Oil Spill In The Gulf Of Spewexico – How many times must this happen

This just in from Mobile Alabama:

http://blog.al.com/live/2010/05/gulf_of_mexico_has_plenty_of_f.html

Breaking News from the Press-Register
Local news updates from Mobile and surrounding communities

Gulf of Mexico has plenty of familiarity with oil spills

By Press-Register staff

May 04, 2010, 4:33PM

Oil exploration in the Gulf of Mexico has led to a number of disasters and near disasters over the past 31 years. In some cases, authorities were unable to stamp out fires or stop spills for months; in others, quick action and good luck prevented disasters from becoming worse than they could have been.

ixtoc.jpgView full size(Courtesy NOAA)Stopping the oil from the IXTOC explosion took over nine months.IXTOC (1979)
The IXTOC I was an exploratory well that blew up in the Bay of Campeche on June 3, 1979, after oil and gas feeding from the well ignited. At its height the well may have pumped upwards of 30,000 barrels of oil (1.26 million gallons) into the Gulf a day; currents eventually brought the oil to the Texas shore that August.  Engineers were finally able to cap the well on March 23, 1980.  The spill is the second-largest in history, behind the deliberate oil spills created at the end of the 1991 Gulf War.  Total cleanup costs are estimated at $498 million (about $1.4 billion in 2010 dollars).Burmah Agate.jpgView full size(Courtesy NOAA)The Burmah Agate caught fire after a collision on November 1, 1979, killing 31 sailors.

Burmah Agate (1979)

As the Texas coastline struggled against the fallout from the IXTOC, a new disaster compounded the woes. The Burmah Agate collided with a freighter near Galveston, Texas on November 1, 1979, causing the ship to explode and killing 31 crew members. The ship spilled 2.6 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico and burned for over two months. Megaborg.jpgView full size(Courtesy NOAA)The Megaborg caught fire while fueling a number of smaller ships.

:}

aaaak

Please read the whole article…I had to stop before I suffocated..

:}

The Oil Spill In The Gulf – It could become the U.S’s biggest natural disaster

That’s right. As big as the Love Canal. As Big as 3 Mile Island. As big as the Exxon Valdez. I shudder to think what this could do to the entire Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1269440/Visible-space-giant-oil-slick-oozing-Americas-Gulf-Coast.html

Visible from space, the giant oil slick oozing towards America’s Gulf Coast

By Mail Foreign Service
Last updated at 3:06 PM on 28th April 2010

Creeping just 20 miles from America’s Gulf Coast, this is the mammoth oil slick threatening to become an environmental disaster in a satellite image taken from space.

The spectacle – caught on Nasa’s Aqua satellite using its Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer instrument – is remarkable as oil slicks are usually notoriously difficult to spot using such equipment.

Yet in these images, the spill’s mirror-like reflection as the sun glints off the water is clearly visible.

Enlarge   mout of mississippi Snapshot of disaster: Four hundred miles out in space, Nasa’s Aqua satellite has taken pictures of the oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico caused by the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig.  In this image from Sunday, the centre of it is about even with the mouth of the Mississippi River
The mirror-like sheen of the oil slick is seen in this image taken  from space by NASA's Aquatic satellite The mirror-like sheen of the oil slick is seen in this image taken from space by NASA’s Aquatic satellite

The enormous spill, which was caused by the April 20 explosion and subsequent sinking of the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform, is now around 48 miles long and 80 miles wide. It is believed to be around 600 miles in circumference.

Hundreds of hotel owners, fishermen and restaurateurs are fearing for their livelihoods as the slick edges ever closer to the American Gulf Coast.

Forecasters say the spill could wash ashore within days near delicate wetlands, oyster beds and pristine white beaches.

:}

Please read the entire article. It is really really scary.

And This from LEAN

http://leanweb.org/donate/donate/donate-join.html

The Unified Command (U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, Minerals Management Service, BP and Transocean) had released this statement earlier today:

Responders have scheduled a controlled, on-location burn to begin at approximately 11 a.m. CDT today (April 28, 2010)…. today’s controlled burn will remove oil from the open water in an effort to protect shoreline and marine and other wildlife.
Workboats will consolidate oil into a fire resistant boom approximately 500 feet long. This oil will then be towed to a more remote area, where it will be ignited and burned in a controlled manner. The plan calls for small, controlled burns of several thousand gallons of oil lasting approximately one hour each.

The Unified Command has also made such statements as:

(The burning is) a strategy designed to minimize environmental risks by removing large quantities of oil…

…there are no anticipated impacts to marine mammals and sea turtles.

The vast majority of this slick will be addressed through natural means and through use of chemical dispersants. Today’s burn will not affect other ongoing response activities, such as on-water skimming, dispersant application, and subsurface wellhead intervention operations. Preparations are also underway in Louisiana, Mississippi, Florida and Alabama to set up a protective boom to minimize shoreline impact.

We believe that releases of information from the Unified Command are glossing over the environmental aspects of this oil spill and failing in their duty to provide the public with accurate and unbiased information. From our experience and the experience of all of our colleagues in dealing with oil spills, once the oil is in the water it is impossible to eliminate all environmental impact. We believe that the government agencies in charge must make a full and accurate assessment of the environmental impacts of this spill.

“The vast majority of this slick will be addressed through natural means.” This sounds an awful lot like: The vast majority of the oil slick will be left in the environment. What impact will this have to the Gulf environment?

