Category Archives: scarcity

Trash And What It Means To Be Human – Why do we even have garbage?

Posted on by
Reply

www.gamespot.com

garb1.jpg

Trash Talk

Much like our discussions of Burning Behavior our discussions of Trash Behavior are rooted in the past. In fact the reader could view Trash Behavior as a subset of Burning Behavior because the Fire unless perfect “throws away” effluent in the form of carbon and other particulates. This is an extreme view I do not share. I believe that Trash Behavior has its origins in the biological process of defecation.

 

www.time.com

 

 

 garb2.jpg

 

What to do with feces would have been easy for early humans. Maybe they were nomadic for more reasons than following the seasons or following their food sources. Maybe they moved on to get away from their own biological waste that while fresh could create disease and pestilence but once degraded was harmless. This idea of “leaving things behind” or throwing things away may have been useful or at least harmless when there was an estimated 50,000 humans on the planet. A mere 13,000 humans in Europe alone. This habit quickly became ingrained in humans and it has spread to all of its endeavors. Much like striking a match however the act of tossing something from ones person can be easily stopped. Simply leaving something in place like not burning things up requires NO ACTION at all.

 

 www.dvice.com

 

 

 

garb3.jpg

 

 

As our numbers multiplied and we abandoned our nomadic waste the behavior of using only part of what we create and throwing some things away only partially used escalating into an industry. With the creation of cities we needed someone to haul out garbage away to a centralized location and we could no longer “piss in the river” with total disregard. Still it was common in much of the developed world to throw your “slop” in the street well into the 1900’s. In the undeveloped world it still is. This attitude would not threaten the world until industry employed it to make profits in the late 1700s.

 

While it is true that small producer culture produced less waste it was brazen in its discharge. Hide Tanners dumped acid in rivers. Iron smelters dumped their waste behind their shops. Glass blowers and melters tossed poisonous smoke into the air. Still there were so few humans and the earth was so vast that it could handle it with very little effect. With the industrial revolution beginning with the steam engine everything changed. In a sense the concept of “disposable” was created. Things were created that would not last a lifetime or two. The idea of “passing things” down slowly but surely was eroded. This is not to pine for a long ago age when humans recycled everything they used. This is to pine for a here and now where everything and everyone is deemed valuable. That we stop throwing ourselves away. This must be said over and over. There are to many people on this planet right now. 7 BILLION people is too many. This is ultimately what humans must grapple with is Who can reproduce and how much. Until we solve that problem we are just parasites on this planets backside.

 

www.thelondonfog.blogspot.com

 

garb4.jpg

Let me be clear. Our species is in danger. We have overseen one of the largest extinction events in the history of the planet. Let us hope our own extinction is not on the horizon.

To let that be so we must change our behavior and soon. I will try to explore the different aspect of Throwing Away Behavior (TAB) in upcoming posts.

 

:}

:}

Man Made Global Warming Is Not Happening – So these experts say

Posted on by
Reply

Ah the liars strike back. SO TAKE THAT you you you environmentalists you.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/12/denialists_scraping_the_bottom.php#more

Denialists scraping the bottom of the barrel 

Category: Global Warming
Posted on: December 28, 2008 10:22 AM, by Tim Lambert

You have to think that global warming denialist Matt Drudge must be getting desperate when he touts a column by Christopher “White asbestos is harmless” Booker arguing that winter has disproved man-made global warming:

First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.

But this time of the year you normally have the whole of Canada and half the US under snow. Look at the graph below from the Rutgers Global Snow Lab. If you move your mouse over it, it will show current snow cover. Not much different, is it?

Despite a strong La Nina this year, 2008 was nowhere near as cold as the years at the start of the 20th century.

So what’s the second part of Booker’s disproof of AGW?

Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a “scientific consensus” in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world’s most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that “consensus” which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.

OK, lets look at the list of “climate experts” who signed the Manhattan declaration. I don’t see many eminent climate scientists there. Of the 619 authors of the IPCC AR4 WG1, precisely zero signed the Manhattan declaration. There are a couple of eminent climate scientists there: Reid Bryson and Bill Gray, but the vast majority are not climate scientists at all, and the list includes entries like this:

John McLean, Climate Data Analyst, Post-graduate Diploma of Computer Studies, B. Arch., Climate Data Analyst, Computer scientist, Melbourne, Australia

Even if you repeat it, “Climate Data Analyst” is just a title he made up. Study the graphs above of climatic data. Congratulations! You’re analyzing climate data, so you can call yourself a Climate Data Analyst as well.

:}

But Booker is a serious author right? Here is one of his little triumphs:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/3982101/2008-was-the-year-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html

I must end this year by again paying tribute to my readers for the wonderful generosity with which they came to the aid of two causes. First their donations made it possible for the latest “metric martyr”, the east London market trader Janet Devers, to fight Hackney council’s vindictive decision to prosecute her on 13 criminal charges, ranging from selling in pounds and ounces to selling produce “by the bowl” (to avoid using weights her customers dislike and don’t understand). The embarrassment caused by this historic battle has thrown the forced metrication policy of both our governments, in London and Brussels, into total disarray.

