Water Hope Earth

David Suzuki speech at Occupy Vancouver, Oct. 22, 2011.

2011-10-28T18:10:00.000-07:00

Thank you. I was worried for a minute there that I was going to get voted off the island.

I want to say right at the beginning that I am speaking to you as a private citizen. I don’t represent or speak on behalf of any organization or group.

I’d also like to begin by acknowledging that we are gathered here on coast Salish ground.

I want to thank the organizers of today’s program for inviting me to share a few ideas with you.

I believe the Occupy movement could be absolutely historic but we won’t know for years from now.

I believe what it is is a demand for open dialog. For conversation in which disparate voices (we’ve already heard some of them) will be heard.
And I am here as much to listen and learn as I am to speak, but I’m especially grateful for being given this time to present my ideas first.

Let me be transparent with my motives, as I hope you ask all speakers to be. I have an agenda. I am an elder and I’m long past the seduction of fame, or money, or power. I speak to you today as a grandparent with four young
children and a fifth on the way.

And I have seized this opportunity to speak about their future - a future that’s far less rich in biodiversity and natural abundance than when I was a child. My generation and the boomers who followed have lived like Kings and Queens. And thoughtlessly partied as if there’s no tomorrow.

We forgot the lessons taught to us by our parents and grandparents who came through the Great Depression:

Live within your means.
Save some for tomorrow.
Satisfy your needs not your wants.
Help your neighbours because some day they will help you.
Share – don’t be greedy.
Money doesn’t make you a better person. Or a more important person.

Well the party’s over. We’ve got to remember those old aphorisms, clean up our mess, and start thinking about our
grandchildren.
I’m a scientist. And what we do is probe the mysteries of the cosmos to uncover laws and principles and explain what’s going on in the world, and how we can live within it.

Physics tells us we can’t build a rocket that will travel faster than the speed of light. I know that CERN they’re saying maybe 6 km faster than the speed of light. But don’t hold your breath on that one.

Physics tells us the law of gravity applies to all objects on earth. That entropy means that perpetual motion machines are not possible.

Those are the laws of physics and we live within them.

In chemistry diffusion constants, reaction rates, atomic properties set the limits of chemical reactions and the kind of molecules we can synthesize.

Biology dictates our absolute need for clean air, clean water, clean soil. Clean energy and biodiversity in order for us to survive and live in a healthy way.

Those are laws of nature and we can’t change them. We have to live within their boundaries.

Many other things are not forces of nature. We draw lines around our property. Around cities, provinces, and countries. And boy do we take them seriously. We will go to war, kill and die to protect those borders.

But you know what? Nature couldn’t care less about human borders. Air, water, dust, storms, drought, global warming, fires, epidemics, migrating birds, fish, mammals and insects pay no attention to our ideas of territory.

Other things, capitalism, economies, corporations, markets and currency, these are not forces of nature. We invented them. And if they don’t work we can and we must change them.

Look at what happened in Copenhagen. 192 nations gathered to deal with the atmosphere that belongs to no-one.

192 national borders, 192 economic priorities. Trying to shoehorn nature to fit our agendas. It will never work, unless we subordinate our priorities to the limits imposed by nature itself.

For me the Occupy Movement is about Ekos, the Greek word for household or domain. It’s about defining our place in community, in the state, in the nation and in the biosphere.

What is our home? And how do we live in it sustainably? With opportunity and meaning and happiness as our highest aspirations?

Ekos is home. Eco-logy is the study of home. Eco-nomics is its management. But we elevate economy above ecology.

For five years the prime minister of Canada has never acknowledged the reality of human induced climate change.

Or that Canada is the industrialized nation most vulnerable to its impact.

And now he’s cutting back on scientists in Environment Canada and research on climate change. So then we don’t have to listen to the facts.

Mr. Harper has steadfastly said, “We can’t reduce greenhouse emissions because it will destroy the economy”.

First of all, it’s not true. Sweden, a northern industrialized country like us, has a carbon tax, reduced its greenhouse emissions to 8% below 1990 levels while its economy grew by more than 44%.

But more egregious than this, Mr. Harper has lifted the economics above the very air that we breathe.

Let’s put the Eko back into economics.

There is an old saying that money talks. I’ve talked to a lot of loonies, but they’ve all been people.

Money may not literally talk, but today it controls and sets the agenda for our governments.

Occupy is not just about the 1% who continue to rake in an ever increasing proportion of society’s wealth, while 99% bear the real cost.

Occupy is about corporate power. Corporations have become bigger than most governments on the planet, and they are no longer bound by national borders, laws or standards.

Occupiers know because so many of you are young, that the terrible inequities represented by the 1% today are also inter-generational. Today’s corporations and the super-rich are increasing wealth at the expense of generations to come.

Exhausting resources, extinguishing species, poisoning air, water and soil.
And economists discount the estimated costs of these problems that will be most strongly felt by successive generations to come.

Have you ever heard a politician call for mass spending for the sake of future generations? Or for children who can’t vote? Or for youth who don’t bother to vote?

Why does the government that we elect to look after our well-being and our future act as a cheer leader for corporate sectors? Because money talks.

For years the auto sector fought every progressive innovation, from seatbelts, to catalytic converters to mileage targets to airbags.

It will cost too much. We’ll be put out of business. Let the markets rule. Don’t legislate. Trust us, is what they said.

For ten years, Chrysler had data that proved airbags saved lives. Yet for years the auto sector fought Ralph Nader while hundreds of thousands of people who could have been saved by airbags died.

And when their beloved free markets shifted to favour foreign companies, those bastions of free enterprise came crawling to governments and asked for bailouts.

David Lewis was right. They’re corporate welfare bums!

But they got the money with very few strings attached.

Why does our government, Ag Canada, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, act as cheerleaders for GMOs, declaring them substantially equivalent to normal food? And thus not requiring special standards of safety? Yet denying the requirement of labeling so at least we can choose what to eat?

Money talks. Just ask Monsanto.

Remember the tobacco industry’s campaign of denial, spending tens of millions to assure us that smoking and second hand smoke were not hazardous. All the while their own experts knew the health dangers.

Why is the pharmaceutical industry allowed to do its own research on drug safety instead of using independent labs? And spend hundreds of millions of dollars to support an army of lobbyists, with the result that the fastest
rising component of health costs are drugs?

Money talks.

Why do we continue to subsidize the fossil fuel industry with billions of our tax dollars while they are reporting record profits year after year?

Do you think the development of the tar sands, the Enbridge pipeline, or LNG ports would be possible without massive subsidies from us the taxpayers?

Money talks.

Fossil fuel companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars to inform us that fossil fuel caused climate change is not real. It is! While saying that scientists are divided on the issues. They are not! While supporting right-wing think tanks and skeptics and websites, all to confuse the public and keep government from acting.

And while they’re doing this they are in full knowledge that what they are denying is real.

If this isn’t immoral I don’t know what is.

And yet Canada calls tar sands oil ethical.

Exxon has reported record profits. It has fought against the class-action suit brought by people impacted by the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Exxon has lost over and over again in the courts, but has appealed each time. And to this day, Exxon has not paid a single cent to the victims of the Exxon Valdez.

Exxon is one of the major contributors to the campaign of disinformation about climate change.

I could go on and on. Publicly held corporations may produce or do things that we need, that are good for society.

But their only mandate is to make money. The more and the faster, the better.
Terrible things have been done in the name of profit, and we need our government to protect us from their depredations. And we are here to ask, How much is enough?

Don’t corporations have any social and ecological responsibilities? Corporations are supported because they are said to be the economic engine of society. But when profit is their goal they will fight to reduce their share of taxes, demand subsidies, oppose regulations, and fire hundreds of employees if it will increase profitability.

Corporations are not people. They are economic creations that are not designed to consider people, communities or ecosystems. And that’s why we elect governments.

People are put in jail today for selling marijuana. But who went to jail after BP spilled oil into the Gulf for a month?

Politicians have rushed us into the global economy. I remember when Brian Mulroney was Prime Minister, and rushed us into free trade agreement with the United States even though 60% of Canadians voted against it.

He was interviewed by Larry King on CNN, and when Larry chided him for Canada’s economic downturn, Mulroney’s reply was, “That was the global economy. Don’t blame me for the global economy.” If we lose control over our economy because of the global economy, why do our politicians give up their responsibility and rush to embrace that globalization?

Globalization does not spread the highest standards for workers, for communities, for ecosystems. Instead, corporations go to the lowest standards of medical care, of wages, and environmental standards, because it’s all
about maximizing profits.

The global economy means our garbage and toxic effluence are shared with the world, dumped into the air, water and land.

When you purchase fancy running shoes, a cellphone or automobile, do you know whether slave or child labour was involved in any part of its production?
The ecological impacts of toxic materials generated in the process of manufacturing. These costs are hidden. Yet each time we make a purchase, we become part of that system that exploits people and ecosystems around the
world.

We claim we live in a democracy. But how many of us will vote next month in the coming election? Maybe we’ll set a record with 25%!

How about the provincial election? Ontario just had a record 49% turnout.

And what about the federal election? When 40% of us don’t vote, we don’t have democracy.

I have voted faithfully in elections ever since I turned 21 in 1957 and I have never voted for a party that formed the government.

In other words, my vote carried no weight, because we are one of the last democracies in the world that doesn’t have a democracy based on proportional representation.

If we don’t vote we don’t have democracy. If we don’t have proportional representation, we have minority rule.

Corporations are not people, and corporations should not be allowed to finance political campaigns for politicians.

Why do we have such a disproportionate representation of politicians who are business people or lawyers? I believe because they can afford to run for office and lose, and they have friends with money. But that skews government priorities to issues jurisdictional and economic.

We need a broader perspective than just legal and economic issues.

Political campaigns should not be financed disproportionately by the wealthy. Any qualified candidate should be able to campaign, and the only money for campaigning should be from us, the taxpayers.

If money talks, let it be from the general public, so their best interests dominate government priorities, not corporations.

A society which supports vast disproportions in the distribution of wealth is not a sustainable society.

A society should measure its success by the care of its weakest, poorest and most vulnerable, not by the number of its super-rich.

Let’s take back the agenda. We need democracy for people not corporations.

We want greater equity. We demand social justice, especially for the first peoples of this nation.

And we want to recognize and protect our most fundamental needs: clean air, clean water, clean soil, clean energy, a diversity of other species, and communities that support our children with love and care.

Thank you all.
Tags: David_ Suzuki Occupy Vancouver

EV Tsunami Starts in Canada: Fully electric car makes debut in Canada

2011-09-24T20:48:00.000-07:00

The first mass-produced, zero-emissions car to be sold in Canada arrived at dealerships this week.

Originally published here.

Get your rebate here if you live in Ontario.

On Friday Ottawa man Ricardo Borba became the first Canadian to drive off with one of the 2011 Nissan Leafs.

Unlike hybrid electric vehicles like the Chevrolet Volt — which arrived at Canadian dealerships a month ago — the Leaf is run entirely from its electric battery, which can allow the vehicle to travel up to 160 kilometres before it must be recharged.

Borba, a software engineer at IBM said he's been fascinated with green technology and is fed up with the fuel industry.

"Right at the time there was an oil spill in the gulf of Mexico," Borba said of the discussions he had with his wife. "So we decided maybe there's another way to do what we need to do that doesn't go deep into the ocean to get the oil, transport the oil, refine the oil."

Since 2010 about 10,000 of the vehicles have been sold worldwide, but in Canada only 40 were sold of the 2011 model.

The company expects to sell 600 cars of the 2012 model. By then, the electric car market will also include other vehicles like the Mitsubishi i-MiEV.

Allen Childs, President of Nissan Canada, said it has taken 18 year of technological development to bring the car to market. "It's exciting for Canadians as well, they have a choice now," said Childs.

"To have a car pass by the gas station, say no to fossil fuels and have no tailpipe on the back of their car... It's fantastic," he said.

The Leaf is not cheap — the basic model starts at just over $38,000, though Borba said he is eligible for an $8,000 tax rebate in Ontario because it is a green car.

Borba had a charging station installed in his garage. It takes about seven hours to fully recharge.

The infrastructure to power the car elsewhere is currently lacking in Ontario, and unlike hybrids the Leaf lacks a combustion-engine to back-up the battery, so Borba knows he won't be taking the vehicle on long-distance trips anytime soon.

"I've very excited and proud to be part of it," said Borba.

Editor's note: Regrettably, the rebate is for the first 10,000 applicants. Mmmm. Mustn't anger OPEC.

Tags: EV Canada electric car vehicle Nissan Leaf
Borba Ontario
government
rebate

Cannabis in food gets stamp of approval from watchdog

2011-03-17T05:16:00.000-07:00

Originally published here

CANNABIS ice cream, cake and beer have been cleared on health grounds by the nation's food watchdog, despite fears the "marijuana munchies" could trigger positive drug tests.

Food Standards Australia New Zealand yesterday sought public comment on an application by deregistered Sydney doctor Andrew Katelaris to lift Australia's ban on food derived from cannabis.

Dr Katelaris, who is appealing against his deregistration for supplying medical marijuana to patients, yesterday said the seeds of industrial hemp contained more Omega 3 acids than seafood. "We're looking at making ice cream and health food bars," he said.

"Our vision is that anything you can do with soy beans or dairy you can do better with hemp seed."

A Food Standards investigation concluded that industrial hemp contained such low levels of the psychoactive substance delta 9-tetraydrocannabinol (THC) that anyone consuming the food would not feel its effect.

"FSANZ has not identified any safety concerns relating to the consumption of hemp foods," the Food Standards report says.

"Hemp seed is a nutritious food containing sizeable amounts of protein, polyunsaturated fats and dietary fibre . . . (and) micronutrients such as thiamin, vitamin E, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, calcium, iron and zinc."

But Food Standards reveals that "various government stakeholders" have raised concerns of high-THC seeds entering the food chain, of advertisers falsely claiming hemp foods have psychoactive properties or that they could trigger positive drug-test results.

"There is a potential risk that . . . labelling and advertising of hemp foods could suggest psychoactive properties . . . (but) this would be misleading," the report says. "Concerns have also been expressed about positive drug tests for cannabis use . . . This is of particular relevance for workplaces that may have drug-testing protocols, for athletes and for roadside drug testing".

The Food Standards report cites a scientific study that this is unlikely, as a person would have to consume eight teaspoons of hemp seed oil, or 300g of seed, daily to fail a drug test "and it is considered that consumption of such amounts is unrealistic."

In 2002, a Food Standards recommendation to approve hemp as food was overturned for fear it would "send the wrong message to the community".

Tags: Katelaris hemp cannabis food Australia legal 2011
March

3 Mile Island Redux - Japan's Nuclear Meltdown

2011-03-12T17:44:00.000-08:00

In light of the current events affecting Japan, notably the potential effects of nuclear reactors melting down, I was 'surprised' when Wiki was notably lacking in reporting the effects of 3 Mile Island's human casualties, while at the same time liberally reporting the estimated 4,000 nuclear radiation-related deaths caused by Chernobyl.

So I dug a little deeper and found an interesting article on Common Dreams covering the cover-up in 3 Mile Island:

People Died at Three Mile Island
by Harvey Wasserman
People died--and are still dying--at Three Mile Island.

As the thirtieth anniversary of America's most infamous industrial accident approaches, we mourn the deaths that accompanied the biggest string of lies ever told in US industrial history.

As news of the accident poured into the global media, the public was assured there were no radiation releases.

That quickly proved to be false.

The public was then told the releases were controlled and done purposely to alleviate pressure on the core.

Both those assertions were false.

The public was told the releases were "insignificant."

But stack monitors were saturated and unusable, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission later told Congress it did not know---and STILL does not know---how much radiation was released at Three Mile Island, or where it went.

Using unsubstantiated estimates of how much radiation was released, the government issued average doses allegedly received by people in the region, which it assured the public were safe. But the estimates were utterly meaningless, among other things ignoring the likelihood that high doses of concentrated fallout could come down heavily on specific areas.

Official estimates said a uniform dose to all persons in the region was equivalent to a single chest x-ray. But pregnant women are no longer x-rayed because it has long been known a single dose can do catastrophic damage to an embryo or fetus in utero.

The public was told there was no melting of fuel inside the core.

But robotic cameras later showed a very substantial portion of the fuel did melt.

The public was told there was no danger of an explosion.

But there was, as there had been at Michigan's Fermi reactor in 1966. In 1986, Chernobyl Unit Four did explode.

The public was told there was no need to evacuate anyone from the area.

But Pennsylvania Governor Richard Thornburgh then evacuated pregnant women and small children. Unfortunately, many were sent to nearby Hershey, which was showered with fallout.

In fact, the entire region should have been immediately evacuated. It is standard wisdom in the health physics community that---due in part to the extreme vulnerability of human embryos, fetuses and small children, as well as the weaknesses of old age---there is no safe dose of radiation, and none will ever be found.

The public was assured the government would follow up with meticulous studies of the health impacts of the accident.

In fact, the state of Pennsylvania hid the health impacts, including deletion of cancers from the public record, abolition of the state's tumor registry, misrepresentation of the impacts it could not hide (including an apparent tripling of the infant death rate in nearby Harrisburg) and much more.

The federal government did nothing to track the health histories of the region's residents.

In fact, the most reliable studies were conducted by local residents like Jane Lee and Mary Osborne, who went door-to-door in neighborhoods where the fallout was thought to be worst. Their surveys showed very substantial plagues of cancer, leukemia, birth defects, respiratory problems, hair loss, rashes, lesions and much more.

A study by Columbia University claimed there were no significant health impacts, but its data by some interpretations points in the opposite direction. Investigations by epidemiologist Dr. Stephen Wing of the University of North Carolina, and others, led Wing to warn that the official studies on the health impacts of the accident suffered from "logical and methodological problems." Studies by Wing and by Arnie Gundersen, a former nuclear industry official, being announced this week at Harrisburg, significantly challenge official pronouncements on both radiation releases and health impacts.

Gundersen, a leading technical expert on nuclear engineering, says: "When I correctly interpreted the containment pressure spike and the doses measured in the environment after the TMI accident, I proved that TMI's releases were about one hundred times higher than the industry and the NRC claim, in part because the containment leaked. This new data supports the epidemiology of Dr. Steve Wing and proves that there really were injuries from the accident. New reactor designs are also effected, as the NRC is using its low assumed release rates to justify decreases in emergency planning and containment design."

Data unearthed by radiologist Dr. Ernest Sternglass of the University of Pittsburgh, and statisticians Jay Gould (now deceased) and Joe Mangano of New York have led to strong assertions of major public health impacts. On-going work by Sternglass and Mangano clearly indicates that "normal" reactor radiation releases of far less magnitude that those at TMI continue to have catastrophic impacts on local populations.

Anecdotal evidence among the local human population has been devastating. Large numbers of central Pennsylvanians suffered skin sores and lesions that erupted while they were out of doors as the fallout rained down on them. Many quickly developed large, visible tumors, breathing problems, and a metallic taste in their mouths that matched that experienced by some of the men who dropped the bomb on Hiroshima, and who were exposed to nuclear tests in the south Pacific and Nevada.

A series of interviews conducted by Robbie Leppzer and compiled in a "a two-hour public radio documentary VOICES FROM THREE MILE ISLAND (http://www.blogger.com/www.turningtide.com) give some indication of the horrors experienced by the people of central Pennsylvania.

They are further underscored by harrowing broadcasts from then-CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-c1PrCLaRw) warning that "the world has never known a day quite like today. It faced the considerable uncertainties and dangers of the worst nuclear power plant accident of the atomic age. And the horror tonight is that it could get much worse."

In March of 1980, I went into the region and compiled a range of interviews clearly indicating widespread health damage done by radiation from the accident. The survey led to the book KILLING OUR OWN, co-authored with Norman Solomon, Robert Alvarez and Eleanor Walters (http://www.blogger.com/www.ratical.org/radiation/KillingOurOwn/KOO.pdf) which correlated the damage done at TMI with that suffered during nuclear bomb tests, atomic weapons production, mis-use of medical x-rays, the painting of radium watch dials, uranium mining and milling, radioactive fuel production, failed attempts at waste disposal, and more.

My research at TMI also uncovered a plague of death and disease among the area's wild animals and farm livestock. Entire bee hives expired immediately after the accident, along with a disappearance of birds, many of whom were found scattered dead on the ground. A rash of malformed pets were born and stillborn, including kittens that could not walk and a dog with no eyes. Reproductive rates among the region's cows and horses plummeted.

Much of this was documented by a three-person investigative team from the Baltimore News-American, which made it clear that the problems could only have been caused by radiation. Statistics from Pennsylvania's Department of Agriculture confirmed the plague, but the state denied its existence, and said that if it did exist, it could not have been caused by TMI.

In the mid-1980s the citizens of the three counties surrounding Three Mile Island voted by a margin of 3:1 to permanently retired TMI Unit One, which had been shut when Unit Two melted. The Reagan Administration trashed the vote and re-opened the reactor, which still operates. Its owners now seek a license renewal.

Some 2400 area residents have long-since filed a class action lawsuit demanding compensation for the plague of death and disease visited upon their families. In the past quarter-century they have been denied access to the federal court system, which claims there was not enough radiation released to do such harm. TMI's owners did quietly pay out millions in damages to area residents whose children were born with genetic damage, among other things. The payments came in exchange for silence among those receiving them.

