Category Archives: over population

Barack Obama And Stupid – The situation just got out of hand

Posted on by
Reply

The public DEMANDS that the police investigate just about everything. The police DEMAND respect. College Professors always DEMAND respect. There was an awful lot of DEMANDING going on in the situation. The thing is I can sympathize with everyone involved. See before there was driving while BLACK, there was driving while HIPPIE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPd4FmlpVxI

Anytime the police saw long hair, they presumed that there was drugs involved. My girlfriend had a nickname for me. She called me PC and it did not stand for politically correct. It stood for Probable Cause.

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

At that time I had a brother who rode around with me a lot. He did not like the police – he called them PIGS. So when I got pulled over and he was along he would start making PIG noises.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU8LBnOJNxk

So I wanted to “kill” them both because the situation was so stupid. I believe that is what Obama meant but did not say, that the situation was STUPID not the people involved because see when you call people stupid they go getting all there back up and stuff. So in that spirit the next several posts will look at things in the environment and energy world that I think are stupid. A list follows:

The phrase Global Warming

Burning things

Cars

Windows

Apples in Illinois in the Winter

Illegal drugs

My mother

Eating meat

:}

Since I owe Dan Piraro for letting me post his cartoons and I share his concerns, Let us start with the last one first. If we are going to admit that Burning Things is Stupid (more on that later) then we have to admit that there are only several sources of legitimate power. These are geothermal, tidal, wind and solar. Just to keep things simple while this is a lot of power it is still finite. ALL food is solar power. No Sun no food. So when we become rational and we may be in the process of doing that, would we eat meat? The answer is probably not. Here is Dan and the Washington Post’s take on it:

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Prius vs. Prime Rib

If you are a person concerned with what you can do to help mitigate climate change, read this short article from the Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/28/AR2009072800390.html:}

:}

The Washington Post opines:

Gut Check

The Meat of the Problem

By Ezra Klein

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

The debate over climate change has reached a rarefied level of policy abstraction in recent months. Carbon tax or cap-and-trade? Upstream or downstream? Should we auction permits? Head-scratching is, at this point, permitted. But at base, these policies aim to do a simple thing, in a simple way: persuade us to undertake fewer activities that are bad for the atmosphere by making those activities more expensive. Driving an SUV would become pricier. So would heating a giant house with coal and buying electricity from an inefficient power plant. But there’s one activity that’s not on the list and should be: eating a hamburger.

If it’s any consolation, I didn’t like writing that sentence any more than you liked reading it. But the evidence is strong. It’s not simply that meat is a contributor to global warming; it’s that it is a huge contributor. Larger, by a significant margin, than the global transportation sector.

According to a 2006 United Nations report, livestock accounts for 18 percent of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. Some of meat’s contribution to climate change is intuitive. It’s more energy efficient to grow grain and feed it to people than it is to grow grain and turn it into feed that we give to calves until they become adults that we then slaughter to feed to people. Some of the contribution is gross. “Manure lagoons,” for instance, is the oddly evocative name for the acres of animal excrement that sit in the sun steaming nitrous oxide into the atmosphere. And some of it would make Bart Simpson chuckle. Cow gas — interestingly, it’s mainly burps, not farts — is a real player.

But the result isn’t funny at all: Two researchers at the University of Chicago estimated that switching to a vegan diet would have a bigger impact than trading in your gas guzzler for a Prius (PDF). A study out of Carnegie Mellon University found that the average American would do less for the planet by switching to a totally local diet than by going vegetarian one day a week. That prompted Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, to recommend that people give up meat one day a week to take pressure off the atmosphere. The response was quick and vicious. “How convenient for him,” was the inexplicable reply from a columnist at the Pittsburgh Tribune Review. “He’s a vegetarian.”

:}

Did you get the half hearted humor – gut check?

:}

Global Warming, What Would Jesus Do – Between Heaven and Earth is where the problem lives

Posted on by
Reply

What does Between Heaven and Earth mean anyway? I mean if Earth is HERE:

www.all-creatures.org/hope/

or here:

www.spacetoday.org/…/TerraAqua/TerraStory.html

or even here:

earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/LivingEarth/

and heaven is here:

www.kidsastronomy.com/deep_space.htm

Then the point seems a little banal. But if the usage is to attempt the creation tension through the juxtaposition of opposites like “between love and hate” or “between enemies and friends” then I totally understand. It’s like that with global warming.

:}

So there are the people from HEAVEN:

 http://alternativepowerpanel.com/blog/?p=193

birte edwards on 26 Feb 2009 06:44 pm

Between Heaven and Earth

This is one in my Dobehave Series: Save Energy, Be Green, Have More

Heaven and Earth- on Global Warming and Climate Change

You know this issue is so important, and sorry for the title – just me having some fun.

Between Heaven and Earth – that’s where the trouble is … in the atmosphere, you see.

We can’t …. actually we could … be involved in alternative energy without knowing or understanding what’s behind it, but I don’t think that’s a good idea.

I hope you have a little time on your hand, as after this I will show you a little video I found on “between heaven and earth”.

Here’s the video I was talking about.

Do you think there are others who could benefit from knowing this? If so, get them over here. There will be a lot more on alternatives, what we can do here and now.