Since Hackney backed out of allowing four criminal charges against Janet to go before a jury next month, all that remains is for her to win her appeal in February against eight convictions which now look quite absurd (including those for selling veg by the bowl, as thousands of other London market traders do every day). The final goal, as Neil Herron of the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund insists, must then be a pardon for the late Steve Thoburn and the four other original “martyrs” who were found guilty in 2002 – after a legal battle also made possible by this column’s readers – of breaking laws so ridiculous that the EU Commission has even denied they existed (but which are still on the statute book).

:}

The EVIL METRIC people must be defeated….HAHAHAHAHAHA 

Oil Prices Fall Below 40$$ Per Barrel – We are all going to die!

Posted on by
Reply

I predicted this almost a year ago. BUT be prepared. By next summer oil will be back up in the 100$$ range probably topping out 132$$ per barrel. Why? Because this commodity market have never been destabilized by speculators before and it will BOUNCE around. Back and forth. Back and forth. Until it settles down where it started and where the Saudi’s say it should be at 70$$ per barrel. Will we survive all that whipsawing? Probably not. By then maybe we will be off the damn stuff and no one will care.

Now The Environmentalists Have Discovered There Is No Clean In Coal – I am shocked

Posted on by
1

I believe in carbon sequestration because I believe that carbon and other elements in smokestack effluent can be recycled. That is they can be used for feedstock for algae or concrete. Injecting it into the ground however is not an option. I have said that for 10 years while everyone else was sucking up to the power companies.

 http://www.newsweek.com/id/173086?GT1=43002

Blowing Smoke

Is clean coal technology fact or fiction?

By Daniel Stone | Newsweek Web Exclusive

Dec 9, 2008 | Updated: 8:08  a.m. ET Dec 9, 2008

 A single power plant in western Pennsylvania is one of the 12 biggest carbon dioxide polluting power plants in the U.S. emitting 17.4 million tons annually.

In the elusive search for the reliable energy source of the future, the prospect of clean coal is creating a lot of buzz. But while the concept—to scrub coal clean before burning, then capture and store harmful gases deep underground—may seem promising, a coalition of environment and climate groups argue in a new media campaign that the technology simply doesn’t exist.

The Alliance for Climate Protection and several other prominent organizations—including the Sierra Club and National Resources Defense Council—launched a multipronged campaign to “debrand” the clean part of clean coal, pointing out that there’s no conclusive evidence to confirm the entire process would work the way it’s being marketed. In the campaign’s TV ad, a technician sarcastically enters the door of a clean coal production plant, only to find there’s nothing on the other side. “Take a good long look,” he says, standing in a barren desert, “this is today’s clean coal technology.”

The campaign was designed to combat the well-funded coal industry, which formed a trade association in April to promote the idea of clean coal. Joe Lucas, a vice president for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, says that the technology does exist, although it’s still in early development stages. “With the current research being done, we think we can get the technology up and running within 10 to 15 years,” he says. Activists like Brian Hardwick, chief spokesman for the Alliance for Climate Protection, aren’t so sure. Hardwick spoke to NEWSWEEK’s Daniel Stone about why the idea of clean coal shouldn’t be considered a solution. 

:}

And it makes for great TV:

http://www.thisisreality.org/#/?p=canary

:}

Of course up till now they have been peddling other “stuff”:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/clean-coal.htm

What is clean coal technology?

by Sarah Dowdey

Coal is the dirtiest of all fossil fuels. When burned, it produces emissions that contribute to global warming, create acid rain and pollute water. With all of the hoopla surrounding nuclear energy, hydropower and biofuels, you might be forgiven for thinking that grimy coal is finally on its way out.

But coal is no sooty remnant of the Industrial Revolution — it generates half of the electricity in the United States and will likely continue to do so as long as it’s cheap and plentiful [source: Energy Information Administration]. Clean coal technology seeks to reduce harsh environmental effects by using multiple technologies to clean coal and contain its emissions.

When coal burns, it releases carbon dioxide and other emissions in flue gas, the billowing clouds you see pouring out of smoke stacks. Some clean coal technologies purify the coal before it burns. One type of coal preparation, coal washing, removes unwanted minerals by mixing crushed coal with a liquid and allowing the impurities to separate and settle.

Other systems control the coal burn to minimize emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulates. Wet scrubbers, or flue gas desulfurization systems, remove sulfur dioxide, a major cause of acid rain, by spraying flue gas with limestone and water. The mixture reacts with the sulfur dioxide to form synthetic gypsum, a component of drywall.

Low-NOx (nitrogen oxide) burners reduce the creation of nitrogen oxides, a cause of ground-level ozone, by restricting oxygen and manipulating the combustion process. Electrostatic precipitators remove particulates that aggravate asthma and cause respiratory ailments by charging particles with an electrical field and then capturing them on collection plates.

