was up to when he helped launch the Industrial Revolution—burning coal to pump water out of a coal mine. This revolution both depended on, and revolved around, fossil fuels. “Before coal,” writes the economist Jeffrey Sachs, “economic production was limited by energy inputs, almost all of which depended on the production of biomass: food for humans and farm animals, and fuel wood for heating and certain industrial processes.” That is, energy depended on how much you could grow. But fossil energy depended on how much had grown eons before—all those billions of tons of ancient biology squashed by the weight of time till they’d turned into strata and pools and seams of hydrocarbons, waiting for us to discover them.

To understand how valuable, and irreplaceable, that lake of fuel was, consider a few other forms of creating usable energy. Ethanol can perfectly well replace gasoline in a tank; like petroleum, it’s a way of using biology to create energy, and right now it’s a hot commodity, backed with billions of dollars of government subsidies. But ethanol relies on plants that grow anew each year, most often corn; by the time you’ve driven your tractor to tend the fields, and your truck to carry the crop to the refinery, and powered your refinery, the best-case “energy output-to-input ratio” is something like 1.34-to-1. You’ve spent 100 Btu of fossil energy to get 134 Btu. Perhaps that’s worth doing, but as Kamyar Enshayan of the University of Northern Iowa points out, “it’s not impressive” compared to the ratio for oil, which ranges from 30-to-1 to 200-to-1, depending on where you drill it. To go from our fossil-fuel world to a biomass world would be a little like leaving the Garden of Eden for the land where bread must be earned by “the sweat of your brow.”

And east of Eden is precisely where we may be headed. As everyone knows, the past three years have seen a spate of reports and books and documentaries suggesting that humanity may have neared or passed its oil peak—that is, the point at which those pools of primeval plankton are half used up, where each new year brings us closer to the bottom of the barrel. The major oil companies report that they can’t find enough new wells most years to offset the depletion in the old ones; rumors circulate that the giant Saudi fields are dwindling faster than expected; and, of course, all this is reflected in the cost of oil.

The doctrinaire economist’s answer is that no particular commodity matters all that much, because if we run short of something, it will pay for someone to develop a substitute. In general this has proved true in the past: Run short of nice big sawlogs and someone invents plywood. But it’s far from clear that the same precept applies to coal, oil, and natural gas. This time, there is no easy substitute: I like the solar panels on my roof, but they’re collecting diffuse daily energy, not using up eons of accumulated power. Fossil fuel was an exception to the rule, a one-time gift that underwrote a one-time binge of growth.

This brings us to the third point: If we do try to keep going, with the entire world aiming for an economy structured like America’s, it won’t be just oil that we’ll run short of. Here are the numbers we have to contend with: Given current rates of growth in the Chinese economy, the 1.3 billion residents of that nation alone will, by 2031, be about as rich as we are. If they then eat meat, milk, and eggs at the rate that we do, calculates ecostatistician Lester Brown, they will consume 1,352 million tons of grain each year—equal to two-thirds of the world’s entire 2004 grain harvest. They will use 99 million barrels of oil a day, 15 million more than the entire world consumes at present. They will use more steel than all the West combined, double the world’s production of paper, and drive 1.1 billion cars—1.5 times as many as the current world total. And that’s just China; by then, India will have a bigger population, and its economy is growing almost as fast. And then there’s the rest of the world.

Trying to meet that kind of demand will stress the earth past its breaking point in an almost endless number of ways, but let’s take just one. When Thomas Newcomen fired up his pump on that morning in 1712, the atmosphere contained 275 parts per million of carbon dioxide. We’re now up to 380 parts per million, a level higher than the earth has seen for many millions of years, and climate change has only just begun. The median predictions of the world’s climatologists—by no means the worst-case scenario—show that unless we take truly enormous steps to rein in our use of fossil fuels, we can expect average temperatures to rise another four or five degrees before the century is out, making the globe warmer than it’s been since long before primates appeared. We might as well stop calling it earth and have a contest to pick some new name, because it will be a different planet. Humans have never done anything more profound, not even when we invented nuclear weapons.

How does this tie in with economic growth? Clearly, getting rich means getting dirty—that’s why, when I was in Beijing recently, I could stare straight at the sun (once I actually figured out where in the smoggy sky it was). But eventually, getting rich also means wanting the “luxury” of clean air and finding the technological means to achieve it. Which is why you can once again see the mountains around Los Angeles; why more of our rivers are swimmable every year. And economists have figured out clever ways to speed this renewal: Creating markets for trading pollution credits, for instance, helped cut those sulfur and nitrogen clouds more rapidly and cheaply than almost anyone had imagined.

But getting richer doesn’t lead to producing less carbon dioxide in the same way that it does to less smog—in fact, so far it’s mostly the reverse. Environmental destruction of the old-fashioned kind—dirty air, dirty water—results from something going wrong. You haven’t bothered to stick the necessary filter on your pipes, and so the crud washes into the stream; a little regulation, and a little money, and the problem disappears. But the second, deeper form of environmental degradation comes from things operating exactly as they’re supposed to, just too much so. Carbon dioxide is an inevitable byproduct of burning coal or gas or oil—not something going wrong. Researchers are struggling to figure out costly and complicated methods to trap some CO2 and inject it intdlderground mines—but for all practical purposes, the vast majority of the world’s cars and factories and furnaces will keep belching more and more of it into the atmosphere as long as we burn more and more fossil fuels.

True, as companies and countries get richer, they can afford more efficient machinery that makes better use of fossil fuel, like the hybrid Honda Civic I drive. But if your appliances have gotten more efficient, there are also far more of them: The furnace is better than it used to be, but the average size of the house it heats has doubled since 1950. The 60-inch TV? The always-on cable modem? No need for you to do the math—the electric company does it for you, every month. Between 1990 and 2003, precisely the years in which we learned about the peril presented by global warming, the United States’ annual carbon dioxide emissions increased by 16 percent. And the momentum to keep going in that direction is enormous. For most of us, growth has become synonymous with the economy’s “health,” which in turn seems far more palpable than the health of the planet. Think of the terms we use—the economy, whose temperature we take at every newscast via the Dow Jones average, is “ailing” or it’s “on the mend.” It’s “slumping” or it’s “in recovery.” We cosset and succor its every sniffle with enormous devotion, even as we more or less ignore the increasingly urgent fever that the globe is now running. The ecological economists have an enormous task ahead of them—a nearly insurmountable task, if it were “merely” the environment that is in peril. But here is where things get really interesting. It turns out that the economics of environmental destruction are closely linked to another set of leading indicators—ones that most humans happen to care a great deal about.

3. “It seems that well-being is a real phenomenon”: Economists discover hedonics

traditionally, happiness and satisfaction are the sort of notions that economists wave aside as poetic irrelevance, the kind of questions that occupy people with no head for numbers who had to major in liberal arts. An orthodox economist has a simple happiness formula: If you buy a Ford Expedition, then ipso facto a Ford Expedition is what makes you happy. That’s all we need to know. The economist would call this idea “utility maximization,” and in the words of the economic historian Gordon Bigelow, “the theory holds that every time a person buys something, sells something, quits a job, or invests, he is making a rational decision about what will…provide him ‘maximum utility.’ If you bought a Ginsu knife at 3 a.m. a neoclassical economist will tell you that, at that time, you calculated that this purchase would optimize your resources.” The beauty of this principle lies in its simplicity. It is perhaps the central assumption of the world we live in: You can tell who I really am by what I buy.

Yet economists have long known that people’s brains don’t work quite the way the model suggests. When Bob Costanza, one of the fathers of ecological economics and now head of the Gund Institute at the University of Vermont, was first edging into economics in the early 1980s, he had a fellowship to study “social traps”—the nuclear arms race, say—in which “short-term behavior can get out of kilter with longer broad-term goals.”

It didn’t take long for Costanza to demonstrate, as others had before him, that, if you set up an auction in a certain way, people will end up bidding $1.50 to take home a dollar. Other economists have shown that people give too much weight to “sunk costs”—that they’re too willing to throw good money after bad, or that they value items more highly if they already own them than if they are considering acquiring them. Building on such insights, a school of “behavioral economics” has emerged in recent years and begun plumbing how we really behave.

The wonder is that it took so long. We all know in our own lives how irrationally we are capable of acting, and how unconnected those actions are to any real sense of joy. (I mean, there you are at 3 a.m. thinking about the Ginsu knife.) But until fairly recently, we had no alternatives to relying on Ginsu knife and Ford Expedition purchases as the sole measures of our satisfaction. How else would we know what made people happy?

That’s where things are now changing dramatically: Researchers from a wide variety of disciplines have started to figure out how to assess satisfaction, and economists have begun to explore the implications. In 2002 Princeton’s Daniel Kahneman won the Nobel Prize in economics even though he is trained as a psychologist. In the book Well-Being, he and a pair of coauthors announce a new field called “hedonics,” defined as “the study of what makes experiences and life pleasant or unpleasant…. It is also concerned with the whole range of circumstances, from the biological to the societal, that occasion suffering and enjoyment.” If you are worried that there might be something altogether too airy about this, be reassured—Kahneman thinks like an economist. In the book’s very first chapter, “Objective Happiness,” he describes an experiment that compares “records of the pain reported by two patients undergoing colonoscopy,” wherein every 60 seconds he insists they rate their pain on a scale of 1 to 10 and eventually forces them to make “a hypothetical choice between a repeat colonoscopy and a barium enema.” Dismal science indeed.

As more scientists have turned their attention to the field, researchers have studied everything from “biases in recall of menstrual symptoms” to “fearlessness and courage in novice paratroopers.” Subjects have had to choose between getting an “attractive candy bar” and learning the answers to geography questions; they’ve been made to wear devices that measured their blood pressure at regular intervals; their brains have been scanned. And by now that’s been enough to convince most observers that saying “I’m happy” is more than just a subjective statement. In the words of the economist Richard Layard, “We now know that what people say about how they feel corresponds closely to the actual levels of activity in different parts of the brain, which can be measured in standard scientific ways.” Indeed, people who call themselves happy, or who have relatively high levels of electrical activity in the left prefrontal region of the brain, are also “more likely to be rated as happy by friends,” “more likely to respond to requests for help,” “less likely to be involved in disputes at work,” and even “less likely to die prematurely.” In other words, conceded one economist, “it seems that what the psychologists call subjective well-being is a real phenomenon. The various empirical measures of it have high consistency, reliability, and validity.”

The idea that there is a state called happiness, and that we can dependably figure out what it feels like and how to measure it, is extremely subversive. It allows economists to start thinking about life in richer (indeed) terms, to stop asking “What did you buy?” and to start asking “Is your life good?” And if you can ask someone “Is your life good?” and count on the answer to mean something, then you’ll be able to move to the real heart of the matter, the question haunting our moment on the earth: Is more better?

4. If we’re so rich, how come we’re so damn miserable?

in some sense, you could say that the years since World War II in America have been a loosely controlled experiment designed to answer this very question. The environmentalist Alan Durning found that in 1991 the average American family owned twice as many cars as it did in 1950, drove 2.5 times as far, used 21 times as much plastic, and traveled 25 times farther by air. Gross national product per capita tripled during that period. Our houses are bigger than ever and stuffed to the rafters with belongings (which is why the storage-locker industry has doubled in size in the past decade). We have all sorts of other new delights and powers—we can send email from our cars, watch 200 channels, consume food from every corner of the world. Some people have taken much more than their share, but on average, all of us in the West are living lives materially more abundant than most people a generation ago.