Oh, if you want all the 20 videos of my Questions & Answers, just sign up at top right for dobehave.

http://alternativepowerpanel.com/blog/?p=12

birte edwards on 25 Dec 2008 02:13 pm

So What’s Between Heaven and Earth – on Global Warming

Final Sci Vis (scientific visualization) Project for junior year
class. Each person in the class had to pick a topic in science and
make a video on it. This is the result of the choice of one student
The student used 3d max for all the animations and edited in Adobe

I was impressed with this video. It may seem a little long, but the
student goes into all aspects that cause global warming, and also
the effects.
The reason I posted this is that it can teach us so much, and also
my gratitude that young people are involved in this issue of global
warming and climate change.I wanted it here on AlternativePowerPanel blog, as this whole issue
lies at the back of alternative power. We are not just talking
about the economic aspects. Other articles and videos will touch
on that as well as on how each and everyone of us can contribute to
create sustainable living and keep the planet blue (or green, if
you want.

Scroll up to view the video.

:}

The there are the people from EARTH:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-4zeHS6g_8&feature=PlayList&p=C03415C86A65D33E&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=18

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fc-BzY09vTU&feature=PlayList&p=11D4E50213231A81&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=37

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-OgF7YNS4A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ozI8TW4he8

:}

Who would you believe?

:}

The Atmosphere’s Going To Hell In A Handbasket – OK so we know it won’t fit

Posted on by
Reply

in a handbasket. I don’t even know what that means or its origins:

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-goi1.htm

I have a hunch it was an allusion to being beheaded where the head would have landed in a basket myself but:

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hell-in-a-handbasket.html

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

But I digress…Of course I digress because the prospects of us humans having screwed up our atmosphere so much that it may cease to support most mammalian life is just to gross and disgusting to contemplate.

http://discovermagazine.com/2009/jun/30-state-of-the-climate-and-science

Environment / Global Warming

The State of the Climate—and of Climate Science

Four scientists discuss where the climate is and where it’s going.

by photography by Timothy Archibald

From the June 2009 issue, published online June 30, 2009

Robin Bell, Ken Caldera, Bill Easterling, Stephen Schneider

In the list of world challenges, global warming might be at once the most alarming and the most controversial. According to some predictions, climate change caused by human activity could cause mass extinction in the oceans, redraw the planet’s coastlines, and ravage world food supplies. At the same time, a significant portion of the American public questions whether global warming will really cause any major harm; many still doubt that human-driven warming is happening at all. How can we settle the debate? And can we intervene in the process or find ways to adapt to the new conditions? In conjunction with the National Science Foundation and the San Francisco Exploratorium, DISCOVER brought together four experts to discuss the reality and meaning of climate change. In a highly nuanced exchange of ideas, these researchers weighed the various scenarios and laid out a road map for navigating the warmer world to come. The conversation was moderated by DISCOVER’s editor in chief, Corey S. Powell.

POWELL: One question I hear all the time is whether the current change in climate is truly extraordinary. Even if humans are contributing to global warming, isn’t this just like the natural variations that have happened many times in the past?

Robin Bell: A little background first. I spend a lot of time studying the ice sheets at the bottom of the planet—how they form and how they collapse. The poles are like the planet’s air conditioner. When things are working well, the poles keep the planet nice and cool and we don’t think about it. When things stop working, the poles can start to melt and there’s a puddle on the floor. Today both poles are getting warmer; in Greenland and Antarctica you can see the surface of the ice dropping, and you can see there’s less mass when you measure the ice from space. The process has been ongoing, but it looks like it’s happening faster than it was. We know the ice sheets have come and gone in the past. Why is this any different? One of the most compelling reasons is that in the past the ice sheets from the two poles didn’t move together—one would lead and the other would follow. This time, both the north and south are spewing ice into the global ocean, accelerating at the same time.

:}

Please read more if you dare.

:}

George Will And Robert Murray Defend The Carbon Economy With Lies

Posted on by
1

The State Journal Register is just the same old Republican Rag that wants to shine Big Coals boots to stay in business. They ran 3 Right Wing Pundits today and 2 of them Commented on the Green Economy. One who says it won’t work and the other who says that Cap and Trade will destroy the US Economy. The first one, George Will:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/03/24/LI2005032402294.html

Who admits in the very article that the report he cites is the product of,  a right wing radical libertarian economist, was published by a right wing think tank that opposes any change in energy policy besides “Drill here, Drill now” and that has neither been replicated nor peer reviewed. BUT none the less it is TRUE to point out that Spain has an unemployment rate of 18% (which is disputed by many) and that every green electricity production job costs  700,000 to 1.5 million $$$ counting subsidies and green corruption.

The unemployment figures are probably 3 to 4 % lower then he reports and at 12-14 % where the United States will end up by September or October BECAUSE we are in the greatest economic downturn since the GREAT Depression (though no one can tell me what was so great about it) that was caused by rightwing attacks on our financial sector, our housing sector and on labor (car manufacturers). These are his wealthy buddies yah know. He then tosses off another “source”, a report by rightwing Missourian, Kitt Bond who may or may not know anything about economics which comes to a similar conclusion, “Oil good when cheap – Wind and Solar bad” and concludes that a failed policy in EDUCATION will have the same results in ENERGY policy. Did George have a cup of coffee today? It is always tough when your biases show like your butt crack.