But for all the global attention focused on the accident and its health effects, there has never been a binding public trial to test the assertion by thousands of conservative central Pennsylvanians that radiation from TMI destroyed their lives.

So while the nuclear power industry continues to assert that "no one died at Three Mile Island," it refuses to allow an open judicial hearing on the hundreds of cases still pending.

As the pushers of the "nuclear renaissance" demand massive tax- and rate-payer subsidies to build yet another generation of reactors, they cynically stonewall the obvious death toll that continues to mount at the site of an accident that happened thirty years ago. The "see no evil" mantra continues to define all official approaches to the victims of this horrific disaster.

Ironically, like Chernobyl, Three Mile Island Unit Two was a state-of-the-art reactor. Its official opening came on December 28, 1978, and it melted exactly three months later. Had it operated longer, the accumulated radiation spewing from its core almost certainly would have been far greater.

Every reactor now operating in the US is much older---nearly all fully three decades older---than TMI-2 when it melted. Their potential fallout that could dwarf what came down in 1979.

But the Big Lie remains officially in tact. Expect to hear all week that TMI was "a success story" because "no one was killed."

But in mere moments that brand new reactor morphed from a $900 million asset to a multi-billion-dollar liability. It could happen to any atomic power plant, now, tomorrow and into the future.

Meanwhile, the death toll from America's worst industrial catastrophe continues to rise. More than ever, it is shrouded in official lies and desecrated by a reactor-pushing "renaissance" hell-bent on repeating the nightmare on an even larger scale.

Harvey Wasserman's Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth, A.D. 2030, is at http://www.blogger.com/www.solartopia.org. He is senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, and writes regularly for www.freepress.org. He and Bob Fitrakis have co-authored four books on election protection, including Did George W. Bush Steal America's 2004 Election?, As Goes Ohio: Election Theft Since 2004 , How the GOP Stole America's 2004 Election & Is Rigging 2008, and What Happened in Ohio

Tags: Japan tsunami nuclear meltdown emergency 3 Mile Island
health
effect

Analysis: Why the Wivenhoe Dam Failed

2011-01-14T21:34:00.001-08:00

I was having a chat with some locals about the flooding situation in Australia, trying to get a perspective on it.

The Bureau of Meteorology site gave an interesting perspective of the various lines of flooding.

If you look at the red line of major flooding particularly in Queensland which has been hit the hardest thus far, it indicates a flow that is unlike the flow of the current river system that figures on the map.

In fact, if you similarly map a line of where the flooding has occurred it seems to flow more over the motorway system, rather than the rivers on the map.

It was shocking how the planners did not learn from the flooding of 1974 which likely showed similar lines of flooding which should have shown the flooding water would be unlikely to flow to the Lake Wivenhoe Dam, but rather follow the highway system in a straight line into Brisbane, devastating communities along the way.

Here's an overall map showing the line of flooding along the motorways

This map shows the line of the flood as it goes past the Lake Wivenhoe Dam and straight into Brisbane.

When planning for future water management, let's hope that the planners consider the lessons of 1974 and the reality of water flows in 2010.

Curiously, there have been many who have critiqued the faulty planning such as

J.V. Hodgkinson.

Who will be brought to task for the poor planning which has taken the lives of Queenslanders and cost billions of dollars to its economy?

Tags: Australia flood Queensland Wivenhoe dam fail
critic

Australia Flooding: Bag of Hammers Award: Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce, "The reason Brisbane doesn't flood is because they have Wivenhoe Dam."

2011-01-12T01:42:00.000-08:00

While Australia and Queensland in particular are in the grips of dealing with this natural disaster, Federal Coalition Leader Tony Abbott and Queensland Premier Anna Bligh have faced off in this debate.

But what was particular ironic when "...Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce, a resident of St George which is expecting a record flood peak on the weekend, ...weighed into the dam debate.

"We'll never get rid of floods but dams could reduce the level of flooding, instead of running over your carpet it's running under your house," he told Sky News.

"That's what people want.

"The reason Brisbane doesn't flood is because they have Wivenhoe Dam."

"In my town, this is the second time in 10 months, people have every right to start asking questions about plans for the future.

"We won't have an economy if we don't have people living in these regions."

Not surprisingly, it's Barnaby who is against the Carbon Reduction scheme. Likely he and his mates still buy into the "La Nina" philosophy of the various disasters affecting countries all around the world, which is being used as a way to rationalize inaction or foolish, ill-considered action.

Maybe some other strategies might need to be considered...maybe better water management - actually hiring qualified people rather than 'mates'.

And while they're at it, the Federal and State governments might want to PROHIBIT building on floodplains.

Tags: Australia flood 2011 dam Barnaby_Joyce
criticism

Australian Flooding - Queensland and Western Australia

2011-01-09T02:05:00.000-08:00

In recent times, Australian has been troubled by lack of water but now it has been hit heavily, causing millions of dollars in damage and 11 fatalities as of this post.

For your information, here's a Wiki backgrounder on the flooding, and here's a map of some of the areas where the floods have hit the hardest.

If you're planning to visit Queensland, we recommend you check this page, which shows where you shouldn't go.

We can only hope that this disaster will help enable the country to make plans for offsetting the issues that will affect the communities for years to come.

Though the corporations have kicked in at this point over AUD5M, the floods are still hitting. Let's hope that some new ideas emerge from the floodwaters to provide some alternatives to sources of energy and food, as many coal mines have been affected as has some thousand hectares of agricultural land.

And, on top of the flooding in Queensland, there's Western Australia.

Watch our site as the situation evolves....

Tags: Australia flood 2011

UBC Students Beat Major Auto Manufacturers to Cross Canada in E-Beetle

2010-11-10T20:08:00.000-08:00

By Big Gordy D.

Press Release Here

UBC E-BEETLE was the first-ever electric car to complete a coast to coast voyage across Canada. Starting on August 21st, 2010, the E- Beetle covered 6400 kilometers in 16 days with a 2 day break in Quebec waiting for Hurricane Earl to pass - without any support vehicles, using only existing infrastructure.

The specs on this vehicle are sublime - the E-Beetle is powered by a Lithium Iron Phosphate battery pack with a capacity of 50 Kilowatt Hours, giving it a range of 300km at 100km/h and 500km at 50km/h with a top speed of 140kmh. Charging time is approximately 4 hours.

Curiously enough, Bartosz Bos, a young visionary who championed the idea, introduced and received the support of the Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association and the Emily Institute of Art and Design, hoping to get funding from Transport Canada back in April 2008, but with stalling from Stephen Harper's government, the product died a slow death at the design stage.

Kudos to Bartosz, the students of the UBC Electric Car Club and their supporters for putting Canada on the map!

Follow the progress of the UBC Electric Car Club.

Tags: E-Beetle Canada electric car 2010 UBC VEVA

Falcon and the Snowman Redux: Gough Whitlam's Dismissal

2010-08-20T23:50:00.000-07:00

Was watching this classic featuring the David Bowie hit, "This is Not America" the other day and had somehow missed the subtext of the story which was how it was uncovered that the CIA had their operatives influence Governor General Sir John Kerr to use a special power to remove then Prime Minister Gough Whitlam when his government enjoyed a majority position in Australia's House of Representatives but a minority in the Senate.

Makes one wonder what other ways the Agency is busying themselves in the 2010 Australia federal election...

...potentially, though, the Whitlam Institute is carrying on the work of one of Australia's most progressive Prime Ministers.

Originally found here

Whitlam's Press Conference Following The Dismissal
November 11, 1975

Following his dismissal and the double dissolution of the Parliament, Gough Whitlam held a press conference at Parliament House, Canberra.

WHITLAM:

Clearly the great issue, almost the sole issue of this campaign will be whether the Government which the people elected with a majority in the House of Representatives will be allowed to govern from now on. The whole of this system is under challenge as we see. Now up till the very last division in the House of Representatives where, we have always believed, governments should be made and unmade. We won that division by a majority of ten votes; sixty-four for us, fifty-four for the others. And during this campaign the overwhelming issue will be, are we to have three year Governments in Australia; is the Party which gets a majority in the House of Representatives to be allowed to govern? That is, it’s the future of Parliamentary democracy as we have known it.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Whitlam, do you believe that Sir John Kerr did a deal with Malcolm Fraser before today’s announcement?

WHITLAM:

I don’t know.

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister are you surprised to know that the Opposition Parties in fact knew of this decision before you went to Government House?

WHITLAM:

I don’t know whether they did know. I’m making no assumptions or at least I’m making no allegations.

JOURNALIST:

Sir, in his statement, Sir John Kerr said that no other decision was open to him which would enable the Australian people to decide for themselves which was the Government. At any time over the last three or four weeks, did the Governor-General put any proposition to you as Prime Minister for a general election or an election of the House of Representatives or any other election to solve this impasse?

WHITLAM:

There was a proposition as to the date of the half-Senate election. And it was as a result of that suggestion that I made the comments I did in Question Time last Tuesday; but there was no response from the other side to that suggestion.

JOURNALIST:

The Governor-General has stated the reason for dismissing you was that you no longer had Supply and cannot govern. At any stage did he tell you along the way that he was dismissing you before the Supply ran out on November 30? In other words tell you that if you wanted to have a half-Senate to have it done by November 30?

WHITLAM:

No, no. That was not the advice that I gave the Governor-General, nor was it the impression that the Governor-General gave me. Supply had not run out by the time I saw the Governor-General at one o’clock today. And as we all know, about a quarter past two this afternoon the Budget Bills were passed and when Mr Fraser read portions of Sir John Kerr’s views to the House of Representatives those views were no longer well based. Because by that time Supply had been passed. The Budget Bills had been passed.

JOURNALIST:

Did he tell you at any stage that he disagreed with Mr Fraser? Mr Fraser has said on a number of occasions that he feared that Labor would gain a temporary majority in the Senate at a half-Senate election at which the Labor Party would be able to pass...

WHITLAM:

Clearly I mustn’t go into details between conversations that I have with the Governor-General or the Queen. Those ought to be confidential. But I can assure you, as is clearly the case, Supply had not run out by one o’clock today when I saw the Governor-General, and of course arrangements were being made to see that Government employees and suppliers would have their debts met by their banks. And the Governor-General had been advised that that was completely legal and constitutional.

JOURNALIST:

How does it feel being the first Prime Minister since Federation to have been sacked by the Crown?

WHITLAM:

I’m the first for 200 years since George the 3rd sacked Lord North.

JOURNALIST:

Do you think in years to come that this will result in a move towards republicism in Australia.

WHITLAM:

Don’t let me speculate on that. But what I am certain is that no Prime Minister with a majority in the House of Representatives will ever again have his commission withdrawn by the Crown or the Crown’s representative.

JOURNALIST:

What’s your view of the vice-regal position now that this current incumbent has refused to accept the advice of the Prime Minister?

WHITLAM:

I mustn’t comment on that.

JOURNALIST:

Am I right in believing that when you went to Government House today the Governor-General did not wait to hear your advice before handing you your dismissal notice? And secondly, now that it seems to have been established that the Senate is the more powerful of the two Houses, do you think that the Governor-General should have commissioned Mr Withers as Acting Prime Minister?

WHITLAM:

That would be the logical extension. But, of course, in the Senate which has just been dissolved, nobody had a majority. And it can’t be said too often, and I believe during the next few weeks of this campaign it will be made very plain, that the only majority that the Opposition secured in the Senate, on this issue of the Budget, were due to the fact that Senator Milliner, the Labor Senator from Queensland was replaced by a non-Labor Senator. If Senator Milliner had still been alive, then the motions to adjourn debate on the Budget would never have been carried. There would have been an equality of votes and those amendments would therefore have been lost. And then, 4 weeks ago, the Senate would have had to vote on the Governor-General’s message asking for the Budget to be passed. Whatever Senator Wither’s qualities may be, he doesn’t have a majority in the Senate. In the old Senate.

JOURNALIST:

Could you answer the first question Sir? Did you get a chance to offer advice to the Governor-General before getting your dismissal notice?

WHITLAM:

I had spoken to him on the phone this morning; he knew what my advice was going to be. I had the advice in writing. He didn’t accept it.

JOURNALIST:

He gave you no indication of what he was going to do when you spoke to him on the phone?

WHITLAM:

None whatever.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Whitlam, are you satisfied that the former Liberal Attorney-General, who is now Chief Justice of the High Court should have been the only outside legal authority that the Governor-General consulted?

WHITLAM:

I think the Governor-General was in error on that issue. The High Court of Australia does not have the function of giving advisory opinions. Some superior courts in other countries do, for instance, the Supreme Court of Canada. The High Court does not have that function. If the views of High Court judges are relevant, then clearly the views of all 7 are equally relevant.

JOURNALIST:

Are you saying that at no stage during the talks you had with the Governor-General did he leave you with an impression that he thought that a general election was the proper course?

WHITLAM:

On the contrary. He gave me the other impression. He knew that I had and was likely to continue to have a majority in the House of Representatives. And he also knew, of course, that the Opposition didn’t have a majority in the Senate.

JOURNALIST:

Are you saying, Mr Whitlam, that he misled you?

JOURNALIST:

Have you been in touch with Buckingham Palace or with London about the actions of the Governor-General?

WHITLAM:

The Governor-General prevented me from getting in touch with the Queen by just withdrawing the Commission immediately. I was unable to communicate with the Quken, as I would have been entitled to do, if I’d had any warning of the course that he, the Governor-General, was to take.

JOURNALIST:

Do you think the Queen knew about this course of action?

WHITLAM:

I shouldn’t think so, but I don’t know.

JOURNALIST:

Sir, are you suggesting that the Governor-General may have misled you?

WHITLAM:

No, I’m not saying that.

JOURNALIST:

Do you think the Governor-General took any advice from Buckingham Palace...?

WHITLAM:

I don’t know. I don’t know. I was not informed that he had. I would think not.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Whitlam, when you say that in the future no other Prime Minister will have his commission withdrawn, what do you mean by that?

WHITLAM:

I believe that we will win this election. The third time will prove it. My Government will be elected for the third time and in those circumstances I don’t believe that the Opposition would venture to be as obstructive again. You may say that that is an optimistic thing about them being obstructive. But it’s been quite clear that the public has been alienated by what Mr Snedden did in April last year. And the public has again been alienated by what Mr Fraser has just done. And I believe that there will be a healthy reluctance by future Liberal leaders to be as obstructive in the Senate again. What we need is a Senate which will work. For the last 3 and a half weeks the Senate has refused to vote on the Budget. The first vote that was taken on the Budget, the one at about a quarter past two this afternoon, resulted in the Budget being passed. And it’s not only in this respect that the Senate has been obstructive. The Senate has rejected more bills in the last 3 years than the Senate had rejected from 1901 to 1972 inclusive.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Whitlam are you satisfied that the Governor-General had the right under the Constitution to withdraw your commission?

WHITLAM:

Oh, no, on the contrary. I’m certain the Crown did not have the right to do what the Governor-General did on this occasion.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Whitlam, if you’re re-elected as Prime Minister, will you retain Sir John Kerr as the Governor-General?

WHITLAM:

Now, as I have said, what goes on between the Crown, the Queen and I, the Queen and me, or the Governor-General and me, must be confidential.

JOURNALIST:

Now that the Governor-General has taken the heat off Sir Phillip Game are you technically Opposition Leader or are you merely the Member for Werriwa?

WHITLAM:

I am the twice elected Prime Minister of Australia. There is a caretaker at the moment. There is no elected Prime Minister currently recognised by the Governor-General. But we have the situation, as you know, that no decisions can be taken until the result of the election is known, because Mr Fraser has been given a commission on condition that he makes no decisions. Now that might be a visual condition for Liberal administrations, but the fact is, that he can’t do anything. It was on that condition, that he was given this commission. And then as we know it takes some weeks to count elections under our electoral laws. It took about six weeks, wasn’t it, to count the last election. And if there had been recounts sought in New South Wales for instance, it would have taken three months to count the elections, so we have to face the decisions for a couple of months and that there will be no decisions for a couple of months and that there will be no Parliament able to legislate in Australia, probably for three months.

JOURNALIST:

Sir, will that affect the economy?

WHITLAM:

Well clearly it will because there are a great number of decisions which have to be made. The economy has already been damaged, unemployment has already been made worse by the conduct of the Senate over the last three and a half weeks.

JOURNALIST:

Do you feel any regrets that you appointed Sir John Kerr?

WHITLAM:

Oh, please don’t.

JOURNALIST:

There has already been some industrial action as a result of today’s proceedings. I would like to ask you a two part question. Do you think that you can continue to urge the Australian union movement to adhere to indexation? And do you think the Australian union movement can regard your election for the third time, as you forecast, as being relevant anymore?

WHITLAM:

This is a worry, obviously. A great number of people will give away the Parliamentary system in Australia if my Government isn’t re-elected. My Party has been elected to government twice. On both occasions it has only been allowed to govern for half its term. Now I have, throughout my Parliamentary life and all my senior colleagues, throughout their Parliamentary lives, have insisted that the way to bring about reform in Australia was through the Parliaments. That the was the way the one could achieve change in an orderly, peaceful, democratic fashion. Now a very great number of people are having their faith shaken. If my Government is not elected the third time, then there can be very great apprehension that people in Australia will believe the Parliament is not a vehicle for reform. They’ll try to go outside the system.

JOURNALIST:

(About republican feeling) Unclear.

WHITLAM:

It may but I’m too far committed to the monachy as you know to...No, I mean the Queen would never have done this, let’s be frank about this. The Queen would never have done this.

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister what were the circumstances and what’s the constitutional significance of Sir John Kerr ignoring the successful motion of no confidence carried in the Fraser government by the House of Representatives today?

WHITLAM:

I can’t understand how the Governor-General took this action. As you remember—and of course we will all be cheking this from Hansard tomorrow—somewhere before three o’clock this afternoon the House of Representatives passed the motion declaring that it had no confidence in Mr Fraser as Prime Minister, and requesting the Speak to advise the Governor-General immediately to call me to be the head of the Australian Government. This motion was carried by 64 votes to 54. the Speaker then sought an audience from the Governor-General. An appointment was made by the Governor-General for the Speaker to wait upon him at a quarter to five. At a quarter to five the Governor-General’s official secretary announced from the steps of Parliament House that both Houses had been dissolved. As you all know, somewhere about quarter past two, that is, at least half an hour before the House of Representatives declared that it had no confidence in Mr Fraser, and that it wanted the Speaker to ask the Governor-General to call me to be the Head of the Government, half an hour before that the Senate had passed the Budget Bills. Accordingly at the time that the Speaker sought an audience with the Governor-General the Budget had already been passed. The House of Representatives had already declared a majority of ten that it had no confidence in Mr Fraser. It had already declared that by the same majority that the Speaker should not request the Governor-General to call me to be the Head of Government. Now I can’t understand how, in those circumstances, the Governor-General saw fit to dissolve both Houses. Clearly the things that he had in mind when he drafted the statement he gave me at one o’clock, and Mr Fraser presumably at about half past one, the grounds in that statement no longer applied and you will notice that the Governor-General declared that the two houses were dissolved on the ground of the double dissolution Bill, he did not purport to dissolve the two Houses because the Government didn’t have Supply. Or because what the elected Government didn’t have Supply.

JOURNALIST:

That being the case, is there any course open to you, any member of the public, the State Government or anyone to clarify the situation, in the High Court?

WHITLAM:

I don’t believe that you can bring the Governor-General before the high Court.

JOURNALIST:

When the Governor-General rejected your advice for an early half Senate election did he give you any opportunity to offer alternative advice?

WHITLAM:

No, no. That’s right, he withdrew my commission.

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister do you believe that you’ve been dismissed illegally?

WHITLAM:

Unconstitutionally. There is no Act which says it can’t happen. But it hasn’t happened for 200 years in the Westminster system. There is no Act of Parliament which says it can’t be done. The whole trust of the Constitution is, that the Party which has the majority in the House of Representatives becomes the Government. And that a Party which is the Government doesn’t cease to be the government unless it loses its majority in the House of Representatives. You can have the situation where a government is in the minority in the Senate. But nevertheless, the government remains the government as longas it has the majority in the House of Representatives. There have been times in the past, not only since we’ve had proportional representation in the Senate and the Senate has been very evenly balanced, when of course on several occasions the Menzies Government, the Holt Government too, didn’t have a majority in the Senate. There have been previous occasions, for instance when the first Menzies Government was defeated and the Fadden Government was defeated, that that Party still had a very large majority in the Senate. But nevertheless, Curtin came in, in the House of Representatives, because a majority of the members of the House of Representatives supported him. And the fact that he didn’t have a majority in the Senate, the fact that if they’d been do disposed the Senators could have rejected the Curtin Budget, never of course occurred to anyone.

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister, you’d probably agree that you enjoy a fight. Are you looking forward to the election campaign and when will you officially launch the campaign?

WHITLAM:

I can’t be sure when I’ll be making my first Public speech but I think I will be having something of political relevance to say at the Liverpool town Hall on Thursday when I’m at the naturalisation and at the Wollongong on Saturday night when I’m at a social function then. Certainly I like a fight. I’ve won a fair number of fights and I expect to win this one. I’ve never known so clear cut an issue. It’s not just what happens to my Government, what’s been done to my Government, it’s what can happen to any Government which thereafter is given a majority in the House of Representatives by the electors and which retains that majority in the House of Representatives. Parliamentary democracy is at stake in Australia here. The alternative is that whenever the Senate fails to pass a Bill, and the Senate fails to pass a Bill if there’s an even division. There doesn’t have to be a majority against the Government proposal in the Senate, it’s enough if the Senate is evenly divided. Now if, by being evenly divided, the Senate can take the Government of the country out of the hands of the Party which has a majority in the House of Representatives then we can have elections, not only every year and a half, as we’ve had in the case of my first two Governments, but also every six months.