What’s odd is, none of it appears to have made us happier. Throughout the postwar years, even as the gnp curve has steadily climbed, the “life satisfaction” index has stayed exactly the same. Since 1972, the National Opinion Research Center has surveyed Americans on the question: “Taking all things together, how would you say things are these days—would you say that you are very happy, pretty happy, or not too happy?” (This must be a somewhat unsettling interview.) The “very happy” number peaked at 38 percent in the 1974 poll, amid oil shock and economic malaise; it now hovers right around 33 percent.

And it’s not that we’re simply recalibrating our sense of what happiness means—we are actively experiencing life as grimmer. In the winter of 2006 the National Opinion Research Center published data about “negative life events” comparing 1991 and 2004, two data points bracketing an economic boom. “The anticipation would have been that problems would have been down,” the study’s author said. Instead it showed a rise in problems—for instance, the percentage who reported breaking up with a steady partner almost doubled. As one reporter summarized the findings, “There’s more misery in people’s lives today.”

This decline in the happiness index is not confined to the United States; as other nations have followed us into mass affluence, their experiences have begun to yield similar results. In the United Kingdom, real gross domestic product per capita grew two-thirds between 1973 and 2001, but people’s satisfaction with their lives changed not one whit. Japan saw a fourfold increase in real income per capita between 1958 and 1986 without any reported increase in satisfaction. In one place after another, rates of alcoholism, suicide, and depression have gone up dramatically, even as we keep accumulating more stuff. Indeed, one report in 2000 found that the average American child reported higher levels of anxiety than the average child under psychiatric care in the 1950s—our new normal is the old disturbed.

If happiness was our goal, then the unbelievable amount of effort and resources expended in its pursuit since 1950 has been largely a waste. One study of life satisfaction and mental health by Emory University professor Corey Keyes found just 17 percent of Americans “flourishing,” in mental health terms, and 26 percent either “languishing” or out-and-out depressed.

5. Danes (and Mexicans, the Amish, and the Masai) just want to have fun

how is it, then, that we became so totally, and apparently wrongly, fixated on the idea that our main goal, as individuals and as nations, should be the accumulation of more wealth? The answer is interesting for what it says about human nature. Up to a certain point, more really does equal better. Imagine briefly your life as a poor person in a poor society—say, a peasant farmer in China. (China has one-fourth of the world’s farmers, but one-fourteenth of its arable land; the average farm in the southern part of the country is about half an acre, or barely more than the standard lot for a new American home.) You likely have the benefits of a close and connected family, and a village environment where your place is clear. But you lack any modicum of security for when you get sick or old or your back simply gives out. Your diet is unvaried and nutritionally lacking; you’re almost always cold in winter.

In a world like that, a boost in income delivers tangible benefits. In general, researchers report that money consistently buys happiness right up to about $10,000 income per capita. That’s a useful number to keep in the back of your head—it’s like the freezing point of water, one of those random figures that just happens to define a crucial phenomenon on our planet. “As poor countries like India, Mexico, the Philippines, Brazil, and South Korea have experienced economic growth, there is some evidence that their average happiness has risen,” the economist Layard reports. Past $10,000 (per capita, mind you—that is, the average for each man, woman, and child), there’s a complete scattering: When the Irish were making two-thirds as much as Americans they were reporting higher levels of satisfaction, as were the Swedes, the Danes, the Dutch. Mexicans score higher than the Japanese; the French are about as satisfied with their lives as the Venezuelans. In fact, once basic needs are met, the “satisfaction” data scrambles in mindlnding ways. A sampling of Forbes magazine’s “richest Americans” have identical happiness scores with Pennsylvania Amish, and are only a whisker above Swedes taken as a whole, not to mention the Masai. The “life satisfaction” of pavement dwellers—homeless people—in Calcutta is among the lowest recorded, but it almost doubles when they move into a slum, at which point they are basically as satisfied with their lives as a sample of college students drawn from 47 nations. And so on.

On the list of major mistakes we’ve made as a species, this one seems pretty high up. Our single-minded focus on increasing wealth has succeeded in driving the planet’s ecological systems to the brink of failure, even as it’s failed to make us happier. How did we screw up?

The answer is pretty obvious—we kept doing something past the point that it worked. Since happiness had increased with income in the past, we assumed it would inevitably do so in the future. We make these kinds of mistakes regularly: Two beers made me feel good, so ten will make me feel five times better. But this case was particularly extreme—in part because as a species, we’ve spent so much time simply trying to survive. As the researchers Ed Diener and Martin Seligman—both psychologists—observe, “At the time of Adam Smith, a concern with economic issues was understandably primary. Meeting simple human needs for food, shelter and clothing was not assured, and satisfying these needs moved in lockstep with better economics.” Freeing people to build a more dynamic economy was radical and altruistic.

Consider Americans in 1820, two generations after Adam Smith. The average citizen earned, in current dollars, less than $1,500 a year, which is somewhere near the current average for all of Africa. As the economist Deirdre McCloskey explains in a 2004 article in the magazine Christian Century, “Your great-great-great-grandmother had one dress for church and one for the week, if she were not in rags. Her children did not attend school, and probably could not read. She and her husband worked eighty hours a week for a diet of bread and milk—they were four inches shorter than you.” Even in 1900, the average American lived in a house the size of today’s typical garage. Is it any wonder that we built up considerable velocity trying to escape the gravitational pull of that kind of poverty? An object in motion stays in motion, and our economy—with the built-up individual expectations that drive it—is a mighty object indeed.

You could call it, I think, the Laurdlgalls Wilder effect. I grew up reading her books—Little House on the Prairie, Little House in the Big Woods—and my daughter grew up listening to me read them to her, and no doubt she will read them to her children. They are the ur-American story. And what do they tell? Of a life rich in family, rich in connection to the natural world, rich in adventure—but materially deprived. That one dress, that same bland dinner. At Christmastime, a penny—a penny! And a stick of candy, and the awful deliberation about whether to stretch it out with tiny licks or devour it in an orgy of happy greed. A rag doll was the zenith of aspiration. My daughter likes dolls too, but her bedroom boasts a density of Beanie Babies that mimics the manic biodiversity of the deep rainforest. Another one? Really, so what? Its marginal utility, as an economist might say, is low. And so it is with all of us. We just haven’t figured that out because the momentum of the past is still with us—we still imagine we’re in that little house on the big prairie.

6. This year’s model home: “Good for the dysfunctional family”

that great momentum has carried us away from something valuable, something priceless: It has allowed us to become (very nearly forced us to become) more thoroughly individualistic than we really wanted to be. We left behind hundreds of thousands of years of human community for the excitement, and the isolation, of “making something of ourselves,” an idea that would not have made sense for 99.9 percent of human history. Adam Smith’s insight was that the interests of each of our individual selves could add up, almost in spite of themselves, to social good—to longer lives, fuller tables, warmer houses. Suddenly the community was no longer necessary to provide these things; they would happen as if by magic. And they did happen. And in many ways it was good.

But this process of liberation seems to have come close to running its course. Study after study shows Americans spending less time with friends and family, either working longer hours, or hunched over their computers at night. And each year, as our population grows by 1 percent we manage to spread ourselves out over 6 to 8 percent more land. Simple mathematics says that we’re less and less likely to bump into the other inhabitants of our neighborhood, or indeed of our own homes. As the Wall Street Journal reported recently, “Major builders and top architects are walling people off. They’re touting one-person ‘Internet alcoves,’ locked-door ‘away rooms,’ and his-and-her offices on opposite ends of the house. The new floor plans offer so much seclusion, they’re ‘good for the dysfunctional family,’ says Gopal Ahluwahlia, director of research for the National Association of Home Builders.” At the building industry’s annual Las Vegas trade show, the “showcase ‘Ultimate Family Home’ hardly had a family room,” noted the Journal. Instead, the boy’s personal playroom had its own 42-inch plasma TV, and the girl’s bedroom had a secret mirrored door leading to a “hideaway karaoke room.” “We call this the ultimate home for families who don’t want anything to do with one another,” said Mike McGee, chief executive of Pardee Homes of Los Angeles, builder of the model.

This transition from individualism to hyper-individualism also made its presence felt in politics. In the 1980s, British prime minister Margaret Thatcher asked, “Who is society? There is no such thing. There are individual men and women, and there are families.” Talk about everything solid melting into air—Thatcher’s maxim would have spooked Adam Smith himself. The “public realm”—things like parks and schools and Social Security, the last reminders of the communities from which we came—is under steady and increasing attack. Instead of contributing to the shared risk of health insurance, Americans are encouraged to go it alone with “health savings accounts.” Hell, even the nation’s most collectivist institution, the U.S. military, until recently recruited under the slogan an “Army of One.” No wonder the show that changed television more than any other in the past decade was Survivor, where the goal is to end up alone on the island, to manipulate and scheme until everyone is banished and leaves you by yourself with your money.

It’s not so hard, then, to figure out why happiness has declined here even as wealth has grown. During the same decades when our lives grew busier and more isolated, we’ve gone from having three confidants on average to only two, and the number of people saying they have no one to discuss important matters with has nearly tripled. Between 1974 and 1994, the percentage of Americans who said they visited with their neighbors at least once a month fell from almost two-thirds to less than half, a number that has continued to fall in the past decade. We simply worked too many hours earning, we commuted too far to our too-isolated homes, and there was always the blue glow of the tube shining through the curtains.

7. New friend or new coffeemaker? Pick one

because traditional economists think of human beings primarily as individuals and not as members of a community, they miss out on a major part of the satisfaction index. Economists lay it out almost as a mathematical equation: Overall, “evidence shows that companionship…contributes more to well-being than does income,” writes Robert E. Lane, a Yale political science professor who is the author of The Loss of Happiness in Market Democracies. But there is a notable difference between poor and wealthy countries: When people have lots of companionship but not much money, income “makes more of a contribution to subjective well-being.” By contrast, “where money is relatively plentiful and companionship relatively scarce, companionship will add more to subjective well-being.” If you are a poor person in China, you have plenty of friends and family around all the time—perhaps there are four other people living in your room. Adding a sixth doesn’t make you happier. But adding enough money so that all five of you can eat some meat from time to time pleases you greatly. By contrast, if you live in a suburban American home, buying another coffeemaker adds very little to your quantity of happiness—trying to figure out where to store it, or wondering if you picked the perfect model, may in fact decrease your total pleasure. But a new friend, a new connection, is a big deal. We have a surplus of individualism and a deficit of companionship, and so the second becomes more valuable.

Indeed, we seem to be genetically wired for community. As biologist Edward O. Wilson found, most primates live in groups and get sad when they’re separated—”an isolated individual will repeatedly pull a lever with no reward other than the glimpse of another monkey.” Why do people so often look back on their college days as the best years of their lives? Because their classes were so fascinating? Or because in college, we live more closely and intensely with a community than most of us ever do before or after? Every measure of psychological health points to the same conclusion: People who “are married, who have good friends, and who are close to their families are happier than those who do not,” says Swarthmore psychologist Barry Schwartz. “People who participate in religious communities are happier than those who are not.” Which is striking, Schwartz adds, because social ties “actually decrease freedom of choice”—being a good friend involves sacrifice.