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x998784623/George-Will-Reality-of-green-spending-not-promising 

George Will: Reality of green spending not promising

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Jun 25, 2009 @ 12:02 AM

WASHINGTON — The Spanish professor is puzzled. Why, Gabriel Calzada wonders, is the U.S. president recommending that America emulate the Spanish model for creating “green jobs” in “alternative energy” even though Spain’s unemployment rate is 18.1 percent — more than double the European Union average — partly because of spending on such jobs?Calzada, 36, an economics professor at Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, has produced a report which, if true, is inconvenient for the Obama administration’s green agenda, and for some budget assumptions that are dependent upon it.Calzada says Spain’s torrential spending — no other nation has so aggressively supported production of electricity from renewable sources — on wind farms and other forms of alternative energy has indeed created jobs. But Calzada’s report concludes that they often are temporary and have received $752,000 to $800,000 each in subsidies — wind industry jobs cost even more, $1.4 million each. And each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation — sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency — of capital. (European media regularly report “eco-corruption” leaving a “footprint of sleaze” — gaming the subsidy systems, profiteering from land sales for wind farms, etc.) Calzada says the creation of jobs in alternative energy has subtracted about 110,000 jobs from elsewhere in Spain’s economy.:}

Normally I would not even dein this kind of obvious “paid to play” kind of Drivel, because if I wrote a blog for everytime George Will was wrong or lying I would never get anything done, but when the SJ-R follows that with an attack on Cap and Trade (the industries OWN proposed solution) written by known liar and coal mine owner Robert Murray that is just way over the line. Please note their web site:

http://www.murrayenergy.net/ 

These people are proud that they are longwall miners and mountain TOP destroyers and even ash producers. To wit:

Murray is the largest privately owned coal company in America
Murrary Energy CorporationProducing approximately 30 million annual tons of bituminous coal that provides affordable energy to households and businesses across the country. We have eight (8) underground and surface mining operations, plus 40 subsidiary and support companies. Transporting coal via truck, rail and waterways, we operate the second largest fleet of longwall mining units in the country. With a support team of 3,000 hard-working, dedicated, and talented employees in six (6) states, Murray Energy Corporation provides efficient, safe, and affordable high-quality coal to the country’s leading electric producers, domestically and abroad.

Energy, Efficiency, Effective leadership . . .
Celebrating 20 years of building America’s energy future, and utilizing the industry’s most modern mining technologies today to enhance safety, improve productivity and reduce costs. We credit our employees and talents of the team assembled to provide this reliable, low-cost energy source. Murray is transforming America’s most abundant natural energy resource into electricity, powering America’s future. Murray Energy’s team, from the CEO to the coal miner, along with their effective managers use state-of-art technology and engineering principles, all to the production of energy..

Commitment . . .
Is the driving force behind Murray Energy producing and delivering to get the most reliable and affordable energy supplied to our customers. From our leadership and management, to our workforce, commitment is the center of our focus to produce every ton of coal safely, efficiently, and to provide the most affordable energy for the benefit of all Americans and the Country

:}

And he says:

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x998784635/Robert-Murray-Waxman-Markey-bill-will-destroy-U-S-coal-industry

Robert Murray: Waxman-Markey bill will destroy U.S. coal industry

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Jun 25, 2009 @ 12:04 AM

Perhaps the most destructive legislation in our country’s history will be voted on, maybe as soon as next week, in the U.S. House of Representatives — the Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill. It is a misguided attempt to address climate change.It will have adverse and lingering consequences for every American.It will raise the cost of electricity in our homes, the fuel for our cars, and the energy that produces our manufacturing jobs, with little or no environmental benefit.Further, independent experts estimate that it will cost Americans more than $2 trillion in just over eight years. All Americans in the Midwest, South and Rocky Mountain regions will be drastically affected because the climate change legislation will destroy the nation’s coal industry and the low-cost electricity it has provided to these regions for generations. Wealth will be transferred away from almost every state to the West Coast and New England.The most abundant and by far least expensive energy source in our country for generating electricity is coal. America’s coal reserves rival the energy potential of Saudi Arabian oil.

:}

Nowhere does he cite actual sources or anything else. No one at the SJ-R calls him on it or points out that “Cap and Trade” was very effective at getting rid of sulfur dioxide.  If coal were not such a nasty energy source we would not be getting rid of it. WHAT doesn’t he understand about “Leave it in the ground”?

:}

Solar Cooling – Why Global warming is Sooooo Dangerous

Posted on by
Reply

I have argued for a long time that the only demonstrable source of global warming is homo sapien. Why? Because we burn things unnecessarily. We can’t help it. We got started a long time ago and it is all we know. All the other potential sources of global warming are in cooling phases, the Sun, the Earth’s Core, Jupiter and the Moon.  Now of course it could be caused by Aliens shooting raybeams at the Earth and if you want to believe that, fine. So for the long term what we get is a hot wet unpredictable planet that causes a human die back…that is ok at one level. Humans have suffered several “evolutionary bottlenecks” and survived. At one point 50,000 years ago us Sapiens went from a couple million strong to 5,000 over night. You might think that having the Homo population shrink to the size of Riverton, IL is scary enough BUT

But the bigger danger is short term. Because the cooling going on is being masked by our polluting, this can have what is called in statistics a “rebound effect”. According to Statistical Theory (and Quantum Physics) everything fluctuates which puts us in danger of having a really really cold or hot year. Believe it or not since we have been warming for soooo long, the odds are that we have a really really cold year. From a food perspective and actually from a life in general perspective it’s better to be hot than it is to be cold – unless of course you are a Neaderthal. The point being that humans shrank to the equator during the last ice age and just kinda hung around.

Why do I bring this up? Well:

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/05/27/solar-minimum.htmlhttp://dsc.discovery.com/space/my-take/solar-minimum-problem.html

Dormant Sun Spills Secrets in Its Sleep

Irene Klotz, Discovery News

 

 

Photo of Sun

Sitting Pretty | Discovery News Video

 

May 27, 2009 — With the sun at its lowest activity level in nearly 100 years, scientists are taking advantage of its quiet state to ferret out some of the more subtle — and occasionally insidious — ways the sun impacts Earth’s climate and atmosphere.

Solar flares and other geomagnetic events on the sun vary in frequency over an 11-year cycle. Now at an unusually low “minimum” in that cycle, the sun is expected to peak in activity in 2013.