JOURNALIST:

Has Mr Fraser told you when he’s going to have an election?

WHITLAM:

No, but it is clearly possible to have an election on the 13 December, that was the date which was shown by the Chief Electoral Officer to be feasible for the half-Senate election which I was advising for the Governor-General to suggest as the date to the State Governors. But moreover any later date like the 20th or the 27th would be very difficult because the usual polling places and the usual polling clerks would not be available. The 13th is a perfectly practicable date. It is the earliest we can have it; as far as I am concerned the sooner the better. The third time will prove it.

Tags: Falcon and the Snowman Australia federal election 2010 Gough Whitlam David Bowie scandal

LA Times: Doubts surface on North Korea's role in ship sinking: "I couldn't find the slightest sign of an explosion..."

2010-07-27T13:59:00.000-07:00

Doubts surface on North Korea's role in ship sinking
Some in South Korea dispute the official version of events: that a North Korean torpedo ripped apart the Cheonan.
July 23, 2010|By Barbara Demick and John M. Glionna, Los Angeles Times

Originally published here.

Reporting from Seoul — The way U.S. officials see it, there's little mystery behind the most notorious shipwreck in recent Korean history.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton calls the evidence "overwhelming" that the Cheonan, a South Korean warship that sank in March, was hit by a North Korean torpedo. Vice President Joe Biden has cited the South Korean-led panel investigating the sinking as a model of transparency.
Advertisement
Ads by Google

* Scientology TodayThe Only Major Religion To Emerge in 20th Century. Watch Online Video Scientology.org

But challenges to the official version of events are coming from an unlikely place: within South Korea.

Armed with dossiers of their own scientific studies and bolstered by conspiracy theories, critics dispute the findings announced May 20 by South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, which pointed a finger at Pyongyang.

They also question why Lee made the announcement nearly two months after the ship's sinking, on the very day campaigning opened for fiercely contested local elections. Many accuse the conservative leader of using the deaths of 46 sailors to stir up anti-communist sentiment and sway the vote.

The critics, mostly but not all from the opposition, say it is unlikely that the impoverished North Korean regime could have pulled off a perfectly executed hit against a superior military power, sneaking a submarine into the area and slipping away without detection. They also wonder whether the evidence of a torpedo attack was misinterpreted, or even fabricated.

"I couldn't find the slightest sign of an explosion," said Shin Sang-chul, a former shipbuilding executive-turned-investigative journalist. "The sailors drowned to death. Their bodies were clean. We didn't even find dead fish in the sea."

Shin, who was appointed to the joint investigative panel by the opposition Democratic Party, inspected the damaged ship with other experts April 30. He was removed from the panel shortly afterward, he says, because he had voiced a contrary opinion: that the Cheonan hit ground in the shallow water off the Korean peninsula and then damaged its hull trying to get off a reef.

"It was the equivalent of a simple traffic accident at sea," Shin said.

The Defense Ministry said in a statement that Shin was removed because of "limited expertise, a lack of objectivity and scientific logic," and that he was "intentionally creating public mistrust" in the investigation.

Tags: North Korea Korea crisis doubts LA Times Los Angeles Times

Behind the Korean crisis: North Korea has denied any involvement in the incident that killed 46 people.

2010-07-25T00:41:00.000-07:00

INSIDE STORY
Behind the Korean crisis

Original story as found on the Al-Jazeera website

Tensions between North and South Korea have escalated, with the South saying it will no longer tolerate any aggression and the North saying that it is ready to defend itself.

While the two neighbours have a history of frosty relations, the conflict gained new momentum last week after South Korea claimed to have found evidence that the North deliberately sank one of its warships two months ago.

North Korea has denied any involvement in the incident that killed 46 people.

Lee Myung-bak, the South Korean president, has said any aggression in the future from the North will be dealt with strongly.

Just what are the issues behind this latest crisis and how far could it escalate?

Inside Story, with presenter Mike Hanna, discusses with Bjørnar Simonsen, an international counselor at the Korean Friendship Association - a group associated with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, John Feffer, the co-director of the think tank Foreign Policy In Focus, and Jong-kun Choi, a professor of political science at Yonsei University.

This episode of Inside Story aired from Tuesday, May 25, 2010.

Tags: North Korea Korea crisis

Another blow at our rivers by Campbell: Flood Valleys, Destroy Rivers for Power for Export

2010-04-30T01:48:00.000-07:00

Just when you think that the Campbell government couldn't screw the electorate and future generations any further, he has further stripped the powers of the BCUC, an organization that regulated utilities in British Columbia.

Despite the fact that David Schreck and his NDP crew contributed to the failure of the Single Transferable Vote, by contributing to the confusion of what it could mean for voters, he does justice to the injust situation now imposed by Campbell's government, through the greenwashed "Clean Energy Act":

Flood Valleys, Destroy Rivers for Power for Export

The next time you hear the Campbell government call something "green", know that means the colour of US currency, rather than meaning environmentally friendly. With the introduction of Bill 17 (2010), the Clean Energy Act, (a more appropriate name would be the Flood Valleys for Power for Export Act) the Campbell government finally came clean with its plans.

For decades British Columbia rejected the development of power for export. The province participates in, and makes a lot of money, from the electrical market, but it does that by importing when power is cheap and exporting when it is expensive. The storage capacity of BC's dams makes that electrical trade possible. Until the Campbell government encouraged the run-of-river projects, generating capacity was not developed in excess of BC Hydro's projected provincial demand.

Section 2 of the Act lists BC's energy objectives, and item "n" states:
"to be a net exporter of electricity from clean or renewable resources with the intention of benefiting all British Columbians and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in regions in which British Columbia trades electricity while protecting the interests of persons who receive or may receive service in British Columbia".

Last summer the British Columbia Utilities Commission rejected B.C. Hydro's 2008 long term acquisition plan (LTAP). Its July 27, 2009 decision rejected or found deficient a number of material parts of B.C. Hydro's plan. On April 27, 2010 the Campbell government put BCUC in its place by stripping the regulatory authority of any powers with respect to 11 projects, including Site C. In addition to putting specific projects beyond the authority of the commission, the Act states that one of British Columbia's energy objectives is: "to ensure the commission, under the Utilities Commission Act, continues to regulate the authority with respect to domestic rates but not with respect to expenditures for export, except as provided by this Act."

No longer will BCUC be able to reject a proposed power project on the grounds that the power is for export and not needed in BC.

BC's rivers are being destroyed and valley's flooded so Californians can crank up their air conditioners.

Ironically, the Bill also reverses the separation of BC Hydro and the British Columbia Transmission Corporation. It is amusing to go back to Hansard for 2003 and read the government's speeches in which they proclaimed why breaking up Hydro was vital to BC's economic interests. Reversing that decision is not because the government has changed its mind with respect to helping its independent power producing (IPP) friends; it's just that having Hydro act as an agent for the IPPs allows them to make even more money while the public bears the risk.

Like the HST, the announcement of a shift in the development of power for export, is something an election should have been fought on. British Columbians did not give the Campbell government a mandate to change Hydro's reason for being.

_____________________________________________________

© 2010 David D. Schreck.

David Schreck's website is www.strategicthoughts.com

Tags: Clean_Energy_Act BCUC British_Columbia hydroelectric power export Campbell Shreck

Sydney Australia Goes Electric (Vehicle)!

2010-03-20T15:43:00.000-07:00

Just before Christmas, after reading this article about how Sydney's Lord Mayor, Clover Moore, was going to be going big with electric vehicles I had a chance to speak with Chris Binns, Manager Strategy & Assets, about the City of Sydney's plans for electric vehicles (EVs).

He mentioned how Sydney is part of a international alliance of cities of cities linked in with the Clinton Climate Initiative exploring the use of EVs, including Berlin, Bogota, Buenos Aires, Copenhagen, Delhi, Houston, London, Los Angeles, Mexico City and Sao Paulo

Chris mentioned how the City had been working with The Institute of Sustainable Futures at UTS to research the best ways to get into the use of EVs.

He also spoke about how they had purchased the Diesel Hybrids, for their light truck needs. He mentioned that although they had considered conversions of their fleets, it was likely that they would initially substitute their internal combustion vehicles with electric vehicles.

He also mentioned that the City was in discussions with Better Place and Chargepoint-Coloumb about the introduction of charging stations. Of course the issue of where they would source the electricity was raised, with Chris assuring me that they would continue to procure green energy. He mentioned that these stations would likely be able to charge 1 minute per km, taking an estimated 4-8 hrs to fully charge.

Other climate friendly initiatives the City has underway are:

* working with local carshare organizations to provide car share spaces to encourage the use of car-sharing.

* establishing a resident parking scheme where hybrids can park at a reduced fee.

* working , with other Councils, on cycleways building on current inter-Council cycling infrastructure.

* using a fleet of hybrid Prius for staff inspections, meeting transport etc.

In terms of local businesses doing the right thing he mentioned how companies were creating various incentives to reward drivers for achieving fuel efficiency.

Chris suggested that people interested in learning about the direction of electric vehicles and infrastructure would have benefitted from attending Phillipe Reboul's EV Conference in Brisbane last November (http://www.evconference.com.au/), which featured some of the big players in the energy business such as ERGON and Energex as well as the major vehicle companies such as Mitsubishi, Nissan, Renault and the luxury Tesla. It is expected that 2010 will be the big year for the EV, with many companies finally launching commercially into Asia, Europe, North America, and hopefully Australia.

Image of Lord Mayor Clover Moore from ecogeneration.

Tags: Sydney Australia electric vehicle Lord Mayor Clover Moore Clinton Climate Initiative

5GGG7Q7XWEE2

Decoding the Climate Change Skeptics

2010-01-13T02:30:00.000-08:00

Mohave Power Station, a 1,580 MW coal power plant near Laughlin, Nevada, out of service since 2005 due to environmental restrictions ^[1]

This is in response to a friend who sent me a letter from an Australian Climate Change Skeptic. Hopefully, some of the unconverted will read this and begin to read their media with an eye to increased oxygen supply. -Ed.

Dear X,

Thanks for the letter. It’s good to have some real climate change denier content, as part of my attempt to help readers become a little more critical in their consumption of media.

Although the writer puts forward some good points about efficiency levels of coal-fired power stations, in the true spirit of 'yellow journalism', he starts out with "At last ... some sensible, verifiable facts..." to hypnotise the reader that what is about to be stated are facts, and then by providing some pretty reasonable facts at the outset that most would not dispute he then goes on to feed the spin, initially claiming that he’s just some regular bloke who wants to pass on some unbiased information he has about coal power.

I believe that given death by coal or death by nuclear, I would prefer the former, but the point is that dealing with climate change, especially from an oxygen-breather such as myself is the attempt to increase the world’s oxygen content and decrease greenhouse gases which open the hole in the ozone which do things like contribute to the ever-increasing spread of drought.

The purpose of encouraging the use of non-greenhouse-gas energy options is to attempt to stave off the extinction of the various species on the Earth, but from the coal industry’s perspective, it seem that this isn’t really all that important, consume energy first, maybe deal with decreasing oxygen supplies later on…

Below I reveal the mind of the reader to expose the trick of the yellow journalist so that you and your fellow readers might understand the ‘magic’ and hopefully learn how to be critical readers.

Douglas

----- Original Message -----
From: X
To: Y
Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 10:56 PM
Subject: Coal Driven Power Stations and Carbon Dioxide.

At last ... some sensible, verifiable facts.

Reader: Yep, well that's what I want to read

I challenge you to read it through and if you believe it, pass it to
your friends and forward it to your MP.

Alternatively, do nothing and I believe YOU WILL PAY.

Reader: I'm already frightened, but now that you have capitalized the words, you have got me scared, so sure hope you help me get less scared.

This article appeared in the Rockhampton morning Bulletin on 22.12.09.
This is an excellent piece for my friends to send to their politicians or to anybody who needs to be educated about Australia's Coal driven power houses.
Terry is now retired and is in excellent health at age 69. Nobody paid him to write the article which was, (to their credit), published by the local press.

Reader: Oh, that's good, as long as nobody paid him, (and I'm sure he isn't a shareholder in any coal-oriented concern either). Oh and thankfully it was published by the local press (who are never influenced by corporate interests).

Written By Terence Cardwell terrycar@iinet.net.au

The Editor The Morning Bulletin.

I have sat by for a number of years frustrated at the rubbish being put forth about carbon dioxide emissions, thermal coal fired power stations and renewable energy and the ridiculous Emissions Trading Scheme.

Reader: I am frustrated too, you're just like me, mate.

Frustration at the lies told (particularly during the election) about global pollution. Using Power Station cooling towers for an example. The condensation coming from those cooling towers is as pure as that that comes out of any kettle.

Reader: I understand what a kettle is, it's how I make my tea, Wow, you're a man of the people, Terry.

Frustration about the so called incorrectly named man made 'carbon emissions' which of course is Carbon Dioxide emissions and what it is supposedly doing to our planet.

Reader: Huh, I never thought that it should have been called 'carbon emissions' either and I sure don't understand what people mean by greenhouse gases, I've been in a greenhouse and didn't die there.

Frustration about the lies told about renewable energy and the deliberate distortion of renewable energy and its ability to replace fossil fuel energy generation. And frustration at the ridiculous carbon credit programme which is beyond comprehension.

Reader: Yeah, I don't understand it, so I'm afraid.

And further frustration at some members of the public who have not got a clue about thermal Power Stations or Renewable Energy. Quoting ridiculous figures about something they clearly have little or no knowledge of.

Reader: Yeah, some people sure are dumb, but I bet you aren't, Terry, you're my mate.

First coal fired power stations do NOT send 60 to 70% of the energy up the chimney. The boilers of modern power station are 96% efficient and the exhaust heat is captured by the economisers and reheaters and heat the air and water before entering the boilers.

Reader: Yeah, I don't know why those people would say that, because Terry says that it's 96% efficient. And he's my mate.

The very slight amount exiting the stack is moist as in condensation and CO2. There is virtually no fly ash because this is removed by the precipitators or bagging plant that are 99.98% efficient. The 4% lost is heat through boiler wall convection.

Reader: Wow, Terry is sure smart, much smarter than me, for a regular bloke, he sure seems to know a lot about coal production. It's too bad that the coal industry doesn't ask him to give speeches on their behalf.

Coal fired Power Stations are highly efficient with very little heat loss and can generate massive amount of energy for our needs. They can generate power at efficiency of less than 10,000 b.t.u. per kilowatt and cost wise that is very low.

Reader: If Terry says the cost is low, I won't even question the cost, because he's my mate.

The percentage cost of mining and freight is very low. The total cost of fuel is 8% of total generation cost and does NOT constitute a major production cost.

Reader: Yes, and I'm sure that the taxpayers don't contribute to the cost of mining or freight through any subsidies, which is fantastic.

As for being laughed out of the country, China is building multitudes of coal fired power stations because they are the most efficient for bulk power generation.

Reader: If China's doing it, then we should too. They're making lots of money, I sure hope we can be just like them.

We have, like, the USA, coal fired power stations because we HAVE the raw materials and are VERY fortunate to have them. Believe me no one is laughing at Australia - exactly the reverse, they are very envious of our raw materials and independence.

Reader: And it's a good thing that these envious countries come into Australia and extract its resources and help us maintain our independence as they take them to their countries and manufacture them into products and sell them back to us. I like buying stuff from other countries.

The major percentage of power in Europe and U.K. is nuclear because they don't have the coal supply for the future.

Reader: Ha Ha to Europe and the UK, we've got coal, too bad for them. Nuclear power is really dangerous. I remember Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Even Warren Buffett doesn’t think it’s any good. (OK, I realize that the Reader just stepped out of character for the moment, but somehow one of his other mates told him about Warren Buffett. He remembered the other events because they were pretty scary.-Ed)

Yes it would be very nice to have clean, quiet, cheap energy in bulk supply. Everyone agrees that it would be ideal. You don't have to be a genius to work that out. But there is only one problem---It doesn't exist.
Reader: If Terry says that there are no other sources of energy, then I won't even question him, because he's my mate.

Yes - there are wind and solar generators being built all over the world but they only add a small amount to the overall power demand.

Reader: And it's probably not because federal and local governments have done nothing to support them. Like in Queensland, they let quite a few people buy into the program before the cut it off with only a few months before it was supposed to end. It's a good thing that coal is there to save the day!

The maximum size wind generator is 3 Megawatts, which can rarely be attained on a continuous basis because it requires substantial forces of wind. And for the same reason only generate when there is sufficient wind to drive them. This of course depends where they are located but usually they only run for 45% -65% of the time, mostly well below maximum capacity. They cannot be relied for a 'base load' because they are too variable. And they certainly could not be used for load control.
Reader: If Terry says so, then again it must be true. I'm sure that those idiots in Scandinavia aren't able to generate much power from their generators.

The peak load demand for electricity in Australia is approximately 50,000 Megawatts and only small part of this comes from the Snowy Hydro Electric System (The ultimate power Generation) because it is only available when water is there from snow melt or rain. And yes they can pump it back but it cost to do that. (Long Story).

Reader: Wow , so if solar and wind can't do it, and there's only that one Hydro System, well there really IS only one choice. I’m getting kind of tired already, so it’s a good thing that Terry is simplifying and shortening everything so I can learn the facts.

Tasmania is very fortunate in that they have mostly hydro electric generation because of their high amounts of snow and rainfall. They also have wind generators (located in the roaring forties) but that is only a small amount of total power generated.

Reader: Lucky them. But at least we have coal. And I don't really know what he means by the 'roaring forties', and of course it's not really worthwhile anyway, as Terry told me.

Based on a average generating output of 1.5 megawatts (of unreliable power) you would require over 33,300 wind generators.

Reader: There's no way that anyone could ever install that number of wind generators, because for some reason, well, you just can't.

As for solar power generation much research has been done over the decades and there are two types. Solar thermal generation and Solar Electric generation but in each case they cannot generate large amounts of electricity.

Reader: Again, thanks to Terry, I am closed off to even considering solar power, cause he says that we just can't do it.

Any clean, cheap energy is obviously welcomed but they would NEVER have the capability of replacing Thermal power generation. So get your heads out of the clouds, do some basic mathematics and look at the facts not going off with the fairies (or some would say the extreme greenies.)
Reader: I would not want to go off with the fairies, because I am not a pagan. So gimme the coal power, Terry.

We are all greenies in one form or another and care very much about our planet. The difference is most of us are realistic. Not in some idyllic utopia where everything can be made perfect by standing around holding a banner and being a general pain in the backside.

Reader: Wow, so Terry is an oxygen-breather, that's a relief. And he's a greenie, but a realistic one. I don't like holding banners and think all those protestor types should all be arrested.

Here are some facts that will show how ridiculous this financial madness the government is following. Do the simple maths and see for yourselves.

According to the 'believers' the CO2 in air has risen from .034% to .038% in air over the last 50 years.

Reader: Uh-huh. Yeah, I sure am skeptical, just like you, Terry.

To put the percentage of Carbon Dioxide in air in a clearer perspective; If you had a room 12 ft x 12 ft x 7 ft or 3.7 mtrs x 3.7 mtrs x 2.1 mtrs, the area carbon dioxide would occupy in that room would be .25m x .25m x .17m or the size of a large packet of cereal.

Reader: OK, thanks for the cereal packet example, I'm with you.

Australia emits 1 percent of the world's total carbon Dioxide and the government wants to reduce this by twenty percent or reduce emissions by .2 percent of the world's total CO2 emissions.

Reader: OK, yeah that seems pretty tough, especially since I don't really understand any of this. Why should we have to do anything if other countries don’t. I mean, the Yanks and the Chinese don’t seem to want to do anything, so why should we, hey Terry?

What effect will this have on existing CO2 levels?

By their own figures they state the CO2 in air has risen from .034% to .038% in 50 years.

Assuming this is correct, the world CO2 has increased in 50 years by .004 percent.

Per year that is .004 divided by 50 = .00008 percent. (Getting confusing - but stay with me).

Reader: No, I think it’s something to do with the cereal packet…

Of that because we only contribute 1% our emissions would cause CO2 to rise .00008 divided by 100 = .0000008 percent.

Reader: Terry, you're my mate, but you're hurting me.

Of that 1% we supposedly emit, the governments wants to reduce it by 20% which is 1/5th of .0000008 = .00000016 percent effect per year they would have on the world CO2 emissions based on their own figures.

Reader: How many bowls of cereal is that?

That would equate to an area in the same room, as the size of a small pin.!!!

Reader: OK, so there would be a pin in the cereal box? That's pretty small. Thanks Terry. So we don’t really have to do anything, really.

For that they have gone crazy with the ridiculous trading schemes, Solar and roofing installations, Clean coal technology. Renewable energy, etc, etc.

Reader: Yeah, what a waste of time. We don’t have to do anything at all and should just keep using energy like there’s no tomorrow.

How ridiculous it that.
Reader: Very. I’m about ready for a VB at this point…

The cost to the general public and industry will be enormous. Cripple and even closing some smaller business.