Do we just think we’re happier in communities? Is it merely some sentimental good-night-John-Boy affectation? No—our bodies react in measurable ways. According to research cited by Harvard professor Robert Putnam in his classic book Bowling Alone, if you do not belong to any group at present, joining a club or a society of some kind cuts in half the risk that you will die in the next year. Check this out: When researchers at Carnegie Mellon (somewhat disgustingly) dropped samples of cold virus directly into subjects’ nostrils, those with rich social networks were four times less likely to get sick. An economy that produces only individualism undermines us in the most basic ways.

Here’s another statistic worth keeping in mind: Consumers have 10 times as many conversations at farmers’ markets as they do at supermarkets—an order of magnitude difference. By itself, that’s hardly life-changing, but it points at something that could be: living in an economy where you are participant as well as consumer, where you have a sense of who’s in your universe and how it fits together. At the same time, some studies show local agriculture using less energy (also by an order of magnitude) than the “it’s always summer somewhere” system we operate on now. Those are big numbers, and it’s worth thinking about what they suggest—especially since, between peak oil and climate change, there’s no longer really a question that we’ll have to wean ourselves of the current model.

So as a mental experiment, imagine how we might shift to a more sustainable kind of economy. You could use government policy to nudge the change—remove subsidies from agribusiness and use them instead to promote farmer-entrepreneurs; underwrite the cost of windmills with even a fraction of the money that’s now going to protect oil flows. You could put tariffs on goods that travel long distances, shift highway spending to projects that make it easier to live near where you work (and, by cutting down on commutes, leave some time to see the kids). And, of course, you can exploit the Net to connect a lot of this highly localized stuff into something larger. By way of example, a few of us are coordinating the first nationwide global warming demonstration­—but instead of marching on Washington, we’re rallying in our local areas, and then fusing our efforts, via the website stepitup07.org, into a national message.

It’s easy to dismiss such ideas as sentimental or nostalgic. In fact, economies can be localized as easily in cities and suburbs as rural villages (maybe more easily), and in ways that look as much to the future as the past, that rely more on the solar panel and the Internet than the white picket fence. In fact, given the trendlines for phenomena such as global warming and oil supply, what’s nostalgic and sentimental is to keep doing what we’re doing simply because it’s familiar.

8. The oil-for-people paradox: Why small farms produce more food

to understand the importance of this last point, consider the book American Mania by the neuroscientist Peter Whybrow. Whybrow argues that many of us in this country are predisposed to a kind of dynamic individualism—our gene pool includes an inordinate number of people who risked everything to start over. This served us well in settling a continent and building our prosperity. But it never got completely out of control, says Whybrow, because “the marketplace has always had its natural constraints. For the first two centuries of the nation’s existence, even the most insatiable American citizen was significantly leashed by the checks and balances inherent in a closely knit community, by geography, by the elements of weather, or, in some cases, by religious practice.” You lived in a society—a habitat—that kept your impulses in some kind of check. But that changed in the past few decades as the economy nationalized and then globalized. As we met fewer actual neighbors in the course of a day, those checks and balances fell away. “Operating in a world of instant communication with minimal social tethers,” Whybrow observes, “America’s engines of commerce and desire became turbocharged.”

Adam Smith himself had worried that too much envy and avarice would destroy “the empathic feeling and neighborly concerns that are essential to his economic model,” says Whybrow, but he “took comfort in the fellowship and social constraint that he considered inherent in the tightly knit communities characteristic of the 18th century.” Businesses were built on local capital investment, and “to be solicitous of one’s neighbor was prudent insurance against future personal need.” For the most part, people felt a little constrained about showing off wealth; indeed, until fairly recently in American history, someone who was making tons of money was often viewed with mixed emotions, at least if he wasn’t giving back to the community. “For the rich,” Whybrow notes, “the reward system would be balanced between the pleasure of self-gain and the civic pride of serving others. By these mechanisms the most powerful citizens would be limited in their greed.”

Once economies grow past a certain point, however, “the behavioral contingencies essential to promoting social stability in a market-regulated society—close personal relationships, tightly knit communities, local capital investment, and so on—are quickly eroded.” So re-localizing economies offers one possible way around the gross inequalities that have come to mark our societies. Instead of aiming for growth at all costs and hoping it will trickle down, we may be better off living in enough contact with each other for the affluent to once again feel some sense of responsibility for their neighbors. This doesn’t mean relying on noblesse oblige; it means taking seriously the idea that people, and their politics, can be changed by their experiences. It’s a hopeful sign that more and more local and state governments across the country have enacted “living wage” laws. It’s harder to pretend that the people you see around you every day should live and die by the dictates of the market.

Right around this time, an obvious question is doubtless occurring to you. Is it foolish to propose that a modern global economy of 6 (soon to be 9) billion people should rely on more localized economies? To put it more bluntly, since for most people “the economy” is just a fancy way of saying “What’s for dinner?” and “Am I having any?,” doesn’t our survival depend on economies that function on a massive scale—such as highly industrialized agriculture? Turns out the answer is no—and the reasons why offer a template for rethinking the rest of the economy as well.

We assume, because it makes a certain kind of intuitive sense, that industrialized farming is the most productive farming. A vast Midwestern field filled with high-tech equipment ought to produce more food than someone with a hoe in a small garden. Yet the opposite is true. If you are after getting the greatest yield from the land, then smaller farms in fact produce more food.

If you are one guy on a tractor responsible for thousands of acres, you grow your corn and that’s all you can do—make pass after pass with the gargantuan machine across a sea of crop. But if you’re working 10 acres, then you have time to really know the land, and to make it work harder. You can intercrop all kinds of plants—their roots will go to different depths, or they’ll thrive in each other’s shade, or they’ll make use of different nutrients in the soil. You can also walk your fields, over and over, noticing. According to the government’s most recent agricultural census, smaller farms produce far more food per acre, whether you measure in tons, calories, or dollars. In the process, they use land, water, and oil much more efficiently; if they have animals, the manure is a gift, not a threat to public health. To feed the world, we may actually need lots more small farms.

But if this is true, then why do we have large farms? Why the relentless consolidation? There are many reasons, including the way farm subsidies have been structured, the easier access to bank loans (and politicians) for the big guys, and the convenience for food-processing companies of dealing with a few big suppliers. But the basic reason is this: We substituted oil for people. Tractors and synthetic fertilizer instead of farmers and animals. Could we take away the fossil fuel, put people back on the land in larger numbers, and have enough to eat?

The best data to answer that question comes from an English agronomist named Jules Pretty, who has studied nearly 300 sustainable agriculture projects in 57 countries around the world. They might not pass the U.S. standards for organic certification, but they’re all what he calls “low-input.” Pretty found that over the past decade, almost 12 million farmers had begun using sustainable practices on about 90 million acres. Even more remarkably, sustainable agriculture increased food production by 79 percent per acre. These were not tiny isolated demonstration farms—Pretty studied 14 projects where 146,000 farmers across a broad swath of the developing world were raising potatoes, sweet potatoes, and cassava, and he found that practices such as cover-cropping and fighting pests with natural adversaries had increased production 150 percent—17 tons per household. With 4.5 million small Asian grain farmers, average yields rose 73 percent. When Indonesian rice farmers got rid of pesticides, their yields stayed the same but their costs fell sharply.

“I acknowledge,” says Pretty, “that all this may sound too good to be true for those who would disbelieve these advances. Many still believe that food production and nature must be separated, that ‘agroecological’ approaches offer only marginal opportunities to increase food production, and that industrialized approaches represent the best, and perhaps only, way forward. However, prevailing views have changed substantially in just the last decade.”

And they will change just as profoundly in the decades to come across a wide range of other commodities. Already I’ve seen dozens of people and communities working on regional-scale sustainable timber projects, on building energy networks that work like the Internet by connecting solar rooftops and backyard windmills in robust mini-grids. That such things can begin to emerge even in the face of the political power of our reigning economic model is remarkable; as we confront significant change in the climate, they could speed along the same kind of learning curve as Pretty’s rice farmers and wheat growers. And they would not only use less energy; they’d create more community. They’d start to reverse the very trends I’ve been describing, and in so doing rebuild the kind of scale at which Adam Smith’s economics would help instead of hurt.

In the 20th century, two completely different models of how to run an economy battled for supremacy. Ours won, and not only because it produced more goods than socialized state economies. It also produced far more freedom, far less horror. But now that victory is starting to look Pyrrhic; in our overheated and underhappy state, we need some new ideas.

We’ve gone too far down the road we’re traveling. The time has come to search the map, to strike off in new directions. Inertia is a powerful force; marriages and corporations and nations continue in motion until something big diverts them. But in our new world we have much to fear, and also much to desire, and together they can set us on a new, more promising course.

- from motherjones. Mar/Apr 2007

Lies, Damn Lies, and Science

In Book, Science, ToMl on September 3, 2009 at 12:48 pm

According to a recent article in Eos (Doran and Zimmermann, ‘Examining the Scientific consensus on Climate Change‘, Volume 90, Number 3, 2009; p. 22-23 – only available for AGU members – update: a public link to the article is here), about 58% of the general public in the US thinks that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing the mean global temperature, as opposed to 97% of specialists surveyed.

The disproportion between these numbers is a concern, and one possible explanation may be that the science literacy among the general public is low. Perhaps Sherry Seethaler’s new book ‘Lies, Damn Lies, and Science’ can be a useful contribution in raising the science literacy?

The book is about science in general and about how science often is miscommunicated in the media. It addresses a range of issues, such as how statistics often is misused, how scientific progress is made in general, that the ’scientific method’ is not always as straightforward as one might like to think, the influence of stake-holders, the importance of knowing the context of the research, relationships between science and policy, and ploys designed to bypass logic. Many of the points made in the book are probably well known for the RC readership – albeit used in different situations to the case studies discussed in the book. There is also some discussion about AGW, amongst other subjects.

The description of the greenhouse effect is not quite correct, as the reader gets the impression that it involves reflecting infrared radiation back to space (p. 84). That is not the case, as the energy from the sun lies mainly in the visible spectrum, and the infra red light from the Earth is a product from the absorption of the sunlight and a re-emittance due to Planck’s law.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Science’ has much in common with the older book ‘Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics’, and that they try to convey similar take-home messages.

- from realclimate

Keeping an eye on Wilkins Ice Shelf

In Antarctica, Global Warming, ToMl on September 3, 2009 at 12:38 pm

animation_resize_01030909As the Wilkins Ice Shelf is at risk of breaking away from the Antarctic Peninsula, ESA’s Envisat satellite is observing the area on a daily basis. The satellite acquisitions of the ice shelf are updated automatically on this website to monitor the developments immediately as they occur.

In late November 2008, new rifts developed on Wilkins Ice Shelf. As scientists predicted, this led to the collapse of the ice bridge that had connected the ice shelf to Charcot Island in early April 2009.

The collapse of the ice bridge, which was approximately 100 km long and only a few km wide, had formed a barrier pinning back the northern ice front of the central Wilkins Ice Shelf. As a consequence of the collapse, the rifts on the shelf widened and new cracks formed as the ice adjusted in the days that followed.

Towards the end of April 2009, icebergs had started to calve from the northern front of the ice shelf, indicating that it had destabilised.

The above animation is comprised of images acquired by Envisat’s Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar (ASAR) and is updated daily as new ASAR acquisitions become available. The individual images that make up the animation are also available in the image archive on the right navigation bar.

