Mary Landrieu – Finally a woman polluter wow that IS equallity

My computer was attacked by a Trojan Horse dialer on Friday and life has sucked ever since. I am posting from the Riverton Library as we speak. This meant that I did not get to give my tribute to Martin Luther King as the founder of the environemental justice movement. So here are some sites to see:

http://taintedgreen.com/general/what-would-martin-luther-king-jr-say-to-us-about-the-environment/000509

or

http://ams.confex.com/ams/87ANNUAL/techprogram/paper_122177.htm 

:}

But we shall move on. We are going over the 17 greatest climate killers in the US as an example of whose behavior we have to change. This post is from 2 very important articles in of all places the Rolling Stone Magazine:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31633532/as_the_world_burns/ 

Meet the 17 polluters and deniers who are derailing efforts to curb global warming in Tim Dickinson’s “The Climate Killers.”

:}

It is sad but true…I worked in Mary’s first campaign for the Senate. The sole reason I did was to make her the first woman elected to the Senate from Louisiana. This is how I am repaid. Just think her Brother Mitch Landrieu is probably the next Mayor of New Orleans. Wonder what they can do together?

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31633524/the_climate_killers/5

The Dirty Democrat
Sen. Mary Landrieu
Democrat, Louisiana

Landrieu — who boasts of being “the most fervent pro-drilling Democrat in the Senate” — has assured oil interests that she’ll be “putting the brakes” on current efforts to cap carbon pollution. Even though her home state will be savaged by climate change, Katrina-style, Landrieu routinely sides with her energy funders. In 2008, after providing the pivotal vote to preserve $12 billion in tax breaks for Big Oil, she received $272,000 from oil and gas interests — third among Democrats. Joined by other Democrats from key energy states — including Jim Webb of Virginia, Max Baucus of Montana, Evan Bayh of Indiana and Robert Byrd of West Virginia — Landrieu tried to kill climate legislation in the Senate by requiring that it be passed by a 60-vote supermajority. “Landrieu acts more to protect Big Oil than the future for the people of Louisiana,” says Tony Massaro of the League of Conservation Voters, which added Landrieu to its “Dirty Dozen” roster of pro-pollution politicians.

:}

Hope somebody drills her someday. 

:}

The Number 2 Polluter In The United States – Rupert Murdock

I know he is an Australian bloke but he owns the media in the US…

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31633532/as_the_world_burns/

Meet the 17 polluters and deniers who are derailing efforts to curb global warming in Tim Dickinson’s “The Climate Killers.”

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31633524/the_climate_killers/2

The Disinformer
Rupert Murdoch
CEO, News Corporation

In 2007, when the world’s most powerful media baron announced his newfound conviction that global warming “poses clear, catastrophic threats,” it seemed as though the truth about climate change might finally get the attention it deserves. Murdoch promised that not only would News Corp. itself become carbon-neutral by 2010, but that his media outlets would explain the urgent need for a cap on carbon emissions. Climate change, he pledged, would be addressed as a sober reality across the News Corp. empire, whether as a plot element on 24 or in a story on Fox News. “I don’t think there’s any question of my conviction on this issue,” Murdoch declared. “I’ve come to feel it very strongly.”

Since then, however, Murdoch and his media operations have become the nation’s leading source of disinformation about climate change. In October, Fox Business ran an extended segment on “The Carbon Myth,” inviting a hack scientist to “make the case” that more carbon pollution is actually “good for the environment.” The Wall Street Journal has continued to lie not only about the reality of global warming but about Obama’s efforts to prevent it, denouncing climate legislation as “likely to be the biggest tax in American history.”

:}

Read the whole article. It is pretty damning.

:}

Oh and I can’t resist, this is the best collection of envirovideos I have ever seen.

http://ecopolitology.org/2010/01/11/the-top-9-viral-videos-of-the-green-movement-1958-2010/

:}

There Are Only 500 Sources World Wide That Need To Be Curbed To Combat Global Warming

If you discount Airplanes, the single biggest cause of Global Warming, and the world’s Militaries, the second largest cause of Global warming then there are 500, yes just 500 point of source polluters that are causing Global Warming. These sources make very real people wealthy. It is these people and there proxies who are causing the problem. Here are my 17 most favorite Americans.