Where do the emissions go?

Carbon capture and storage — perhaps the most promising clean coal technology — catches and sequesters carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from stationary sources like power plants. Since CO2 contributes to global warming, reducing its release into the atmosphere has become a major international concern. In order to discover the most efficient and economical means of carbon capture, researchers have developed several technologies.

Coal isn't going anywhere soon -- it generates half of the U.S. power supply.
Aaron Cobbett/Stone/Getty Images
Coal isn’t going anywhere soon — it generates half of the U.S. power supply.

Flue-gas separation removes CO2 with a solvent, strips off the CO2 with steam, and condenses the steam into a concentrated stream. Flue gas separation renders commercially usable CO2, which helps offset its price. Another process, oxy-fuel combustion, burns the fuel in pure or enriched oxygen to create a flue gas composed primarily of CO2 and water — this ­sidesteps the energy-intensive process of separating the CO2 from other flue gasses. A third technology, pre-combustion capture, removes the CO2 before it’s burned as a part of a gasification process.

:}

Here is where the bullshit starts, “Why would they have to do anything after sequestration?”

:}

After capture, secure containers sequester the collected CO2 to prevent or stall its reentry into the atmosphere. The two storage options, geologic and oceanic, must contain the CO2 until peak emissions subside hundreds of years from now. Geologic storage involves injecting CO2 into the earth. Depleted oil or gas fields and deep saline aquifers safely contain CO2 while unminable coal seams absorb it. A process called enhanced oil recovery already uses CO2 to maintain pressure and improve extraction in oil reservoirs.

:}

How Many Countries Does It Take To Change A Light Bulb? Apparently Many

Posted on by
Reply

Will we ever learn?

 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081212/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_poland_climate_talks

Poor nations to get funds

 to fight climate change

By ARTHUR MAX, Associated Press Writer

POZNAN, Poland – Negotiators at a U.N. climate conference broke through red tape and freed up millions of dollars Friday to help poor countries adapt to increasingly severe droughts, floods and other effects of global warming.“This could be the one thing to come out of Poznan,” said Kit Vaughan of WWF-Britain.The decision in the final hours of the two-week conference could begin to release some $60 million (euro45 million) within months, according to delegates and environmentalists following the closed-door talks.“This is an important step,” said delegate Mozaharul Alam of Bangladesh.Alam said ministers and senior delegates from dozens of countries decided to give a blocked fund’s governing board the authority to directly disburse money to developing countries for projects to reduce greenhouse gases.

Until now, the U.N.-backed Adaptation Fund board could not operate because its board had no right to approve and sign those contracts.

The fund is derived from a 2 percent levy on offset investments that industrial nations make on green projects in the developing world. The negotiators have been discussing other ways to ramp up the fund into the billions.

The agreement was one of the few concrete goals the delegates set for Poznan when the talks began Dec. 1. Delegations from nearly 190 countries are negotiating a new climate change pact, to be completed next December in the Danish capital of Copenhagen, that would succeed the Kyoto Protocol when it expires in 2012.

:}

:}

Around The World In 80 Days – Well not quite but

Posted on by
Reply

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7766249.stm

‘Solar taxi’ goes round the world

A solar-powered car has arrived at the UN climate change talks in the Polish city of Poznan after a round-the-world trip covering almost 40 countries.

At the wheel of the “solar taxi” was Swiss teacher Louis Palmer who made the 52,000km (32,000 mile) 17-month trip.

He said the feat proved solar power was a viable alternative to oil-based fuels and could help fight global warming.

But he said the prototype would need serious modification before it could be mass produced.

The small blue-and-white three-wheeler tows a trailer packed with batteries charged by the sun. It can travel for 300km on a single charge and reach speeds of 90km/h (55mph).

“People love this idea of a solar car,” Mr Palmer said outside the venue of the UN climate talks. “I hope that the car industry hears…and makes electric cars in future.”

Mr Palmer, 36, said the car ran “like a Swiss clock,” breaking down only twice during the gruelling trip through 38 nations starting in Lucerne in July 2007.

Newt Gingrich Plans To Save The Earth – Maybe the silliest use of energy yet

Posted on by
1

So silly in fact that the price of the book has fallen from $20 to $2.39.

http://www.amazon.com/Contract-Earth-Newt-Gingrich/dp/0801887801 

This from a man who does not believe in global warming. This from a man who helped start the “Drill Here, Drill Now” movement. This from a man who adamitly opposes Cap and Trade even though it’s an industry ameliorative. Oh and a forward by the man who once hypothesized that people with black skin have lower I.Q.s then people with white skin color. But don’t listen to me:

http://www.amazon.com/review/product/0801887801

7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars If we pass the test, we get to keep the planet (Everglades), December 6, 2007

Local Book Review by John Arthur Marshall, (JAMinfo@AOL.com); President
Arthur R. Marshall Foundation and Florida Environmental Institute, Inc. www.ArtMarshall.org

A Contract with the Earth: Newt Gingrich and Terry Maple; John Hopkins; 2007

Contract with the Earth is an overdue call for local, national and international action in a time of serious need for we planetary occupants to pay much more attention to what we are doing to the planet (destroying our life support system at a seemingly indiscernible rate, with enormous consequences given ubiquitous inaction). This is the major problem that Contract addresses.