“If you thought that the globe was going to warm up because there was more solar activity, you might perhaps expect it to get warmer everywhere, and this is not the case,” said Joanna Haigh, an atmospheric physicist with Imperial College in London.

:}

Even worse:

 

alien life solar system space

Comparison between solar minimum (left) and solar maximum (right) in extreme ultraviolet light (EUV). Huge coronal loops can be seen erupting from the solar surface at solar max, conditions perfect for solar flares and CMEs. The Solar and Heliospheric Observatory’s EIT instrument captured these images 11 years apart Credit: SOHO/NASA

 

 

sun solar flare burst hot gas star burn center solar system earth

Want more? Click here for the rest of the Wide Angle: Solar Maximum. Credit: NASA

 

The sun is being really boring. Nearly 18 months after the “official” start of Solar Cycle 24, observers are looking closely at the ball of hot plasma in the sky asking, “What is wrong with the sun?”

To be honest, we don’t know if there’s something wrong or not; it depends on what your opinion of “wrong” is.

On the one hand, the sun is enduring the deepest solar minimum for a century, perplexing solar physicists, leading to some suggestions the sun may continue its blank stare for some time to come.

As sunspot number is astonishingly low, this means internal magnetic activity must also be low. For some reason, the usual cycle of 11 years from peak to trough — from solar maximum to solar minimum — has been interrupted. The fireworks we experienced in 2003 could be a thing of the past and we might be looking at another Maunder Minimum (an extended period of time from 1645 to 1715 when few sunspots were seen by astronomers).

As magnetic activity is low, this also means there has been a drop in solar energy output. There has been a 0.02 percent decrease in optical light and a 6 percent drop in ultraviolet light if we compare this solar minimum with the last one, 12 years ago. Although we’re not going to freeze any time soon, the suns reduction in output could have consequences for our climate. But no, it won’t save us from carbon-induced global warming, that problem is here to stay.

:}

I was going to work my way through all the energy incentives from the Feds and showing examples of each starting with PAINT your ROOF white…something I have advocated for 30 years but I thought this was more important for today. Jam Band Friday will have to do.

:}

Peak Oil I Love YOU…Leanan does an amazing job

Posted on by
Reply

It is rare well at least medium rare that I give credit where credit is due but the Peak Oil folks and Leanan in particular deserve so much credit. Day in and Day out..NO MATTER what the price of oil or gasoline…they still believe that we are running out of the stuff. That is great because WE ARE:

http://www.peakoil.com/

:}

From the paranoid:

http://www.peakoil.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=47647

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0415/p13s01-wmgn.html

Economic slump provides

tinder for global conflicts

With more people pushed into poverty,

the probability of armed rebellions increases around the world.

By David R. Francis | Columnist

The new director of the National Intelligence Agency caused something of a stir last month when he warned Congress: “The primary near-term security concern of the United States is the global economic crisis and its geopolitical implications.”

On that theme, Hampshire College professor Michael Klare sees the world economic meltdown as already prompting “economic brush fires” around the world and worries whether these could prove “too virulent to contain.”

It seems as if the lyrics “trouble, trouble, trouble” from Meredith Willson’s “The Music Man” have become too real in today’s world.

Last November Robert Zoellick, president of the World Bank Group, noted that the global financial crisis would hit hardest the “poorest and most vulnerable” in the developing world. At that time, Mr. Zoellick calculated another 100 million people around the world had been driven into poverty as a result of soaring food and oil prices. These prices have eased. Nonetheless, hundreds of millions in poor nations must try to balance household budgets on incomes of $2 a day or less.

Now he’s forecasting the world economy will shrink by 1 to 2 percent this year, with difficulties possibly extending into next year. That’s much worse than the bank group’s forecast last year. It will be the first time world output has actually declined since World War II. And each 1 percent decline

in developing-country growth rates pushes an additional 20 million people into poverty, Zoellick reckons.

“The political ramifications [of rising poverty] will be great … though hard to predict,” says John Sewell, a senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars in Washington. Before the election last fall, he assembled a group of experts who urged the incoming president to streamline the nation’s development tools. These are now spread among 12 government departments, 25 government agencies, and almost 60 government offices. “No one is in charge,” the group held.

Powerful droughts around the world could cause food shortages, reversing a dramatic drop in global poverty that the economic crisis recently halted, worries Mr. Klare, an expert on peace and world security.

In Africa and in East Asia, population growth also adds to economic pressures.

As for brush fires, the driest tinder lies in eastern European states such as Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, and Bulgaria, he says. There, the people in fragile democracies had the notion that rising prosperity in the 1990s and up to 2006 would continue forever. Now the money from the West has dried up and gone home, leading to an economic bust.

“That is what is driving them to rage,” says Klare. “The promises have been taken away.”

:}

To the paradoxical:

 http://www.peakoil.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=47644

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30240000/

Renewable energy’s environmental paradox

Wind and solar projects may carry costs for wildlife

Image: Sandhill cranes

Sandy Seth, via Friends of the Bosque del Apache via AP

Sandhill Cranes fly in formation into the Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge near Socorro, N.M., last year. Environmentalists have raised concerns that the birds’ habitats could be affected by a planned sun and wind power transmission line.

WASHINGTON – The SunZia transmission line that would link sun and wind power from central New Mexico with cities in Arizona is just the sort of energy project an environmentalist could love — or hate. And it is just the sort of line the Interior Department has been tasked with promoting — or guarding against.

If built, the 460-mile line would carry about 3,000 megawatts of power, enough to avoid the need for a handful of coal-fired plants and to help utilities meet mandated targets for use of renewable fuel. “We have to connect the sun of the deserts and the winds of the plains to places where people live,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said recently.