Meet the 17 polluters and deniers who are derailing efforts to curb global warming in Tim Dickinson’s “The Climate Killers.”

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31633524/the_climate_killers/

The Profiteer
Warren Buffett
CEO, Berkshire Hathaway

Despite being a key adviser to Obama during the financial crisis, America’s best-known investor has been blasting the president’s push to curb global warming — using the same lying points promoted by far-right Republicans. The climate bill passed by the House, Buffett insists, is a “huge tax — and there’s no sense calling it anything else.” What’s more, he says, the measure would mean “very poor people are going to pay a lot more money for their electricity.” Never mind that the climate bill, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, would actually save Americans with the lowest incomes about $40 a year.

But Buffett, whose investments have the power to move entire markets, is doing far more than bad-mouthing climate legislation — he’s literally banking on its failure. In recent months, the Oracle of Omaha has invested billions in carbon-polluting industries, seeking to cash in as the world burns. His conglomerate, Berkshire Hathaway, has added 1.28 million shares of America’s biggest climate polluter, ExxonMobil, to its balance sheet. And in November, Berkshire placed a huge wager on the future of coal pollution, purchasing the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad for $26 billion — the largest acquisition of Buffett’s storied career. BNSF is the nation’s top hauler of coal, shipping some 300 million tons a year. That’s enough to light up 10 percent of the nation’s homes — many of which are powered by another Berkshire subsidiary, MidAmerican Energy. Although Berkshire is the largest U.S. firm not to disclose its carbon pollution — and second globally only to the Bank of China — its utilities have the worst emissions intensity in America, belching more than 65 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere in 2008 alone.

:}

16 more to go. See yah tomorrow

:}

Why The Energy Companies Lobbied Against Healthcare – To stave off Cap and Trade

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31633532/as_the_world_burns/

 

As the World Burns

How Big Oil and Big Coal mounted one of the most aggressive lobbying campaigns in history to block progress on global warming

JEFF GOODELLPosted Jan 06, 2010 8:15 AM

Meet the 17 polluters and deniers who are derailing efforts to curb global warming in Tim Dickinson’s “The Climate Killers.”

This was supposed to be the transformative moment on global warming, the tipping point when America proved to the world that capitalism has a conscience, that we take the fate of the planet seriously. According to the script, Congress would pass a landmark bill committing the U.S. to deep cuts in carbon emissions. President Obama would then arrive in Copenhagen for the international climate summit, armed with the moral and political capital he needed to challenge the rest of the world to do the same. After all, wasn’t this the kind of bold move the Norwegians were anticipating when they awarded Obama the Nobel Peace Prize?

As we now know, it didn’t work out that way. Obama arrived in Copenhagen last month without any legislation committing the U.S. to reduce carbon pollution. Instead of reaching agreement on how to stop cooking the planet, the summit devolved into bickering over who bears the most blame for turning up the heat. The world once again missed an opportunity to avert disaster — and the delay is likely to have deadly consequences. In recent years, we have moved from talking about the possibility of climate change to watching it unfold before our eyes. The Arctic is melting, wildfires are turning into infernos, warm-weather insects are devouring forests, droughts are getting longer and more lethal. And the more we learn about climate change, the more it becomes apparent how enormous the risks are. Just a few years ago, researchers estimated that sea levels would likely rise 17 inches by 2100. Now they believe it could be three feet or more — a cataclysmic shift that would doom many of the world’s cities, including London and New Orleans, and create tens of millions of climate refugees.

Our collective response to the emerging catastrophe verges on suicidal. World leaders have been talking about tackling climate change for nearly 20 years now — yet carbon emissions keep going up and up. “We are in a race against time,” says Rep. Jay Inslee, a Democrat from Washington who has fought for sharp reductions in planet-warming pollution. “Mother Nature isn’t sitting around waiting for us to get our political act together.” In fact, our failure to confront global warming is more than simply political incompetence. Over the past year, the corporations and special interests most responsible for climate change waged an all-out war to prevent Congress from cracking down on carbon pollution in time for Copenhagen. The oil and coal industries deployed an unprecedented army of lobbyists, spent millions on misleading studies and engaged in outright deception to derail climate legislation. “It was the most aggressive and corrupt lobbying campaign I’ve ever seen,” says Paul Begala, a veteran Democratic consultant.