Contract might be summarized as a re-call of Teddy Roosevelt conservationism with emphasis on the authors’ new advocacy of entrepreneurial environmentalism. All this verges on a matter of insistence, which is good, even great, if twice as many folks that are engaged in the present environmental movement read and heed… Then engage at least one neo-conservationist politician on the need to take on stewardship of the environment as a major issue in the current election debates. We can do it!

As the authors astutely note: Everyone ought to participate in discussions of environmental policies and to that end should have a rudimentary understanding of the processes that make a habitable planet.

Of particular importance in the current elections scenario, the authors identify the need to get the environment elevated as arguably the most important issue confronting society today. How can presidential candidates not pay attention to long-term effects of climate change, and the need for conservation and preservation of what remains of our life support system? A bonus is a call for strategic planning, and adherence to planetary needs.

The authors acknowledge that insufficient attention is being paid by politicians, and with the rest of us, lament that the current administration has been a failure here, even with the late attempt at for lasting legacy to cover inaction regarding potential disastrous consequences in the future.

The author’s define the distinction between conservation and preservation in a manner that deserves further consideration. That is left for future readers to discover, in a book that is worth reading, and begging for action by the non-reactive information-overloaded majority.

As President of a tree-planting organization, my most favorite spot in this book is Chapter 8: Renewing the Natural World. This chapter emphasizes the need to preserve rainforests and restore forests and wetlands. Here in Florida we call them forested wetlands, or swamps (lots of cypress and custard apple trees and related species normally in standing water). In the sequence of quotable quotes at the beginning of each chapter, Chapter 8 also holds my favorite quote:

Few are altogether deaf to the preaching of pine trees. Their sermons on the mountains go to our hearts; and if people in general could be got into the woods, even for once to hear the trees speak for themselves, all difficulties in the way of forest perseveration would vanish. John Muir [Founder Sierra Club]; there were also lots of pine trees in Florida. The past-tense is not good.

This quote is an appropriate sequel to another salient section in Chapter 10, with the mention of Richard Louv, author of Last Child in the Woods. Louv amplifies the need for the younger generation to be more exposed to nature, as previous generations were. Something is missing. Louv points out that staying indoors in front of a computer, rather than more exposure to nature, may lead to nature deficit disorder, which he relates to potential attention deficit disorder and maladjustments in life.

As a sixth generation Floridian, following progress of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) I very much appreciate Newt’s observation on page 226:

“Florida has the opportunity to become a laboratory that the entire world studies… There are very few places where you have a complex fragile ecosystem this close to this many people”. Newt, Associated Press, 1997. Recent AP headlines – Everglades Restoration bogged down – is inappropriate.

The authors also recognize that the proximity of massive land-fills (Mt. Trashmore’s we call them) to the Everglades are inappropriate to conservation and preservation of important ecosystems. Currently, local government is considering locating a Mt. Trashmore right next to the Arthur R. Marshall National Wildlife Refuge, a primary subject of CERP implementation. Not only will the landfill be a dominant terrain feature, the creatures this will attract will pose a serious threat to native wildlife, especially wading birds. This could also pose a serious threat to federal funding.

The authors also implore us (again!) to think globally and act locally. OK Palm Beachers, CERP implementation is also about sustaining a viable water supply. This is need to know stuff.

Unfortunately the behavior of government toward CERP, especially in the current federal administration, is much like the authors describe:

The American government, however continues to posture and vent, unable or unwilling to commit or act decisively…. Except possibly to give development overwhelming priority.

If there is one thing that might call for a little reconsideration, it is the authors’ inclination to view technological solutions as sometimes preferable to natural one’s, without mentioning the precautionary principle, an approach advocated by scientists when there is a dearth of knowledge. Scientists caution on reliance of engineered solutions, as there are always unforeseen, usually adverse consequences here. Humankind’s intrusions require natural solutions. Natural solutions are most often perpetual, and the most cost-effective. OK, green energy may be an exception.

At the onset, Contract challenges the readers to take a Test to determine whether (or not) you (the reader) is a mainstream environmentalist. In the end the authors challenge the readers to support the broad principles of the contract, by contributing time and ideas to create together a new kind of environmental movement.

From the Everglades Restoration endeavor, a more widely applicable quote is attributed to the Mother of the Everglades, Marjory Stoneman Douglas, author of Everglades, River of Grass:

If we pass the Test we get to keep the planet!

DISCLAIMER: The Author of this review, an Everglades restoration advocate, is not a professional book reviewer.