But the line would also cross grasslands, skirt two national wildlife refuges and traverse the Rio Grande, all habitat areas rich in wildlife. The graceful sandhill crane, for example, makes its winter home in the wetlands of New Mexico’s Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge, right next to the path of the proposed power line. And much of the area falls under the protection of the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

:}

To the pusillanimously positive:

http://www.peakoil.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=47643

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2009/04/action-plan-for-50-how-solar-thermal-can-supply-europes-energy

April 15, 2009

Action Plan for 50%:

How Solar Thermal Can Supply Europe’s Energy

The solar thermal sector’s strategy to reach a 50% contribution

to Europe’s space and water heating requirements by 2050.

by David Appleyard, Associate Editor

London, UK [Renewable Energy World Magazine]

The research efforts and infrastructure needed to supply 50% of the energy for space and water heating and cooling across Europe using solar thermal energy has been set out under the aegis of the European Solar Thermal Technology Platform (ESTTP). Published in late December 2008, more than 100 experts developed the Strategic Research Agenda (SRA), which includes a deployment roadmap showing the non-technological framework conditions that will enable this ambitious goal to be reached by 2050.

A strategy for achieving a vision of widespread low-temperature solar thermal installations was first explored by ESTTP in 2006, but since then the SRA has identified key areas for rapid growth. These focus points include

the development of active solar buildings, active solar renovation, solar heat for industrial processes and solar heat for district heating and cooling. Meanwhile, amongst the main research challenges is the development of compact long-term efficient heat storage technology. Once available, they would make it possible to store heat from the summer for use in winter in a cost-effective way.

The ESTTP’s main objective is to create the right conditions in order to fully exploit solar thermal’s potential for heating and cooling in Europe and worldwide.

As a first step for the development of the deployment roadmap and of the Strategic Research Agenda, ESTTP developed a vision for solar thermal in 2030. Its key elements are to establish the Active Solar Building – covering 100% of their heating and cooling demand with solar energy – as a standard for new buildings by 2030; establish the Active Solar Renovation as a standard for the refurbishment of existing buildings by 2030 (Active Solar renovated buildings cover at least 50% of their heating and cooling demand with solar thermal energy); supply a substantial share of the industrial process heat demand up to 250°C, including heating and cooling, desalination and water treatment; and achieve broad use of solar energy in district heating and cooling.

:}

They got it covered. My hat’s off to you.

:}

What Can Happen To America If We Don’t Live Within Our Energy Means -South Africa

Posted on by
Reply

South Africa the home of the much touted and most used syngas projects in the world struggles to get by.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVLu16lU4iI

Originally started in response to WWI fuel shortages and escalated during WWII for all the obvious reasons …ummm apartheid and the efforts to defeat the ANC and Nelsen Mandella.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwgl4D4s-e4

It has left South Africa  thus:

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE5315U320090402?feedType=RSS&feedName=environmentNews

South Africa says still facing major energy crisis

Thu Apr 2, 2009 1:21pm EDT

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tG6CNhGoILs

By James Macharia

JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) – South Africa’s energy minister said on Thursday the country was still in the grip of a major power crisis despite being able to keep the lights on since a series of blackouts early last year.

Voluntary energy savings had failed to meet the required levels, and the country was risking new power cuts, the Minister of Minerals and Energy, Buyelwa Sonjica said in a statement.

State-owned utility Eskom, which provides 95 percent of the country’s power, has rationed electricity since early last year, but has not cut power since last April.

Sonjica said Africa’s biggest economy was suffering from a perilously low electricity reserve margin or spare capacity.

“The recent lack of blackouts has led to the assumption that our energy situation has been resolved,” Sonjica said.

“Unfortunately this is far from the truth. We are in trouble unless we all begin to take responsibility for our habits of energy wastage.”

Two years ago, Sonjica urged South Africans to save 10 percent of their electricity usage every year for the next five years but so far energy savings were way below that, she said.

Sonjica said a healthy electricity reserve margin was about 17 to 20 percent, to ensure that sudden changes in demand or supply and power-plant maintenance do not cause blackouts.

Eskom said in January the reserve margin was about 8 percent, and has said its long term target is 15 percent.

She said following the success of the Earth Hour over the weekend, and with winter fast approaching, she wanted South Africans to save power to ensure stable electricity supply.

Lights went out in homes across the globe on Saturday for Earth Hour 2009, a global event designed to highlight the threat from climate change.

Sonjica said the Earth Hour initiative would promote awareness that the country still faced a serious energy crisis because South Africa’s record on energy conservation was poor.

“South Africa is one of the least energy efficient nations in the world and the least efficient in Africa,” she said.

“We also hold the number 11 spot on the top 20 greenhouse gas emitters list and are responsible for 42 percent of Africa’s emissions. Every kilowatt of electricity you use produces 1 kg of carbon dioxide; one of the main greenhouse gases.”

Critics say the energy crisis that dented South Africa’s growth and investor-friendly image was caused by the government’s failure to invest in new power generation plants, coupled with surging demand led to the power crisis.  Continued…

:}

I don’t think that sounds so good…SO KEEP TALKING CLEAN COAL BABY…it is a quick way to energy death.