:}

So How Do All The Climate Liars Get To Copenhegan – Is someone paying their way

No one bothers to ask themselves, “how does a parellel anti-global warming conference get set up in Copenhagen”? We know how the pro-climate people got there. The world’s environmental organizations sent them. Some of them live there or are close enough to drive. The Government people got there on their countries dime as did the UN people. But how did the aptly named Lord Mockton get there? The answer is easy – The Carbon Industry sent them:

http://motherjones.com/special-reports/2009/12/dirty-dozen-climate-change-denial

Assignment 2020, Climate Change, Copenhagen Climate Talks, Corporations, Environment, Top Stories

In 2006, according to the Pew Research Center, 77 percent of Americans saw “solid evidence” for global warming. By this fall, that figure had dropped to 57 percent—and just 36 percent said they believed that humans are to blame. That’s good news for climate change skeptics and deniers, who have spent years trying to perpetuate the illusion that the reality of climate change is up for debate. Never mind that the scientific consensus is firmly on the side of global warming—for anyone seeking an alternate view, there’s an entire parallel universe where junk science and bogus statistics ricochet through an echo chamber of kooky blogs, “nonpartisan” institutes, and fake “green” and “citizen” groups that are often acting on behalf of the oil and coal industry.

With Copenhagen kicking off and the overblown “Climategate” scandal making headlines, the deniers have even more fodder for their campaign to kill serious action to slow climate change.

Here’s a guide to the dozen loudest components of the climate disinformation machine.

:}

This is one of the most comprehensive articles I have seen and I urge everyone to read the whole thing. These pricks think they can BURN us off the planet. I hope they are wrong.

:}

Piracy Spreads To West Africa – For now they just wanted the cash

:}

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

:}

Pirates kill seaman in W.Africa tanker attack

COTONOU — Pirates attacked an oil tanker off the coast of west Africa, killing a Ukrainian officer before escaping with the contents of the ship’s safe, the ship’s owners and Benin’s navy commander said Tuesday.

Commander Maxime Ahoyo said the officer on the Monrovia-flagged Cancale Star was shot dead when he confronted the pirates after they boarded the vessel in darkness 18 nautical miles (33 kilometres) off the coast of Benin.

The tanker’s Latvian captain, Jaroslavs Semenovics, said around six or seven pirates had approached the tanker in a speed boat.

“They came on deck, pointed a pistol to the head of one of the sailors, marched him to the cabin,” Semenovics told AFP.

“They asked me to open the safe and they collected all the cash,” he added. He did not say how much was stolen.

The 230-metre (750-foot) Cancale Star was carrying 89,000 cubic metres of crude from Nigeria’s Niger Delta, the captain said.

Dot Dot Dot

Medics aboard the vessel said four other crew members were wounded in the attack, one seriously.

The pirates fled after a member of the tanker’s crew raised the alarm by sounding a siren, with the crew managing to overpower a pirate and hand him over to police for questioning.

The captured pirate said he was from a Nigerian border town.

The multinational crew of 24 includes Russians, Filipinos, Latvians and Ukrainians, Radings said.

Piracy in oil-rich west African waters is on the rise, according to the International Maritime Bureau, with more than 100 cases last year.

Most attacks occur while ships are at anchor or close to the shore, unlike in east Africa, where Somali pirates have netted millions of dollars in ransoms in exchange for the release of ships captured hundreds of miles from the coast.

Dot Dot Dot

It said that pirates have attacked and robbed vessels and kidnapped crews along the coast and rivers, anchorages, ports and surrounding waters.

Officials voiced fears earlier this year that west African pirates would copy the tactics of Somali gangs.