T.L. Cardwell

Reader: I have a small business and in case we go with coal, it will close. I'm going to contact my MP straightaway. If I ever see you in a pub, Terry, my shout!

To the Editor I thought I should clarify. I spent 25 years in the Electricity Commission of NSW working, commissioning and operating the various power units. My last was the 4 X 350 MW Munmorah Power Station near Newcastle. I would be pleased to supply you any information you may require.

Reader: Good thing that I didn't read this, otherwise I might think that you have been influenced by the coal industry and have thought that you were trying to trick me, but I know you wouldn't do that, mate.

Climate Change Skeptic
Energy Coal Nuclear Wind Critical Thinking whemedia

Copenhagen ends in failure

2009-12-19T02:00:00.000-08:00

Originally posted here

Photo from UK Daily Telepgraph

"The city of Copenhagen is a crime scene tonight, with the guilty men and women fleeing to the airport." Don't feel too dirty partyers. Be sure to buy indulgences and see you when you fly in to the party at Whistler

Low targets, goals dropped: Copenhagen ends in failure

Deal thrashed out at talks damned as climate change denial in action
* http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/18/copenhagen-deal
* John Vidal, Jonathan Watts and Suzanne Goldenberg in Copenhagen
* guardian.co.uk, Saturday 19 December 2009 00.47 GMT
* Article history
Barack Obama as he walks through the press conference room at t

Onlookers stretch to shake the hand of US President Barack Obama as he walks through the press conference room at the Bella Centre Photograph: ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images

The UN climate summit reached a weak outline of a global agreement last night in Copenhagen, falling far short of what Britain and many poor countries were seeking and leaving months of tough negotiations to come.

After eight draft texts and all-day talks between 115 world leaders, it was left to Barack Obama and Wen Jiabao, the Chinese premier, to broker a political agreement.

The deal – known as the Copenhagen accord – "recognises" the scientific case for keeping temperature rises to no more than 2C but did not contain commitments to emissions reductions to achieve that goal.

American officials spun the deal as a "meaningful agreement", but even Obama said: "This progress is not enough."

"We have come a long way, but we have much further to go," he added.

The deal was brokered between China, South Africa, India, Brazil and the US, but late last night it was still unclear whether it would be adopted by all 192 countries in the full plenary session.

The agreement aims to provide $30bn in funding for poor countries to adapt to climate change from next year to 2012, and $100bn a year after 2020.

But it disappointed African and other vulnerable countries who had been holding out for far deeper emission cuts in order to hold the global temperature rise to 1.5C this century. As widely expected, all references to 1.5C in previous versions of the agreement were removed at the last minute, but more surprisingly, the earlier 2050 goal of reducing global CO2 emissions by 80% was also dropped.

The agreement also set up a forestry deal which is hoped would significantly reduce deforestation in return for cash. It lacked the kind of independent verification of emission reductions by developing countries that the US and others demanded.

Obama hinted that China was to blame for the lack of a substantial deal. In a press conference he condemned the insistence of some countries to look backwards to previous environmental agreements. He said developing countries should be "getting out of that mindset, and moving towards the position where everybody recognises that we all need to move together".

This was a not-so-veiled reference to the epic row over whether to ditch the Kyoto protocol and its legal distinction between developed and developing nations. Developing nations saw this as an attempt by the rich world to wriggle out of its responsibility for climate change. Many observers blamed the US for coming to the talks with an offer of just 4% emissions cuts on 1990 levels. The final text made no obligations on developing countries to make cuts.

Negotiators will now work on individual agreements such as forests, technology, and finance – but, without strong leadership, the chances are that it will take years to complete.

Obama cast his trip as a sign of renewed US global leadership. "The time has come for us to get off the sidelines and shape the future that we seek; that is why I came to Copenhagen," he said. But he said he would not be staying for the final vote "because of weather constraints in Washington".

Lumumba Di-Aping, chief negotiator for the G77 group of 130 developing countries, was scathing: "This deal will definitely result in massive devastation in Africa and small island states. It has the lowest level of ambition you can imagine. It's nothing short of climate change scepticism in action.

"It locks countries into a cycle of poverty for ever. Obama has eliminated any difference between him and Bush."

John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK said: "The city of Copenhagen is a crime scene tonight, with the guilty men and women fleeing to the airport.

"Ed Miliband [UK climate change secretary] is among the very few that come out of this summit with any credit. It is now evident that beating global warming will require a radically different model of politics than the one on display here in Copenhagen."

Lydia Baker, Save the Children's policy adviser said: "By signing a sub-standard deal, world leaders have effectively signed a death warrant for many of the world's poorest children.

"Up to 250,000 children from poor communities could die before the next major meeting in Mexico at the end of next year."

-30-

We're hopeful that at least Australia will get on with leading by example. -Ed.

Climate Change Economics
Energy Forests Social Impacts Oil Sands Truth

Green pot of carbon gold lures politicians

2009-12-14T03:11:00.000-08:00

We figure it's time to again present the Greening the Desert post here video here

... and then read this article:

Originally published here

GUY PEARSE AND GREGG BORSCHMANN
December 14, 2009

IT WAS a candid remark in a private briefing. But the comments by an Australian climate negotiator in Copenhagen late last week gave some insight into where Labor intends to find a potentially ambitious cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

It will be in the same place that Liberal leader Tony Abbott is indicating he will go looking for his ''practical measures'' to solve climate change - and nowhere near the smokestacks of coal-fired power stations or greenhouse-intensive industries. It will be in the rolling back paddocks, grazing lands and grasslands of rural Australia, from Burke to Barcaldine, from Wubin to Wangaratta - a green pot of carbon gold.

It is hard to put a dollar value on the potential bonanza. Equally, it is hard to put an exact figure on the possible emissions reductions, but the predicted numbers are mind-boggling - enough, some say, to make Australia carbon neutral for the next three or four decades. And all that without having to impose a nasty tax, set up a complicated emissions trading scheme or clean up a single polluting pipe. It is a political win-win.

The climate change negotiator reportedly told a private briefing last week at the UN climate conference that Australia would be able to commit to a 25 per cent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 if proposed land-use rule changes pushed by developed countries are accepted as part of a new global climate deal.

The changes are highly contentious in Copenhagen, as developing nations recognise the potential for countries such as Canada, the US and Australia to offset industrial pollution against carbon sequestration in rural landscapes. Intuitively, it seems implausible that simple changes in how we manage agricultural land might return much carbon to our soils. It's hard to imagine that perennial pastures, reducing tillage and fertiliser use and improving fire management could be any match for the relentless 24/7 pollution billowing from coal-fired power stations and grid-locked freeways.

Yet, because we have hundreds of millions of hectares of land, very small increases in soil carbon could generate huge reductions in our net emissions.

Under the Kyoto Protocol, Australia has no incentive to take up these opportunities, because we don't have to account for most land-related emissions. And from the figures revealed today showing a 657 per cent jump in the numbers since 1990, it is obvious why Australia at present prefers not to account for them.

Australia has led the charge at climate change negotiations over recent years to change the way that land-use emissions are counted in the next global climate deal. If it carved out so-called natural or ''exceptional'' events such as bushfires and drought, which cause the huge spikes in our emissions, Australia could claim carbon credits from ''forest and land-use management''. This then opens up rural lands to so-called ''carbon farming'' on a grand scale.

What both major parties appear to recognise is that, with luck and time, land use can be turned into a huge carbon sink that can postpone industrial emission cuts for possibly another decade. Asked about this potential, Climate Change Minister Penny Wong told the ABC's Four Corners program: "We need it to be counted in the international accounting rules so that it counts towards Australia's target."

Last year, in his official climate report to the Government, economist Ross Garnaut estimated that increasing soil carbon in grazing areas and crop lands could store 354 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year for 20-50 years (equivalent to more than half of Australia's current annual emissions). Garnaut's work is backed up by the CSIRO and the Wentworth Group.

Christine Jones (who inspired former opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull and Coalition climate action spokesman Greg Hunt) is a renowned soil scientist who argues that holistic management of agricultural lands could make Australia carbon-neutral for decades.

If accurate, that is enough to soak up Australia's entire post-industrial contribution to climate change - with simple land-care practices, and without the costly pyrolysis reactors required to produce biochar.

It is no wonder that Tim Flannery refers to Australia's ''terrestrial carbon'' offset potential as ''an ecological magic pudding'', arguing that Australia could export 100 million tonnes worth annually to the US.

Of course, that won't happen if the US achieves what Australia has in mind - offsetting its industrial and energy emissions with rural carbon certificates.

This would not cost taxpayers a fortune. At present, soil carbon credits trade on the Chicago Climate Exchange for much less than $US5 ($A5.47) a tonne. Without emissions trading, farmers would be price takers. And emission targets need only be met during the years specified in a new Kyoto protocol or global treaty - perhaps not until 2020. Plenty of time to get farmers organised.

To many scientists and environmentalists (not to mention financial entrepreneurs), it makes sense to link forest protection and soil restoration directly with carbon money. What better way to drive large-scale action than with the money polluting industries must pay to reduce or offset their greenhouse pollution? To those who have campaigned in vain to save the world's tropical forests, or watched Australia's farmlands being trashed, carbon offsets are the holy grail. Most of the practices that would boost carbon storage in soil and forests would also boost biodiversity and agricultural productivity.

Many farmers are also already seeing it as a big win. At seminars and expos across the country, farmers are signing up to registers and for contracts to sell their soil carbon credits. Farmers agreeing to reduced tillage, bio-fertiliser use and other soil conditioning are told to expect a 1 per cent increase in soil carbon in the top 150 millimetres of their soils - up to 55 tonnes of carbon dioxide credit a hectare. Farmers organisations are jumping on the bandwagon in what's being billed as the ''soil carbon solution''. Even coal giant Rio Tinto has chipped in some money.

The catch is that if storing carbon in rural soils is seen as a substitute for burning less fossil fuel, scientists say that the global climate is in deep trouble. The so-called grandfather of climate science, NASA's James Hansen, leads a growing push among scientists arguing that the only really safe territory for atmospheric carbon dioxide is 350 parts per million or less. It is currently at 387 ppm. Burying carbon in rural lands may draw down some of that atmospheric carbon, but only if it is on top of big emission cuts from industrial sources, especially the burning of coal.

The suspicion that we may be comparing apples with pears when it comes to measuring carbon at the smokestacks and out in the back paddocks is backed by an insider who knows intimately how Australia does its greenhouse gas accounting. This source said there were huge problems trying to account for carbon in rural landscapes.

"This is all about paper shuffling. It's not about reducing emissions. It's about being seen to be complying [with targets] for political reasons. Whatever the outcome, I would not be confident that it will be effective in doing what it's meant to do - and that is cutting emissions," he said.

The source said land-use accounting was incredibly important to the Government, and for this reason had been kept ''in-house''.

Almost all other greenhouse accounting, including transport and energy, is done by outside consultants. Those calculations are relatively precise and easy to cross-check - but that is not the case with land-use carbon accounting. "It makes you wonder what they're up to,'' the source said.

Guy Pearse is the author of High & Dry and Quarry Vision; Gregg Borschmann is environment editor with ABC Radio National breakfast.

-30-

OK, so things are looking up, hey?

green gold
climate change carbon sequestration Copenhagen Australia greening_the_desert Guy_Pearse Gregg_Borschmann

Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak

2009-12-12T18:43:00.000-08:00

Originally posted here

Developing countries react furiously to leaked draft agreement that would hand more power to rich nations, sideline the UN's negotiating role and abandon the Kyoto protocol

And here is a deeper, micro-level assessment from Adam Welz' Blog.

Here's a reaction to the text by Lumumba Di-Aping, Sudanese by birth and chief negotiator of the so-called G77 bloc (which mostly consists of poor countries):

"...Speaking in measured tones, Di-Aping first attacked the
2 degrees C warming maximum
that most rich countries currently consider acceptable.
Referring continuously to science, in
particular parts of the latest IPCC report (which he
referenced by page and section) he said that
2 degrees C globally meant 3.5 degrees C for much of Africa.
He called global warming of 2 degrees C “certain death for Africa”,
a type of climate fascism” imposed on Africa by high carbon
emitters. He said Africa was being asked to sign on to an
agreement that would allow this warming in exchange for
$10 billion,
and that Africa was also being asked to “celebrate” this deal."

Here's the Danish text that's causing the disarray.

climate change Danish text Copenhagen Africa

Climate Change Denier Plimer addresses Copenhagen 'heretics'

2009-12-10T02:31:00.000-08:00

Professor Plimer of the University of Adelaide has shown how unashamed the Australian mining sector is by sending him in to rebut the climate change initiatives being proposed in Copenhagen.

Between him and Liberal Leader Tony Abbott, quoted recently saying, "Notwithstanding the dramatic increases in man-made C02, emissions over the last decade, the world's warming has stopped.", unfortunately, the reality is that increases in C02 and other gases are increasing in parallel with the increases in "methane gas" being spewed from the mouths of the climate deniers. Of course the levels of methane gas will pale in comparison to those that could be unleashed on the Earth should the temperatures continue to increase. And then there will be no more days of slathering on layer after layer of sunscreen and wearing budgie-smugglers at the beach, Tony!

Surprisingly, in the image above he seems to be showing his true 'Rainbow Warrior' colours. So maybe this is all a big ruse before he and his team release their proposal for an emissions trading scheme...?

We did a little more research on Professor Plimer and found his "Heaven and Earth" pseudo-science well-dissected here.

climate change denier plimer Copenhagen Abbott emissions trading scheme Australia

The Cove: They're Killing Flipper!

2009-12-08T02:35:00.000-08:00

It's likely believed by many that dolphins and whales are protected species.

Not so in Japan. The Oceanic Preservation Society's The Cove exposes how a community in Japan called Taiji is systematically killing tens of thousands of dolphins every year. And this is being done right in front of the world community.

If we doom our fellow mammals to extinction, can humanity be far behind?

Even if you don't care about fish or sea mammals, there is some pretty scary information about the current levels of mercury in these creatures, often several hundred times above the toxic levels. Of course mercury poisoning has been directly linked to many different diseases.

But just so this blog doesn't totally bring you down, there is at least a therapy to detoxify mercury and other heavy metals from your body - chelation therapy. Now, if only there was a therapy to cleanse people from their immoral and unethical treatment of other species.

kill Flipper
The_Cove dolphin movie mercury poisoning seafood
chelation therapy

Mounting Debilities and Deaths from H1N1 Vaccine

2009-12-05T18:31:00.000-08:00

Full article here on Dr. Mercola's site
December 05 2009

Jordan McFarland, a 14-year-old boy from Virginia, is weak and struggling to walk after coming down with a reported case of Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) within hours after receiving the H1N1 vaccine for swine flu.

McFarland left Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children in a wheelchair nearly a week after developing severe headaches, muscle spasms and weakness in his legs following a swine flu shot.

Jordan is among the first people in the U.S. to report developing the potentially life-threatening muscle disorder after receiving the H1N1 vaccine this fall. Increased cases of GBS were found in patients who received a 1976 swine flu vaccine.

Likewise, a young woman in France has also been diagnosed with GBS after a swine flu shot. The woman, identified only as a health worker, was diagnosed with GBS six days after she received the swine flu shot, according to the French health ministry

Swedish, Japanese, and Chinese health officials have also reported a number of serious side effects, including deaths of people who received the H1N1 vaccine.

In China, the Ministry of Health announced that the two people, including one teacher from Hunan province, died hours after receiving their inoculations.

Chinese health officials have pulled all vaccines manufactured in the same batch used to inoculate the teacher.

Fifty-four percent of Chinese residents reported in a China Daily survey that they would not get the H1N1 vaccine because of concerns about the shot's safety. Among those inoculated so far in China, more than 1,200 have complained of side effects ranging from sore arms, rashes, and headaches, to anaphylactic shock and sudden drops in blood pressure.

swine flu prevention vaccine debilities Mercola Mounting Debilities and Deaths from H1N1 Vaccine

Warren Buffett rejects Nuclear Plant in Idaho due to high cost

2009-11-20T14:57:00.000-08:00

Originally found here

By Andrea Shipley, Snake River Alliance Executive Director

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

MidAmerican Nuclear Energy Company Agrees with the Snake River Alliance that Nuclear Energy is Too Expensive

Advocates of a nuclear power “renaissance” are basing their appeals on the notion that nuclear power will be an inexpensive way to get new baseload capacity and to combat global warming. However, MidAmerican Nuclear Energy Company, owned by leading businessman Warren Buffett, has ended its pursuit of a nuclear energy facility in Payette County after the company spent $13 million researching the viability of the location.

“When one of the top business people of this country agree with the Snake River Alliance's conclusion that nuclear energy is not economically viable in this state, it sends a very clear message to other investors who want to try to build a nuclear plant in Idaho,” said Andrea Shipley, Executive Director of the Snake River Alliance.

Although MidAmerican says its decision is based on economic considerations and not on issues related to the suitability of the Idaho site, Shipley says, “Not only is nuclear power an economically unsound decision, its waste is dangerous to the health and security of Idaho. Also, there simply is not enough water to support the cooling of a nuclear power plant in Idaho. Power plants are notorious for requiring massive amounts of water, and as Idahoans know the Snake River is already over-allocated in terms of water withdrawals. The amount of water required for one nuclear plant would have significant impacts on Idaho’s rivers, fish, and of course our agriculture industry. We believe the economic promise of renewable energy is the best solution for Idaho.”
The Snake River Alliance agrees with energy analysts and agencies such as the four-state Northwest Power and Conservation Council that Idaho can meet its projected energy requirements by implementing more ambitious energy conservation and efficiency programs and by creating a climate to develop the state’s untapped wind, geothermal, and other clean and affordable energy resources.

The people of Payette were invited to a MidAmerican community information meeting Dec. 20, 2007, where more than 400 community members attended. Many expressed concerns about the risks of nuclear power and how the proposed nuclear plant would impact their lives and livelihoods.

The Payette community’s experience with MidAmerican, which was very transparent about its plans, was quite different than those in Owyhee County working with Alternate Energy Holdings, Inc..

AEHI wants to build a 1,600-megawatt nuclear reactor on C.J. Strike Reservoir near Bruneau. AEHI built two towers in Owyhee County despite Owyhee County’s denial of permits for the towers in early November. One tower is a cellular tower, although there is no contract with a cellular company. The other tower is a meteorological tower designed to gather wind and other data required to process an application to build what could become Idaho’s first commercial nuclear power plant.

“We have to wonder why AEHI continues to refuse to comply with the approval process to build the towers and why they are not being transparent as MidAmerican was with the community about their plans,” Shipley said, adding county officials have been quoted in the Owyhee Avalanche as saying AEHI has violated the county’s zoning ordinances.

“If AEHI shows this much disregard for Owyhee County’s laws on something as basic as erecting required meteorological towers, why should the county, its residents, and the state of Idaho have any faith that AEHI will obey county and state laws in the future?”

The Snake River Alliance is a nonprofit organization working towards energy solutions for Idaho and dedicated to serving as Idaho’s nuclear watchdog.
#####

CONTACT INFORMATION

(208) 433-9161 office
(208) 514-8713 cell

Internet Link :

www.snakeriveralliance.org

Warren Buffett Warren_Buffett nuclear power

New South Wales, Australia launches Gross Feed In Tariff Scheme for Solar Panels!

2009-11-11T03:31:00.001-08:00

Last night, at the local Sydney Central ATA Meeting, Mark Kibby of Suntech shared with attendees the benefits of the recent announcement of the NSW Solar Bonus Scheme, which stands to boost the solar panel industry in Australia considerably.

Read below about how this will happen, it's exciting! - Ed.

Originally posted on Energy Matters

After a review in New South Wales of upcoming solar feed in tariff arrangements, known as the NSW Solar Bonus Scheme, the Rees Government last night decided to switch from a net feed in tariff model, which only only pays for surplus electricity produced and exported to the mains grid, to a gross model where all power generated by a home solar power system will attract a premium payment.

Households in New South Wales with solar panels will be paid 60 cents per kilowatt hour for all electricity generated under the Solar Bonus Scheme. The NSW scheme will have a cap on the size of home solar power systems of 10 kW. According to a press release from Premier Rees's office, a system this size would generate around 16 700 kWh and pay almost $10 000 a year.

The generous rate will allow home owners to receive a much more rapid return on their investment for installing solar panels.

Gross feed in tariffs are considered a key element in boosting solar power uptake and are at the heart of Germany's dominance as a solar power generating nation. The ACT is the only other state or territory in Australia currently offering a gross feed-in tariff.

The NSW gross feed in initiative is due to commence in January 2010 and the scheme is proposed to run for seven years. Legislation for the Solar Bonus scheme is expected to be passed in NSW Parliament by mid-November.

Related:

NSW Solar Bonus Scheme details
New South Wales solar power specials
Instant online quote for NSW solar power

New_South_Wales Australia solar_ panel Gross_Feed_In_Tariff Suntech

Visualing Sustainability

2009-11-11T03:25:00.000-08:00

Whoa! The Computing for Sustainability site has by far the most number of images related to 'sustainability'. One would suggest that if one were trying to define it in an image, you could likely find one that should suit your purposes on this site...

OK, now geddonwithit...Ed.

visualize sustainability Computingforsustainability Computing

U.S. passes historic health care legislation

2009-11-07T22:55:00.000-08:00

The Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives has passed historic health care legislation to provide medical coverage to millions of Americans.