- from esa

Disappearing from map

In Antarctica, Global Warming, ToMl on September 2, 2009 at 3:12 pm

www.reuters.comAn ice bridge which had apparently held a vast Antarctic ice shelf in place during recorded history shattered on Saturday and could herald a wider collapse linked to global warming, a leading scientist said.

The satellite picture, from the European Space Agency (ESA), showed that a 40 km (25 mile) long strip of ice believed to pin the Wilkins Ice Shelf in place had splintered at its narrowest point, about 500 meters wide.

The Wilkins, now the size of Jamaica or the U.S. state of Connecticut, is one of 10 shelves to have shrunk or collapsed in recent years on the Antarctic Peninsula, where temperatures have risen in recent decades apparently because of global warming.

The ESA picture showed a jumble of huge flat-topped icebergs in the sea where the ice bridge had been on Friday, pinning the Wilkins to the coast and running northwest to Charcot Island.

The loss of the ice bridge, jutting about 20 meters out of the water and which was almost 100 km wide in 1950, may now allow ocean currents to wash away far more of the Wilkins shelf.

Nine other shelves have receded or collapsed around the Antarctic Peninsula in the past 50 years, often abruptly like the Larsen A in 1995 or the Larsen B in 2002 further north.

Cores of sediments on the seabed indicate that some of these ice shelves had been in place for at least 10,000 years.

www.reuters.com1In January, the remaining ice bridge had been surrounded by icebergs the size of shopping malls, many of them trapped in sea ice. A few seals were visible lolling on sea ice in the low Antarctic sunshine.

Temperatures on the Antarctic Peninsula have risen by up to about 3 Celsius (5.4 Fahrenheit) in the past 50 years, the fastest rate of warming in the Southern Hemisphere.

The loss of ice shelves does not affect sea levels — floating ice contracts as it melts and so does not raise ocean levels. But their loss can allow glaciers on land to slide more rapidly toward the sea, adding water to the oceans.

The Wilkins does not have much ice pent up behind it. But bigger ice shelves to the south on the frozen continent, where no major warming has been detected, hold back far more ice.

- from reuters. 6 Apr 2009

What is science?

In Science, ToMl on August 29, 2009 at 7:35 am

Science is both a body of knowledge and a process.
Science is a collection of isolated and static facts and also a process of discovery that allows us to link isolated facts into coherent and comprehensive understandings of the natural world.

Science is exciting.
Scientists are motivated by the thrill of seeing or figuring out something that no one has before.

Science is useful.
The knowledge generated by science is powerful and reliable. It can be used to develop new technologies, treat diseases, and deal with many other sorts of problems.

Science is ongoing.
Science is continually refining and expanding our knowledge.

Science is a global human endeavour.
People all over the world participate in the process of science.

- from berkeley

Page 1

Cleaning oil spills also harmful

In Oil, Pollution, ToMl on August 29, 2009 at 2:16 am

A new Queen’s University study shows that detergents used to clean up spills of diesel oil actually increase its toxicity to fish, making it more harmful. The detergents are oil dispersants that decrease the surface tension between oil and water, allowing floating oil to mix with water as tiny droplets. Dr. Peter Hodson and his team found that dispersion reduces the potential impacts of oil on surface-dwelling animals, While this should enhance biodegradation, it also creates a larger reservoir of oil in the water column.

This increases the transfer of hydrocarbons from oil to water, Dr. Hodson explains. The hydrocarbons pass easily from water into tissues and are deadly to fish in the early stages of life. “This could seriously impair the health of fish populations, resulting in long-term reductions in economic returns to fisheries,” he says.

The study is published in the journal, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.

The researchers also determined that even though chemical dispersants are not typically used in freshwater, turbulent rivers can disperse spilled diesel and create similar negative effects.

- from queensu. 16 Mar 2009

Feminization of fish

In Health, Pollution, ToMl on August 29, 2009 at 1:55 am

Around the world, increasing numbers of male fish are developing female traits — growing new sexual organs and sometimes even producing eggs. The phenomenon has been blamed mostly on chemicals that get into the water and mimic the female hormone estrogen.

But a new study puts some of the blame on an entirely different class of chemicals — ones that block the action of male hormones called androgens.

It isn’t the first study to suggest that anti-androgens might be contributing to the feminization of fish. But the new research found that there are far more of these chemicals in our lakes and streams than anyone realized. And anti-androgenic chemicals in the water might affect human health as well.

Charles Tyler, along with Susan Jobling at Brunel University in London and other colleagues, looked at chemical run-off in 51 rivers throughout the United Kingdom. By combining concentrated water samples with cultures of yeast genetically engineered to have androgen receptors, the scientists were able to measure the amount of anti-androgen activity in each sample.

The researchers’ results, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, revealed a significant amount of anti-androgenic activity in nearly all of the samples tested.

The researchers also collected fish from each site. With statistical models, they were able to show that anti-androgens were just as responsible for the feminization of fish as estrogenic compounds were — if not more so.

Anti-androgenic chemicals usually come originally from pesticides or pharmaceuticals that get into wastewater. Dozens of studies have linked these chemicals with health problems in mammals, said Gerald Ankley, an ecotoxicologist with the Environmental Protection Agency in Duluth, Minn. But this is one of the first studies to make the link in fish.

scientists will need to figure out exactly which anti-androgenic chemicals are causing problems in fish. (For his part, Tyler says he is on the verge of announcing three new anti-androgenic chemicals that will add to the list of more commonly known compounds).

Researchers also want to test whether certain mixtures of hormone-disrupting compounds are more harmful than any one chemical alone, Ankley added. And the work brings up plenty of questions about what chemicals in our rivers and streams might be doing to human health. After all, people and fish have similar hormonal systems.

“If it happens in fish, it can happen in humans.”, Tyler said.

- from discovery. 4 Mar 2009

Distance travelled for work

In ToMl, Transportation on August 29, 2009 at 1:47 am

According to the 2001 Nationwide Household Travel Survey (NHTS), 58% of all vehicle trips to work are less than 11 miles (17.7 kilometers).

Vehicle trips to work that are 5 miles (8 kilometers) and less represent 37%, according to the same survey.

Trips between 6 and 10 miles (9.6 to 16 kilometers) represent 21%.

Only 10% of vehicle trips to work are equal or more than 31 miles (50 kilometers). This is very promising since EVs that are coming to market over the next few years. usually have an all-electric driving range of around 40-50 miles (65-80 kilometers).

- from treehugger. 5 Mar 2009

Sea Sick

In Book, Environment, Ocean, ToMl on August 29, 2009 at 1:40 am

All life — whether on land or in the sea — depends on the oceans for two things:

• Oxygen. Most of Earth’s oxygen is produced by phytoplankton in the sea. These humble, one-celled organisms, rather than the spectacular rain forests, are the true lungs of the planet.

• Climate control. Our climate is regulated by the ocean’s currents, winds, and water-cycle activity.

Sea Sick is the first book to examine the current state of the world’s oceans — the great unexamined ecological crisis of the planet — and the fact that we are altering everything about them; temperature, salinity, acidity, ice cover, volume, circulation, and, of course, the life within them.

Alanna Mitchell joins the crews of leading scientists in nine of the global ocean’s hotspots to see firsthand what is really happening around the world. Whether it’s the impact of coral reef bleaching, the puzzle of the oxygen-less dead zones such as the one in the Gulf of Mexico, or the shocking implications of the changing Ph balance of the sea, Mitchell explains the science behind the story to create an engaging, accessible yet authoritative account.

- from mcclelland

New Economic Team of US

In Economics, Financial crisis, ToMl, USA on August 28, 2009 at 5:29 pm

On Monday Obama named New York Federal Reserve Bank President Timothy Geithner to the post of the Treasury Secretary. Former Treasury Secretary under Clinton Lawrence Summers was named the Director of the National Economic Council in the White House.


Obama said again and again during the campaign that the crisis on Wall Street represented the culmination of an ideology of deregulation and laisse-faire trickle-down economics that had guided the country for the past eight years. The truth is, it was not just eight years, they guided them under Reagan and also under Clinton.

That is where Larry Summers comes in because he was the last treasury secretary under Clinton. He along with Alan Greenspan and Robert Rubin were the key architects of the policies of deregulation that created the crisis that we’re living now. And those key policies are the killing of Glass-Spiegel that allowed a series of very large but mergers that created these institutions that are too big and too intermingled to fail we’re told again and again.
The deliberate decision to keep the derivatives out of the reach of financial regulators- that was also a Summer’s decision. And also allowing the banks to carry these extraordinary levels of debt. 33 to 1 in the case of Bear Sterns.

Larry Summers in the context in which he says it was 1992 and it was when he was making World Bank economic policy as it related to Russia, in the midst of a financial crisis. What he said is truly an ideologue and a follower of the very ideology- not just a follower but a propagator of the very ideology that Obama ran his campaign against. And here’s the qoute. This is Larry Summers in 1992: “Spread the truth. The laws of economics are like the laws of engineering. One set of laws works everywhere.” And then he laid out those laws a little bit later.

He referred to the three “ations”, and those were privatization, stabilization, and liberalization. So he has been preaching the doctrine. He is by no means an innocent bystander. He is a dyed-in-the-wool privatizer, free trader. And he along with Tim Geithner, his deputy play key roles during the very important economic crises in other countries like Russia, Mexico etc, When these countries suffered profound econimic crisis created by the deregulations they preach more deregulations more privatization and economic austerity to disastrous results.
- Naomi Klein


He is not quite as pessimistic as Naomi Klein is because first of all, Obama is the president, and not Summers.
we have reality on our side in the sense there is a very serious crisis. And if Obama follows the advice of the 1990’s version of Larry Summers, he will be politically toast.
- Robert Kuttner


“On Monday, Geithner was busy executing the government’s massive rescue of Citicorp–the very banking behemoth that Geithner and Summers helped to create back in the Clinton years, along with Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan and Robert Rubin, Clinton’s economics guru. Now Rubin is himself a Citicorp executive and his bank is now being saved by his old protégé (Geithner) with the taxpayers’ money. Geithner has been a central player in the deal-making, from Bear Stearns to AIG to Citi. The strategy has not only failed, it has arguably made things worse as savvy market players saw through the contradictions and rushed out to dump more bank stocks.”
- William Greider in The Nation

“Ultimately, Summers was one of the key architects of our financial crisis. Hiring him to fix the economy makes as much sense as appointing Paul Wolfowitz to oversee the Iraq withdrawal.”
- Mark Ames in The Nation


And the question is, whether Geithner and Summers in very different historical moments can turn into different kinds of people under the leadership of a president who knows his own survival depends on pursuing a recovery.


what Larry Summers did in Russia, under privatization that will be ruling Russia for the next hundred years. The key was to use public expenditure that would increase private wealth. What the plan is, from everything Obama has said, is that there is going to be a heavy government expenditure infrastructure here, very much like it was in Chicago, and this infrastructure is going to create huge real estate fortunes for the property along the line that in the vicinity of the location of the infrastructure. It’s going to create huge financial fortune.

Mass-transit and almost every country creates an increase in real estate values along the routes that could actually rental that is increased by this could actually finance the entire transport system. In London when they built the tube extension to their financial district of the loop, they created 13 billion pounds worth of increased in real estate value. The tube itself cost only $8 billion. They left this $13 billion real estate value in the hands of the private landlords. Same thing in Chicago in the US. It can be a very heavy investment in mass transportation here. This is going to create enormous real-estate values. The tax system, leaves these in private hands. All of the tax proposals that Mr. Obama have spoken about, have to do with income tax primarily. The rich people prefer not to earn income. They prefer to make capital gains. So the intention of the economic gain that Mr. Obama brought in is really to create a huge capital gains economy. Even more disparity of wealth while leaving in place the one thing that should address in the last year and that is the enormous debt overhead. Nothing is happening on that. He is adding to debt, not reducing it.