John Arthur Marshall
2806 South Dixie Highway, WPB 33405; 561-801-2165
 

:}

On the other hand:

Same old, same old, April 18, 2008

By  Arthur E. Lamontagne –
(REAL NAME)   

A lot of rehash of old ideas and trite science. I was disappointed, especially since I have been a big fan of Newt’s philosophies and politics.
:}

If you want to hear what the great man himself thinks try, are you ready for it?, newt.org:

 http://newt.org/AContractwiththeEarth/tabid/220/Default.aspx

:}

Scientist Fred Bortz sees it a little different:

http://www.fredbortz.com/review/ContractWithEarth.htm

I am a scientist, and I vote. To put this review in context, I place myself in the moderate to progressive segment of American politics. But I never let my political views get in the way of interpreting what observation, experiment, and scientific analysis tell me about the world.

For instance, when I reviewed Chris Mooney’s provocative The Republican War on Science (RWOS), my first reaction was skepticism. “Show me the evidence,” I demanded of that book. In the end, Mooney’s thorough research persuaded me that his thesis deserved serious consideration.

RWOS covered a broad range of topics, but the one of greatest concern to me was the political foot-dragging and outright denial of human-induced global warming, especially in the Republican controlled congress and the George W. Bush White House.

I often wrote in my blog that I would listen to any proposed political solution to the problem–liberal, conservative, or otherwise–as long as the discussion began with the best understanding of the science and considered a range of plausible scenarios. Thus I was heartened to learn of this new book by one of the United States leading conservative thinkers, Newt Gingrich, in collaboration with conservationist Terry Maple.

I assumed that I would disagree with Gingrich’s proposed political approaches. But I also assumed that the book will make an important contribution to the debate on global warming. I was correct on both counts. A Contract With the Earth has the potential to move the debate away from whether global warming is occurring and whether human activities are causing it, and move toward issues where conservatives and liberals argue about how best to deal with the problem.

However, I am disappointed that it pussyfoots around the Right’s nonsense about calling global warming a hoax and a liberal conspiracy. Gingrich frequently points fingers at the Left for their “doomsday scenarios.” I disagree with that characterization, though I understand that a warning can be delivered too stridently, thereby turning off the people you hope to reach.

But if turning people away from the solution is a problem, then Gingrich needs to be equally critical of outright denialism on the Right. To deny and obfuscate is far more than simply to “disdain” environmental action, which is about as far as he goes in criticizing his own party. He may not have agreed with leading denier Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, but by remaining quiet he facilitated Inhofe’s misuse of his Chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works to block action on global warming. In this book, Gingrich is continuing to give Inhofe and his cronies a pass.

In other words, I don’t doubt his sincerity about the need to act, and I don’t question the value of conservative approaches to the solution. But Gingrich is clearly worried about his right flank in this book. Mainstream Republicans have known for some time that global warming is a problem and would welcome some courageous leadership from Gingrich. Instead, many of them will see this as opportunism by someone who wants to be president and thus can’t afford to alienate the Right.

Physicist Fred Bortz is the author of numerous science books for young readers.

:}

Leave it to the Washington Post to get it right:

http://www.powells.com/review/2008_01_04.html

Green Republicans

A review by Juliet Eilperin

Yet they gloss over some of the toughest questions facing international policymakers today, and they compare the environmental records of Bush and former President Bill Clinton in a way that strains credulity.  

On the central question of global warming, Gingrich and Maple are closer to Bush than to most of the world’s business and political leaders. They argue that climate change poses a serious threat and that the United States should reengage in international negotiations. But they question the wisdom of imposing a mandatory, nationwide cap on carbon emissions on the grounds that Europe’s carbon dioxide emissions rose faster than America’s between 2000 and 2004. (It’s worth noting that since 2000, U.S. emissions have risen at 1.5 times the rate they did in the 1990s, not exactly a stunning model of restraint.) Like Bush, Gingrich and Maple rest their hopes on technological innovation: “The world can be changed faster by the spread of brilliant ideas than by any plodding bureaucracy, and we gladly put our faith in such intellectual and social processes.”

In that sense this book is classic Newt, brimming with military metaphors and grand visions of America leading the rest of globe to a brighter future. In environmentalism, as in war, “we must demand a complete and decisive victory,” the authors say. “Renewing the earth is surely one of the greatest challenges this generation has confronted, and we understand how important it is to succeed.”

To show the value of what they call “business partnerships on behalf of the environment,” the authors describe how the Nature Conservancy, Conservation International and the Wildlife Conservation Society have made common cause with such corporate entities as Wal-Mart and McDonald’s. As a result, much of the book reads like the kind of corporate advertisement that appears on newspaper op-ed pages. Gingrich and Maple contend that the private sector, not government, holds the answers to the globe’s biggest problems. The question is whether people in places such as Bangladesh can afford to wait and see if they’re right.