The bill requires most Americans to carry health insurance and would provide funding for those who can't afford it.

Although she might not get much of the credit, one can be sure that Hilary Clinton's work in 1993 had a lot to do with this happy occasion for most Americans.

Here's the latest on the situation from Google.

Rod of Asclepius from Wiki

healthcare reform US trillion Obama Hilary_Clinton Asclepius

Food or Fuel for Supper tonight? Farmers protest against coal

2009-11-06T16:12:00.000-08:00

Pip Hinman 20 September 2008

Originally posted here

People power came to Gunnedah in north-west NSW on September 15 as more than 300 farmers and their supporters rallied outside the Gunnedah Basin Coal Conference. They were protesting against a coalmining project in the agriculturally rich Liverpool Plains that was given state government approval in 2006.

The protest organisers, the Caroona Coal Action Group, opposes BHP Billiton’s plan to start exploration drilling for coal. CCAG wants an independent study on the likely impact of mining on the region’s extensive acquifers, which make the area an important food bowl.

A CCAG report on the protest stated that “supporters of clean air, clean food and clean water” were surprised that the conference delegates were “for some reason not using the front entrance”.

Independent MP Tony Windsor, Greens MLC Lee Rhiannon and the National Party’s Trevor Khan addressed the rally. Windsor spoke in favour of the miners funding an independent, catchment-wide study to determine whether mining and farming could co-exist sustainably. Rhiannon spoke of the need to maintain good agricultural land and Khan urged CCAG and its supporters to “maintain the rage”. Doug Ranken from CCAG, and Narrabri grain grower and local councillor Bevan O’Regan, also spoke.

CCAG is not against mining, but oppose exploratory mining when studies on the long-term impacts of mining on the acquifers, and the Mooki, Quirindi and Yarraman Creeks and the Doona State Forest, have not been conducted.

In April 2006, BHP was awarded a coal exploration licence for the Caroona area. In July, local farmer Tim Duddy objected to BHP drilling on his property. BHP won a court injunction against him, but a community blockade of the Duddy property, Rossmar Park, in late July kept BHP off the land.

Since then a “people power” campaign, which involves the local Indigenous community, businesses and farmers, has kept up the pressure.

coal food_security NSW BHP_Billiton people_power Australia

CBS Reveals that Swine Flu Cases Seriously Overestimated

2009-10-25T04:09:00.000-07:00

Originally posted here

Posted by: Dr. Mercola
October 24 2009 | 94,175 views

Dr. Mercola Interviews Barbara Loe Fisher, founder of the National Vaccine Information Center

CBS News Washington Unplugged: H1N1 Cases Exaggerated?

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states on their main flu Web site http://www.cdc.gov/flu/ that flu activity is increasing in the United States, with most states reporting "widespread influenza activity."

The CDC goes on to say, and I quote:

"So far, most flu is 2009 H1N1 flu (sometimes called "swine flu")."

But wait stop the presses.

A three-month-long investigation by CBS News, released earlier this week that included state-by-state test results, revealed some very different facts. The CBS study found that H1N1 flu cases are NOT as prevalent as feared. A CBS article even states:

"If you've been diagnosed "probable" or "presumed" 2009 H1N1 or "swine flu" in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn't have H1N1 flu. In fact, you probably didn't have flu at all."

Obviously CBS News and the CDC are completely contradicting each other. So who is right?

Well, CBS reports that in late July 2009 the CDC advised states to STOP testing for H1N1 flu, and they also stopped counting individual cases.

Their rationale for this, according to CBS News, was that it was a waste of resources to test for H1N1 flu because it was already confirmed as an epidemic.

So just like that virtually every person who visited their physician with flu-like symptoms since late July was assumed to have H1N1, with no testing necessary because, after all, there's an epidemic.

It's interesting to note that at the same time as the CDC decided the H1N1 epidemic warranted no further testing for cases due to its epidemic status, Finnish health authorities actually downgraded the threat of swine flu.

In late July the health ministry and the National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL) in Finland actually removed swine flu from a list of diseases considered dangerous to the public because the majority of cases recovered without medication or hospital care!

And, as the CDC continues to use fear to motivate and control Americans with their worst-case swine flu scenarios, they say nothing of the experience of those in the southern hemisphere, which just finished their flu season and found it was not as bad as expected.

CBS News Finds H1N1 Tests "Overwhelmingly Negative"

Before beginning their investigation, CBS News asked the CDC for state-by-state test results prior to their halting of testing and tracking. The CDC did not initially respond so CBS went to all 50 states directly, asking for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July.

What did they find? CBS reported:

"The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico."

As you can see from this CBS News graphic, not only are most cases of suspected flu-like illnesses not H1N1, they're not even the flu but more likely some type of cold or upper respiratory infection!

(Image from CBS News)

Where is the CDC Getting Their Data?

Given CBS News' findings that most cases of flu-like illnesses are neither H1N1 nor the flu, it begs the question: Why is the CDC reporting that most flu in the United States is in fact H1N1?

Barbara Loe Fisher, founder of the National Vaccine Information Center who I spoke with in the interview above, was a consumer representative on the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee in 2003, and she asked the head of the influenza branch of the CDC how much of the flu-like illness that occurs in America every year is actually due to the flu.

The answer was about 20 percent, which corresponds more closely with the CBS News data from 2009.

According to the CBS News study, when you come down with chills, fever, cough, runny nose, malaise and all those other "flu-like" symptoms, the illness is likely caused by influenza at most 17 percent of the time and as little as 3 percent! The other 83 to 97 percent of the time it's caused by other viruses or bacteria.

So remember that not every illness that appears to be the flu actually is the flu. In fact, most of the time it's not.

Curiously, the CDC still advises those who were told they had 2009 H1N1 (and therefore should be immune to getting it again) to get vaccinated unless they had lab confirmation.

Is the CDC Purposely Misinforming the Public to Sell More Flu and H1N1 Vaccines?

Conflicts of interest are rampant in the vaccination infrastructure. The same people who are regulating and promoting vaccines are also evaluating vaccine safety.

For instance, Dr. Paul Offit of the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia earned at least $29 million as part of a $182-million sale by the hospital of its worldwide royalty interest in the Merck Rotateq vaccine. He also formerly sat on the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to help create the market for rotavirus vaccine

This type of conflict of interest has been going on for some time.

In August 1999, the Committee on Government Reform initiated an investigation into Federal vaccine policy. During the investigation the Committee extensively reviewed financial disclosure forms and related documents and interviewed key officials from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the CDC.

It was revealed that many individuals on two key advisory committees had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies that manufacture vaccines. These individuals were even granted waivers allowing them to fully participate in discussions about vaccine licensing and recommendations for children, despite the fact that federal law states members of advisory committees are required to disclose such ties and recuse themselves from such discussions and decisions.

Further, the investigation revealed that the FDA's and CDC's conflict of interest rules were not strongly enforced while the rules themselves were weak. Specific problems noted by the Committee included:

The CDC routinely granted waivers from conflict of interest rules to many members of its advisory committee.
Those CDC advisory committee members who were not allowed to vote on certain recommendations due to financial conflicts of interest were still allowed to actively participate in committee deliberations and advocate specific positions.
The Chairman of the CDC's advisory committee owned 600 shares of stock in Merck, a pharmaceutical company with an active vaccine division.
Members of the CDC's advisory committee often left key details out of their financial disclosure statements, and were not required to provide the missing information by CDC ethics officials.

And, when the FDA and CDC approved the controversial rotavirus vaccine in 1998 and 1999, the Committee's report said:

3 out of the 5 FDA advisory committee members who voted to approve the rotavirus vaccine in December 1997 had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.
4 out of the 8 CDC advisory committee members who voted to approve guidelines for the rotavirus vaccine in June 1998 had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.

The rotavirus vaccine was pulled from the market one year after approval, after it was found to cause severe bowel obstructions.

Given their sordid history, can the CDC really be trusted, even today? Do you think that much has changed in just one decade?

Is the H1N1 Vaccine Really Safe as the CDC Says it Is?

CDC officials are screaming that H1N1 is so different from the seasonal influenza strains that have circulated in the past few decades that a national alarm must be sounded and everyone needs to be so afraid that we all should get vaccinated to prevent a deadly pandemic.

Yet, they say the new H1N1 vaccine is safe based on vaccines for that very same flu strain from which it is so different. They write on their Web site "the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines are expected to have similar safety profiles as seasonal flu vaccines ..."

Another contradiction.

While symptoms of H1N1 flu and seasonal flu are virtually identical, the H1N1 vaccine is showing signs of being quite different from the seasonal flu shot.

Although both are produced using antiquated 50-year-old technology that involves injecting the virus into eggs and allowing it to grow, the virus being used to produce the swine flu vaccine has been found to reproduce much more slowly in eggs than the ordinary flu virus.

And according to a separate CBS News report, the U.S. government is now funding newer unprecedented technologies to speed up vaccine production, including one that involves growing the virus inside animal cells and another that involves flu proteins grown inside insect cells.

The risks of these, and the current fast-tracked swine flu vaccine, are truly unknown at this time.

There is NO Incentive for the CDC or Vaccine Manufacturers to Care About Safety

You may think that the CDC and the vaccine manufacturers must be concerned about safety, as if they released a dangerous vaccine and promoted it to the American public, imagine the lawsuits they would face.

This is actually no longer reality as the U.S. government has granted vaccine makers total legal immunity from any lawsuits that result from the new swine flu vaccine.

In fact, drug manufacturers got a major boost in protection and were granted unprecedented powers to experiment on the population with the passing of the 2006 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (the PREP Act).

This law allows the DHHS Secretary to invoke almost complete immunity from liability for manufacturers of vaccines and drugs used to combat a declared public health emergency, which the "swine flu pandemic" qualifies as.

The PREP Act removes your right to a trial jury unless you can provide clear evidence of willful misconduct that resulted in death or serious physical injury. But that's not all. First you must apply for and be granted permission to sue by the DHHS Secretary.

The most problematic aspect of the PREP Act is that it removes all financial incentive to make a safe product.

In fact, vaccine makers now have a negative incentive to test it for safety, because if they are aware of problems, then they could potentially be held liable for willful misconduct!

As long as they can prove they "didn't know" of any problem, they will not be liable for damages. Hence it's in their best interest to know as little as possible about the adverse reactions it might cause.

It seems unimaginable, but you and your children are now being enlisted as an unpaid human trial subjects for experimental, fast-tracked vaccines like the swine flu vaccine.

Even if They Were Effective or Safe, Most Vaccines Will Come Too Late

Recent national polls have revealed that 30 percent to 50 percent in many communities are not planning to get a swine flu shot ... but there are many who are still ready to stand in line.

If you have not yet made up your mind and have questions, we have created some fact-filled posters that you can print and post ALL over your community, your local stores, office and schools.

You can also visit the special section of my site that is devoted to giving you all the latest H1N1 Swine Flu Alerts. This is an excellent go-to source to stay updated on all the new swine flu developments.

But I wanted to share one final detail, and that is a new study just released by Purdue University researchers and published in the journal Eurosurveillance.

The researchers found that at this point in time any vaccinations that are given in the United States will likely have little effect on the number of infections. The researchers state:

"The model predicts that there will be a significant wave in autumn, with 63% of the population being infected, and that this wave will peak so early that the planned CDC vaccination campaign will likely not have a large effect on the total number of people ultimately infected by the pandemic H1N1 influenza virus."

In other words, infections are predicted to peak in late October (now) and by the end of the year it's estimated that 63 percent of the U.S. population will have been infected with H1N1 swine flu.

What does this mean? By the end of the year the majority of the U.S. population will have likely acquired natural immunity.

Natural immunity is what you gain when you recover from influenza and natural immunity is what is protecting older Americans, who have recovered from exposure to H1N1 strains of influenza in the past and are therefore less susceptible today.

This new revelation, coupled with CBS News' finding that swine flu cases are already being greatly overestimated ... and the fact that vaccines do not offer long-term immunity anyway ... and the questionable motives behind CDC's massive vaccination campaign ... puts an entirely different slant on the swine flu "epidemic," don't you think?

If you are still concerned about the swine flu, you should know that it is relatively easy to improve your immune response to fight this infection. If 99.9% of the people are not having any serious complications from H1N1, it would seem perfectly rational to believe that minor lifestyle changes could have dramatic effects on fighting this infection, and none of these involve taking potentially dangerous and unproven vaccine interventions.

Simple Measures That Can Help You Fight Illness

Vitamin D has been well documented to increase the production of over 200 anti microbial peptides that fight infection.
Eliminate sugar from your diet as that will impair your immune response
Get plenty of rest
Exercise appropriately

You can also help make a BIG difference in protecting your right to make informed, voluntary vaccination choices by supporting the National Vaccine Information Center.

I have made this non-profit organization -- America's Vaccine Safety Watchdog -- one of my favorite charities and I urge you to become a donor member and help NVIC protect your informed consent rights and your children's health.

H1N1 overestimated swine flu CBS mercola

Plastic Blob Threatens to Cover the Earth

2009-10-11T04:38:00.000-07:00

By Kathy Marks, Asia-Pacific Correspondent, and Daniel Howden

Tuesday, 5 February 2008

Original Article posted here.

A "plastic soup" of waste floating in the Pacific Ocean is growing at an alarming rate and now covers an area twice the size of the continental United States, scientists have said.

The vast expanse of debris – in effect the world's largest rubbish dump – is held in place by swirling underwater currents. This drifting "soup" stretches from about 500 nautical miles off the Californian coast, across the northern Pacific, past Hawaii and almost as far as Japan.

Charles Moore, an American oceanographer who discovered the "Great Pacific Garbage Patch" or "trash vortex", believes that about 100 million tons of flotsam are circulating in the region. Marcus Eriksen, a research director of the US-based Algalita Marine Research Foundation, which Mr Moore founded, said yesterday: "The original idea that people had was that it was an island of plastic garbage that you could almost walk on. It is not quite like that. It is almost like a plastic soup. It is endless for an area that is maybe twice the size as continental United States."

Curtis Ebbesmeyer, an oceanographer and leading authority on flotsam, has tracked the build-up of plastics in the seas for more than 15 years and compares the trash vortex to a living entity: "It moves around like a big animal without a leash." When that animal comes close to land, as it does at the Hawaiian archipelago, the results are dramatic. "The garbage patch barfs, and you get a beach covered with this confetti of plastic," he added.

The "soup" is actually two linked areas, either side of the islands of Hawaii, known as the Western and Eastern Pacific Garbage Patches. About one-fifth of the junk – which includes everything from footballs and kayaks to Lego blocks and carrier bags – is thrown off ships or oil platforms. The rest comes from land.

Mr Moore, a former sailor, came across the sea of waste by chance in 1997, while taking a short cut home from a Los Angeles to Hawaii yacht race. He had steered his craft into the "North Pacific gyre" – a vortex where the ocean circulates slowly because of little wind and extreme high pressure systems. Usually sailors avoid it.

He was astonished to find himself surrounded by rubbish, day after day, thousands of miles from land. "Every time I came on deck, there was trash floating by," he said in an interview. "How could we have fouled such a huge area? How could this go on for a week?"

Mr Moore, the heir to a family fortune from the oil industry, subsequently sold his business interests and became an environmental activist. He warned yesterday that unless consumers cut back on their use of disposable plastics, the plastic stew would double in size over the next decade.

Professor David Karl, an oceanographer at the University of Hawaii, said more research was needed to establish the size and nature of the plastic soup but that there was "no reason to doubt" Algalita's findings.

"After all, the plastic trash is going somewhere and it is about time we get a full accounting of the distribution of plastic in the marine ecosystem and especially its fate and impact on marine ecosystems."

Professor Karl is co-ordinating an expedition with Algalita in search of the garbage patch later this year and believes the expanse of junk actually represents a new habitat. Historically, rubbish that ends up in oceanic gyres has biodegraded. But modern plastics are so durable that objects half-a-century old have been found in the north Pacific dump. "Every little piece of plastic manufactured in the past 50 years that made it into the ocean is still out there somewhere," said Tony Andrady, a chemist with the US-based Research Triangle Institute.

Mr Moore said that because the sea of rubbish is translucent and lies just below the water's surface, it is not detectable in satellite photographs. "You only see it from the bows of ships," he said.

According to the UN Environment Programme, plastic debris causes the deaths of more than a million seabirds every year, as well as more than 100,000 marine mammals. Syringes, cigarette lighters and toothbrushes have been found inside the stomachs of dead seabirds, which mistake them for food.

Plastic is believed to constitute 90 per cent of all rubbish floating in the oceans. The UN Environment Programme estimated in 2006 that every square mile of ocean contains 46,000 pieces of floating plastic,

Dr Eriksen said the slowly rotating mass of rubbish-laden water poses a risk to human health, too. Hundreds of millions of tiny plastic pellets, or nurdles – the raw materials for the plastic industry – are lost or spilled every year, working their way into the sea. These pollutants act as chemical sponges attracting man-made chemicals such as hydrocarbons and the pesticide DDT. They then enter the food chain. "What goes into the ocean goes into these animals and onto your dinner plate. It's that simple," said Dr Eriksen.

-30-

Reminds me of those old movies from the past where they warned us about 'The Blob'. Maybe they will just, like, freeze it like in the movie. - Ed.

plastic blob threat earth seafood danger

United States vs. New Zealand and Canadian Healthcare

2009-10-04T21:45:00.000-07:00

Original Blogpost Found Here

~by Don Welch

I was in the U.S. last December and had a talk with a RWR (Right Wing Relative) about health care reform. She was horrified at the prospect of socialized medicine. I asked her if she would like to hear my experiences with the health care system in New Zealand. The answer was no.

I didn’t know it then but her response was a harbinger of the health care ‘debate’ that would soon follow. Simply put, for many in the U.S. there can be no debate about health care reform. There can be no fact gathering or analysis. There can be no comparative shopping.

There are just over 4 million people in New Zealand in a land/sea area roughly equal to California. More than 25% of those folks live in Auckland, which means there are a lot of little places in the wap-wap. I live in Nelson, a town of 56,000 , which makes us the 13th largest urban area in the country. Delivering consistent health services is not easy.

Our system here is single payer with a private option. Non critical surgeries are wait-listed. The wait times are about the same as those at Kaiser-Permanente in California. If the wait times get too long, all hell breaks out; people write letters to the editor; the Health Minister gets hung in effigy.

I can buy private insurance to get around the wait times. At 59 years old, male, a smoker, that would cost me $100 (U.S) a month.

I get to pick my primary doctor and can change it if I’m not satisfied. Doctor’s visits cost $10 (U.S.) unless they are for preventive care or advice. Those visits are free. Medicine cost on average about $3 (U.S) for a months supply as long as I use the brand that the government has selected. Sometimes I have to wait as much as 5 minutes before the doc can see me.

They consider the brain a major organ here so mental health services are included (free).

They have an organization called ACC (Accident Compensation Corporation). If I am injured anywhere at anytime, the ACC pays for treatment. They will also pay for lost income
. Because the ACC exists, it is rare for someone to sue as a result of an accident or medical malpractice. So my car insurance costs S 140 (U.S) a year.

I do pay more in taxes. My effective tax rate runs at 30% . Still, if I had to pay US rates for health and car insurance, it would cost me thousands more each year. And that doesn’t include the money I save by not buying insurance for my employees.

If my relative had let me share my experience, I would have told her that New Zealand Health care is not perfect. The sparse population does create inconsistencies and our World Health Organization rating is actually lower than the US (41 vs 37).

My own personal experience, here in the bustling metropolis of Nelson, is that it is better, dramatically better, and at a much lower cost.

I would have also told her that I feel safer here. I would have told her that at 59 I feel free to change jobs. I would have told her that I feel good about being part of a culture that protects its people first, then lets all those smart corporate types and lawyers find ways to make money
doing something productive.

Oh, by the way, there are a lot of Canadians that live or travel here. I always ask them if they like their health services.

They do.

-30-

As a Canadian, I have to say that in fact all Canadian health insurance is not created equal. In Ontario, for example, health insurance is free and paid for by income tax, as I believe it is in Quebec. In British Columbia, it costs just under $100 per month, if you're a working stiff.

I'd also suggest that when you get into a car accident or injured on the job, the situation is also not as good as New Zealand's, as I was injured in a car accident and on the job and in both cases was forced back to work - injured.

So when the researchers are touting Canada as a great example of healthcare, I think they should not paint it all with the same brush. Of course Canada does have its 'bandaid' for its provincially-handicapped system through the Health and Welfare Trust system

I suggest to take a hard look at New Zealand as a starting point. -Ed.

Image of Hippocrates from Tom Roeser Blog. (Not sure what he thinks about the whole debate. -Ed)

healthcare New_Zealand United_States Canada discussion debate

Lennon rolls over in grave: "Harper plays grand piano and sings the Beatles' "With a Little Help from My Friends."

2009-10-04T18:58:00.000-07:00

...all this after he had criticized galas not less than a year ago. Too bad we missed our opp to restore democracy when we had the Coalition 'forces' prorogued by the rogue earlier this year :(.

We speculate the song was an ode to his friend Iggy, who helped him restore his hold on Canada's government.

Original article here

Sat Oct 3, 11:54 PM

By Sean Kilpatrick, The Canadian Press

OTTAWA - A year after Prime Minister Stephen Harper dismissed galas as the playground of elites, he decided to ham it up a bit at a glittering high society event in Ottawa Saturday.