From January to September of this year, the International Maritime Organisation reported 160 acts of piracy off the coast of Somalia, including 34 hijacked vessels and more than 450 people made hostage

:}

What shall we call this? Poor people gone wild? There are after all no fish in the sea.

:}

Cap And Trade – An industry insider opposes it when industry proposes it

:}

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

:}

This is an example of what we have to put up with in this community. Springfield has been raped by corporate media purchases. First a right wing conglomerate, the Sinclair Broadcast Group, bought channel 20 and gave us an ex-CIA agent as a far right social commenter. Then Gatehouse buys our local paper, the State Journal Register, and in one week they give us an editorial in which Union Pacific says that they can ram as many freight trains down our throats as they want and the opinion below that Cap and Trade will kill the USA’s economy. This by the guy who lead the deregulation train before it derailed our economy. Thanks a lot man.

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x801093616/Dan-Miller-CO2-curbs-would-be-devastating

In My View: CO2 curbs would be devastating

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Nov 07, 2009 @ 12:03 AM

 Regulations and mandates that force nationwide cuts in carbon dioxide emissions offer only speculative environmental benefits, if any, as a switch to wind and solar power will certainly cause more harm than good to the environment.

But command-and-control forces in Congress are headed in that direction, with the House narrowly passing a bill to cap CO2 emissions, and the Senate taking up a companion bill this month.
Engineers calculate that a stunning 600 square miles of wind turbines would be needed to produce the same 1,000 megawatts of electricity as a single medium-to-large coal power plant. That’s enough to provide electricity to about 10,000 homes.

Even in favorable locations, wind turbines can supply electrical power only about 20 percent of the time, meaning utilities still must have an alternative baseload source to compensate for wind fluctuations, and those alternatives are three: coal, natural gas or nuclear power plants. But by taking coal and natural gas out of production due to carbon dioxide restrictions, a massive and enormously expensive program will be needed to build more nuclear power plants to supply this baseload.

Further, wind turbine developments despoil nature’s beauty, and indiscriminately kill birds and bats, including many endangered species.

Writing last summer in the Boston Globe, Eleanor Tillinghast, director of the environmental advocacy group Green Berkshires, warned, “Cutting wide swaths of unspoiled forest for access roads, clear-cutting miles of ridgelines, erecting industrial structures with spinning blades that threaten migrating birds and the last remaining bats — these are irreversible actions with permanent consequences.”

Solar power likewise requires substantially more environmental destruction than coal. The Nevada Solar One array, the most efficient in the nation, requires 350 acres of land to produce less than 1/10th the power of a conventional coal-fueled power plant, and that’s at peak efficiency at noon on a cloudless day.

Both wind and solar power projects inevitably would require the construction of new transmission lines, often across otherwise-pristine lands, to reach energy-hungry consumers. The nation’s key wind corridor, from the Texas panhandle to the Dakotas, contains no major population center.

Further, wind and solar generators consume much more water than coal power plants, a serious problem in desert areas with the most sunlight.

All of that explains why so many environmentalists oppose further development of wind and solar power. By forcing construction of more of these projects, carbon dioxide restrictions will have a devastating impact on many of America’s most valuable natural treasures.

Dan Miller is publisher at The Heartland Institute and former chairman of the Illinois Commerce Commission, the public utility regulatory body in Illinois. He can be reached at
dmiller@heartland.org.

:}

More on this guy Miller later.

:}

Carbon Sequestration – The ultimate in madness

Notice they say the “carbon plume may eventually drift (DRIFT) under Ohio”.  Notice the guy says everything will be fine until SOMETHING goes wrong. Notice one of the commentators says that depending on the amount of ammonia used the site could be considered a hazmat accident waiting to happen?

This article is from a very nifty issue of Scientific America:

 http://www.scientificamerican.com/subscribe/sub_search.cfm?ec=ggl07

But to the article:

 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=first-look-at-carbon-capture-and-storage#cid_CBB2987B-B337-3523-7FEF1219537C766B

 

November 6, 2009 | 9 comments

First Look at Carbon Capture and Storage in a West Virginia Coal-Fired Power Plant [Slide Show]

The world’s first power facility to capture and store a portion of its carbon dioxide has begun operating in Appalachia

By David Biello

 

mountaineer-ccs

CARBON CAPTURE: A relatively small unit in the shadow of the smokestack at the Mountaineer Power Plant in West Virginia has begun capturing carbon dioxide from the plant’s flue gas and injecting it underground for permanent storage.