The kicker is when he is talking about, Obama is talking about tax, he is talking about income tax. Most wealth, is not taxed, because most wealth, takes the form of return capital gain, most wealth does not pay, if I see a wage if not others, so what Obama is talking about, well, is taxation at the margin. He is not talking about kind of wealth, and the kind of returns that Wall Street gets, which are not subject to taxation at all, in fact, the give aways, that the treasury put in to the bank available, says that because the banks are bought, affiliates that have cash, they are not even going to be subject of the income taxation. So the whole issue of the devils of detail of the small print and Mr. Obama, thanks to his appointing Summers in this aim, is going to leave it there. The Russian cryptnocrats didn’t have to tax on income, as the phrase went, only the little people pay taxes, I am afraid that’s going to be the case under Mr. Obama also.
- Robert Kuttner


Nancy Pelosi and that others are saying when you bring us the plan, maybe we’ll talk about giving you money. Do the banks have any plans with the money they’re getting?

No, and of course that’s what we should be doing. I think rather than throwing money at them we ought to probably nationalize one or two banks. That with the money taxpayers are putting into the bank’s does what money usually does in capitastic society, it produces ownerships. The amount of money taxpayers are putting into banks at this point is more than the total value of the stocks of these banks as valued by Wall Street.

Well if you’re putting in a majority share of the money, you should get a majority share of the ownership. If banks are too traumatized to resume lending, even with public money then if we had a publicly owned bank or two, we could show them how to do it. We could also have a complete look at their books, which we don’t now have. One question being asked about Tim Geithner is that if the Federal Reserve is the agency charged with examining bank holding companies and it was the strategy of Citigroup as a bank holding company, as shown in Sunday’s Time investigative piece, the strategy of the holding company was to do all of these exotic speculative investments.

Where was Tim Geithner at the Federal Reserve of New York which has the examiners that are supposed to be examining the bank at the holding company level. Why didn’t they get a look at the book? If we do not have tools to allow examiners to get inside to dig deep inside the plumbing and understand what dangerous risks bank speculators are taking, we need to do two things. We need to change the laws so the agency’s can have adequate supervisory power. The agencies need to use that adequate supervisory power. and in the meantime, we need to take this money and just nationalize a couple of banks outright. I completely agree with you that there is a double standard vis-a-vi the banks and vis-a-vi Detroit.

It is a little bit easier a few of the political will to just take over a bank that it is to take over an auto company. Because the question remains, even if we were to require the auto executives to come up with a plan for conversion to fuel efficient cars and fire the auto executives and get people who were competent and get public representatives on the company boards, you still love to come up with products consumers want to buy. And that has so far eluded Detroit. It has not eluded the Japanese competitors of Detroit. But, oddly enough, the recipe of how you fix a bank is somewhat easier than the recipe of how you fix an auto company. Stay away from these exotic financial instruments, get rid of conflicts of interest, have transparency. And we had the political will, it would not be that difficult to get the banking sector back on track. Detroit if anything is even harder. Pelosi is right to say that we don’t want to throw money at Detroit’s until we see the plan, but we ought be doing at least as much for the banking sector.
- Robert Kuttner


We are already seeing hesitation about the commitment to not renew the Bush tax cuts. Then there’s a huge fight over capital gains tax and the kinds of taxes paid by hedge funds.

Larry Summers is coming straight from a hedge fund. He’s managing director of one of the most secretive hedge funds (D.E. Shaw) around . So the real question is not whether they will spend taxpayer money, they will on infrastructure, but the point is will they just just rack up huge debt and deficits or will they actually pay for this with taxes on the wealthy, which is what they promised to do and what we’re seeing Gordon Brown begin to do in Britain. Because if they do not pay for this an equitable way, in a progressive way, then what will happen is this huge investment in infrastructure will create huge economic crisis down the road. It will be blamed on Obama. And then, there will be a wave of privatizations, these new investments in public spending. There will be a whole new bubble.
- Naomi Klein


Most infrastructure is built by states and localities. I do not think there will be privatization of this new infrastructure because right now, the states and localities are broke. here in New York city that have announced they’re cutting back on the Second Avenue subway, raising transport fares. All over the United States, municipalities are broke. The idea of bringing in Summers is to do this from the very beginning, with private funds that will be provided largely by the government itself. And if you look of the bailout money that has been given, yesterday Bloomberg calculated over 7.7 trillion dollars of just the government taking over from the financial sector this year. Of all of the 7.7 trillion dollars, what has not been done? One thing that has not been bailed out has been the pension benefit guaranty corporation They are already $25 billion in deficit. And Congress a few years ago passed a law that this year if they’re not fully funded, they are going to have to suddenly make up the entire shortfall. Which is essentially going to make many corporations insolvent for their pension funds. Forcing a shift away from guaranteed pensions to sort of whatever we have we’ll pay you. Standardize contributions, but not standardized payoffs. So there’s going to be an enormous squeeze on the kind of labor’s that is employed in states and municipalities, unions for infrastructure to essentially privatize from the beginning with government guarantees, government funds and it will be a bonanza for the banks and that’s out there they are going to earn their way out of debt. By lending to private funds instead of government funds.
- Michael Hudson


In 1996 General Motors introduced the EV-1 electric car in California and Arizona. Hundreds of the electric cars were soon on the road, then they all disappeared. The mystery behind their disappearance is the subject of this documentary “Who Killed the Electric Car?”

In this clip,
PETER HORTON: There’s nothing like driving a car when you realize as you are sitting in traffic there’s no pollution coming out of your tailpipe.

DAVID LETTERMAN: By driving an electric car, what are you sparing us from?

TOM HANKS: I’m saving America, Dave. That’s what I am doing, I am saving America by driving electric cars.

AMY GOODMAN: That was Tom Hanks speaking on the David Letterman Show. Despite the praise from drivers, General Motors stopped manufacturing the cars and forced all drivers to return their EV-1’s. GM was able to do this because none of the cars had actually been sold, only leased. After the electric cars were removed from the road they were sent to Arizona where they were crushed.

CHRIS PAINE: We flew over at General Motors and looking down, we could see right next to the racetrack where the EV-1 was first tested, we saw maybe 50 EV-1’s, crushed and put on top of semi flatbeds right next to the yellow crusher. General motors is almost finished off I think. I don’t imagine there’s many EV-1’s left that haven’t been crushed out. It’s pretty sad.

DAVE BARTHMUSS: There’s one of four things that will happen with the EV-1s. They will go to colleges and universities, engineering schools. They’ll go to museums and other displays across the country. Other EV-1 vehicles are being driven by our engineers and the other option for EV-1’s at the end of their life is recycling. But know that every part of the EV-1 is going to be recycled, dismantled through a third party and then reused. Everything is going to be recycled, we are not just going to crush it and send it off to a landfill.

JIM BOYD: When I saw the picture of the pile of crushed cars, it hurt and I, you know, I thought it was pretty spiteful.

IRIS OVSHINSKY: To see on the computer, on the internet, that the crushed EV-1s that GM did—it was tragic.
- Who Killed the Electric Car


That film is one of the most profound documentary’s of our time. GM was actually ahead of Toyota, and now working our way back towards a plug an electric car via modified hybrid, but they had the technology 12,14 years ago, you can’t make this stuff up. The patent for the battery that made possible the EV1 was bought by Exxonmobil just so it would never be utilized again. I think that is why in restructuring the auto industry, you have to get rid of the executives.

Its not just enough throw money at them. It gives you a sense of how profound the challenge is—just analogizing Bob Rubin for a second, in a country where market capitalism has as much power as it does in the U.S., whether the villain of the piece is GM or Robert Rubin and Citigroup, it is bigger than any one person, its a system you have to fight. It’s the mark of their power—residual power of the system. Even when the system as come to a crisis of its own making, and your president as attractive and intelligent as Barack Obama, the institutional practice to reappoint the same standards are overwhelming. It is only when Obama looks over the cliff of the failure of his own administration because he has not thought boldly enough, that he may change his plans and move in a more radical direction.

So far the direction whether its taxing rich people, he has moved and is disappointing. The same thing was true of the Roosevelt administration in the beginning. All you can do is hope the pressure from folks like us, ordinary people and social movements, and from the dire circumstances we face ,will push the ministration in a more progressive direction.
- Robert Kuttner


The point that Robert Kuttner made, the bottom line for that is the fatal alliance between the American auto industry and the oil industry. It was the auto industry that bought up public transportation in Los Angeles and other cities after the World War II, and tore it down some people would not have public transportation and would have to have oils to drive cars.
- Michael Hudson


when anybody comes looking for a long, whoever has the money has the leverage. We know that from the International Monetary Fund and you know that from your local bank. They set the conditions for that loan. When you look at deals that have been negotiated, not just by Henry Paulson, but also by Tim Geithner, you know hes the one that negotiated, really the key person on the JP Morgan-Bear Sterns deal. He was also central in the AIG deal. And what we see again and again, taxpayers have taken on enormous risks from these companies. But they have not been exerting control in terms of reregulating the sector as a whole. Because the sector as whole lining up for these equity deals, emergency loan.

When exactly is the Re-regulation going to happen? is there any conditions attached to these loans. This is the moment of high leverage. It is not just about firing the boss and seats on the board, it is about we re-regulating exactly what Larry Summers and Tim Geithner de-regulated under the Clinton administration. The real question is do these people have the humility to fix their own mistakes? My question is his Larry Summers’ ego too big to fail? These guys should not be promoted at this point. Their reputations should really be destroyed by their own track records.
All these people are constantly talking about how brilliant the art despite the dismal track record in this country and other countries in which they have meddled including South Korea and Russia.

The key issue here is Obama is coming to these decisions because he is under enormous pressure from above, Wall Street, how do you transition from a pro Obama campaign movement to an independent social movement that puts will counter-pressure on him from below? Those are the conditions under which Roosevelt sold the new deal as a compromise to elite. We do not have those dynamics right now. We have a situation where we have super-fans for Obama, constantly apologizing for every decision that he makes versus a gloves-off elite who are putting real pressure on him behind the scenes. And we are seeing the result.
- Naomi Klein


Discussion: Naomi Klein, Robert Kuttner, Michael Hudson

Naomi Klein, Investigative journalist and author of “The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.”

Robert Kuttner, Veteran economic journalist and the cofounder and coeditor of The American Prospect magazine. His latest book is called “Obama’s Challenge: America’s Economic Crisis and the Power of a Transformative Presidency.”

Michael Hudson, president of the Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends, Distinguished Research Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City and author of “Super-Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire.” He is the chief economic adviser to Rep. Dennis Kucinich.

- from democracynow. 25 Nov 2008

Private Cars in China up 28% in 2008

In Car, China, ToMl, Transportation on August 28, 2009 at 7:42 am

The total number of cars for civilian use in China rose 24.5% in 2008 from 2007 to 24.38 million, according to data released by the National Bureau of Statistics of China. Private-owned cars numbered 19.47 million, representing a 28.0% increase over 2007.