Juliet Eilperin is the Post‘s national environmental reporter.

:}

:}

The Topic Of The Week Is Silly Energy Uses – As typed in at Google

Posted on by
Reply

I was shocked when I type in Silly Energy Uses into Google and got back 8 out of 10 references to Sarah Palin. But then I thought about it and realised that the Drill Here, Drill Now crowd does look silly, with oil prices in the 50$$ per barrel range and maybe going to 40$$ a barrel. The Saudis, the Ruskies and the Venezualans (should we call them Vennies?) have got to be looking to kill a bunch of Hedge Fund Operators and other bizzilionaires. Though the Brazilians (Brazzies?)got pletty of crap all over their faces too. What in the world are they going to do with all those oil rigs?

I have not had so much laughter and fun since the gas lines in the 70’s and the recession that led up to globalization in the 80s.

http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/10/29/sarah_palin_on_energy/

 htww.png

Wednesday, Oct. 29, 2008 09:39 PDT

Sarah Palin’s silly energy speech

When the announcement that John McCain had chosen Sarah Palin to be his running mate broke across the political landscape like an Alaskan mountain avalanche, many analysts, including yours truly, jumped to the conclusion that her background in energy issues made her a savvy choice in an era of record-breaking oil prices. McCain’s “drill here, drill now” mantra was taking a bite out of Obama’s poll numbers, and the immediate expectation was that Palin would be a potent vehicle for delivering energy-related soundbites.

But it didn’t turn out that way. On Wednesday morning, oil traded at $65 dollars a barrel, more than 50 percent off its July peak of $147. The financial crisis proved more riveting than gas prices, and Sarah Palin’s rocky performance as a debutante on the national political stage swiftly obliterated the conventional wisdom that she could be an asset to the McCain campaign.

 :}

But Palin’s speech is still worth some attention, because it clearly makes the case for why the McCain-Palin agenda is fundamentally wrong for the United States.

Palin started off by acknowledging that “the price of oil is declining largely because of the market’s expectation of a broad recession that would lower demand.” She was absolutely correct to note that “this is hardly a good sign of things to come,” and that “when our economy recovers, and growth once again creates new demand, we could run into the same brick wall of rising oil and gasoline prices.”

(:=} even the Saudis got to get into the act)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122523334615277739.html

By GUY CHAZAN

 LONDON — The slump in oil prices has spread relief among consumers and fuel-reliant industries, but also is squeezing the companies who could invest in new sources of oil — spurring concerns that prices will prompt them to shelve investments.

Industry executives warn that could mean the world will face a dramatic ramping up of prices as soon as the global economy, and demand, begins to rebound.

“Low oil prices are very dangerous for the world economy,” said Mohamed Bin Dhaen Al Hamli, the United Arab Emirates’ energy minister, speaking Tuesday at an oil-industry conference in London. 

(:=}

The piece drew many comments but the first is the most rational. Then they decay into the IT CAN’T BE DONE comments from the ignorant right. As usual.

 http://letters.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/10/29/sarah_palin_on_energy/view/index3.html?show=all

What we need is a commitment to relatively low-tech alternative energy

Solar satellites and fusion energy are pie-in-the-sky ideas that have been around forever and have yielded little practical promise. Existing earth-based solar collector and wind farm technology could provide a substantial percentage of our energy needs right now. Dedicating a few hundred square miles of CA/NV desert land to a massive solar collector that could provide 100% of U.S. electrical needs would be a worthy investment.

 http://www.gossiprocks.com/forum/u-s-politics-issues/86951-sarah-palins-silly-energy-speech.html

Both the McCain/Palin campaign and the Obama/Biden campaign are making unrealistic promises about the prospect of reaching energy independence. As Obama himself notes, when you consume 25 percent of the world’s oil but own only 3 percent of the world’s oil reserves, energy independence isn’t ever going to come from expanding domestic production.The difference between the two campaigns is that McCain/Palin is more unrealistic. Obama has made it clear that his energy independence plan will requires massive expansion of alternative and renewable energy resources and huge investments in conservation and energy efficiency, even as he acknowledges that more investment in offshore drilling, nuclear power, and clean coal will also most likely be necessary. (McCain and Palin routinely misrepresent Obama’s position on nuclear power and clean coal, and the vice presidential candidate did so again today.)Palin devoted one paragraph of her energy security policy speech to alternative energy solutions.

In our administration, that will mean harnessing alternative sources of energy, like wind and solar. We will end subsidies and tariffs that drive prices up, and provide tax credits indexed to low automobile carbon emissions. We will encourage Americans to be part of the solution by taking steps in their everyday lives that conserve more and use less. And we will control greenhouse gas emissions by giving American businesses new incentives and new rewards to seek, instead of just giving them new taxes to pay and new orders to follow.

That’s not enough. True leadership on energy requires devoting more than one paragraph to vague handwaving about wind and solar and greenhouse gas emissions. Economic turmoil and low oil prices may have shunted renewables and conservation off the main track for now, but to quote Palin, “this is hardly a sign of good things to come.”