NEW HAVEN, W.Va.—A 100-story smokestack belches a roiling, white cloud of water vapor, carbon dioxide and other leftover gases after burning daily as much as 12,000 tons of coal at the Mountaineer Power Plant—a total of 3.5 million tons a year. The facility just outside the town of New Haven boasts a single 65-meter-high boiler capable of generating enough steam to pump out 1,300 megawatts of electricity—enough to power nearly one million average American homes a month—continuously. And now roughly 1.5 percent of the CO2 billowing from its stack is being captured in an industrial unit rising from the concrete in its shadow and then pumped underground for storage. In case you were wondering, this last phase is called “clean coal”.

Mountaineer is the turning point,” says Philippe Joubert, president of Alstom Power, a subsidiary of France-based Alstom, SA. “We believe coal is a must, but we believe coal must be clean.”

View a slide show of the world’s first carbon capture and storage facility in operation

The small stream of flue gas travels to the carbon-capture unit through plastic pipes reinforced with fiberglass and is cooled to between –1 and 21 degrees Celsius from the 55-degree C temperature at which it emerges from the other environmental technology add-ons that strip out the fly ash, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. The carbon-capture machine’s loud hum comes primarily from the whirring of fans to further cool the flue gas, along with the steady jostling of the agitator that keeps solids from settling out in the tall tank where the CO2 is captured. There is also the continuous chug of the compressors pressurizing that captured CO2 into a liquid at 98 kilograms per square centimeter. An incessant rumble also emanates from the regenerator stacks, as well, where steam heat and pressure combine to turn ammonium bicarbonate (part of the CO2-stripping process) back into baker’s ammonia (ammonium carbonate), siphoning off the captured CO2 in the operation. A little bit of ammonium sulfate—a fertilizer—is also produced; it is shipped to a farmer’s cooperative just across the river in Ohio.

:}

Renewable Energy Fails And The Lights Go Out – This guy is so wrong in so many ways it is hard to count

It is jam band Friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irZi18VR31M

This is a perfect example of an Oil and Gas shill. Actually at this point I guess I should call him a Carbon front man. Ever notice how it’s always a man? He ignores the subsidies paid to the Oil and Gas business right now, which are huge. He ignores the impact of the pollution (externalities you know). He ignores the fact that, as predicted, we are starting to use oil shale and oil sands which are marginal materials because we are running out of resources. Not because of “magical” new technologies.  He ignores the simple fact that if everyone in the world heated their water using geothermal or solar we could cut consumption in half….

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeRa3RtBiIU&feature=related )

In fact he sounds like a buggy maker or a whip maker right after the automobile was first introduced.

http://www.buggymuseum.org/buggytown.htm

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,757393,00.htmlhttp://www.tocreateyourdestiny.com/html/where_have_all_the_buggy_maker.html

Unlike those Talk Radio these days, I like to periodically present the other side of a case and oh boy, does this guy do it.

http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=2544

Posted on Nov. 05, 2009

Renewable Banality: The Latest British Export

UK wind energy. Photo by Mitch: Flickr

Photo by Mitch: Flickr

I loved the true story of the Nigerian energy worker who, having received a pay check for $900, amended the figure to read $9,000. As the reporter wittily put it, “The check fraud proved entirely successful … right up to the point where he attempted to cash it.” That’s kind of how I feel about the renewable energy revolution. It will prove entirely successful in the eyes of the public and media — right up to the point where the lights start going out. And those lights will soon start going out, according to a new report.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYxp6OIEZlk&feature=related )

I fully understand the romantic attraction of the clean energy revolution and the rush to replace ‘dirty’ fossil fuels. In the light of the war on carbon it’s a no brainer, right? Which is precisely why, just as diminishing EU and UK subsidies are prompting an industry exodus westward, the British renewables industry may be about to be given an unexpected investment shot in the arm from some of the world’s biggest multinational companies in one of the biggest analogs to the adage “I gave at the church,” in this case the environmentalism church. Companies, it seems, in their rush to appear politically correct are oblivious to how that renewable revolution is ushering in a new dark age in Britain.