Harper took to the stage, sat down at a grand piano and sang the Beatles' "With a Little Help from My Friends."

He was performing one of the most elite of audiences: the black-tie gala at the National Arts Centre traditionally attracts the most powerful people in Ottawa society and movers and shakers in Canadian culture.

Harper, a Beatles fan, was accompanied by renowned cellist Yo Yo Ma.

The prime minister managed to hold a tune and drew a standing ovation from an audience that was in a playful mood.

The gala raises money for youth and the arts.

Harper's dismissive attitude toward culture and the arts was blamed for his party's poor showing in Quebec in the 2008 election.

Harper's wife, Laureen, is chairwoman of the NAC gala.

-30-

We imagine the composer of "When Irish Eyes are Smiling" must've done the same when Mulroney and Reagan nauseated listeners with their rendition back in the day, as they celebrated the birth of a unsmiley event of the North American Free Trade Act. Sure would've been nice if MDC had been a bigger fan of Mulroney than Lennon, back in the day...

Harper Lennon NAC gala

'Psycho Chook" Rudd still leading in the polls

2009-06-01T07:27:00.000-07:00

Apparently the Australian federal Liberal party are all out of real ammunition to use against Kevin Rudd, so they have cooked up a story where they refer to him as a 'psycho chook', as a result of an alleged situation aboard a flight where he apparently got steamed about the colour of a seat...? (Another story has it that it was because of lack of access to some tea. Guess it's time for another election, I guess;) -Ed.)

Oh well, at least while he's not getting agitated about trivialities, he is smoking the Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull by a good 30 percentage points. A Galaxy poll revealed 55 per cent of voters thought Mr Rudd was a strong leader, compared with just 27 per cent for Mr Turnbull. It is likely that it is the Liberals who are getting cooked by the Kyoto-compliant Prime Minister. And we could understand them feeling a little steamed. Maybe it's high time they joined in and tried to help out with helping Australia achieve its climate change targets as they will personally benefit from cooler temperatures and likely cooler heads.

Maybe if Canada's PM, Steve Harper, were a little more psycho chook, Canada would finally get on with meeting its Kyoto commitments.

psycho chook Rudd kyoto Australia Harper Climate_change

EPIC 2009: Blowing the doors off sustainability

2009-05-18T14:18:00.000-07:00

We thought last year's EPIC was impressive but this year's event held at the new, LEED Platinum Vancouver Convention Centre was exceptional. We only wish that we had the time free to attend all of the great talks.

There were also great small details such as full-cycle recycling and composting pickup promoted by Metro Vancouver Zero Waste team:

and even the world-shaking great idea of wrapper collecting by the TerraCycle and ClifBar folks:

We did hear inspiring speeches by Bruce Poon-Tip, CEO & Founder, G.A.P. Adventures who extolled the merits of sustainable adventure travel, which is basically going on a trip and helping the communities that you visit through meaningful direct action.

and

Stacy Malkan, Author, Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry; Founder, Campaign for Safe Cosmetics who spoke about how activism is helping change the toxic formulations in health products. We also learned of a great database for those concerned about chemicals in health products - Skindeep.

There were some excellent examples of how EV technology has moved forward so that soon we will see consumer and corporate electric vehicles running fully electric on Vancouver's streets (of course the trolley buses are already doing that). Rapid Electric Vehicles (REV), a Vancouver company is at the forefront of this advance.

As part of this discovery, we learned about the new charging stations by ChargePoint coming into Concord Pacific and other buildings in Vancouver, thanks to successful lobbying by the Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association.

And, towards energy self-sufficiency we learned of Burnaby-based MSR Innovations solar roofing solutions that will likely bring power to even the most remote locations.

Not surprisingly, some of the biggest innovations coming to Canada are at the microscopic level through the introduction of bokashi. Now consumers and corporations can consider composting ALL of their food waste. Here are a couple of companies making it happen:

US-based bokashicycle

and

Canada-based ecoliving organics

And of course there were all sorts of food such as New World Natural Foods' Bliss Balls:

and drink from Phillips Distilling company's Prairie Organic Vodka story really caught our ear:

EPIC Vancouver 2009 zero-waste REV electric_vehicle ChargePoint MSR_Innovations safe_cosmetics ecoliving bokashicycle New_World_Natural Bliss_balls prairie_organic_vodka

Do Not Take A Swine Flu Vaccine!

2009-04-26T12:56:00.000-07:00

From Patricia Doyle, PhD 4-25-9

Originally published on Rense.com

Hello Jeff -

I am making a plea to everyone who reads this, please, please DO NOT TAKE ANY VACCINE THAT IS PURPORTED TO 'PREVENT' THIS FLU.

Remember 1976 and the so called Swine Flu outbreak that was purported to be a coming pandemic? It only infected recruits at Ft. Dix. Why? Because I believe that the so called Swine Flu virus infected the recruits due to the vaccines they were given. Whether the government developed the Swine Flu 1976 virus and infected the recruits as a means to test the public to see if people would comply with a call to take vaccination against Swine Flu, or the recruits became infected via contaminated vaccine they were given as part of the recruit regimen, that outbreak was as phony as they come. I was one of the people duped into taking a Swine Flu shot and it made me so sick. I was sick in bed for three months after taking the vaccine.

Do not take seasonal flu vaccine if you are told that it could help prevent this brand new Swine Flu variant. It won't do a thing to prevent this flu. What it will do is serve up new genetic material to the Swine Flu virus that I have dubbed Spanish Flu 2, the Sequel. The Spanish Flu variant will use the gene sequences in the vaccine in humans to develop more of the changes that make the virus more readily infect humans. We do not want to give this virus more human genetic material so that it will infect humans more readily person to person. This is what vaccinated individuals do for pandemic strains.

There is also a safety issue in any experimental vaccine, much like the one in 1976. Some people even feel that such a vaccine for pandemic strain might require more than one vaccination which could actually be a binary set up. The first shot might just add some genetic code that stays dormant in the body until one gets the second vaccine shot which then serves to only cause infection. It could trigger Guillain-barre syndrome, Typhus or some other condition.

An Influenza vaccine does not protect or prevent a person from contracting flu. It is purported to, maybe, prevent some complications of flu and maybe shorten duration. I am not even sure it does that. Personally, I feel the vaccine weakens our immune system and also sickens us due to contaminants in the vaccine. I feel that people can better protect themselves by washing hands often and thoroughly. People should also use protective gloves when out and about during epidemics. Don't be afraid of "looking odd." I would not be ashamed to use a mask and gloves. I see that the Mexicans are using them.

A big problem during a pandemic is that these simple supplies will become extremely scarce awfully quickly. Stock up now. Medical supplies. personal hygene supplies and don't forget fido, or any other pet. Once a pandemic hits, it will be too late to stock up. Water, too.
We may lose clean water and electric power, so be prepared.

So, please, people, DON'T TAKE ANY VACCINES OFFERED. THEY COULD KILL YOU BEFORE ANY VIRUS KILLS YOU.

Pat Doyle

Patricia A. Doyle DVM, PhD Bus Admin, Tropical Agricultural Economics Univ of West Indies Please visit my "Emerging Diseases" message board at: http://www.emergingdisease.org/phpbb/index.php Also my new website: http://drpdoyle.tripod.com/ Zhan le Devlesa tai sastimasa Go with God and in Good Health

-30-

For your information, here is the latest on the Swine Flu 'Pandemic' from the mainstream media, note that "Pan-" is the first part of the word, as in 'Pan-ic'. Don't panic and you will survive.

Note that in Korea, with their diet heavy in Kimchi caused there to be almost NO cases of SARS. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

So far, avoiding crowds and likely cutting back on your pork consumption might be useful. But at least if you have to go into crowds, wear an N95 mask, gloves and wash your hands often, this also according to this site (Look at the Bird Flu link on the left.). - Ed.

swine flu prevention vaccine rense Patricia_Doyle Do Not Take A Swine Flu Vaccine

How to get into the Carbon Trading Market

2009-02-27T08:41:00.001-08:00

Recently, our consulting company was asked to learn about how to get into the Carbon Trading Market. Of course, since we are based in Canada, which is no longer a participant in the Clean Development Mechanism we have to look at getting involved in a 'parallel' system called the Western Climate Change Initiative (WCI), currently serving many Western US States and a number of Canadian provinces. A seemingly lesser-developed system affecting only the energy sector in the Eastern U.S. is the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).

We were pleased to get this and a lot of very useful information about this from Greg Adams of BalanceCO2.com, who are involved in a number of different CDM Projects as verifiers and provide consulting in areas related to the CDM.

We are hoping that the Canadian government will eventually get on with the CDM, and follow suit with Australia who signed on after Kevin Rudd became Prime Minister in 2008.

For your information, here is a summary of the initial steps one has to undertake to get into the Carbon Trading Market. We have a wide base of companies involved in the market and are pleased to assist you in any serious enquiry beyond this. Here is a message we received from the UNFCCC organization, regarding our query about getting into the CDM:

"Thank you for visiting the UNFCCC CDM website.

The UNFCCC secretariat is charged with the responsibility of supporting
the Conference of the Parties and the Conference of the Parties serving as
the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol and their associated
bodies. In the case of the clean development mechanism (CDM), the
secretariat solely supports the CDM Executive Board. In light of the above
and as an impartial organization, please note that the UNFCCC secretariat
is not in a position to provide any consultancy services, financial or
marketing support.

That said, with regards to the procedure on how to start a CDM project
activity, we recommend that you start off by becoming familiar with the
objectives of the Kyoto Protocol (http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/background/items/2878.php), background of
the CDM (http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/2718.php), and the rules that apply to projects submitted under the CDM scheme
(please visit http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/pac/index.html). More
information on small-scale projects is available at: (http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/pac/pac_ssc.html).

Before starting the process, we would like to bring to your attention that the outcomes of EB 41 introduced in Annex 46 a guidance on the demonstration and assessment of prior consideration of the CDM. This document will help the Executive Board on the issue of prior consideration of the CDM as a major element in assessing that the CDM benefits were considered necessary in the decision to undertake the project as a CDM
project activity. Please see http://cdm.unfccc.int/EB/archives/meetings_08.html#041.

You will find that in order to start a CDM project activity, you will need
to develop a Project Design Document (PDD). You may seek assistance from
project consultants or developers to help you at this stage. Unfortunately,
the secretariat cannot provide such services to project participants, as
seen above. In order to get in contact with project developers, you could
contact the Designated National Authority (DNA) of your country, a list of
which can be found here: http://cdm.unfccc.int/DNA/index.html. The DNA, in
addition to providing information on possible resources also provides a
letter of approval of the project activity, which is a key document for the
registration of a project.
Additionally, we would recommend that you get information and/or advice
through the CDM Bazaar website, a free web portal where CDM stakeholders,
buyers, sellers and service providers can share information and contact
details. Please see: http://www.cdmbazaar.net/.

Once you have developed a PDD you are ready to contact a designated
operational entity (DOE). DOEs are companies accredited by the CDM
Executive Board who are responsible for carrying out the main assessment
activities of validation, verification, and certification as mentioned in
the project cycle referred to above (http://cdm.unfccc.int/DOE/index.html
).The first assessment done by a DOE is during the validation stage. Once
validation has successfully occurred, the DOE is responsible for submitting
the project and required documentation to the Executive Board, via the
secretariat, as part of a request for registration for that project. For
more information, please see the Modalities and Procedures for a clean
development mechanism contained in decision 3/CMP.1 (http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/COPMOP/08a01.pdf#page=6). You may wish to note that a project which is eligible to be considered as a small scale CDM project activity can benefit from the simplified modalities and procedures, which were adopted by the COP/MOP at its first session in decision 4/CMP.1, annex II (http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/COPMOP/08a01.pdf#page=43).

Once the project is registered, project participants are required to
monitor the project according to the monitoring plan that was presented in
the PDD. At this stage a DOE is contracted to conduct verification
(determination that monitored emissions reductions have occurred as a
result of that project) and certification (assurance that the verified
emissions reductions were achieved within a specified time period). The
completion of these processes will lead the DOE to request the issuance of
CERs to the Executive Board. Once the EB has approved this, CERs will be
transferred to the holding account you will then have to open (or to your
national registry should you be connected to the ITL), to receive your
credits.

We hope that the above will give you a good introduction to the different
steps involved in the process. Further and more detailed information is
available on the UNFCCC CDM website, which we have somewhat referenced
above. For example, you will find there a few useful resources and tools
such as:

- The Methodology search engine:
http://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/PAmethodologies/approved.html?searchon=1&searchmode=advanced
(You can filter all approved methodologies and access their documentation)
- The Project Activity search engine:
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/projsearch.html (will help you find similar
CDM project activities to yours and their documentation as examples)
- The CDM Glossary of Terms:
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/glossary.html
- The Catalogue of Decisions:
http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/catalogue/search

Finally, we would also like to refer you to a publication from the IGES
"CDM in Charts", which may also be instrumental in getting a good
understanding of the process. Please see: http://www.iges.or.jp/en/cdm/pdf/charts.pdf.

We hope this information will be useful.

Regards,

Your CDM Team"

how_to carbon_trade carbon credit CDM Kyoto Clean Development Mechanism Western Climate Change Initiative climate_change BalanceCO2.com natural_capitalism

Debate: Single Transferable Vote versus First Past The Post

2009-02-26T00:09:00.000-08:00

Here was a great debate held as part of Langara College's Speaking Series, in this corner, Shoni Field for Single Transferable Vote, and in the other corner, David Shreck for First Past The Post, the current electoral system in the Canadian provinces and federal government:

Debate STV Shoni_Field Single_Transferable_Vote First_Past_The_Post David_D._Schreck BC May_12_2009 fair_vote

Easy Gas to Electric Vehicle Conversion

2009-02-15T23:22:00.001-08:00

Thanks to J. Peter McKay of the Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association, neophytes can learn the key steps to converting a gas vehicle to electric:

There, now go and convert and save the world, eh?

easy
electric vehicle conversion VEVA Vancouver

Easy STV

2009-02-14T15:45:00.000-08:00

In case you are wondering what the whole Single Transferable Vote is about, here are some excellent visuals that explain it all.

First of all this site, the BC-STV site, is where everything you could ever want to know about BC-STV resides.

An animation which explains how it would work:

And if you need something for explaining how it would work, here is an excellent 15-page Adobe PDF that explains how it would work in practice.

easy STV Single_Transferable_Vote electoral_reform BC May_12_2009 fair_vote

Fish farm critics win major court victory

2009-02-09T22:39:00.000-08:00

Originally published here.

In a major victory for anti-fish farm advocates, the British Columbia Supreme Court has ruled that fish farms are the jurisdiction of the federal government and not the B.C. government.

Environmentalist Alexandra Morton, who has long opposed salmon farms in the Broughton Archipelago and other sensitive areas, along other activists, brought the constitutional challenge.

The significance was outlined in an e-mail Morton sent to her supporters before the decision:

"I will be receiving the Court's decision on whether the provincial government can continue regulating and siting salmon farms. If we win the fish farm licenses of B.C. could become unlawful," she wrote.

The justice in the case, Christopher Hinkson, has suspended his decision for 12 months to allow the two levels of government to arrange for the change of related laws.

Morton wrote that in her opinion, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans "has not done a great job with their role with salmon farms, but the big difference between the federal and provincial governments is that the federal government is responsible for our oceans and our ocean fisheries. As it stands now the agency in charge has no legal responsibility to protect wild salmon from the impacts of salmon farms and we can see the result of that."

Winning the case would not end the situation, she added, expecting legal appeals to be made and the DFO's stewardship of the industry to take time to get started.

Morton says wild salmon pump $1 billion a year into B.C.'s economy and need to be protected for the entire ecosystem.

Ottawa delegated responsibility for licensing fish farms to the provinces in the late 1980s.

Tags: farmed_and_dangerous BC Alexandra_Morton salmon farm constitutional_challenge pcb sea_lice

No more PCBs or Sea Lice? Salmon farming spawns aboriginal class-action suit against B.C. government

2009-02-04T10:28:00.000-08:00

Here's a backgrounder on the issue, which prompted this action....

from the Canadian Press

VICTORIA, B.C. — A Northern Vancouver Island First Nation is launching a class-action lawsuit against the B.C. government alleging salmon farms are harming wild salmon stocks.

The Alert Bay-area aboriginal band will release details of their planned class-action lawsuit Wednesday at a press conference in Vancouver.

First Nations and environmental groups have long complained that waste from the farms is dangerous to wild stock, and that farmed salmon spread disease and contribute to higher concentrations of sea lice that cripple young wild salmon.

The chief of the Kwicksutaineuk and Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation, also known as the Guilford Island First Nation, could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

But in a statement, the band said it will seek "to address the negative impacts of open net-cage salmon farming and resulting decline in the wild salmon population in traditional territory."

Jennifer Lash, executive director of the Living Oceans Society, based in Sointula, an island near Alert Bay, said critics of the industry are concerned that the open-net cages used by the aquaculture industry are causing declines in wild salmon stocks.

"It's really sad when we get to the point where we have to go to court, but if that's what they need to do to have their issues heard, then that's what they need to do," said Lash.

The marine conservation organization is not involved in the planned class action, but Lash said she is familiar with the concerns area aboriginals have with the aquaculture industry.

"The issue here is that the First Nations here and in other regions of B.C. are feeling a huge amount of impact from the aquaculture industry, the salmon farming industry, on their communities," said Lash.

"They are feeling that all the work that they've been trying to do to communicate their concerns to the federal and provincial governments, they're not getting anywhere."

Lash said some aboriginal groups believe the ecosystem that supports their communities are being negatively impacted.

"It's a very deep running commitment that they have to the ocean and to have that affected negatively by the salmon farming industry is really quite horrible for them."

The aboriginal band said the B.C. government has authorized 29 aquaculture sites in the Broughton Archipelago, a cluster of islands near Alert Bay, located more than 450 kilometres north of Vancouver.

A spokeswoman for the B.C. Agriculture and Lands Ministry, which is responsible for aquaculture in British Columbia, said the government is aware legal action, but isn't prepared to make an immediate comment.

The aboriginals said the legal action will be the first class-action lawsuit in Canada launched to protect aboriginal treaty rights.

Tags: farmed_and_dangerous BC class_action_lawsuit salmon wild farmed pcb sea_lice

Top BC Scientists Speak Out vs. Private River Power

2009-02-02T18:13:00.000-08:00

Sunday, 01 February 2009 21:12

From Save our Rivers

Save Our Rivers Society is pleased to present this new 8-min video featuring conversations with two of Canada's top fish biologists, Dr. Gordon F. Hartman and Otto Langer - both former senior scientists and managers at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans - on private river power in BC.

Dr. Gordon F. Hartman

The two esteemed scientists - both known for standing on principle, even when inconvenient - discuss their multiple grave concerns about the ecological risks of the Campbell government's private river power gold rush. They cover topics from the impacts on fish & wildlife from "run of river" power projects - each concluding that they are categorically not "green" - to addressing our inadequate environmental review process, and the "endless growth paradigm" in our society, in order to become truly sustainable.

Otto Langer

Both men have long careers in biology, management, academia and consulting, and have consistently spoken up to save fish. Dr. Hartman was famously one of the "dissident scientists" who blew the whistle on Alcan's flow regimes for its proposed Kemano Completion Project on the Nechako system. He and the other brave scientists were instrumental, along with a few solitary media figures - namely, Rafe Mair and Ben Meisner - in turning the tide of public sentiment against the calamitous KCP in the mid-1990's, thus saving large numbers of salmon and other species. Otto Langer, similarly, has spoken out in some challenging situations, taking his former employer, DFO, and the BC government to task for not protecting fish - especially when it comes to salmon farms on BC's coast and gravel extraction from the Fraser. Both of these courageous scientists caution against this "irresponsible and reprehensible" private river power program, which has seen close to 700 of BC's most precious rivers claimed by private companies to make power for the US market.

"It's green alright. Because green is the colour of money." - Dr. Gordon F. Hartman

Tags: Save_our_rivers BC scientist water river piracy Private_power drought

Parched: Australia faces collapse as climate change kicks in

2009-02-02T17:43:00.000-08:00

Let's hope that the Aussies can put their White Paper into action ASAP. -Ed.

Geoffrey Lean and Kathy Marks report on the worst heatwave in the country's history

The Independent, Feb 1st 2009

Original article here.

Leaves are falling off trees in the height of summer, railway tracks are buckling, and people are retiring to their beds with deep-frozen hot-water bottles, as much of Australia swelters in its worst-ever heatwave.

On Friday, Melbourne thermometers topped 43C (109.4F) on a third successive day for the first time on record, while even normally mild Tasmania suffered its second-hottest day in a row, as temperatures reached 42.2C. Two days before, Adelaide hit a staggering 45.6C. After a weekend respite, more records are expected to be broken this week.

Ministers are blaming the heat – which follows a record drought – on global warming. Experts worry that Australia, which emits more carbon dioxide per head than any nation on earth, may also be the first to implode under the impact of climate change.

At times last week it seemed as if that was happening already. Chaos ruled in Melbourne on Friday after an electricity substation exploded, shutting down the city's entire train service, trapping people in lifts, and blocking roads as traffic lights failed. Half a million homes and businesses were blacked out, and patients were turned away from hospitals.