The chemical dispersants are essentially a soap like material that emulsifies the oil and causes it to sink into the water column and to the sea floor. What impact will this sub-surface oil have on marine life, on the oyster beds and benthic organisms?

Oil booms proved to be pretty ineffective during the fuel-oil barge spill in the Mississippi River in 2008. How effective will booms be in rough seas?

We do agree that burning the slick is preferable to the surface oil coming on to shore but we also ask that the Agencies involved make a full and accurate assessment of the environmental impacts of the burning of the surface oil.

We simply ask that an honest and accurate assessment of the full environmental impacts of this spill be conducted by the relevant government agencies and then released to the public.

To report affected wildlife, call 1-866-557-1401.

For more information regarding the Deepwater Horizon incident, contact the joint information center at (985) 902-5231 or (985) 902-5240.

You can contact us at 1-866-msriver.

:}

God I hate this.

:}

So A Volcano And An Oil Rig Blew Up – So what it was Earth Week

It is true, a Volcano blew up and I did not say a word:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/04/14/iceland.volcano.evacuation/index.html

800 evacuated as Iceland volcano erupts

By the CNN Wire Staff
April 14, 2010 12:38 p.m. EDT

(CNN) — Icelandic authorities evacuated about 800 people early Wednesday when a volcano erupted beneath the Eyjafjallajokull glacier, an emergency spokesman said.

The first evacuations began at 2 a.m. (10 p.m. ET Tuesday), according to Rognvaldur Olafsson, chief inspector at Iceland’s Department of Civil Protection and Emergency Management. He said everyone in the area was safe.

“We have located the fissure that is erupting under the glacier,” Olafsson told CNN. He said scientists are currently doing aerial reconnaissance of the area and that officials would know more when they return.

So far, he said, the eruption has created a large hole in the glacier. Lava is not a big concern but flooding is, he said.

iReport: Are you there? Send your images, videos

Map: Eyjafjallajokull glacier

RELATED TOPICS
  • Iceland

“The volcano is under the glacier, and it’s melting parts of the glacier,” Olafsson said. “The rivers will rise and potentially make some damage.”

iReporter captures footage of eruption

Rivers closest to the glacier have already started rising, he added.

The glacier is the sixth-biggest in Iceland, just to the west of the bigger glacier, Myrdalsjokull. It is about 100 miles (160 km) east of the capital, Reykjavik.

:}

So will it effect the environment. Yes. Anything that disrupts air travel is a good thing because air travel is one of the largest causes of global warming. Will it cool the planet any. Probably not but if Kitra goes off it could be a major event and the last three times “Eyja” went off Kitra did too. So keep on watching folks. Air travel here was disrupted too so it was nice to sit on my swing out back and look at the stars with no blinking jet lights.

:}

And yes, an Oil Rig blew up and sank. What, that doesn’t happen everyday? I guess the gulf needs 42,000 gallons of oil spilled in it every day for God knows how long.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/26/national/main6433600.shtml

NEW ORLEANS, April 26, 2010

Oil Spill Continues; Will Robot Fix Leak?

Officials Wait to See if Unmanned Submarines Can Activate Cut-Off Valves a Mile Below Gulf of Mexico Surface

(CBS/AP)

Authorities continue to monitor the size and direction of a Gulf of Mexico oil sheen by air, while using robotic underwater equipment to try to shut off its source at a wrecked deepwater drilling platform.

The Coast Guard and the companies that owned an operated the rig plan a Monday afternoon news conference in Robert, La., the site of a command center established over the weekend to deal with the crisis.

The oil has been leaking at a rate estimated at 42,000 gallons a day. Workers are trying to make sure the oil doesn’t reach the Gulf Coast’s fragile ecosystem.

An explosion on the floating deep water rig last Tuesday night led to a huge fire and the eventual sinking of the rig. The search for 11 missing workers was called off on Friday.

Crews began using a robot submarine Sunday to try to the leak nearly a mile below the surface, but said it would take at least another day before they knew whether the job was completed.

The Coast Guard said the oil spill was expected to stay 30 miles off the coast for the next several days.

The robot submarines are trying to activate valves at the well head. If that doesn’t work, crews are also planning to drill a relief well to cut off the flow – which could take several months.

What appeared to a manageable spill a couple of days ago after an oil rig exploded and sank off the Louisiana coast Tuesday, has now turned into a more serious environmental problem. The new leak was discovered Saturday, and as much as 1,000 barrels – or 42,000 gallons – of oil is leaking each day, Coast Guard Rear Adm. Mary Landry said.

:}

This is what they want in the artic? If they drill off Virginia, is this what they want coming up Chesapeake Bay?

:}

My Dad Owned 3 Dodge Desotos – In the early and mids 60s

It’s Jam Band Friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdMDexoMSlc

What a difference 50 years make. My dad loved these cars. They weighed a ton, had huge engines and got 10 miles to the gallon when gas was 15 cents a gallon. Now we are switching to electricity. What a world we live in.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CmEpXnjJj0 )


1958 Dodge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeSoto_%28automobile%29

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

1952 DeSoto DeLuxe hood ornament.

The DeSoto (sometimes De Soto) was a brand of automobile based in the United States, manufactured and marketed by the Chrysler Corporation from 1928 to 1961. The DeSoto logo featured a stylized image of Hernando de Soto. The De Soto marque was officially dropped 30 November 1960, with a bit over two million built since 1928.[1]

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sN-srcAgH8 )

The DeSoto make was founded by Walter Chrysler on August 4, 1928, and introduced for the 1929 model year. It was named after the Spanish explorer Hernando de Soto. Chrysler wanted to enter the brand in competition with its arch-rivals General Motors, Studebaker, and Willys-Knight, in the mid-price class.