:}

OverPopulation Is The Real Problem With Energy – We are not sustainable and 6 billion people will have to die

Posted on by
1

OverPopulation is never a pleasant topic. Why? Well for so many reasons:

1. It is Anti-Capitalistic. Capitalism is founded on an unlimited growth model as is it’s hand maiden in literature – science fiction. Malthus sends Capitalists into a frenzy of “it ain’t so” denial. But if he is ultimately right, and our technology and science can not prevent our population from stabilizing at a set amount, then Capitalism is dead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8-WgJVUcD4

2. It is anti-religious. Almost every religion in the world preaches procreation. The idea has always been that the religion that has the most recruits will eventually  become the ULTIMATE Religion. Which is the goal of course.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kndX3tVxCt8&feature=related

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7974995.stm

Earth population ‘exceeds limits’

By Steven Duke
Editor, One Planet, BBC World Service


LIVING ON A CROWDED EARTH

Crowded commuter trains (AP)

 

Current world population – 6.8bn

Net growth per day – 218,030

Forecast made for 2040 – 9bn

Source: US Census Bureau

There are already too many people living on Planet Earth, according to one of most influential science advisors in the US government.

Nina Fedoroff told the BBC One Planet programme that humans had exceeded the Earth’s “limits of sustainability”.

Dr Fedoroff has been the science and technology advisor to the US secretary of state since 2007, initially working with Condoleezza Rice.

Under the new Obama administration, she now advises Hillary Clinton.

“We need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the global population; the planet can’t support many more people,” Dr Fedoroff said, stressing the need for humans to become much better at managing “wild lands”, and in particular water supplies.

Pressed on whether she thought the world population was simply too high, Dr Fedoroff replied: “There are probably already too many people on the planet.”

:}

3. OverPopulation is very male. Knowing that OverPopulation must end is very women centered. One of the most mysogynist impulses is religion’s and men’s impulse to control a woman’s womb. When women control their womb they produce 2 or 3 children which is just about right for their health and just about right for the planet. But over procreation has been the norm for the last 300 years and we are about to reap it’s wind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlpyGhABXRA&feature=related 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1525/is_5_84/ai_62896162/

COPYRIGHT 1999 Sierra Magazine

COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group

Y6B: The Real Millennial Threat

– effects of overpopulation – Brief Article

Sierra ,  Sept, 1999   by William G. Hollingsworth

Think the population explosion is over? Think again.

On or about October 12, 1999, human population is expected to reach 6 billion. While it took until about 1800 to reach the first billion, the trip from 5 billion to 6 will have required a mere 12 years. Those born in 1930 will have seen humankind triple within their lifetime.

That makes all the more surprising the strange take of the national media, which over the past few years have been full of stories like “The Population Explosion Is Over” (The New York Times Magazine) or “Now the Crisis Is Global Underpopulation” (Orange County Register). These contrarian stories are based on two recent demographic trends: fertility in nearly all developed nations has fallen below the population-stabilizing “replacement” rate (2.1 children per woman, where mortality is low), and fertility is declining in most of the developing world. These trends led the United Nations to revise its population projections, reflecting a slower rate of growth than previously forecast.

Related Results

Short Term Energy Monitoring: A Road To Long Term Energy Savings?

“Slower,” however, does not mean slow. At the current global growth rate, 1.5 million people–roughly a new metropolitan Milwaukee–are added every week. Despite fertility declines, birthrates in much of the world remain high. For example, Guatemala’s fertility is 5.1 children per woman, Laos and Pakistan’s 5.6, and Iraq’s 5.7. And those are not even the high end of the spectrum: Afghanistan’s fertility rate is 6.1. The 43 nations of East, West, and Central Africa average 6.0, 6.2, and 6.3 children per woman, respectively. Countries that have reduced their birthrate to three or four children per woman are also growing very rapidly. This is partly because of “population momentum,” in which earlier high fertility yields a large proportion of young people. Even fertility rates fractionally above replacement can perpetuate rapid growth.

What if every nation’s fertility stayed at its present level? Human population would exceed 50 billion by the year 2100–if the earth could support that many.

The UN “medium” projections (perhaps the most realistic) now assume that fertility in developing nations will fall to about 2.2 children per woman over roughly the next 30 years. Even so, world population would reach 8.9 billion by 2050. The 2.9 billion gain would itself equal the world’s entire human population in 1957.

Most future growth will occur in the most distressed regions of the earth, many of which are already experiencing severe deforestation, water shortages, and massive soil erosion. In the medium projections, sub-Saharan Africa’s present population of 630 million will more than double to 1.5 billion by 2050. By that time, Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, and Pakistan will also more than double, as will Bolivia, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Paraguay. Bangladesh will grow by two-thirds, and India will increase by more than half a billion persons to 1.5 billion.

:}

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/eye/overpopulation/overpopulation.html

4. OverPopulation harbors everyone’s worst fears about “State” control. That we will be prohibited to breed “for our own good” and that only the rich shall have kids. Which would your rather have a human die off of 6 billion people or a little self control?? But we are past that now. The die off will happen and the real issue is “what do we do when humans become food”…and once we get over the crash how do we stabilize the population.  Many world leaders are thinking about this now. Shouldn’t you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kndX3tVxCt8&feature=related

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

Overpopulation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

 The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (December 2007)

 

 

Map of countries by population density (See List of countries by population density.)

 

 

Areas of high population densities, calculated in 1994.

 

 

Map of countries and territories by fertility rate (See List of countries and territories by fertility rate.)

Overpopulation is a condition where an organism‘s numbers exceed the carrying capacity of its habitat. In common parlance, the term usually refers to the relationship between the human population and its environment, the Earth.[1]

Overpopulation does not depend only on the size or density of the population, but on the ratio of population to available sustainable resources. If a given environment has a population of 10 individuals, but there is food or drinking water enough for only 9, then in a closed system where no trade is possible, that environment is overpopulated; if the population is 100 but there is enough food, shelter, and water for 200 for the indefinite future, then it is not overpopulated. Overpopulation can result from an increase in births, a decline in mortality rates due to medical advances, from an increase in immigration, or from an unsustainable biome and depletion of resources. It is possible for very sparsely-populated areas to be overpopulated, as the area in question may have a meager or non-existent capability to sustain human life (e.g. the middle of the Sahara Desert or Antarctica).