More than 20 people have died from the heat, mainly in Adelaide. Trees in Melbourne's parks are dropping leaves to survive, and residents at one of the city's nursing homes have started putting their clothes in the freezer.

"All of this is consistent with climate change, and with what scientists told us would happen," said climate change minister Penny Wong.

Australia, the driest inhabited continent on earth, is regarded as highly vulnerable. A study by the country's blue-chip Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation identified its ecosystems as "potentially the most fragile" on earth in the face of the threat.

Many factors put Australia especially at risk. Its climate is already hot, dry and variable. Its vulnerable agriculture plays an unusually important part in the economy. And most people and industry are concentrated on the coast, making it vulnerable to the rising seas and ferocious storms that come with a warmer world.

Most of the south of the country is gripped by unprecedented 12-year drought. The Australian Alps have had their driest three years ever, and the water from the vast Murray-Darling river system now fails to reach the sea 40 per cent of the time. Harvests have fallen sharply.

It will get worse as global warming increases. Even modest temperature rises, now seen as unavoidable, are expected to increase drought by 70 per cent in New South Wales, cut Melbourne's water supplies by more than a third, and dry up the Murray-Darling system by another 25 per cent.

As Professor David Karoly, of the University of Melbourne, said last week: "The heat is unusual, but it will become much more like the normal experience in 10 to 20 years."

Tags: heat_wave Australia drought Independent climate_change geddonwithitalready

Build Your Dreams 1: Revving China's auto industry

2009-02-02T00:16:00.000-08:00

By Peter Day
Global business correspondent, BBC News

Original Article here

A model poses by a F3DM electric vehicle at 2008 China High-tech Fair (October 2008) in Shenzhen The BYD F3DM is a petrol-electric hybrid plug-in vehicle. Cars leave me cold, but not the BYD F3DM. I drove it the other day, and it really is remarkable.

In one way, it is a rather ordinary compact saloon car, though it did have exceptional acceleration when I put my foot down zooming round the factory grounds in Shenzhen, the vast new Chinese city just north of Hong Kong.

This is a plug-in electric car, hence the acceleration, but when the electric battery runs out after 80 miles (128km), the petrol engine switches in seamlessly.

"Oh, just like one of those new eco-friendly hybrid cars," you may think.

But the makers argue that hybrids are more gas-guzzler than battery driven, whereas this model tries to be half and half.

And the makers? Well they are called BYD, a Chinese company which has been in existence for a bare 13 years, and which only recently started making any kind of car at all.

This new dual mode rechargeable car makes its launch appearance in China on 15 December, but BYD's Paul Lin let me have my test drive the other day.

And then when he showed me the company museum, he really set me thinking.

What is a business only 13 years old doing with a museum anyway?

Because the company has such enormous ambitions it wants to tell the world how far it has come and how much further it intends to go.

Rapid growth

Paul Lin showed me how BYD has evolved, starting with rechargeable batteries that soon became standard parts for one third of all the world's mobile phones, following the research speciality of the founder and chairman Wang Chuanfu.

And the modest battery making company grew and grew.

Wang Chuanfu soon saw that battery powered cars might be the future.

The size and scale of what BYD has already achieved is breathtaking, but that is nothing compared to its ambition

BYD knew a lot about batteries, and it was not daunted by the complexities of car-making either.

Six years ago, it bought two established Chinese car firms, and now BYD has seven huge plants with 130,000 employees.

The car I drove is made at the new headquarters factory - a giant one in Shenzhen, a city which was just a fishing town 30 years ago, with some 70,000 inhabitants.

Thanks to China's rush to modernise, Shenzhen is now part of the global manufacturing powerhouse in the Pearl River Delta, with an estimated population of 14m.

Wheel of modernisation

BYD's vast new factory did not exist 15 months ago, and they had to level several hills and fill in several lakes to create the site.

The workers mostly live in vast dormitories close by.

Like most of the Shenzhen workforce, they have migrated into the city from distant country places, moving from poverty in search of the fabled better life, spinning the great wheel of China's modernisation.

The size and scale of what BYD has already achieved is breathtaking, but that is nothing compared to its ambition.

The F3DM uses a petrol combustion engine to charge the car's battery
This company has already made public its aim to be the number one car firm in China by the year 2015, and then - deep breath - number one in the whole world in 2025.

Despite my scepticism, Paul Lin had no doubt about this. The current fate of the American car industry suggests there may be room at the top some time before that date.

But to Paul Lin and the company he is part of, this ambition is entirely natural.

Car making is less difficult than high technology, they argue, and many of the techniques they have learned in high tech can now be applied to the automobile.

Remarkable endorsement

I put my foot down and revved almost silently across the factory campus in my (sample) new car, and wondered about the future.

As an exporter, China is going to be badly hit by the global recession, but already the best factories are evolving up the technology chain in much the same way as BYD has transformed itself from a supplier of other people's mobile phone batteries into a car maker with its own name on the front.

Critics say this is a copycat car, but that is how the Japanese auto industry started.

And in September there was a remarkable endorsement of BYD when even as global stock markets were plunging, the canniest American investor of them all, Warren Buffet of Omaha, Nebraska, paid $230m (£155m) for a 10% stake in the Chinese company.

Mr Buffett is a quite notorious investor for the long-term, not the quick buck, so he must recognise something in those initials BYD.

The company says they stand for "Build Your Dream", but they could mean absolutely anything.

electric_car China BYD Build_Your_Dreams Peter_Day BBC_News Warren_Buffett Vancouver Canada

Harper on Canada 1997

2009-02-01T23:30:00.000-08:00

by Doug Brown

Here is something circulating around Facebook that I hope Canadian voters will consider leading up to the next election by reading what Prime Minister Stephen Harper thought of Canada back in '97. (See article below for the full text of this revealing oratory).

And let's also hope that Obama's team is able to put aside the dirty pool waged by Harper's crew during the elections, as a way to helping this God-fearing leader to understand that egos have to take a backseat to meaningful action when we have both an economy and environment in crisis.

Originally taken off the CTV website.

Canadian Press

OTTAWA -- The text from a speech made by Stephen Harper, then vice-president of the National Citizens Coalition, to a June 1997 Montreal meeting of the Council for National Policy, a right-wing U.S. think tank, and taken from the council's website:

Ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by giving you a big welcome to Canada. Let's start up with a compliment. You're here from the second greatest nation on earth. But seriously, your country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world.

Now, having given you a compliment, let me also give you an insult. I was asked to speak about Canadian politics. It may not be true, but it's legendary that if you're like all Americans, you know almost nothing except for your own country. Which makes you probably knowledgeable about one more country than most Canadians.

But in any case, my speech will make that assumption. I'll talk fairly basic stuff. If it seems pedestrian to some of you who do know a lot about Canada, I apologize.

I'm going to look at three things. First of all, just some basic facts about Canada that are relevant to my talk, facts about the country and its political system, its civics. Second, I want to take a look at the party system that's developed in Canada from a conventional left/right, or liberal/conservative perspective. The third thing I'm going to do is look at the political system again, because it can't be looked at in this country simply from the conventional perspective.

First, facts about Canada. Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it. Canadians make no connection between the fact that they are a Northern European welfare state and the fact that we have very low economic growth, a standard of living substantially lower than yours, a massive brain drain of young professionals to your country, and double the unemployment rate of the United States.

In terms of the unemployed, of which we have over a million-and-a-half, don't feel particularly bad for many of these people. They don't feel bad about it themselves, as long as they're receiving generous social assistance and unemployment insurance.

That is beginning to change. There have been some significant changes in our fiscal policies and our social welfare policies in the last three or four years. But nevertheless, they're still very generous compared to your country.

Let me just make a comment on language, which is so important in this country. I want to disabuse you of misimpressions you may have. If you've read any of the official propagandas, you've come over the border and entered a bilingual country. In this particular city, Montreal, you may well get that impression. But this city is extremely atypical of this country.

While it is a French-speaking city -- largely -- it has an enormous English-speaking minority and a large number of what are called ethnics: they who are largely immigrant communities, but who politically and culturally tend to identify with the English community.

This is unusual, because the rest of the province of Quebec is, by and large, almost entirely French-speaking. The English minority present here in Montreal is quite exceptional.

Furthermore, the fact that this province is largely French-speaking, except for Montreal, is quite exceptional with regard to the rest of the country. Outside of Quebec, the total population of francophones, depending on how you measure it, is only three to five per cent of the population. The rest of Canada is English speaking.

Even more important, the French-speaking people outside of Quebec live almost exclusively in the adjacent areas, in northern New Brunswick and in Eastern Ontario.

The rest of Canada is almost entirely English speaking. Where I come from, Western Canada, the population of francophones ranges around one to two per cent in some cases. So it's basically an English-speaking country, just as English-speaking as, I would guess, the northern part of the United States.

But the important point is that Canada is not a bilingual country. It is a country with two languages. And there is a big difference.

As you may know, historically and especially presently, there's been a lot of political tension between these two major language groups, and between Quebec and the rest of Canada.

Let me take a moment for a humorous story. Now, I tell this with some trepidation, knowing that this is a largely Christian organization.

The National Citizens Coalition, by the way, is not. We're on the sort of libertarian side of the conservative spectrum. So I tell this joke with a little bit of trepidation. But nevertheless, this joke works with Canadian audiences of any kind, anywhere in Canada, both official languages, any kind of audience.

It's about a constitutional lawyer who dies and goes to heaven. There, he meets God and gets his questions answered about life. One of his questions is, "God, will this problem between Quebec and the rest of Canada ever be resolved?'' And God thinks very deeply about this, as God is wont to do. God replies, "Yes, but not in my lifetime.''

I'm glad to see you weren't offended by that. I've had the odd religious person who's been offended. I always tell them, "Don't be offended. The joke can't be taken seriously theologically. It is, after all, about a lawyer who goes to heaven.''

In any case. My apologies to Eugene Meyer of the Federalist Society.

Second, the civics, Canada's civics.

On the surface, you can make a comparison between our political system and yours. We have an executive, we have two legislative houses, and we have a Supreme Court.

However, our executive is the Queen, who doesn't live here. Her representative is the Governor General, who is an appointed buddy of the Prime Minister.

Of our two legislative houses, the Senate, our upper house, is appointed, also by the Prime Minister, where he puts buddies, fundraisers and the like. So the Senate also is not very important in our political system.

And we have a Supreme Court, like yours, which, since we put a charter of rights in our constitution in 1982, is becoming increasingly arbitrary and important. It is also appointed by the Prime Minister. Unlike your Supreme Court, we have no ratification process.

So if you sort of remove three of the four elements, what you see is a system of checks and balances which quickly becomes a system that's described as unpaid checks and political imbalances.

What we have is the House of Commons. The House of Commons, the bastion of the Prime Minister's power, the body that selects the Prime Minister, is an elected body. I really emphasize this to you as an American group: It's not like your House of Representatives. Don't make that comparison.

What the House of Commons is really like is the United States electoral college. Imagine if the electoral college which selects your president once every four years were to continue sitting in Washington for the next four years. And imagine its having the same vote on every issue. That is how our political system operates.

In our election last Monday, the Liberal party won a majority of seats. The four opposition parties divided up the rest, with some very, very rough parity.

But the important thing to know is that this is how it will be until the Prime Minister calls the next election. The same majority vote on every issue. So if you ask me, "What's the vote going to be on gun control?'' or on the budget, we know already.

If any member of these political parties votes differently from his party on a particular issue, well, that will be national headline news. It's really hard to believe. If any one member votes differently, it will be national headline news. I voted differently at least once from my party, and it was national headline news. It's a very different system.

Our party system consists today of five parties. There was a remark made yesterday at your youth conference about the fact that parties come and go in Canada every year. This is rather deceptive. I've written considerably on this subject.

We had a two-party system from the founding of our country, in 1867. That two-party system began to break up in the period from 1911 to 1935. Ever since then, five political elements have come and gone. We've always had at least three parties. But even when parties come back, they're not really new. They're just an older party re-appearing under a different name and different circumstances.

Let me take a conventional look at these five parties. I'll describe them in terms that fit your own party system, the left/right kind of terms.

Let's take the New Democratic Party, the NDP, which won 21 seats. The NDP could be described as basically a party of liberal Democrats, but it's actually worse than that, I have to say. And forgive me jesting again, but the NDP is kind of proof that the Devil lives and interferes in the affairs of men.

This party believes not just in large government and in massive redistributive programs, it's explicitly socialist. On social value issues, it believes the opposite on just about everything that anybody in this room believes. I think that's a pretty safe bet on all social-value kinds of questions.

Some people point out that there is a small element of clergy in the NDP. Yes, this is true. But these are clergy who, while very committed to the church, believe that it made a historic error in adopting Christian theology.

The NDP is also explicitly a branch of the Canadian Labour Congress, which is by far our largest labour group, and explicitly radical.

There are some moderate and conservative labour organizations. They don't belong to that particular organization.

The second party, the Liberal party, is by far the largest party. It won the election. It's also the only party that's competitive in all parts of the country. The Liberal party is our dominant party today, and has been for 100 years. It's governed almost all of the last hundred years, probably about 75 per cent of the time.

It's not what you would call conservative Democrat; I think that's a disappearing kind of breed. But it's certainly moderate Democrat, a type of Clinton-pragmatic Democrat. It's moved in the last few years very much to the right on fiscal and economic concerns, but still believes in government intrusion in the economy where possible, and does, in its majority, believe in fairly liberal social values.

In the last Parliament, it enacted comprehensive gun control, well beyond, I think, anything you have. Now we'll have a national firearms registration system, including all shotguns and rifles. Many other kinds of weapons have been banned. It believes in gay rights, although it's fairly cautious. It's put sexual orientation in the Human Rights Act and will let the courts do the rest.

There is an important caveat to its liberal social values. For historic reasons that I won't get into, the Liberal party gets the votes of most Catholics in the country, including many practising Catholics. It does have a significant Catholic, social-conservative element which occasionally disagrees with these kinds of policy directions. Although I caution you that even this Catholic social conservative element in the Liberal party is often quite liberal on economic issues.

Then there is the Progressive Conservative party, the PC party, which won only 20 seats. Now, the term Progressive Conservative will immediately raise suspicions in all of your minds. It should. It's obviously kind of an oxymoron. But actually, its origin is not progressive in the modern sense. The origin of the term "progressive'' in the name stems from the Progressive Movement in the 1920s, which was similar to that in your own country.

But the Progressive Conservative is very definitely liberal Republican. These are people who are moderately conservative on economic matters, and in the past have been moderately liberal, even sometimes quite liberal on social policy matters.

In fact, before the Reform Party really became a force in the late '80s, early '90s, the leadership of the Conservative party was running the largest deficits in Canadian history. They were in favour of gay rights officially, officially for abortion on demand. Officially -- what else can I say about them? Officially for the entrenchment of our universal, collectivized, health-care system and multicultural policies in the constitution of the country.

At the leadership level anyway, this was a pretty liberal group. This explains one of the reasons why the Reform party has become such a power.

The Reform party is much closer to what you would call conservative Republican, which I'll get to in a minute.

The Bloc Quebecois, which I won't spend much time on, is a strictly Quebec party, strictly among the French-speaking people of Quebec. It is an ethnic separatist party that seeks to make Quebec an independent, sovereign nation.

By and large, the Bloc Quebecois is centre-left in its approach. However, it is primarily an ethnic coalition. It's always had diverse elements. It does have an element that is more on the right of the political spectrum, but that's definitely a minority element.

Let me say a little bit about the Reform party because I want you to be very clear on what the Reform party is and is not.

The Reform party, although described by many of its members, and most of the media, as conservative, and conservative in the American sense, actually describes itself as populist. And that's the term its leader, Preston Manning, uses.

This term is not without significance. The Reform party does stand for direct democracy, which of course many American conservatives do, but also it sees itself as coming from a long tradition of populist parties of Western Canada, not all of which have been conservative.

It also is populist in the very real sense, if I can make American analogies to it -- populist in the sense that the term is sometimes used with Ross Perot.

The Reform party is very much a leader-driven party. It's much more a real party than Mr. Perot's party -- by the way, it existed before Mr. Perot's party. But it's very much leader-driven, very much organized as a personal political vehicle. Although it has much more of a real organization than Mr. Perot does.

But the Reform party only exists federally. It doesn't exist at the provincial level here in Canada. It really exists only because Mr. Manning is pursuing the position of prime minister. It doesn't have a broader political mandate than that yet. Most of its members feel it should, and, in their minds, actually it does.

It also has some Buchananist tendencies. I know there are probably many admirers of Mr. Buchanan here, but I mean that in the sense that there are some anti-market elements in the Reform Party. So far, they haven't been that important, because Mr. Manning is, himself, a fairly orthodox economic conservative.

The predecessor of the Reform party, the Social Credit party, was very much like this. Believing in funny money and control of banking, and a whole bunch of fairly non-conservative economic things.

So there are some non-conservative tendencies in the Reform party, but, that said, the party is clearly the most economically conservative party in the country. It's the closest thing we have to a neo-conservative party in that sense.

It's also the most conservative socially, but it's not a theocon party, to use the term. The Reform party does favour the use of referendums and free votes in Parliament on moral issues and social issues.

The party is led by Preston Manning, who is a committed, evangelical Christian. And the party in recent years has made some reference to family values and to family priorities. It has some policies that are definitely social-conservative, but it's not explicitly so.

Many members are not, the party officially is not, and, frankly, the party has had a great deal of trouble when it's tried to tackle those issues.

Last year, when we had the Liberal government putting the protection of sexual orientation in our Human Rights Act, the Reform Party was opposed to that, but made a terrible mess of the debate. In fact, discredited itself on that issue, not just with the conventional liberal media, but even with many social conservatives by the manner in which it mishandled that.

So the social conservative element exists. Mr. Manning is a Christian, as are most of the party's senior people. But it's not officially part of the party. The party hasn't quite come to terms with how that fits into it.

That's the conventional analysis of the party system.

Let me turn to the non-conventional analysis, because frankly, it's impossible, with just left/right terminology to explain why we would have five parties, or why we would have four parties on the conventional spectrum. Why not just two?

The reason is regional division, which you'll see if you carefully look at a map. Let me draw the United States comparison, a comparison with your history.

The party system that is developing here in Canada is a party system that replicates the antebellum period, the pre-Civil War period of the United States.

That's not to say -- and I would never be quoted as saying -- we're headed to a civil war. But we do have a major secession crisis, obviously of a very different nature than the secession crisis you had in the 1860s. But the dynamics, the political and partisan dynamics of this, are remarkably similar.

The Bloc Quebecois is equivalent to your Southern secessionists, Southern Democrats, states rights activists. The Bloc Quebecois, its 44 seats, come entirely from the province of Quebec. But even more strikingly, they come from ridings, or election districts, almost entirely populated by the descendants of the original European French settlers.

The Liberal party has 26 seats in Quebec. Most of these come from areas where there are heavy concentrations of English, aboriginal or ethnic votes. So the Bloc Quebecois is very much an ethnic party, but it's also a secession party.

In the referendum two years ago, the secessionists won 49 per cent of the vote, 49.5 per cent. So this is a very real crisis. We're looking at another referendum before the turn of the century.

The Progressive Conservative party is very much comparable to the Whigs of the 1850s and 1860s. What is happening to them is very similar to the Whigs. A moderate conservative party, increasingly under stress because of the secession movement, on the one hand, and the reaction to that movement from harder line English Canadians on the other hand.

You may recall that the Whigs, in their dying days, went through a series of metamorphoses. They ended up as what was called the Unionist movement that won some of the border states in your 1860 election.

If you look at the surviving PC support, it's very much concentrated in Atlantic Canada, in the provinces to the east of Quebec. These are very much equivalent to the United States border states. They're weak economically. They have very grim prospects if Quebec separates. These people want a solution at almost any cost. And some of the solutions they propose would be exactly that.

They also have a small percentage of seats in Quebec. These are French-speaking areas that are also more moderate and very concerned about what would happen in a secession crisis.

The Liberal party is very much your northern Democrat, or mainstream Democratic party, a party that is less concessionary to the secessionists than the PCs, but still somewhat concessionary. And they still occupy the mainstream of public opinion in Ontario, which is the big and powerful province, politically and economically, alongside Quebec.

The Reform party is very much a modern manifestation of the Republican movement in Western Canada; the U.S. Republicans started in the western United States. The Reform Party is very resistant to the agenda and the demands of the secessionists, and on a very deep philosophical level.

The goal of the secessionists is to transform our country into two nations, either into two explicitly sovereign countries, or in the case of weaker separatists, into some kind of federation of two equal partners.

The Reform party opposes this on all kinds of grounds, but most important, Reformers are highly resistant philosophically to the idea that we will have an open, modern, multi-ethnic society on one side of the line, and the other society will run on some set of ethnic-special-status principles. This is completely unacceptable, particularly to philosophical conservatives in the Reform party.

The Reform party's strength comes almost entirely from the West. It's become the dominant political force in Western Canada. And it is getting a substantial vote in Ontario. Twenty per cent of the vote in the last two elections. But it has not yet broken through in terms of the number of seats won in Ontario.

This is a very real political spectrum, lining up from the Bloc to reform. You may notice I didn't mention the New Democratic Party. The NDP obviously can't be compared to anything pre-Civil War. But the NDP is not an important player on this issue. Its views are somewhere between the liberals and conservatives. Its main concern, of course, is simply the left-wing agenda to basically disintegrate our society in all kinds of spectrums. So it really doesn't fit in.