Shortly after DeSoto was introduced, however, Chrysler completed its purchase of the Dodge Brothers, giving the company two mid-priced makes. Had the transaction been completed sooner, DeSoto never would have been introduced.

Initially, the two-make strategy was relatively successful, with DeSoto priced below Dodge models. Despite the economic times, DeSoto sales were relatively healthy, pacing Dodge at around 25,000 units in 1932. However, in 1933, Chrysler reversed the market positions of the two marques in hopes of boosting Dodge sales. By elevating DeSoto, it received Chrysler’s streamlined 1934 Airflow bodies. But, on the shorter DeSoto wheelbase, the design was a disaster and was unpopular with consumers. Unlike Chrysler, which still had more traditional models to fall back on, DeSoto was hobbled by the Airflow design until the 1935 Airstream arrived.

Aside from its Airflow models, DeSoto’s 1942 model is probably its second most memorable model from the pre-war years, when the cars were fitted with powered pop-up headlights, a first for a North American mass-production vehicle. DeSoto marketed the feature as “Air-Foil” lights “Out of Sight Except at Night”.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGBKy5iMRBw )

After wartime restrictions on automotive production were ended, DeSoto returned to civilian car production when it reissued its 1942 models as 1946 models, but without the hidden-headlight feature, and with fender lines extending into the doors, like other Chrysler products of the immediate postwar period.

Until 1952, DeSoto used the Deluxe and Custom model designations. However, in 1953, DeSoto dropped the Deluxe and Custom names and designated its six-cylinder cars the Powermaster and its V8 car the Firedome.

At its height, DeSoto’s more popular models included the Firedome, Firesweep, and Fireflite. The DeSoto Adventurer, introduced for 1956 as a high-performance hard-top coupe (similar to Chrysler’s 300), became a full-range model in 1960.

DeSotos sold well through the 1956 model year. That year, for the first, and only, time in the marque’s history, it served as Pace Car at the Indianapolis 500.[2] In 1955,[3] along with all Chrysler models, De Sotos were redesigned with Virgil Exner‘s “Forward Look”. Exner gave the DeSoto soaring tailfins fitted with triple taillights, and consumers responded by buying record numbers. The 1957 had a well integrated design, with two variations: the smaller Firesweep, based on the concurrent Dodge; and the Firedome and Fireflite (and its halo model Adventurer sub-series), based on the larger Chrysler body. As was conventional in the era, subsequent years within the typical three year model block were distinguished by trim, bumper, and other low cost modifications, typically by adding bulk to bumpers and grilles, taillight changes, color choices, instrumentation and interior design changes and often additional external trim.

The 1958 economic downturn hurt sales of mid-priced makes across the board, and DeSoto sales were 60 percent lower than those of 1957 in what would be DeSoto’s worst year since 1938. The sales slide continued for 1959 and 1960 (down 40 percent from the already low 1959 figures), and rumors began to circulate DeSoto was going to be discontinued

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY6vxrs_S_o )

By the time the 1961 DeSoto was introduced in the fall of 1960, rumors were widespread that Chrysler was moving towards terminating the brand, fueled by a reduction in model offerings for the 1960 model year.

For 1961, DeSoto lost its series designations entirely, in a move reminiscent of Packard’s final lineup. And, like the final Packards, the final DeSoto was of questionable design merit. Again, based on the shorter Chrysler Windsor wheelbase, the DeSoto featured a two-tiered grille (each tier with a different texture) and revised taillights. Only a two-door hardtop and a four-door hardtop were offered. The cars were trimmed similarly to the 1960 Fireflite.

The final decision to discontinue DeSoto was announced on November 30, 1960, just forty-seven days after the 1961 models were introduced. At the time, Chrysler warehouses contained several million dollars in 1961 DeSoto parts, so the company ramped up production in order to use up the stock. Chrysler and Plymouth dealers, which had been forced to take possession of DeSotos under the terms of their franchise agreements, received no compensation from Chrysler for their unsold DeSotos at the time of the formal announcement. Making matters worse, Chrysler kept shipping the cars through December, many of which were sold at a loss by dealers eager to be rid of them. After the parts stock was exhausted, a few outstanding customer orders were filled with Chrysler Windsors.

:}

Have a good weekend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abtsjWiiDoY

:}

Healthcare Is Not Prepared For Peak Oil – In fact it throws our money out the window

This article is about a year old and it makes points that have been made before, such as:

1. The medical field is not prepared for Global Warming. Our Healthcare system world wide will not be able to cope with the shift in and increase in what are largely thought of as tropical diseases today.

2. Medical Communty’s contribute to Global Warming through inefficiencies.

They also make the point that whether you believe in Peak Oil or not,  Healthcare is addicted to Oil.

3. The pharmaceutical industry’s dependence on Oil would cause it to collapse if oil supplies became restricted or suffered a huge price increase.

4. Hospitals are dependent on electricity (coal) for their medical practices and have very little flexibility built into their practice. eg. No xrays, then what?

But the most telling part for me is the following.

:}

http://www.greens.org/s-r/45/45-05.html

Medicine at the Crossroads of Energy
and Global Warming

by Dan Bednarz, Ph.D., and Kristin Bradford, M.D., M.P.H.