 :}

But then the real waste of Energy was people trying to “figure out the real” John McCain. He was the guy who wanted to build 100 NUKES and was too old and out of touch to be President.

http://sillyhumans.blogspot.com/

 By TIM DICKINSON Posted Oct 16, 2008 7:00 PM

—
This is the story of the real John McCain, the one who has been hiding in plain sight. It is the story of a man who has consistently put his own advancement above all else, a man willing to say and do anything to achieve his ultimate ambition: to become commander in chief, ascending to the one position that would finally enable him to outrank his four-star father and grandfather.

In its broad strokes, McCain’s life story is oddly similar to that of the current occupant of the White House. John Sidney McCain III and George Walker Bush both represent the third generation of American dynasties. Both were born into positions of privilege against which they rebelled into mediocrity. Both developed an uncanny social intelligence that allowed them to skate by with a minimum of mental exertion. Both struggled with booze and loutish behavior. At each step, with the aid of their fathers’ powerful friends, both failed upward. And both shed their skins as Episcopalian members of the Washington elite to build political careers as self-styled, ranch-inhabiting Westerners who pray to Jesus in their wives’ evangelical churches.

 http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain

On the grounds between the two brick colleges, the chitchat between the scion of four-star admirals and the son of a prizefighter turns to their academic travels; both colleges sponsor a trip abroad for young officers to network with military and political leaders in a distant corner of the globe.

“I’m going to the Middle East,” Dramesi says. “Turkey, Kuwait, Lebanon, Iran.”

“Why are you going to the Middle East?” McCain asks, dismissively.

“It’s a place we’re probably going to have some problems,” Dramesi says.

“Why? Where are you going to, John?”

“Oh, I’m going to Rio.”

“What the hell are you going to Rio for?”

McCain, a married father of three, shrugs.

“I got a better chance of getting laid.”
 :}

:}

5 Environmentally Friendly Entrepeneurs Get Awards – Invest now

Posted on by
2

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4290905.html?nav=rss20

5 Award-Winning

Green Technologies from

 the Clean Tech Open 2008

The envelope, please—the California Clean Tech Open, the Oscars of the green business world, took place at San Francisco’s Palace of Fine Arts last week. Standout clean-tech startups in six categories received $100,000 “startup in a box” packages to help bring their sustainable visions closer to fruition. Here’s a glimpse at some of this year’s luminaries.

By Elizabeth Svoboda

Published on: November 10, 2008

 http://www.bottlestone.com/

 BottleStone

Winner of California Clean Tech Open! We would like to give a special thanks to the CCTO Green Building category sponsors: Argonne National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. President and CEO Michael Looney speaks to ABC News.

BottleStone is a beautiful, new green surface material made of 80% post-consumer recycled glass. BottleStone provides a green alternative to stone slabs offering the same warm aesthetics of natural stone materials.

http://www.electradrive.net/

Winner of the Transportation Award at the 2008 California Clean Tech Open, ElectraDrive is commercializing an invention to enable the mass conversion of existing cars and light trucks to electric drive.With ElectraDrive, you can benefit from the size and functionality you need from your vehicle, without being tied to the pump.

  • Mile-for-mile, electric power is less than one-tenth the cost of gasoline.
  • We are already energy-independent when it comes to electricity production.
  • An ElectraDrive conversion will liberate your vehicle from foreign oil, and reduce pollution.

At a Glance
ElectraDrive replaces a vehicle’s gas drivetrain.
All-electric traction provides instant torque.
Drive electrically around town, plug in to recharge.
Never worry about running out of juice on longer trips: an onboard generator charges the battery pack.
Fill up only six times a year.
Improve reliability, extend vehicle life.
ElectraDrive will adapt to cars and light trucks of all sizes.
Configure the system to meet your driving needs: performance, efficiency or a blend.

http://www.viridisearth.com/

VIRIDIS EARTH TECHNOLOGIES

Viridis means green. Located in the San Jose Environmental Business Cluster, Viridis Earth Technologies seeks innovative solutions that encourage human activities with minimal impact   on the fragile environment.

Currently, we are developing simple but environmentally effective technologies to reduce the energy consumption of air conditioners. Please contact us for more details.