The total number of motor vehicles for civilian use reached 64.67 million (including 14.92 million tri-wheel motor vehicles and low-speed trucks) by the end of 2008, up 13.5%, of which private-owned vehicles numbered 41.73 million, up 18.1%.

Passenger traffic on all modes of transportation climbed 8.2% year-on-year to 23,372.2 million person-kilometers. Of that, highway passenger traffic increased 9.8% to 12,636.0 million person-kilometers, representing 54% of all passenger traffic. Rail passenger traffic increased 7.8% to 7,778.6 million person-kilometers, civil aviation passenger traffic increased 3.3% to 2,882.8 million person-kilometers, and waterway traffic dropped 3.8% to 74.8 million person-kilometers.

China’s GDP grew 9.0% year-on-year in 2008 to 30.067 trillion yuan (US$4.4 trillion), up by 9.0 percent over the previous year. That growth rate represented a sharp drop from the 2006 to 2007 growth of 13.0%.

- from greencarcongress. 27 Feb 2009

People of China please dont mimic west.
Please try to reduce your travel.

Replacing radioactive strontium batteries

In Norway, Nuclear, ToMl on August 27, 2009 at 10:33 am

the Governor of Murmansk Oblast Yury Yevdokimov and his Norwegian counterpart Finnmark County Governor Gunnar Kjønnøy met in Kirkenes to discuss further cooperation within nuclear safety projects. The successful project of removing radioactive strontium batteries from lighthouses will now be adopted in the Baltic Sea.
Norway will grant 62 million NOK to nuclear safety projects in Russia in 2009.

So far Norway has granted 130 million NOK to infrastructure improvements at the nuclear waste storage facility in Andreeva Bay on the Kola Peninsula. This year focus will be on building of a training center and a canteen for 100 workers and also improvements in the electricity supply to the bay from the naval town Zaozersk. The Norwegian side plans to spend another 8-10 million NOK on this project in 2009-2010.

Yevdokimov believes that removal of the nuclear waste form the storage facility can begin in 2010. The harbor facilities have been upgraded, and a an Italian project partner is engaged in building of a special boat that can transport containers with waste from the bay to the railroad for further transportation to the Mayak plant outside Chelyabinsk. He underlines the degree of difficulty connected with the work, and says that it will take years to clear the storage facility.

Since 2001 169 radioactive strontium batteries (RTGs) have been removed from light houses along the coast of the Kola Peninsula and in the White Sea area. The radioactive sources have been replaced with solar cell technology. Only 11 RTGs remain. These are located in difficult accessible places and will be removed in course of 2009. The last RTGs will be removed from Vaygach Island in August under a ceremony where representatives from both the Russian and Norwegian governments are expected to participate.

Based on the successful cooperation in the Norwegian-Russian project on replacing radioactive strontium batteries with solar panels in lighthouses along the White Sea and Barents Sea coast, the two governors have been asked to be project leaders in a similar program in the Baltic Sea.

RTGs will be removed from 79 lighthouses in the Gulf of Finland and eight on the coast of Kaliningrad.

An agreement on the project is expected to be signed in March by Yevdokimov, Kjønnøy and Commander of the Russian Baltic Fleet, who owns and operates the Baltic Sea lighthouses. The first 22 RTGs are planned to be removed this year.

- from barentsobserver. 25 Feb 2009

Areva’s profit is slashing

In Nuclear, Olkiluoto, ToMl on August 27, 2009 at 5:22 am

The construction of the OL3 EPR reactor at Olkiluoto in Finland has been such a disaster, it is now directly impacting on the builder’s profits. French nuclear clowns Areva have today announced that their profits have been slashed by 20 per cent on last year, from 743 million euros to 589 million.

This single reactor – initially projected to cost three billion Euros – has now accumulated 1.7 billion euros in losses for the company who want to sell EPR reactors to the rest of the world. And this figure excludes the 2.4 billion euros that OL3’s buyers – Finnish utility TVO – are claiming in damages from Areva for massive schedule and cost overruns, and general all-round incompetence.

If the claim goes against Areva, OL3 could end up costing the company more than it was paid to build it. How’s that for nuclear economics?

- from greenpeace. 26 Feb 2009

Eco-City Melbourne

In Australia, Social, ToMl on August 27, 2009 at 5:08 am

A VISION for a suburb of the future with no cars, an 80 per cent reduction in carbon emissions and the ability to grow its own food has been unveiled by a State Government-funded thinktank. And it could happen on a site just two kilometres from the centre of Melbourne.

A 20-hectare site for the new green suburb has even been identified on land owned by VicTrack, the government body that owns the state’s rail assets. The lease on the site known as E-Gate, just off Footscray Road, expires in 2014 and Major Projects Victoria has been working with VicTrack on possibilities for the land.

Now, the Victorian Eco-Innovation Lab, a university-based thinktank funded by the Government, has come up with ideas for a new environmentally friendly suburb at the site.

An exhibition of the proposals from 200 university students, known as Eco-City Melbourne

The lab’s director Professor Chris Ryan said a new sustainable suburb could be created at E-Gate, including a ban on cars.

“No cars on the site — the site is made for walking, cycling and we are going to provide on the site free, small, electric vehicles that can be picked up by any resident on the site and roamed around on the site,” he said.

He said it was only a 25-minute walk to the central business district and there would be cars available on the suburb’s fringe for residents to book. “If this was a standard development, you would have 4000-5000 cars.”

Professor Ryan said the medium-density suburb would have buildings of up to eight storeys and a centralised heating and cooling system.

He said the site would also treat all its own sewage and use some of the resultant methane for power production. There would also be urban wind towers and solar panels to produce electricity.

Another innovative feature would be the suburb’s ability to produce food, with mini urban-farms spread across the development and a “multi-storey farm”.

- from theage. 25 Feb 2009

What Is Science

In Science, ToMl on August 26, 2009 at 5:24 pm

Science is, in one sense, our knowledge of all the stuff that is in the universe: from the tiniest subatomic particles in a single atom of the metal in your computer’s circuits, to the nuclear reactions that formed the immense ball of gas that is our sun, to the complex chemical interactions and electrical fluctuations within your own body that allow you to read and understand these words. science is also a reliable process by which we learn about all that stuff in the universe.

Science relies on testing ideas with evidence gathered from the natural world.

Science helps satisfy the natural curiosity with which we are all born: why is the sky blue, how did the leopard get its spots, what is a solar eclipse? With science, we can answer such questions without resorting to magical explanations.

And science can lead to technological advances.

Science focuses exclusively on the natural world, and does not deal with supernatural explanations.

Science is a way of learning about what is in the natural world, how the natural world works, and how the natural world got to be the way it is. It is not simply a collection of facts; rather it is a path to understanding.

Scientists work in many different ways, but all science relies on testing ideas by figuring out what expectations are generated by an idea and making observations to find out whether those expectations hold true.

Accepted scientific ideas are reliable because they have been subjected to rigorous testing, but as new evidence is acquired and new perspectives emerge these ideas can be revised.

Science is a community endeavor. It relies on a system of checks and balances, which helps ensure that science moves in the direction of greater accuracy and understanding. This system is facilitated by diversity within the scientific community, which offers a broad range of perspectives on scientific ideas.

- from berkeley

Congo, a country with huge natural resources, but

In Congo, Neo-colonialism, ToMl, war on August 26, 2009 at 3:20 pm

Congo itself is located in the heart of Africa. It’s literally and figuratively the fulcrum on which Africa swings. It’s the size of western Europe, bordered by nine other African countries. So, when something happens in the Congo, it affects not only its neighbors, but the entire African continent. And it’s the geostrategic storehouse of minerals that are central or vital to the functioning of modern technology, as well as the US and Western aerospace and military industries. So it’s a critical country not only for the African continent, but for the world as a whole.

the latest development is a result of what’s been transpiring for the last twelve years or so. The central question that we see in the Congo is, who’s going to control Congo’s wealth, and for whose benefit? Wangari Maathai, the Nobel laureate, said that these wars, when you look at them, it’s about who’s going to control the resources. And this conflict in the Congo that we see today is a resource conflict.

And the latest expression of this resource conflict is Laurent Nkunda’s rebel group, that is trying to capture and control resource-rich areas in eastern Congo, that’s backed up by the Rwandan government, who has invaded the Congo twice, first in 1996 and again in 1998, with the full backing of the United States and other Western nations. And this is according to congressional testimony that was held in 2001 when Cynthia McKinney and Tom Tancredo had hearings on the situation in the Congo, where you had experts under oath documenting US involvement or backing of the invasions.

Nkunda is a former member of the Rwandan military. He had fought with Rwandan Patriotic forces when they replaced the so-called Hutu regime in 1994. He is also under an executive order from President Bush, who outlined that he should be called for or brought to justice for committing war crimes. And he’s heading up a group called the Congress—or the National Congress for the Defense of the People. So he and his group is made up of about 6,000 rebel forces, which is a key point, because these conflicts are often presented as Africans warring against each other, but what we have here is a small group—6,000 in a nation of nearly 60 million—that’s getting strong support by one of US’s staunchest allies in the region, Rwanda.

a number of weapons traders in the area. From 2001 to 2003, the United Nations documented the trades of arms in the Congo. It identified individuals such as George Forrest out of Belgium, also looked at eastern European nations that are involved in arms trades in the region.

Congo is endowed with spectacular natural resources that are vital to the functioning of modern society. We can take, for example, cobalt, of which Congo has a third of the world’s reserve of cobalt. Cobalt—the Congressional Budget Office says cobalt is a strategic mineral for the US’s aerospace and military industries. For those of us who are concerned about environmentally friendly cars, such as the hybrid, cobalt is a central mineral for the functioning of the batteries in those cars. You have about 2.5 kilograms of cobalt in a Toyota Prius, for example.

You have coltan, or columbite-tantalite. Congo has anywhere from 64 to 80 percent of the world’s reserve of this mineral, which is found in almost every cell phone. It’s found in the video games that our children play. It’s found in the airbags in our automobiles, and the air suspension brakes. It’s actually the wonder resource or wonder mineral of our time.

You have tin, which is vital to the functioning of our computers and laptops. So there are a number of strategic minerals that are found in the Congo that are key to the functioning of modern society and modern industries.

the different forces that came into the Congo—you have to understand, Congo was invaded in 1996, where Laurent Kabila, the father, was installed, and then invaded again in 1998, when Kabila fell out with his backers, Rwanda and Uganda. As a result of the second invasion in ’98, Kabila reached out to its SADC members, Southern African Development Community members, Angola and Zimbabwe, to come to the rescue and forestall Rwanda’s and Uganda’s effort to overthrow him.