The difficult thing now is there’s no [longer any] low-hanging fruit. — Roger Elliott, St. Joseph’s Hospital, Chippewa Falls, WI, on efforts to reduce hospital energy costs.

[A]ny field … should be judged by the degree to which it understands, anticipates, and takes action in regard to changes in society. — Bernard Sarason, The Making of an American Psychologist

dot dot dot (as they say)

A given in hospital operations is unlimited inputs of energy and resources; this results in waste in the name of hygiene, insurance and regulatory considerations, and “the best” care. However, the fact that worldwide “energy demand is accelerating” and on its current pace “will double by the year 2050” will soon burst upon medicine.

Turning specifically to energy usage, the Health Care Energy Project tells us that hospitals “use twice as much energy per square foot as office buildings…” In addition, hospitals consume large quantities of petroleum-based, processed, and transported products ranging from aspirin to jells and lubricants to plastic dinnerware and gloves to pharmaceuticals, syringes, IV and dialysis tubing, to name but a few. And most of these items are produced for one-time, non-recyclable use. Petroleum derivatives are also found in many computer parts, electronic equipment, furniture, and so on.


… hospitals “use twice as much energy per square foot as office buildings…”


As noted, hospital administrators are somewhat aware of and responding to the rise in energy costs for heating, cooling, and lighting, primarily by locating the problem in the domain of facilities management. Therefore, controlling energy costs in a hospital largely is confined to electricity and natural gas bills.

As the costs of oil and natural gas have risen in recent years facilities managers are trying to make their buildings more energy efficient, hoping that such savings will offset price rises. Yet, a 2006 survey of hospitals found:

More than 90% … reported higher energy costs over the previous year [2005], and more than half cited increases in double-digit percentages.

The facilities management response is to replace, retrofit or upgrade inefficient infrastructure —boilers, lighting fixtures, building insulation, windows, etc., and in general to “modernize” facilities — in accordance with the Energy Star Program. Some of the newest “green” hospital building approaches promise to reduce energy consumption by as much as 60% below code mandates. This is encouraging, but only a beginning.

However, new construction is done only when it makes “economic sense,” leaving many older hospitals and kindred structures too obsolete to “economically” justify retrofitting or demolishing and replacement — again energy is presumed to be plentiful and cheaper than upgrading — and no consideration whatsoever is given to its scarcity. Moreover, the costs for new hospital construction are soaring, another factor traceable to increasingly expensive fossil fuels. Dave Carpenter, summarizing a 2006 energy survey of hospitals, comments on the constraints facilities managers face:

Money-related reasons were among those given most often in response to a … question asking why recommended energy-saving measures hadn’t been implemented, including 37% who reported a lack of funds. Additionally, 31% cited other priorities, 26% said the payback period was judged to be too long, 23% said operations and maintenance budgets were underfunded and 16% cited lack of senior management commitment and support.

Given these constraints:

Facilities managers have little choice but to stay on the lookout for energy savings wherever they can be found. [One manager] says “it’s going to get worse before it gets better…”

We would argue that “it,” energy costs, will not get better. The entire health care industry will be forced to accommodate to dwindling fossil resources while simultaneously beginning to face the consequences of global warming.

This is stark because the health care system —already stressed in other ways — could begin to fail and even collapse for want of energy and a surge in patients.


… the health care system … could begin to fail and even collapse…


Finally, a word is needed on the third so-called “fall-back” fossil fuel we have barely mentioned, coal, since many energy experts offer it as a painless fix for peak oil. While the high levels of greenhouse emissions of coal are well known, what is less appreciated is that carbon sequestration to control greenhouse emissions is expensive and still an unproven technology. Second, recent reviews have concluded there are substantially less coal reserves than the commonly accepted estimates of 200–300 years supply. Perhaps as little as a few decades of recoverable coal remains, much of it low-grade and high in pollutants.

The dimensions of what we face are uncertain, but the major question undeniably is how will hospitals change given the ecological (global warming as well as multiple sources of pollution and resource scarcity) and geological (twilight of fossil fuels) state of affairs the world now faces?

:}

And the answer is?

:}

Scientists Are Such Wimps – No guns blazing here

This is a pretty simple (dare I say it) observation. Instead of scaring the crap out of people and tagging the polluters as the killers that they are, scientist must haggle over DATA. That’s the way to get the high school graduates all excited. Even college graduates in say, Education, Physical Ed., Social Work and other softer occupations at the college level don’t believe in something directly observable like evolution, let alone something arcane as climate destabilization. Don’t even get me started about all those people who get a “religious education”.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/235084

Sharon Begley

Their Own Worst Enemies

Why scientists are losing the PR wars.

Published Mar 18, 2010
From the magazine issue dated Mar 29, 2010

It’s a safe bet that the millions of Americans who have recently changed their minds about global warming—deciding it isn’t happening, or isn’t due to human activities such as burning coal and oil, or isn’t a serious threat—didn’t just spend an intense few days poring over climate-change studies and decide, holy cow, the discretization of continuous equations in general circulation models is completely wrong! Instead, the backlash (an 18-point rise since 2006 in the percentage who say the risk of climate change is exaggerated, Gallup found this month) has been stoked by scientists’ abysmal communication skills, plus some peculiarly American attitudes, both brought into play now by how critics have spun the “Climategate” e-mails to make it seem as if scientists have pulled a fast one.