 

 http://www.cleantechopen.com/app.cgi/teams/directory/view_team/1/242

Focal Point Energy

Solar Hot Water and Steam Generation for Industrial Applications

Competitions

2008 Renewables Winner

Address

1450 Koll Circle, Ste. 105

San Jose, CA 95112

Contact

Taber Smith
1450 Koll Circle, Ste 105

San Jose, CA 95112
Please login to see email and phone information

Description

Focal Point Energy is making a solar hot water and steam generator for industrial applications. In the western US alone, roughly 18 Billion Dollars is spent heating hot water and steam for industrial applications, such as pasteurizing milk. Most of the time, the sun is blaring down on a nearly empty rooftop. Heating water and steam with the sun is very efficient, which can provide the short payback necessary for many of these low-margin businesses. But these industries need large roof systems that are easily installed, maintained, & repaired. Focal Point Energy has developed a roof-mountable, large-scale, high-temperature solar water and steam heater that is low-cost, light-weight, and easily connected into existing industrial boiler systems to provide clean heat without interruption or contamination. Focal Point is changing the way industries generate heat!

 http://www.cleantechopen.com/app.cgi/teams/directory/view_team/1/254

Solar Red

We dramatically lower the cost of residential PV

Competitions

2008 Green Building Runner up

Contact

Joe Augenbraun
609 Gloucester Lane

Foster City, CA 94404
Please login to see email and phone information

Description

Solar hardware costs scale with volume and innovation, while installation costs do not. Because of this, installation will soon become the dominant cost of residential PV systems. The current trend is to lower installation cost by making small evolutionary changes to the existing process. Solar Red disrupts the residential and small installation ecosystem by cutting the cost of installation in half.

:}

:}

Witches And Sarah Palin Make For Crazy Energy Policy – Better give the kids their candy or it’s a nasty trick for you

Posted on by
1

Witches are so cool. Feared because they were powerful woman who paid no mind to no man. But then some people fear them, well, because they are fearful all the time:

 http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080925_13_ANCH744416

Palin once blessed to be free from ‘witchcraft’

By GARANCE BURKE Associated Press Writer
9/25/2008  9:41 AM

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — A grainy YouTube video surfaced Wednesday showing Sarah Palin being blessed in her hometown church three years ago by a Kenyan pastor who prayed for her protection from “witchcraft” as she prepared to seek higher office.The video shows Palin, the Republican vice presidential candidate, standing before Bishop Thomas Muthee in the pulpit of the Wasilla Assembly of God church, holding her hands open as he asked Jesus Christ to keep her safe from “every form of witchcraft.”“Come on, talk to God about this woman. We declare, save her from Satan,” Muthee said as two attendants placed their hands on Palin’s shoulders. “Make her way my God. Bring finances her way even for the campaign in the name of Jesus. … Use her to turn this nation the other way around.”Palin filed campaign papers a few months later, in October 2005, and was elected governor the next year.

Palin does not say anything on the video and keeps her head bowed throughout the blessing. She was baptized at the church but stopped attending regularly in 2002

Come on, talk to God about this woman. We declare, save her from Satan,” Muthee said as two attendants placed their hands on Palin’s shoulders. “Make her way my God. Bring finances her way even for the campaign in the name of Jesus. … Use her to turn this nation the other way around.”

Palin filed campaign papers a few months later, in October 2005, and was elected governor the next year.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj-on3kfWuE 
:}

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/24/video-palin-shown-praying_n_128873.html

 Blumenthal, in addition to his on the scenes reporting, posts video of the sermon which Palin references (footage begins at 7:30). In it, the minister implores Jesus to protect Palin from “the spirit of witchcraft.” Earlier, he states, “We need God taking over our education system. If we have God in our schools, we will not have our kids being taught how to worship Buddha, how to worship Muhammad. We will not have in the curriculum witchcraft and sorcery.” He also preaches, “The other area is the media. We need believers in the media. We need God taking over the media in our lives.” 

 :}

This stuff seems rather ho hum until you go from Halloween to the real world.

🙂

MINISTRY STUDENTS: Governor asked them to pray for troops, pipeline.

By GENE JOHNSON
The Associated Press

Published: September 4th, 2008 01:50 AM
Last Modified: September 4th, 2008 06:35 PM

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told ministry students at her former church that the United States sent troops to fight in the Iraq war on a “task that is from God.”

In an address last June, the Republican vice presidential candidate also urged ministry students to pray for a plan to build a $30 billion natural gas pipeline in the state, calling it “God’s will.”

Palin asked the students to pray for the troops in Iraq and noted that her eldest son, Track, was expected to be deployed there.

“Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God,” she said. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God’s plan.”

A video of the speech was posted at the Wasilla Assembly of God’s Web site before finding its way on to other sites on the Internet.

Palin told graduating students of the church’s School of Ministry, “What I need to do is strike a deal with you guys.” As they preached the love of Jesus throughout Alaska, she said, she’d work to implement God’s will from the governor’s office, including creating jobs by building a pipeline to bring North Slope natural gas to North American markets.

“God’s will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that,” she said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhs-Faxi55o

:}

Now I know what you are thinking, many oil Executives have prayed and prayed that their pipelines got done on time and under budget. But that was so they didn’t lose any money. Sarah’s praying to get the pipelin to happen. Geez, I thought that was Congress and the EPA’s job. Happy Halloween!

Oh and for a real witch:

 http://bizarrocomic.blogspot.com/

 biz_lesbianwitches_10-31-07_wb.jpg

Dan he is funny, oh I mean damn – never mind

:}