Why the multinationals?

Speaking at a UK Confederation of British Industries (CBI) conference in October, the Bank of America’s head of power and utilities, John Lynch, named companies like Google, Microsoft, Wal-Mart and IKEA (the Swedish home goods company) as being potential new investors for Britain’s offshore wind industry. “This is the technology that the UK is leading in, and these companies are looking at ways to get involved,” Lynch told his CBI audience, “because it meets their own corporate social responsibility objectives.” Enthusing over the prospect of a massive new injection of funds for British industry, Lynch noted how the Crown Estate (which owns the UK seabed) had launched the offshore program specifically to enable Britain to meet its target of 80 percent cuts in carbon emissions by 2050 compared with 1990 levels. Clearly nobody had told Lynch that in recent weeks the leaders of Britain’s biggest energy companies privately warned the government that its climate targets, contingent upon renewable sources replacing hydrocarbon fuels, are “illusory” and “delusional.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMdCLL9Q6Ck&feature=related )

as we say in the editing business … or dot dot dot

Put bluntly, Tucker shows that industrial scale renewable energy is, realistically and mathematically, an economic non-starter.

Ironically, just as UK and European subsidy opportunities are dwindling and the revolution faltering, the retail multinationals may be about to reinvigorate the flagging UK program. And as the economic cost of renewables is being counted across Europe, Britain’s energy-climate policy is likely to be touted increasingly as the blueprint for others to follow. A rash of UK studies continue to sound alarm bells over the government’s current energy direction and, one of these, just published, should do the same well beyond UK shores.

Does it really take an Einstein?

In October, the UK energy regulator, Ofgem (The Office of Gas and Electricity Markets), warned that Britain was facing 1970s style power blackouts within just four years – a much shorter timescale than previously thought. Project Discovery cited the British government’s failure to renovate its “crumbling power infrastructure” due to compliance with new EU rules that will force the closure of a quarter of the country’s power stations by 2015. In a typically British understatement, Alistair Buchanan, Ofgem’s chief executive warned, “There could be a potential shortfall in the period 2013-18 … Life might be pretty cold.” Buchanan’s assessment is that only an “involuntary curtailment of demand” – power cuts – can conserve household supplies, unless the government acts urgently to upgrade its nuclear plants. Jeremy Nicholson, of the Energy Intensive Users Group, representing some of Britain’s biggest manufacturers, said that power cuts that hit UK business first would present a “material threat to heavy industry.” Nicholson also warned that once the crisis hit the 60 percent hike in British energy bills currently being acknowledged by the government will, more realistically, hit the 120 percent mark.

Bottom line? If Einstein’s E=mc2 as it applies to renewable energy doesn’t cut the intellectual ice for prospective investors and foreign governments alike, perhaps another will. Try this:

UK energy-climate policy, circa 2009 = a blueprint for black-outs.

See what I mean about a fraudulent check being entirely successful right up to the point

:}

But here is where his analysis shows his paradigm. He says industrial users have to have “so in so” amount of power. I say great. Let the industries that need it generate it in such a way that they generate no pollution. Thank you very much and usins in the residential market, well we will keep our alternative energies. Come on you ARE the smartest guys in the world right? oh..OR maybe not?

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQs4Ra_qEvI&feature=related )
:}

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

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

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

November 04, 2009

Peak oil and population control

Flintoff

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

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

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

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

Two million!

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

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

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

:}

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

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

November 1, 2009

William Stanton: I botched our suicide pact

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

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

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

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

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

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

:}

For a better exposition you might look here:

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

Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas, Ireland

ASPO Newsletters, Article Number 573 (July 2005)

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

Reducing Population in Step with Oil Depletion

by William Stanton

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

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

:}

Or more to the point read the original:

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

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

:}