Scientists are lousy communicators. They appeal to people’s heads, not their hearts or guts, argues Randy Olson, who left a professorship in marine biology to make science films. “Scientists think of themselves as guardians of truth,” he says. “Once they have spewed it out, they feel the burden is on the audience to understand it” and agree.

That may work if the topic is something with no emotional content, such as how black holes form, but since climate change and how to address it make people feel threatened, that arrogance is a disaster. Yet just as smarter-than-thou condescension happens time after time in debates between evolutionary biologists and proponents of intelligent design (the latter almost always win), now it’s happening with climate change. In his 2009 book, Don’t Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style, Olson recounts a 2007 debate where a scientist contending that global warming is a crisis said his opponents failed to argue in a way “that the people here will understand.” His sophisticated, educated Manhattan audience groaned and, thoroughly insulted, voted that the “not a crisis” side won.

Like evolutionary biologists before them, climate scientists also have failed to master “truthiness” (thank you, Stephen Colbert), which their opponents—climate deniers and creationists—wield like a shiv. They say the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is a political, not a scientific, organization; a climate mafia (like evolutionary biologists) keeps contrarian papers out of the top journals; Washington got two feet of snow, and you say the world is warming?

There is less backlash against climate science in Europe and Japan, and the U.S. is 33rd out of 34 developed countries in the percentage of adults who agree that species, including humans, evolved. That suggests there is something peculiarly American about the rejection of science. Charles Harper, a devout Christian who for years ran the program bridging science and faith at the Templeton Foundation and who has had more than his share of arguments with people who view science as the Devil’s spawn, has some hypotheses about why that is. “In America, people do not bow to authority the way they do in England,” he says. “When the lumpenproletariat are told they have to think in a certain way, there is a backlash,” as with climate science now and, never-endingly, with evolution. (Harper, who studied planetary atmospheres before leaving science, calls climate scientists “a smug community of true believers.”)

:}

I Was Gona Do Another Post On Solar Water Heaters – The commercially available ones complete with installation

I was going to include a rant here:

That Americans have been brainwashed to believe that  energy isn’t free. The point being that if all we allowed was renewables that is all we would have. If we mandated geothermal and solar water heating for residential then in 20 years most of America would be off the grid. But powerful mining operations employing 1000s of people and powerful oil interests employing 10s of 1000s of people are never going to allow that, let alone the utility industry which employs millions of people. Then I ran across this article on PeakOIL and I thought isn’t this a much better way to put it…more on solar water heaters tomorrow.

(This was my original lead in march with the below citation for an obscure publication that ran an interesting article about the transition movement in Milwaukee of all places. I am not even sure I like the town that much..But after a nasty interaction with the editor I have taken that piece down completely…..June, note DN)

According to this dreadful woman:

From: Katherine Keller <editor@bayviewcompass.com>
Subject: You have published copyrighted material (publisher is “bitching”)
To: info@censys.org
Cc: “Daniel Gray” <dangray35@gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, June 2, 2010, 9:29 PM

I am really only allowed to publish 12 words, but she would graciously give me 150 if I would just limit myself to that. SO:

please do not go to this website…ever…because it really sucks

http://bayviewcompass.com

Here are some sites that don’t:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transition_Towns

Transition Towns

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to:navigation, search

Totnes, Devon: a Transition Town

Transition Towns (also known as Transition network or Transition Movement) is a movement that originates from a student project overseen by permaculture teacher Rob Hopkins at the Kinsale Further Education College in Ireland. The term “transition town” was coined by Louise Rooney[1] and Catherine Dunne. Following its start in Kinsale, Ireland it then spread to Totnes, England where Rob Hopkins and Naresh Giangrande developed the concept during 2005 and 2006.[2] The aim of this community project is to equip communities for the dual challenges of climate change and peak oil. The movement currently has member communities in a number of countries worldwide. The Transition Towns movement is an example of socioeconomic localization.

Contents

[hide]

:}

http://www.transitiontowns.org/

What is a Transition Town (or village / city / forest / island)?

Here’s how it all appears to be evolving…

It all starts off when a small collection of motivated individuals within a community come together with a shared concern: how can our community respond to the challenges, and opportunities, of Peak Oil and Climate Change?

They begin by forming an initiating group and then adopt the Transition Model (explained here at length, and in bits here and here) with the intention of engaging a significant proportion of the people in their community to kick off a Transition Initiative.

A Transition Initiative is a community (lots of examples here) working together to look Peak Oil and Climate Change squarely in the eye and address this BIG question:

“for all those aspects of life that this community needs in order to sustain itself and thrive, how do we significantly increase resilience (to mitigate the effects of Peak Oil) and drastically reduce carbon emissions (to mitigate the effects of Climate Change)?”

After going through a comprehensive and creative process of:

  • awareness raising around peak oil, climate change and the need to undertake a community lead process to rebuild resilience and reduce carbon
  • connecting with existing groups in the community
  • building bridges to local government
  • connecting with other transition initiatives
  • forming groups to look at all the key areas of life (food, energy, transport, health, heart & soul, economics & livelihoods, etc)
  • kicking off projects aimed at building people’s understanding of resilience and carbon issues and community engagement
  • eventually launching a community defined, community implemented “Energy Descent Action Plan” over a 15 to 20 year timescale

This results in a coordinated range of projects across all these areas of life that strives to rebuild the resilience we’ve lost as a result of cheap oil and reduce the community’s carbon emissions drastically.