The resources to be considered when evaluating whether an ecological niche is overpopulated include clean water, clean air, food, shelter, warmth, and other resources necessary to sustain life. If the quality of human life is addressed, there may be additional resources considered, such as medical care, education, proper sewage treatment and waste disposal. Overpopulation places competitive stress on the basic life sustaining resources, leading to a diminished quality of life.:}

:}

http://www.culturechange.org/overpopulation_resources.html

:}

Is Capitalism An Illusion – Have we been deluded for the last 100 years?

Posted on by
Reply

The American public has been told for 100 years that prices are controlled by supply and demand. What if that is not true? The implications for how we treat the rich are enormous. Yet the energy market, one of our largest ever, is pointing to the idea that there is no relation between supply and demand.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29495753/

Oil producers running out of storage space

Glut caused by world slowdown leaves the world awash in crude

NEW YORK – Supertankers that once raced around the world to satisfy an unquenchable thirst for oil are now parked offshore, fully loaded, anchors down, their crews killing time. In the United States, vast storage farms for oil are almost out of room.

As demand for crude has plummeted, the world suddenly finds itself awash in oil that has nowhere to go.

It’s been less than a year since oil prices hit record highs. But now producers and traders are struggling with the new reality: The world wants less oil, not more. And turning off the spigot is about as easy as turning around one of those tankers.

So oil companies and investors are stashing crude, waiting for demand to rise and the bear market to end so they can turn a profit later.

Meanwhile, oil-producing countries such as Iran have pumped millions of barrels of their own crude into idle tankers, effectively taking crude off the market to halt declining prices that are devastating their economies.

Traders have always played a game of store and sell, bringing oil to market when it can fetch the best price. They say this time is different because of how fast the bottom fell out of the oil market.

“Nobody expected this,” said Antoine Halff, an analyst with Newedge. “The majority of people out there thought the market would keep rising to $200, even $250, a barrel. They were tripping over each other to pick a higher forecast.”

Now the strategy is storage. Anyone who can buy cheap oil and store it might be able to sell it at a premium later, when the global economy ramps up again.

The oil tanks that surround Cushing, Okla., in a sprawling network that holds 10 percent of the nation’s oil, have been swelling for months. Exactly how close they are to full is a closely guarded secret, but analysts who cover the industry say Cushing is approaching capacity.

There are other storage tanks in the country with plenty of extra room to take on oil, but Cushing is the delivery point for the oil traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange. So the closer Cushing gets to full, the lower the price of oil goes.

:}

YET the price of gasoline continues to go up…How is that possible? Prices in Springfield went from $1.75 to current price of $1.99 in a day. This article is a month old BUT:

 http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/16/news/economy/gasoline/index.htm

Gasoline prices continue to rise

Pump prices rose 20 cents since January; above $2 a gallon in three states.

 

By Kenneth Musante, CNNMoney.com staff writer

January 16, 2009: 2:55 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — Average gasoline prices rose 1.7 cents Friday, according to a daily survey of gas station credit card swipes.

The price of gas rose to a national average of $1.816 a gallon from $1.799 a day earlier, according to motorist group AAA. Prices were higher than the $1.667 a gallon reported a month ago, but lower than the $3.044 a gallon gas was selling for on the same day last year.

Gas prices have risen for the past three days, according to AAA data, and are nearly 20 cents higher than they were on Jan. 1.

Gas prices initially rose last year, following a resurgence in the price of crude oil, gas’s main ingredient. But as concern about falling demand for oil sent crude prices down more than $6 a barrel this week, the drivers may be in for a decline in gas prices as well.

“The American consumer is still staying home,” said Geoff Sundstrom, fuel price analyst at AAA.

“There’s absolutely no reason why the price of gasoline should be as high as it is,” he said.

:}

No reason what so ever.

:}

Digg Is A Fascinating Place – But as a Blogger it is depressing

Posted on by
Reply

Digg is a great place and as an Environmentalist/Energy person I get many of my ideas for posts there. But it can be depressing sometimes. Over the weekend people posted hundreds of articles to the point where I had to go nearly 10 PAGES into their posting to try to catch up. I never did.

 http://digg.com

http://digg.com/news/science/upcoming

Here is just a sampling of their first page. It is amazing.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/02/ecological-stimulus-package-investing-natural-capital.php

Ecological Stimulus Package:

Investing In Natural Capital

by Earthwatch Institute on 02.16.09

Business & PoliticsBy: Jeanine Pfeiffer, Earthwatch Institute

What if we gave our environment the same wallop of attention we’re giving our economy? What if we valued natural capital as highly as financial capital?

The US Congress has passed a $790 billion economic stimulus package. Last November, the Chinese government approved a four trillion yuan (US $586 billion) financial stimulus plan.

The Chinese plan included 350 billion yuan (US$51 billion) for ecological and environmental projects. These projects, according to the Chinese Minister of Environmental Protection, Zhou Shengxian, will emphasize treating pollution and supporting rural environmental efforts and green industries.

In the US, President Obama’s administration is proposing a ten-year $150 billion plan to create clean energy industries, green jobs, and change consumption habits. The plan aims to reduce greenhouse emissions, but also includes intriguing bullet points like clean coal technology and constructing the Alaska natural gas pipeline.