Here we have again today, where we see Rwanda backing Nkunda, Nkunda vowing to go all the way to Kinshasa, and Angola has said, “Well, we’re not going to allow that to happen again. We’re going to step in.” So, now you see Angolans coming in. That’s why in today’s New York Times editorial, it warns about a regional war occurring as a result of Rwanda’s backing of Nkunda and Angola now saying that it’s going to come into the fray.

there are 17,000 peacekeepers, UN peacekeepers, in eastern Congo. They are being kept there or maintained there to the tune of a billion dollars a year. However, Congo is the size of western Europe. You have about one peacekeeper for every 10,000 people or so. So they have a daunting task to try and bring about peace and stability in the region. So they’ve had difficulty protecting the civilian population. So you have—Nkunda’s troops are really running circles around the UN troops. In addition to that, UN troops, their mandate is limited. They don’t have an offensive mandate. So that makes it even more difficult for them to rout the rebel forces of Laurent Nkunda.

the issue is not even so much the UN forces. What we see in the Congo is policies coming from the West that prioritize profit over the people. Kabila, himself, was installed in 2006, in elections that were held in the Congo, with the full backing of the Western powers, to the exclusion of the pro-democracy and grassroots forces inside the Congo. So you hear today experts in the media saying, “Well, Kabila should control the country, or he should do more with his own troops,” who have been also been accused of committing atrocities. But it’s not in the political DNA of the Kabila government to govern. The government actually reigns, but it does not govern. And when it was put in place by the Western nations, they knew very well what the outcome would be, because he was put in place in order to provide unfettered access for Congo’s vast mineral resources to Western corporations. And this has been documented by—in Foreign Policy magazine back in 2006 by Paule Bouvier and [Pierre] Englebert. They clearly stated that the US and Western nations were prioritizing stability over democracy. We argued at that time that the result—that the US or the Western nations would get neither stability nor democracy, because the policies were flawed in the first place.

Are they going to go from a—look at Africa from a perspective of charity and militarization, or are they going to look at Africa from a perspective of justice?

Put justice and the people as priorities and radically change and fundamentally change the way the United States and Western nations deal with the African continent.

Maurice Carney talking with Amy Goodman

Maurice Carney is with the organization Friends of the Congo.

- from democracynow. 13 Nov 2008

Polluting Maritime Shipping industry

In Ship, ToMl, Transportation on August 26, 2009 at 9:51 am

Globally, commercial ships emit almost half as much particulate matter pollutants into the air as the total amount released by the world’s cars, according to a new study led by NOAA and the University of Colorado at Boulder. Ship pollutants affect local air quality and the health of people living along coastlines. The findings appear online this week in the Journal of Geophysical Research.

The study is the first to provide a global estimate of maritime shipping’s total contribution to air particle pollution based on direct measurements of emissions. The authors estimate that globally, ships emit 0.9 teragrams, or about 2.2 million pounds, of particle pollution each year.

“Since more than 70 percent of shipping traffic takes place within 250 miles of the coastline, this is a significant health concern for coastal communities,” said study lead-author Daniel Lack, a researcher with the NOAA-supported CU Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, based at NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory.

Earlier research by one of the study’s authors, James Corbett, of the University of Delaware, linked particle pollution to premature deaths among coastal populations.

During the summer of 2006, Lack and colleagues, aboard the NOAA ship Ronald H. Brown, analyzed the exhaust from more than 200 commercial vessels, including cargo ships, tankers and cruise ships, in the Gulf of Mexico, Galveston Bay, and the Houston Ship Channel.

The researchers also examined the chemistry of particles in ship exhaust to understand what makes ships such hefty polluters.

Ships emit sulfates, the same particles associated with diesel-engine cars and trucks which motivated improvements in on-road vehicle fuel standards. Sulfate emissions from ships vary with the concentration of sulfur in ship fuel, the authors found. Globally, fuel sulfur content is regulated under the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships. As a result, some ships use “cleaner,” low-sulfur fuels, while others continue to use the high-sulfur counterparts.

Yet, sulfates make up just under half of shipping’s total particle emissions, according to the NOAA-CU study. Organic pollutants and sooty, black carbon, which make up the other half of emissions, are not directly targeted by today’s regulations. A 2008 study by Lack’s team focused exclusively on soot.

Emissions of these non-sulfate particles, the study found, depend on the operating speed of the engine and the amount of lubricating oil needed to deal with wear and tear from burning less-refined fuels.

“Fortunately, engines burning ‘cleaner,’ low-sulfur fuels tend to require less complex lubricants. So the sulfur fuel regulations have the indirect effect of reducing the organic particles emitted,” said Corbett.

One surprising result of burning low-sulfur fuels: while total particle emissions diminish, the time the remaining particles spend in the air appears to increase. It’s while they’re airborne that particles pose a risk to human health and affect climate.

Lack and colleagues found that the organic and black carbon portion of ship exhaust is less likely to form cloud droplets. As a result, these particles remain suspended for longer periods of time before being washed to the ground through precipitation.

NOAA-supported Cooperative Institutes are academic and nonprofit research institutions that demonstrate the highest level of performance and conduct research that supports NOAA’s Mission Goals and Strategic Plan.
NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.

- from noaanews. 26 Feb 2009

No clear record of nuclear materials

In Nuclear, ToMl, USA on August 26, 2009 at 7:29 am

A number of U.S. institutions with licenses to hold nuclear material reported to the Energy Department in 2004 that the amount of material they held was less than agency records indicated. But rather than investigating the discrepancies, Energy officials wrote off significant quantities of nuclear material from the department’s inventory records.

That’s just one of the findings of a report released yesterday by Energy Department Inspector General Gregory Friedman that concluded “the department cannot properly account for and effectively manage its nuclear materials maintained by domestic licensees and may be unable to detect lost or stolen material.”

Auditors found that Energy could not accurately account for the quantities and locations of nuclear material at 15 out of 40, or 37 percent, of facilities reviewed. The materials written off included 20,580 grams of enriched uranium, 45 grams of plutonium, 5,001 kilograms of normal uranium and 189,139 kilograms of depleted uranium.

“Considering the potential health risks associated with these materials and the potential for misuse should they fall into the wrong hands, the quantities written off were significant,” the report says. “Even in small quantities normally held by individual domestic licensees, special nuclear materials such as enriched uranium and plutonium, if not properly handled, potentially pose serious health hazards.”

Auditors also found that waste processing facilities could not locate or explain the whereabouts of significant quantities of uranium and other nuclear material that Energy Department records showed they held. In another case, Energy officials had no record of the fact that one academic institution had loaned a 32-gram plutonium-beryllium source to another institution.

The audit was a follow-up to a 2001 probe that found similar record-keeping problems. “Key commitments made by the department were not completed nearly eight years after our earlier audit,” Friedman reported.

More than 100 academic and commercial institutions and government agencies lease nuclear materials that are owned by Energy. The department, along with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, is supposed to track these materials through the centralized accounting system known as the Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards System, or NMMSS.

“Due to the inconsistencies documented in our report, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the department to accurately identify the type and quantity of its nuclear materials affected if an incident occurred at one of the sites whose NMMSS inventory we could not verify,” the inspector general stated in Monday’s report.

In a written response to the report, Glenn Podonsky, the chief health, safety and security officer at Energy, largely concurred with the findings and recommendations for improving inventory records.

- from globalsecuritynewswire. 24 Feb 2009

Romania and Bulgaria in illegal nuclear state aid accusations

In Nuclear, ToMl on August 26, 2009 at 7:25 am

Both the Bulgarian and Romanian governments today find themselves accused offering hundred of millions of euros in illegal state aid to the nuclear industry in violation of the EC Treaty.

In order to build the Cernavoda 3 and 4 reactors, the Romania government announced in August 2008 plans for loan guarantees to the Romanian state utility S.N. Nuclearelectrica for loans totalling 220 million euros, a payment of 350 million euros from the state budget for the provision of heavy water for the Cernavoda nuclear power plant between 2009 and 2012, and 800 million of direct investment from the country’s National Development Fund which is also part of the state budget.

In October last year, the Bulgarian Government announced the allocation of
300 Million Bulgarian Leva (154.5 million euros) from the state budget to state-owned energy group Bulgarian Energy Holding EAD and the National Electric Company (NEK) with the purpose of constructing of a new nuclear power plant at Belene. In December 2008, the Bulgarian Government announced a further allocation of 400 Million Bulgarian Leva (205 million euros) from the state budget for increasing the capital of Bulgarian Energy Holding.

At least the two governments can’t be accused of cover-up on this occasion. They made the announcements in public decrees (Decree 259 in Bulgaria and Decision 643/2007 in Romania).

The allocations of these massive sums favour the countries’ respective nuclear industries and so distort their energy markets. This is where Romania and Bulgaria risk violating the EC Treaty. How are other energy generators expected to compete against such blatant bias? Where are the similar sums for energy efficiency programmes and renewable energy technologies?

The Romanian and Bulgarian governments want to hand massive financial advantages to the nuclear industry in return for what? Certainly not energy security, jobs or meeting carbon emissions targets. Can’t the nuclear industry operate without these massive subsidies? If not, why not, is the question you should be asking yourself. Again.

- from greenpeace. 25 Feb 2009

Climate-ecology attribution chain

In Climate Change, ToMl on August 26, 2009 at 7:18 am

Many are obviously curious about whether certain current regional environmental changes are traceable to global climate change. There are a number of large-scale changes that clearly qualify—rapid warming of the arctic/sub-arctic regions for example, and earlier spring onset in the northern hemisphere and the associated phenological changes in plants and animals. But as one moves to smaller scales of space or time, global-to-local connections become more difficult to establish. This is due to the combined effect of the resolutions of climate models, the intrinsic variability of the system and the empirical climatic, environmental, or ecological data—the signal to noise ratio of possible causes and observed effects. Thus recent work by ecologists, climate scientists, and hydrologists in the western United States relating global climate change, regional climate change, and regional ecological change is of great significance. Together, their results show an increasing ability to link the chain at smaller and presumably more viscerally meaningful and politically tractable scales.

For instance, a couple of weeks ago, a paper in Science by Phil van Mantgem of the USGS, and others, showed that over the last few decades, background levels of tree mortality have been increasing in undisturbed old-growth forests in the western United States, without the accompanying increase in tree “recruitment” (new trees) that would balance the ledger over time. Background mortality is the regular ongoing process of tree death, un-related to the more visible, catastrophic mortality caused by such events as fires, insect attacks, and windstorms, and typically is less than 1% per year. It is that portion of tree death due to the direct and indirect effects of tree competition, climate (often manifest as water stress), and old age. Because many things can affect background mortality, van Mantgem et. al. were very careful to minimize the potential for other possible explanatory variables via their selection of study sites, while still maintaining a relatively long record over a wide geographic area. These other possible causes include, especially, increases in crowding (density; a notorious confounding factor arising from previous disturbances and/or fire suppression), and edge effects (trees close to an
opening experience a generally warmer and drier micro-climate than those in the forest interior).

They found that in each of three regions, the Pacific Northwest, California, and the Interior West, mortality rates have doubled in 17 to 29 years (depending on location), and have been doing so across all dominant species, all size classes, and all elevations. The authors show with downscaled climate information that the increasing mortality rates likely corresponds to summer soil moisture stress increases over that time that are driven by increases in temperature with little or no change in precipitation in these regions. Fortunately, natural background mortality rates in western forests are typically less than 0.5% per year, so rate doublings over ~20-30 years, by themselves, will not have large immediate impacts. What the longer term changes will be is an open question however, depending on future climate and tree recruitment/mortality rates. Nevertheless, the authors have shown clearly that mortality rates have been increasing over the last ~30 years. Thus the $64,000 question: are these changes attributable in part or all to human-induced global warming?