The community also recognizes two crucial points:

  • that we used immense amounts of creativity, ingenuity and adaptability on the way up the energy upslope, and that there’s no reason for us not to do the same on the downslope
  • if we collectively plan and act early enough there’s every likelihood that we can create a way of living that’s significantly more connected, more vibrant and more in touch with our environment than the oil-addicted treadmill that we find ourselves on today.

If you want to find out more, check out the other menu items on the left hand site of the page.

Final point

Just to weave the climate change and peak oil situations together…

:}

http://www.transitionus.org/

  • Great Unleashings in Carrboro-Chapel Hill, NC, Bloomington, IN and Laguna Beach, CA!

    As part of the Transition Model, the Great Unleashing is the coming together of the people in a community to envision a positive, resilient future in response to climate change and the end of cheap oil. For many groups, the Great Unleashing marks the kick-off of working groups to start in earnest to build the community that they want to see. Here are some recaps of the Unleashing events this month across the country, with each place with its own unique flavour.

  • May Round-up of What’s Happening in the World of Transition – US Edition

    Here are some highlights of what’s keeping Transition Initiatives busy across the country and around the world…

  • Tucson takes it up a notch: Cyclovia Tucson

    In Arizona, members of Sustainable Tucson, 29th Official Transition Initiative in the US, have been collaborating with the folks planning Cyclovia for Tucson. The Inaugural Cyclovia Tucson took place on April 18th, 2010, within the comfortable traffic free city streets, public parks and areas in-and around the University of Arizona.

:}

More tomorrow

:}

Top Energy Stories Of 2009 – The end of the Naughties

Ok we are 14 hours away from the year 2010 so I am going to have to post several top 10 lists. It seems that everyone has to have one. Since that is the case I will use theirs. But first I have to say:

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

Our First top 10 is from the Energy Tribune but actually originates with:

Posted on Dec. 28, 2009

http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=2768

The Top Ten Energy Stories of 2009 Ed. note: This item originally ran in Robert Rapier’s R-Squared Energy Blog.

Here are my choices for the Top 10 energy related stories of 2009. Previously I listed how I voted in Platt’s Top 10 poll, but my list is a bit different from theirs. I have a couple of stories here that they didn’t list, and I combined some topics. And don’t get too hung up on the relative rankings. You can make arguments that some stories should be higher than others, but I gave less consideration to whether 6 should be ahead of 7 (for example) than just making sure the important stories were listed.

  1. Volatility in the oil marketsMy top choice for this year is the same as my top choice from last year. While not as dramatic as last year’s action when oil prices ran from $100 to $147 and then collapsed back to $30, oil prices still more than doubled from where they began 2009. That happened without the benefit of an economic recovery, so I continue to wonder how long it will take to come out of recession when oil prices are at recession-inducing levels. Further, coming out of recession will spur demand, which will keep upward pressure on oil prices. That’s why I say we may be in The Long Recession.
  2. The year of natural gasThis could have easily been my top story, because there were so many natural gas-related stories this year. There were stories of shale gas in such abundance that it would make peak oil irrelevant, stories of shale gas skeptics, and stories of big companies making major investments into converting their fleets to natural gas.Whether the abundance ultimately pans out, the appearance of abundance is certainly helping to keep a lid on natural gas prices. By failing to keep up with rising oil prices, an unprecedented oil price/natural gas price ratio developed. If you look at prices on the NYMEX in the years ahead, the markets are anticipating that this ratio will continue to be high. And as I write this, you can pick up a natural gas contract in 2019 for under $5/MMBtu.
  3. U.S. demand for oil continues to declineAs crude oil prices skyrocketed in 2008, demand for crude oil and petroleum products fell from 20.7 million barrels per day in 2007 to 19.5 million bpd in 2008 (Source: EIA). Through September 2009, year-to-date demand is averaging 18.6 million bpd – the lowest level since 1997. Globally, demand was on a downward trend as well, but at a less dramatic pace partially due to demand growth in both China and India.

:}

Then there is Greentech Media:

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/top-ten-energy-storage-of-2009/

Top Ten Energy Storage of 2009

Electric vehicles boost lithium-ion batteries, DOE dollars for grid storage, ice-making air conditioners, and a smart grid to rule them all.

Energy storage – you can’t do electric vehicles without it, and it sure would make renewable solar and wind energy a lot more useful.

That’s the imperative behind 2009’s push into energy storage – from the fast-moving world of batteries for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles to the slower development of a variety of technologies for storing power on the electricity grid.

1. A123, Green Tech’s First IPO of 2009: A123 Systems broke the green tech IPO drought in September, when it debuted its shares to the public markets and was immediately rewarded with a doubling of their price. But the lithium-ion battery maker has since seen shares fall to close to their initial offering price of $13.50, perhaps linked to the scaling back of electric vehicle plans by customer Chrysler. A123 is also making batteries for grid energy storage, bridging two worlds that have until now been mostly separate.

2. The Government Boosts Vehicle Batteries” Next-generation batteries wouldn’t be where they are today without the billions of stimulus dollars the federal government has aimed at the sector. In August, the Department of Energy handed out $2.4 billion to such companies as EnerG2, A123 Systems, Johnson Controls, eTec, EnerDel, Saft and Chrysler and General Motors, most of it to build battery factories in the United States – a key goal of the grants, given Asia’s dominance in battery technology and manufacturing.