Where’s the environment – left on the “outside”?
Absent from any of these plans, debates, and discussions on economic stimuli and environmental plans (several million hits on the internet, last time I checked), is a clear focus on our ecology, our natural capital.

Thinking environmentally is not the same as thinking ecologically. In common speak, the word “environment” refers to our surroundings –the “out there” part of our world. An environment can just as easily include tons of concrete buildings, asphalt highways, and diverted waterways as it can include rain forests, furry critters, and mountain streams.

:}

 http://lafora.com.br/2009/02/o-ar-que-resfria-sua-casa-aquece-o-mundo/

 

“O ar que resfria sua casa aquece o mundo”

16/02/09 | América do Sul/Central/Caribe, Interesse Público, Painéis |

Da Prolam Y&R do Chile para campanha de alerta contra o aquecimento global para a Columbia.

Tags:

 :}

http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/5-dark-labor-pitfalls-in-the-new-green-e.php

 

3 Labor Pitfalls in the New Green Economy

One of the most compelling concepts behind the new green economy is its ability to create jobs in the US. You certainly can’t outsource the installation of a solar system or high-efficiency windows. Industrial-scale wind turbines are enormous, thus favoring local production.Although these concepts are true, there are some pitfalls to watch for:

1. Outsourcing Manufacturing
The US has lost 6 million manufacturing jobs in the last three decades.

2. US Subsidies Benefiting Offshore Manufacturers
US Law requires domestic sourcing for many programs and agencies, including the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, Clean Water Grants for Water Treatment, and the Energy Policy Act of 1992.

3. Low Wages
Not all green jobs pay a lot of green, even when receiving generous local subsidies. A recent study of green jobs found recycling plant workers making as little as $8.25 an hour and manufacturing jobs in renewable energy products paying as low as $11 an hour.

:}

http://www.naturalnews.com/News_000734_Los_Angeles_South_Central_farmers.html

This is a quick update to bring a few time-sensitive items to your attention that you may want to check out.

First, I’ve just posted an exclusive interview with Dr. Steve from his Real Health show. He interviews me about the economic stimulus bill (15 minutes duration). This was recorded just yesterday, and thanks to Dr. Steve, we got it posted here: http://www.naturalnews.com/podcasts…

Dr. Steve’s Real Health show is the best health podcast on the ‘net, by the way. Listen to all 71 episodes here: http://web.mac.com/drsteve720/Site/…

On a separate topic, when I saw this next YouTube movie, I finally came to realize that the human species is probably not going to make it. What YouTube movie could possibly have such a powerful impact on my perspective of the human race? Watch it yourself and you’ll see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wusC…

Watch LAPD cops stand guard as the food supply of hundreds of poor L.A. families is being bulldozed into dust… this is madness in the extreme, and it’s happening right here in the United States of America, by the orders of city officials!

If you’re not already in tears after seeing that video, watch the aftermath of the city’s bulldozers here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juMe…

:}

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/02/12/fish.migration.study/index.html

February 12, 2009 — Updated 2227 GMT (0627 HKT)

 Fish migrating to cooler waters, study says


(CNN) — Climate-driven environmental changes could drastically affect the distribution of more than 1,000 species of commercial fish and shellfish around the world, scientists say.

 

Red areas on this map show regions that are expected to have the greatest increase in fish populations by 2050.

 

Red areas on this map show regions that are expected to have the greatest increase in fish populations by 2050.

For the first time, researchers using computer models have been able to predict the effect that warming oceans, fed by greenhouse-gas emissions, could have on marine biodiversity on a global scale.

A new study predicts that by 2050, large numbers of marine species will migrate from tropical seas toward cooler waters — specifically the Arctic and Southern Ocean — at an average rate of 40 to 45 kilometers (about 25 to 28 miles) per decade.

These migrations could lead to “numerous extinctions” of marine species outside the Arctic and Antarctic, especially in tropical waters, according to the study’s projections.

“These are major impacts that we are going to see within our lifetime and our children’s lifetime,” said William Cheung, lead author of the study, set to be published this week in the journal Fish and Fisheries.

“Climate change provides us with a kick in the pants,” added Cheung, a marine biologist and lecturer at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom. “We can’t think about climate change and biodiversity without thinking about the impact it will have on people.”

:}

http://www.ec.gc.ca/education/default.asp?lang=en&n=3D1A3FBA-1

Go on Stand By

A computer that runs 24 hours a day is eating up electricity, and money out of your wallet. stand by

Pay attention to that humming sound: that’s your computer sucking up energy. Whether you work in an office or at home, powering a computer is probably using more electricity than you think, and contributing to your personal greenhouse gas emissions, particularly when the electricity is generated with fossil fuels like oil or coal.

Research shows that most people leave their computer on throughout the entire business day, including lunchtime and meetings, but only use their computers an average of four hours a day. Plus, running a computer continuously at full power generates heat, which causes indoor temperatures to rise and increases the demand for air conditioning in the summer months.

If you work from home, consider that your network of home computers, monitors and printers can use more than 200 kilowatts per year per computer. Tally how much time one computer is on each day and multiply that by its energy usage. Now take a look at your electricity bill and see how the costs of staying connected can add up.

Going on stand by can be good

Reduce your energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by enabling the monitor’s energy-saving features when you are away from your computer for a short period of time. In “stand by” mode (also called sleep mode, hibernate or power down mode), your computer typically drops to 50% of its maximum power consumption.

:}

From the green economy, to air conditioning, to bulldozing poor peoples gardens, to climate change to power vampires, how is a simple blogger to compete…yet I will continue to try.

:}

Oh and a lady wanted me to post a link with her site. So:

http://www.torontorealestatedirect.com?pg=NCYKt