Yes, argues a pair of December papers in the Journal of Climate, and a 2008 work in Science. The studies, by Bonfils et. al. (2008), Pierce et. al. (2008), and Barnett et. al. (2008), link observed western temperature and temperature-induced snowmelt processes to human-forced (greenhouse gases, ozone, and aerosols) global climate changes. The authors used various combinations of three GCMs, two statistical downscaling techniques (to account for micro-climate effects that aren’t resolved in the GCMs), and a high resolution hydrology model to experiment with the various possible causes of the observed climatic changes and the robustness of the methods. The possible causes included the usual list of suspects: natural climatic variability, the human-induced forcings just mentioned, and non-human forcings (solar and volcanic). Climate models were chosen specifically for their ability to account for important, natural climatic fluctuations in the western US that influence temperature, precipitation and snowpack dynamics, particularly the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, and El Niño/La Niña oscillations, and/or their ability to generate the daily climatic values necessary for input to the hydrologic model. The relevant climate variables included various subsets of minimum and maximum daily temperatures from January to March (JFM), their corresponding monthly averages, degree days (days with mean T>0ºC), and the ratio of Snow Water Equivalent (SWE) to water year precipitation (P). In each case, multiple hundred year control runs were generated with two GCMs to isolate the natural variability, and then forced runs from previous model intercomparison projects were used to identify the impacts of the various forcings.

The results? The authors estimate that about 50% of the April 1 SWE equivalent, and 60% of river discharge date advances and January-to-March temperature increases, cannot be accounted for by either natural variability or non-human forcings. Bonfils et al also note that the decreases in SWE are due to January-to-March temperature increases, not winter precipitation decreases, as the observational record over the last several decades shows. The April snow is a key variable, for along with spring through early fall temperatures, it has a great bearing on growing season soil moisture status throughout the western United States, and thus directly on forest productivity and demographic processes.

- from realclimate. 19 Feb 2009

Michael Moore talking

In Democracy, ToMl, USA on August 25, 2009 at 3:23 pm

Michigan, one of the hardest hit areas of the nation, Michigan’s unemployment now at 8.7 percent.

Thousands and thousands of jobs, more jobs, are going to be eliminated, on top of the already thousands of more jobs that will be eliminated in the next few years because General Motors and Chrysler build twentieth century vehicles that either nobody wants or we shouldn’t be building, considering the climate crisis that’s in front of us.

It happened because the workers don’t control the means of production.

If the autoworkers, years and years ago, could have had a say in the cars that were being built, the Big Three would have built cars that people wanted to drive, instead of the kind of crappy-mobiles that they continue to build, the gas-guzzlers they continue to build. And people wanted something different, and nobody listened, because the auto companies were arrogant, and they had—they have always had the attitude that what’s good for— the old saying—General Motors is good for the country. Well, the country changed; General Motors didn’t change. And so, now the people have suffered as a result of it. If we had a democratic economy, where the people, we the people, had a say in the decisions that are made, in terms of how our corporations are run, the things that they produce for our society, what we need collectively as a society, we probably wouldn’t find ourselves in some of the positions that we’re in right now.

I don’t call it a bailout. This is a robbery. They are looting the US Treasury. I can’t believe that they’ve gotten away with it so far. They, over the last eight years, but really over the last twenty-eight years, have operated in a matter—I don’t know how quite to describe Wall Street, but just imagine a bunch of junkies just putting more junk into their system and constantly in some kind of feeding frenzy to get more of that junk. And it’s like the US Congress just decided to take a big hypodermic needle and give them another injection—a word they actually like to use—of the junk, of the heroin. I think that—nothing has made me more upset, other than the war, in the last umpteen years, and it’s—I start to think about it, and my brain starts to expand.

Anyone who tries to make a profit from healthcare will be arrested.

It should be a crime to make a profit off somebody being sick. I mean, seriously, you know, 100, 200 years from now, anthropologists, they’re going to dig us up, and they’re going to wonder, who were these people? Look at—they’re going to say, “Look at this. When somebody got sick in their society, they actually made them fork over money so that somebody else could make a profit off the fact that they got cancer or had a broken arm or, you know, was in a car accident, or whatever.” I mean, we’re going to look awfully cruel, and they’re not going to understand why we would do such a thing, why we just wouldn’t take care of people, why that wouldn’t be essentially a human right. So, you know, I think it should be a crime. And I’m hoping that we have a universal healthcare system that is nonprofit. Nonprofit, nobody should be making any money off this.

The French pay such low taxes, I’d like us to pay as little—as few taxes as they pay. Of course, when you say that, people are going, “What? He must have had that wrong.” And, of course, see, on paper, we don’t call a lot of things taxes. So, it sometimes looks like we pay more taxes than the Europeans, but their taxes cover real things. They get something back for the taxes they pay for. So if you live in France, your healthcare is completely free, your college is completely free, and that’s any college, a technical—all the way from a technical college to the Sorbonne, you go for free. Child care is free or almost free, depending on what your income level is. And the list goes on and on and on. And that’s why, you know, out of all the demonstrating and the rioting that goes on in France over various things, you never see them demonstrating over paying too high of taxes. And why is that? Well, that’s because they get something for it.

We have to pay for our kids’ college education. We have to pay, if you’re not covered by a group plan by your employer—and even then, you know, essentially, you’re paying for it, because you could maybe getting that money in wages. Obviously, we have to pay for our own childcare, all these other things. You know, if you add up what the average person pays, if you’re buying your own healthcare insurance, average family pays $1,000 a month. If you’re—what are you paying on your college loan? I mean, you know, people anywhere from $200 to $800 a month maybe on their college loan. How much do you pay in daycare every week for your kids? A couple hundred bucks? More? Probably. But we don’t call those taxes. But if you add all that up, in addition to the income tax we do pay, we pay more than the French and the Germans and the people in these other countries.

So, what I’m suggesting is, is that we start to look at this whole tax thing in a different way. And I understand why Americans, you know, don’t like to pay taxes, other than their own, you know, self-absorption sometimes and a sort of “me, me, me” society that we live in, whereas these other societies are constructed more around the word “we.” Even though that’s the first word of our founding document—“We the people”—it really is about me, me, getting me, getting my, myself, me, my, my, looking out for yourself. “Hey, I got mine; you get yours. Hey, you’re not my problem; I’ve got to take care of myself. You take care of yourself.” You know, that’s kind of the American way of looking at things. That’s not the way they look at things all the time in some of these other countries. And so, maybe if we thought a little differently about this and if Americans actually saw some—I mean, ask the average person what are you getting for your taxes that you’re paying, you know, $10 billion a month are going to the Iraq war. I mean, people can’t even get their potholes fixed here in Michigan on the roads, let alone, you know, being—having any good feelings about, you know, what they’re getting when they’re paying taxes.

there’s over a billion people on this planet that don’t have access to clean drinking water. You know, what if we made it an American mission to make sure that the entire third world had clean drinking water? One of the statistics I read was it would cost about $10 per person in the third world of people who don’t have the clean drinking water right now. So, that’s—geez, that’s $10 times a billion people? $10 billion. That’s just October in Iraq. For the money that we’re spending in Iraq in October, we could provide clean drinking water to most of the people that don’t have it. And I, as an American, would rather be known by the people who are struggling to survive in the third world as the country that gave them clean drinking water or gave them other things that they need to help them in their daily existence to survive. I think most Americans would rather be known for that. Instead, we’re known as the invaders and the occupiers and the people who prop up the regimes in these countries, and I’m tired of that. I’m really tired of it.

I think a lot of people don’t realize that those who make over $102,000 a year pay no Social Security tax on any of that money they make over $102,000. I think people think that that’s just a flat tax, whatever it is. I forget what the percentage is now, something like six-and-a-half, seven percent that’s on your paycheck that goes to Social Security. It’s a flat tax that everyone pays, so it doesn’t matter, you know, if you make $25,000 a year or $55,000 a year or $75,000 a year, you’re paying that—that percentage of your income automatically goes to Social Security. But once you reach $102,000, you’re home free, you don’t pay anything, zero, after $102,000. Why isn’t everyone’s income, all their income, taxed for Social Security? Because I’ve got to tell you, a person who’s making a million dollars a year, they can afford to pay the Social Security tax on that amount over $102,000, but it’s a lot harder for a person making $25,000 a year to have almost seven percent of their income go to Social Security. That’s a big bite out of them.

Senator Dodd, his staff did the research on this, and he actually brought it up in one of the debates—if the rich paid the same Social Security tax—not more- tomorrow, if we had that money, tomorrow, there’d be enough money in Social Security until something like 2075. Almost to the next century, we’d have enough money in Social Security. There’d be no Social Security solvency problem. The reason we have the problem is because the rich don’t pay. They don’t pay their fair and equal share.

Bush and his Wall Street cronies wanted to take people’s Social Security, privatize it, put it into these private accounts, and put it into the stock market. That’s what he wanted to do four years ago. That was the—it was the first thing he tried to do when he got elected for the first time there in 2004, when he was elected. And he was going to—our money—just imagine, our Social Security would be in the stock market crash right now. Thank God that didn’t happen. But that’s the way they think, and I think a different way.

Michael Moore talking with Amy Goodman

Michael Moore, Academy Award-winning filmmaker, author and activist. His new book is Mike’s Election Guide ’08, and his new online film is called Slacker Uprising: A Look at the Youth Vote. His earlier books, Stupid White Men…And Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation and Dude, Where’s My Country? His other films, among them, Fahrenheit 911, as well as Sicko, and, of course, Roger and Me shot Michael Moore to fame.

- from democracynow. 31 Oct 2008

Coolerado air conditioners

In Air Conditioning, ToMl on August 24, 2009 at 2:44 pm

howcooleradoworks500The Coolerado air conditioner uses a thermodynamic cycle called the Maisotsenko Cycle (M-Cycle) that capitalizes on natural, clean energy – psychrometric energy – found in our atmosphere. This cycle can improve any energetic or refrigeration cycle.

The patented Coolerado heat and mass exchanger was developed to economically take advantage of the M-Cycle. A heat and mass exchanger (HMX) consists of several plates of a special plastic that is designed to wick water evenly on one side and transfer heat through the other side. The plates are stacked on each other, separated by channel guides.

The purpose of the channel guides is to provide structure to the exchanger as well as direct air movement within the HMX. The channel guides divide the incoming air stream into product air and working air. The product air is always separate from the working air and stays within dry channels the entire length of the exchanger. The product air is cooled sensibly (rejecting its heat to the working air), and can be designed to cool below the wet bulb temperature of the incoming air stream. The product air travels the distance of the exchanger and into the space designated for cooling.

The working air initially enters dry channels where it is pre-cooled sensibly before it is fractioned into multiple streams which are directed into wet channels. The heat from the product air is transferred to the working air in the wet channels by means of evaporation (mass transfer and state change). The heat is exhausted out the sides of the HMX and then to the atmosphere.

Because the heat from the product air is rejected to the working air through heat exchange surfaces in the exchanger, the product air only experiences sensible cooling – cooling without adding humidity. The product air stream is completely separate from the working air and never comes in contact with a wetted surface. This process occurs multiple times in a short physical space within the exchanger, resulting in progressively colder product and working air temperatures.

The HMX system is modular, so the size and shape of a Coolerado air conditioner can be changed to meet user requirements. The Coolerado computer modeling program can be used to design for specific needs. In addition, the product air to working air ratio can be adjusted for a particular application.

- from coolerado

Travel to Antarctica is increasing

In Antarctica, ToMl, Tourism on August 24, 2009 at 2:26 pm

Recreational travel is growing in Antarctica, and is raising concern over the safety of the place. According to Clarin newspaper, the number of cruise ships that are navigating this area has gone from 35 in the early ’90s to 258 last summer, and in the same period five accidents have been registered.

Some might say that tourism can create awareness over subjects such as climate change, but it’s h