3. Fuel Cells’ Waning Fortunes? What the federal government has given to batteries, it has taken away from a once-favored alternative – fuel cells. Technologies to convert hydrogen into electricity and water are clean, but they also require a massive infrastructure to deliver hydrogen – which is mostly made today by cracking natural gas – to millions of vehicles. Energy Secretary Steven Chu has said he will cut back drastically on DOE funding for vehicular fuel cell research, which he described as decades away from commercial viability. In the meantime, fuel cells soldier on in the stationary power generation market, and are finding niches in forklifts and other short-range heavy vehicles, as well as in military applications.

But wait? Panasonic has started to deliver fuel cells that burn natural gas to produce heat and electricity in Japan and Bloom Energy is expected to come out of its hidey hole soon to talk about devices that pretty much do the same thing for industrial customers. By exploiting heat and power, these fuel cells can be 80 plus percent efficient.

:}

What better way to end the new year but with the Department of Defense:

http://dodenergy.blogspot.com/2009/12/year-in-review-top-10-dod-energy-events.html

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Year in Review: Top 10 DOD Energy Events of 2009

Not sure if you’ll agree, but from my vantage point, this was the first year that merits a DOD Energy top ten. Folks who’ve been at this enterprise a long time, like Tom Morehouse and Chris DiPetto at OSD (and a small handful of others in the Services), have been doing energy grunt work without a heck of a lot of support or credit (that’s my take, not theirs). Over the past decade there have been isolated wins and signs of improvement, but nothing sustained.

But this year something changed, and I have to give credit to the increasing strength of the convoy connection. It’s finally shown everyone that being smart and proactive on energy issues isn’t the domain of Birkenstock wearing, granola eating, tree hugging peace-nicks. The clear (and easy to understand and communicate) link between fuel convoys and 1) causalities, 2) costs, and 3) mission degradation.

I’m sure I’m leaving a lot out (that’s a good thing). But without further adieu, here’s the list for the year, in no particular order:

  1. Gigantic Army solar installation off the ground at Fort Irwin in California’s Mojave Desert to advance conversation beyond Nellis. Score – Fort Irwin: 500+ Megawatts, Nellis AFB: 14 Megawatts
  2. Boeing’s high tech, super efficient 787 Dreamliner finally flew. Basis for future tanker/transport?
  3. Convoy lessons brought the concept of proactive energy planning fully out of its Birkenstock phase … for everyone.
  4. Energy audits in Afghanistan commence with Marines. It’s called MEAT, for Marine Energy Assessment Team, see here and here.
  5. Like DARPA to advance US space tech post Sputnik, ARPA-E‘s mission is to turbocharge US competitiveness in energy tech (ET).
  6. 3 of the 4 Services hold major confs exclsively on energy issues. The Navy version in particular generated a huge amount of great info

:}

HAPPY NEW YEAR

:}

The Population Of Britain Falls To 2 Milllion After Spectacular And Bloody Die Off

That is that there will be a massive die off when the cheap oil runs out. He also believes in euthanasia for the less fortunate.

http://timesonline.typepad.com/environment/2009/11/peak-oil-and-population-control.html

November 04, 2009

Peak oil and population control

Flintoff

Last week I had the miserable experience of interviewing a man who had accidentally survived a suicide pact with his wife.

Dr William Stanton, 79, has bone cancer and is plainly very ill: doctors give him three to eight months. His wife Angela was 74, and in good health, but didn’t want to survive him.

Dr Stanton happens to be one of the foremost proponents of population control in Britain, possibly anywhere, and has written articles and letters for anybody who will publish them, including his local paper and the New Scientist. But the latter stopped publishing him more than 20 years ago because – he believes – his views are regarded as being beyond the pale.

A geologist by profession, Dr Stanton has made a massive study of global population growth since the start of the industrial revolution, and suggests persuasively that the growth can be accounted for precisely by the advent of cheap oil. He contends that global oil production is at peak now, however, and that diminishing supplies will require the population of Britain to fall from around 60m today to just 2m in 2150.

Two million!

This will either happen inadvertently, he argues, as people kill each other for precious resources, or in a controlled way, as laws restrict women to just one child each, humane euthanasia becomes widespread to deal with people who represent a “net drain” on society, and immigration is made illegal – arrivals would be put to work in chain gangs, with other criminals.

In its own terms, Dr Stanton’s analysis makes some sense, but his prescriptions are utterly repellent. But when I said that, he told me I was being sentimental. Was he right?

You can read my Sunday Times interview here. If you wish to find out more about Dr Stanton’s views – and his struggle to get them into the mainstream – you should Google him.

:}

Unfortunately, in the long article of maybe a gazillion words, he mentions Bill Stanton’s beliefs on population in two or three paragraphs focusing most of the rest of the article on Stanton and his wife’s botched double suicide. The irony of his healthy wife dying and he being terminal with cancer and living is over exploited. Also the author spills a lot of ink on Britain’s law against assisted suicide and how 132 Britains went to Switzerland to do the deed.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6897964.ece

November 1, 2009

William Stanton: I botched our suicide pact

William Stanton and his wife tried to end their lives together – but they only half succeeded. He says He’d do it again

Terminally ill Dr William Stanton from Westbury-sub-Mendip, Somerset who entered into a suicide pact with his wife Angela which he survived but left the otherwise healthy Mrs Stanton dead

Early one morning in September, William Stanton heard footsteps coming up the stairs of his cottage in Somerset. He knew who it was and panicked. “I shouted out: ‘Go away, Nigel, leave me to it, leave me to it!’”

Nigel, a neighbour and family friend, did not go away. He came into the bedroom and found Stanton in distress and his wife Angela lying dead with a plastic bag over her head.

The Stantons had made a pact to end their lives together and put it into effect just days after the director of public prosecutions revealed how he would apply the law prohibiting assisted suicide. It did not work out as they planned and stands as a terrible cautionary example for anybody thinking that self-inflicted death is easily arranged.

I met Stanton last week in the neat and pretty bedroom where Angela’s body was found. I noted a commode in the corner and a trolley-load of pills beside Stanton, who was sitting up in bed. He is 79 and obviously unwell — his doctors say bone cancer will kill him in three to eight months — but he complained only that the pills make him lethargic.

:}

For a better exposition you might look here:

http://billtotten.blogspot.com/2005/07/oil-and-people.html

Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas, Ireland

ASPO Newsletters, Article Number 573 (July 2005)

The population of the World expanded six-fold in parallel with oil production during the First Half of the Age of Oil. William Stanton, author of The Rapid Growth of Human Population 1750-2000 (Multi-Science Publishing, 2003) contributes the following analysis of how population will have to return to pre-Oil Age levels. Let us hope that it does not come to this, but the options explained do have a certain chilling logic.

Reducing Population in Step with Oil Depletion

by William Stanton

Recent articles in the ASPO Newsletter have agreed that the explosion of world population from about 0.6 billion in 1750 to 6.4 billion today was initiated and sustained by the shift from renewable energy to fossil fuel energy in the Industrial Revolution. There is agreement that the progressive exhaustion of fossil fuel reserves will reverse the process, though there is uncertainty as to what a sustainable global population would be.

In this time of energy abundance, and the complacency it engenders, the vast majority of the general public assumes that what the future holds is “more of the same”. They argue, if pushed, that the expertise inherited by post-fossil-fuel scientists and engineers will allow a smooth transition into a new kind of energy-rich world in which renewable generators will produce as much energy as fossil fuels do now. Such a view is untenable because it ignores the fact that almost all materials essential to modern civilization will be orders of magnitude more costly, and scarce, when they have to be produced using renewable energy instead of fossil fuels.

:}

Or more to the point read the original:

http://www.relocalize.net/files/Futures%20proof.pdf

By the By, if he is right there would only be 12 million people left in America. Best estimates for Native American populations the were 21 million..

:}

Peak Oil To The Oil And Gas Crowd Is Like Turds In The Punch Bowl

Yup, they don’t like it much:

http://www.gjfreepress.com/article/20091014/OPINION/910139986/1021/NONE&parentprofile=1062

The fallacy of peak oil

The onset of this week in Denver has been witness to a conference hosted by the Association for the Study of Peak Oil, a collection of hand-wringers, theorists, and computer-modelers (co-founded, incidentally, by none other than Randy Udall, brother of U.S. Senator Mark Udall), who subscribe to the proposition that the world has reached, or will soon reach, the point of maximum oil production. This historic juncture, the theory asserts, will serve to signal the beginning of the end of the fossil-fueled society, as worldwide demand transcends supply, resulting in a steady, irreversible decline in oil production, terminating at the moment when the very last thimbleful of crude is cajoled out of the ground.

Like virtually all successful fallacies, this one incorporates a large measure of truth; as a finite commodity, the world oil supply will, eventually, be exhausted. Insofar as this is the case, the theory is valid — all other factors remaining fixed, there WILL come a point in time where demand outstrips supply, and production thereby enters a terminal decline phase. The question, of course, is WHEN this will occur.

The most strident peak-oilers postulate that the date is imminent; indeed, many say it has already come and gone. The problem with their reasoning is best illustrated through an example from economic history.

In 1803, Thomas Robert Malthus presented the second edition of his “Essay on the Principle of Population.” In it, he laid out his theory that the rate of population growth would outpace the rate of increase in the food supply. He predicted that famine would ravage the earth in short order.

What Malthus forgot to consider was the role of technological advances in the food production industry. The Agricultural revolution spurred by improved tools, seeds and techniques, enabled many more people to be fed by the labor of many fewer people (and on less acreage).

In a similar vein, the proponents of peak oil tend to overlook some key factors: advances in drilling, exploration, production, and conveyance of oil and natural gas have served to make available sources which as little as a decade ago were considered unrecoverable, and hence not included on peak prediction spreadsheets. Horizontal and directional drilling capabilities, breakthroughs in well logging and evaluation technologies, and advances in production techniques serve as a few examples of innovations which have increased accessibility to, and improved recovery of, hitherto unobtainable resources.

Also conveniently ignored in the petro-doomsday scenarios, are the roles played by unconventional sources, such as oil sand, oil shale, and tight gas formations. For instance, Canada’s oil sands, which at last count hold more than 170 billion barrels of recoverable oil located in northern Alberta, were thought, 40 years ago, to be too expensive and technologically prohibitive to produce on a widespread, commercial scale. Today, oil sands production, both through mining, and in situ (in place) production, using modern techniques such as Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage, accounts for nearly 10 percent of U.S. oil imports, or half of Canadian oil exports. And conservative estimates place the number of recoverable barrels in our own oil shale at between 500 billion and 1.1 trillion (with a ‘T’). To put that in perspective, consider that the lower number represents roughly triple the proven resources in the Middle East.

:}

I think you get the idea…but apologists for the renewable industry? Wow I never would have guessed that.

:}