But I don't use this comparison of the pre-Civil War lightly. Preston Manning, the leader of the Reform party has spent a lot of time reading about pre-Civil War politics. He compares the Reform party himself to the Republican party of that period. He is very well-read on Abraham Lincoln and a keen follower and admirer of Lincoln.

I know Mr. Manning very well. I would say that next to his own father, who is a prominent Western Canadian politician, Abraham Lincoln has probably had more effect on Mr. Manning's political philosophy than any individual politician.

Obviously, the issue here is not slavery, but the appeasement of ethnic nationalism. For years, we've had this Quebec separatist movement. For years, we elected Quebec prime ministers to deal with that, Quebec prime ministers who were committed federalists who would lead us out of the wilderness. For years, we have given concessions of various kinds of the province of Quebec, political and economic, to make them happier.

This has not worked. The sovereignty movement has continued to rise in prominence. And its demands have continued to increase. It began to hit the wall when what are called the soft separatists and the conventional political establishment got together to put in the constitution something called "a distinct society clause.'' Nobody really knows what it would mean, but it would give the Supreme Court, where Quebec would have a tremendous role in appointment, the power to interpret Quebec's special needs and powers, undefined elsewhere.

This has led to a firewall of resistance across the country. It fuelled the growth of the Reform party. I should even say that the early concessionary people, like Pierre Trudeau, have come out against this. So there's even now an element of the Quebec federalists themselves who will no longer accept this.

So you see the syndrome we're in. The separatists continue to make demands. They're a powerful force. They continue to have the bulk of the Canadian political establishment on their side. The two traditional parties, the Liberals and PCs, are both led by Quebecers who favour concessionary strategies. The Reform party is a bastion of resistance to this tendency.

To give you an idea of how divided the country is, not just in Quebec but how divided the country is outside Quebec on this, we had a phenomenon five years ago. This is a real phenomenon; I don't know how much you heard about it.

The establishment came down with a constitutional package which they put to a national referendum. The package included distinct society status for Quebec and some other changes, including some that would just horrify you, putting universal Medicare in our constitution, and feminist rights, and a whole bunch of other things.

What was significant about this was that this constitutional proposal was supported by the entire Canadian political establishment. By all of the major media. By the three largest traditional parties, the PC, Liberal party and NDP. At the time, the Bloc and Reform were very small.

It was supported by big business, very vocally by all of the major CEOs of the country. The leading labour unions all supported it. Complete consensus. And most academics.

And it was defeated. It literally lost the national referendum against a rag-tag opposition consisting of a few dissident conservatives and a few dissident socialists.

This gives you some idea of the split that's taking place in the country.

Canada is, however, a troubled country politically, not socially. This is a country that we like to say works in practice but not in theory.

You can walk around this country without running across very many of these political controversies.

I'll end there and take any of your questions. But let me conclude by saying, good luck in your own battles. Let me just remind you of something that's been talked about here. As long as there are exams, there will always be prayer in schools.

Tags: Stephen_Harper Barack_Obama 1997 speech

Australia Catches Up With Kyoto?

2009-01-27T23:13:00.000-08:00

Australia has released its scheme to meet its Kyoto commitments. I wonder if anyone out there can tell me if this has meaning for Ma and Pa Kettle currently baking in Australia's desertified Outback? Let's hope that it was printed on 100% Post-Consumer Waste Paper (whinge).

Let's hope so, but just in case, be sure to turn off that tap and while you're at it, could you switch off that lamp behind you?

While you're here we recommend you check out this great story about how Geoff Lawton of the Permaculture Research Institute, an Australian organization, used permaculture to recapture a desert in Jordan.

We endorse this as a real solution to help with Australia's challenge to meet the changing climate.

Forest Kyoto climate_change Post-Consumer_Waste_Paper PRI White_Paper Permaculture_Research_Institute permaculture sustainable water natural_capitalism green desert Jordan

Post-Consumer Waste Paper

The Australian: Bittersweet prize

2009-01-27T17:36:00.000-08:00

Original Article here

Related article from the Sydney Morning Herald

By Nicolas Rothwell

INDIGENOUS rights campaigner Mick Dodson, the newly appointed 2009 Australian of the Year, confided yesterday that he had found the accolade a hard one to accept given the bleak resonances for many Aboriginal people of January 26, the date when the First Fleet hove to in Sydney Harbour: "invasion day".

"I angsted about it, I thought about it very, very deeply," he said: "I too share the concerns of my indigenous brothers and sisters about the date."

How to avoid legitimising the regime that honours you, when you disapprove of its core symbols and lament the sweep of its national narrative?

It is a familiar dilemma for Dodson, who has received many distinctions and national awards in his high-profile career of activism. He dealt with it smoothly on Sunday: within minutes of accepting his title from Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, he was canvassing the idea of changing the date of Australia Day.

But lurking behind Dodson's immediate difficulty is another, much more disquieting problem for today's old-established indigenous campaigners.

What to fight for, against whom? How to avoid being co-opted by a federal Government and establishment so sentimentally accepting of the Aboriginal cause?

The pattern of Dodson's life well illustrates the shifts that have occurred over the past generation in the possibilities of indigenous political action. He has gone from the margins, step by step, towards the centre of the national stage, and back out into the shadows again.

Born in the Northern Territory, descended from the Yawuru people of the Broome region, educated initially in Katherine and Darwin, and then at the blue-riband Monivae boarding school in the Western District of Victoria, Dodson took a law degree at Monash University.

It was the prelude to a career in the nascent Aboriginal political vanguard. He worked in the Victorian Aboriginal legal service, and became a barrister. Soon he moved to Darwin, and worked there for the Northern Land Council, at that stage an organisation full of energy and passion, embroiled in constant front-line struggles.

By the end of the 1980s, the course for a new phase in Aboriginal activism was set, and its champions had emerged: Dodson himself to the fore, accompanied by his brother Patrick, the theorist of reconciliation, academic Marcia Langton and Kimberley Land Council director Peter Yu.

Like his colleagues in this movement, Dodson presciently believed a new era in the battle for rights was dawning: the vital contests would be fought in the arena of law, his own speciality. They would be fought, above all, over issues of social justice and claims of recompense for past wrongs.

By chance, Dodson was soon able to devote himself this new agenda. In the bicentennial year, 1988, he was appointed as counsel assisting the landmark royal commission into Aboriginal deaths in custody: the inquiry lasted more than two years, and laid bare in uncompromising fashion the conditions in remote bush communities, conditions that have only worsened in the decades since.

Dodson was next appointed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, a post he held from 1993 to 1998.

It was a time when the faded past of Aboriginal Australia was coming into fresh view, and the experiences of the Stolen Generations were being excavated after long silence. It was also the period when the second crucial document that shifted Australia's way of imagining indigenous affairs was being drawn up: the emotive Bringing Them Home report into the separation of Aboriginal children from their families.

Bringing Them Home appeared in April 1997, early in the reign of conservative prime minister John Howard: his administration briskly shelved the report, and refused every call for a national apology to the Stolen Generations.

Upon the report's completion, Dodson went into long exile from governmental favour, an exile that only really ended this week with his appointment as the nation's chief ambassador to itself.

But it was an unusually high-profile kind of exile, for late 20th century institutional Australia offered a rich diversity of posts to an Aboriginal campaigner with attitude.

As a result, the past decade and a half has not been without activity for Dodson: he is presently a professor at the Australian National University, the director of its centre for indigenous studies, the chair of the Australian Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, and the co-chair of Reconciliation Australia.

This thick portfolio of positions testifies to the strong appeal of the Dodson brand. He is famous chiefly for his willingness to critique the liberal establishment. His public manner, both curmudgeonly and cerebral, fits well with the flow of his arguments.

Above all, Dodson has been there, in the headlines, holding his ground, for a generation, Akubra-hatted, unbowed.

What lies behind the gruff persona? Dodson's lectures and speeches reveal a persistent enthusiasm for international law as a lever to effect constitutional change in Australia: he helped draft the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples, and he is a member of the UN permanent forum on indigenous issues.

It is this impeccable biography of urgency and agitation that Dodson now puts at the nation's service, as he sets about presenting and articulating Australia's grand themes and concerns, and applying pressure on society to adjust its values and its norms.

Much as the 2007 Australian of the Year, environmentalist author Tim Flannery, seemed a contrarian choice well selected to counter and neutralise criticism of the eco-sceptic federal government of the day, so Dodson's appointment has a political undertext. He is not the first indigenous Australian of the year: far from it - previous incumbents include Galarrwuy and Mandawuy Yunupingu, Evonne Goolagong Cawley, Neville Bonner and Lowitja O'Donoghue. But he is the first indigenous activist with so clearly defined a critical profile.

It is hard, given the membership of the Australia Day Council Board, rich in senior public servants, not to see Dodson's new post as part of the Rudd Government master-plan for dealing with the indigenous domain. This blueprint is straightforward: engage every Aboriginal leader, and keep them talking, debating and consulting indefinitely.

Thus the project for a new indigenous representative council is now the subject of protracted debate, while the fine points of the native title system, indigenous housing and education are all under wide discussion, with reviews and submissions flooding in.

Since Rudd made an apology to the Stolen Generations the first item of business on the first sitting day of the new federal parliament, in February last year, it may seem natural for campaigners such as Dodson to regard the present regime in Canberra as one more sympathetic to the cause of indigenous rights that its obdurate predecessor.

In fact, the track record to date suggests that Rudd and Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin intend little shift in the broad settings that determine Aboriginal policies. The NT intervention continues, and has been quietly extended to cover much of the east and central Kimberley: compulsory income management is now in place in a wide range of Aboriginal communities across central and north Australia, despite the fervent opposition of many Aboriginal activists and the party chieftains of the Labor Left.

No: for Dodson and the current he incarnates in the indigenous political leadership, the chief significance of the Rudd Government's arrival is rather that the days of reflex opposition are gone. The federal Government is no longer a natural object of hostility and scorn, presided over by a prime minister who refuses to apologise.

On the contrary, it is, in theory at least, an ally. The space for activism has thus vanished, almost overnight.

Consider the fate of the Dodson and his key comrades in the old indigenous vanguard. His brother, Patrick Dodson, has been drafted in by the NT Labor Government as a facilitator in Aboriginal communities, to explain why it no longer supports the creation of remote outstations.

Peter Yu, the former Kimberley land rights activist, prepared the NT intervention review for Macklin late last year, and was sharply critical of several key provisions: Macklin used his moral authority and then ignored his critique.

And now Mick Dodson is seen as a figure sufficiently mainstream to represent Australia and its inchoate identity on the national stage. It is an outcome rich in ironies, for the titans of a movement that once dreamed of turning the political order upside down.

Perhaps, in a sense, the linked fates of the radical indigenous leadership point to nothing as much as their success.

A generation on, Australia is a very different place in its attitudes to the Aboriginal domain. But the federal Government, and the extended establishment that revolves about it, is also very different: it has new and subtle skills and methods for the embrace and control of its critics.

No one more critical of Australia's past could be imagined than Dodson, who regards the day of the First Fleet's arrival as "the day on which our world came crashing down".

What a masterstroke, then, to elevate him to a position of ambassadorship, to have him represent Australia's tolerance and commitment to the abstract principles of indigenous advancement.

Dodson, like others of his generation, now looks around and sees the complex, mixed picture of indigenous Australia: fast-growing, culturally vibrant, traversed by disadvantage and chaos, observed, all the while, admired from outside, administered by the mainstream with warm, attentive eyes.

Who would have thought the story of a career in protest and struggle would come to this particular climax? Who would have expected Dodson, after years of sadness and qualified eclipse, to be brought, in this ambiguous way, back home?

Australia has an odd way of functioning as an open society, through forgetting and through silence as much as through generosity. Dodson, who railed against the system all his adult life, and fought with steely reserve against its systematic injustices, now finds himself in the spotlight for his deep Australian characteristics: it is the deepest honour, and, in some subterranean fashion, the strangest blow.

Tags: Mick_Dodson Kevin_Rudd Australia Reconciliation Aborigine indigenous

The Single Transferable Vote

2009-01-14T02:18:00.000-08:00

By Doug Brown

On May 12, 2009, BC voters will get another chance to vote on a reform of the current electoral system as proposed by the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform.

They of course chose the Single Transferable Vote or STV, which has had most notable success in Ireland. The United Kingdom's Electoral Reform Society have been tracking the progress of BC's attempts to push this reform.

At this year's STV reunion, co-sponsored by Fair Voting BC, the directors and citizens gathered to rally around educating voters about why they had chosen this model over many others.

Many believe that voters were confused about what they were voting for the last time they had a chance to decide and unfortunately the required 60% required for reform fell short. It is hoped that a grassroots campaign will see this reform succeed this time around.

Here are some key segments from that conference:

STV Single_Transferable_Vote electoral_reform BC May_12_2009 fair_vote

Hansen: Dion was right

2009-01-07T11:38:00.000-08:00

Original article by by Tim Bousquet of Halifax's The Coast here.

Image from The Day After Tomorrow (or recent weather conditions in North America)

(It's a shame that Dion had to step down because if he had remained leader of the Coalition, we likely would have seen some change. I would find it difficult to see Ignatieff propose any ideas much different than Harper. Oh well , you get what you 'apathy' for.- Ed.)

James Hansen is the NASA scientist who first testified to the US Senate on the climatic challenges facing the globe in 1988, and continues to be one of the leading climatologists researching the issue.

Today, New Year's Day, Hansen releases a a letter to Michelle and Barack Obama:, in which he underscores the importance of taking quick action to address global warming. The letter's worth reading in its entirety, but of special interest to Canadians may be the section that deals with the need for a carbon tax. Hansen argues not just that a carbon tax is necessary, but also that a cap and trade system is not a viable alternative.

As you'll recall, Stéphane Dion campaigned on a carbon tax. Jack Layton condemned it, saying he would prefer a cap and trade system, and Stephen Harper ridiculed it as an economy killer. There were no doubt many reasons why he lost in the polls, but Canadians overwhelmingly rejected Dion and therefore the carbon tax. But here we are, three months later, and the man who arguably knows more about global warming than any other human tells us we can't avoid cataclysmic climate change without a carbon tax:

The physics of the matter, together with empirical data, also define the need for a carbon tax. Alternatives such as emission reduction targets, cap and trade, cap and dividend, do not work, as proven by honest efforts of the 'greenest' countries to comply with the Kyoto Protocol:

(1) Japan: accepted the strongest emission reduction targets, appropriately prides itself on having the most energy-efficient industry, and yet its use of coal has sharply increased, as have its total CO2 emissions. Japan offset its increases with purchases of credits through the clean development mechanism in China, intended to reduce emissions there, but Chinese emissions increased rapidly.

(2) Germany: subsidizes renewable energies heavily and accepts strong emission reduction targets, yet plans to build a large number of coal-fired power plants. They assert that they will have cap-and-trade, with a cap that reduces emissions by whatever amount is needed. But the physics tells us that if they continue to burn coal, no cap can solve the problem, because of the long carbon dioxide lifetime.

(3) Other cases are described on my Columbia University web site, e.g., Switzerland finances construction of coal plants, Sweden builds them, and Australia exports coal and sets atmospheric carbon dioxide goals so large as to guarantee destruction of much of the life on the planet.

Indeed, 'goals' and 'caps' on carbon emissions are practically worthless, if coal emissions continue, because of the exceedingly long lifetime of carbon dioxide in the air. Nobody realistically expects that the large readily available pools of oil and gas will be left in the ground. Caps will not cause that to happen – caps only slow the rate at which the oil and gas are used. The only solution is to cut off the coal source (and unconventional fossil fuels).

Coal phase-out and transition to the post-fossil fuel era requires an increasing carbon price. A carbon tax at the wellhead or port of entry reduces all uses of a fuel. In contrast, a less comprehensive cap has the perverse effect of lowering the price of the fuel for other uses, undercutting clean energy sources.vi In contrast to the impracticality of all nations agreeing to caps, and the impossibility of enforcement, a carbon tax can readily be made near-global.

It's hard to read these words and not think that Canadians have made a terrible blunder.

Adding: Hansen says more about the issue here:

"Goals" for percentage CO2 emission reductions and "cap & trade & dividend" are a threat to the planet, weak tea, not commensurate with the task of getting CO2 back to 350 ppm and less. Note:

(1) There must be a tax at the mine or port of entry, the first sale of oil, gas and coal, so every direct and indirect use of the fuel is affected. Anything less means that the reduction of demand for the fuel will make it cheaper for some uses; e.g., people will start burning coal in their stoves. Peter Barnes' idea to push the cap upstream to the extent possible is not adequate nor is a 'gas tax' suggested by NY Times and others. A comprehensive approach is needed.

(2) "Cap & trade & dividend" creates Wall Street millionaires and complex bureaucracy. The public is fed up with that – rightly so. A single carbon tax rate can be adjusted upward affecting all activities appropriately. With 100% dividend the public will allow a carbon price adequate to the job, i.e., helping us move to the post- fossil-fuel world.

(3) Supply 'caps' cannot yield a really big reduction because of the weapon: 'shortages'. All a utility has to say is 'blackout coming' and politicians and public have to cave in – we are not going to have the lights turned out. Will the public allow a high enough tax rate Yes, dividends will exceed tax for most people concerned about their bills.

(4) A tax is not sufficient. All other measures, such as building codes, are needed. But with millions of buildings, all construction codes and operations cannot be enforced. A rising carbon price provides effective enforcement.

(5) Wouldn't it be cheaper to let people burn the dirtiest fuel? No. The clean future that we aim for, including more efficient energy use, is not more expensive. For example, you may have read about passively heated homes that require little energy and increase construction costs only several percent. Such possibilities remain the oddball (with high price tag), not the standard construction, unless the government adopts policies that make things happen.

Dion Hansen climate_change Canada get_a_grip

Fair Market Value and the Cheque Exchange

2009-01-01T11:32:00.000-08:00

by Doug Brown

So we like to provide solutions to the environmental and human rights issues facing humanity.

The simplest thing that can happen is our societies need to start to make better use of our charitable sector. And this doesn't mean getting in more free volunteers to weaken the already low value of human capital but rather to engage contributors to community development at fair market value.

Fair market value is the highest rate that a given human charges out at. So, for example if a lawyer charges out at $150 per hour to his clients in the profit sector, then he or she equally should and can legally charge out to his clients in the charitable sector.

Of course, Revenue Canada at least tries to discourage people from doing this as they do not treat services the same as goods, requiring people to treat the in-kind donation as revenue. Having said this, I have personally performed a 'cheque exchange' with different charities where I charged out a fair market value rate for the work I performed. I issued the charity an invoice for the work performed, they send me a cheque for the work, I deposit the cheque into my bank account and then issue them a cheque for the same amount. After they receive the cheque, they issue me a charitable tax receipt. The curious thing is that although I have to record the income at full value, I only get 30% of the work credited as a deduction. Yeah, this needs work.

Probably one of the most challenging things about making the charitable sector work is that both accountants and lawyers are scared of Revenue Canada so don't expect them to be able to challenge this for you, though it is an area that needs addressing.

In the interest of balanced reporting, here is a more conservative approach to charitable donations. How can you make it easy for people to be generous?

The fact of the matter is that the key to change is for the tax people to make policy changes to encourage charitable acts. In Canada at least we are getting there, but there are still a few penstrokes away from sustainability.

fair_market_value cheque_exchange Revenue_Canada in-kind eat charity

Is there a bridge over Troubled waters?

2008-12-30T21:21:00.000-08:00

The sea is suffering, mostly at the hand of man, says John Grimond (interviewed here)

Magnum Photos

All of us have in our veins the exact same percentage of salt in our blood that exists in the ocean...And when we go back to the sea...we are going back from whence we came. John Kennedy

HUMAN beings no longer thrive under the water from which their ancestors emerged, but their relationship with the sea remains close. Over half the world’s people live within 100 kilometres (62 miles) of the coast; a tenth are within 10km. On land at least, the sea delights the senses and excites the imagination. The sight and smell of the sea inspire courage and adventure, fear and romance. Though the waves may be rippling or mountainous, the waters angry or calm, the ocean itself is eternal. Its moods pass. Its tides keep to a rhythm. It is unchanging.

Or so it has long seemed. Appearances deceive, though. Large parts of the sea may indeed remain unchanged, but in others, especially in the surface and coastal waters where 90% of marine life is to be found, the impact of man’s activities is increasingly plain. This should hardly be a surprise. Man has changed the landscape and the atmosphere. It would be odd if the seas, which he has for centuries used for food, for transport, for dumping rubbish and, more recently, for recreation, had not also been affected.

The evidence abounds. The fish that once seemed an inexhaustible source of food are now almost everywhere in decline: 90% of large predatory fish (the big ones such as tuna, swordfish and sharks) have gone, according to some scientists. In estuaries and coastal waters, 85% of the large whales have disappeared, and nearly 60% of the small ones. Many of the smaller fish are also in decline. Indeed, most familiar sea creatures, from albatrosses to walruses, from seals to oysters, have suffered huge losses.

Read the full article here.

Grimond Economist sea future eat fish

Scraping the Sky with Green

2008-12-18T22:20:00.000-08:00

by Doug Brown

I was watching the Knowledge Network's Design E2 Program the other night and saw an inspiring program about the Commerzbank building in Frankfurt, Germany. Although it was built over 10 years ago, it saves over 30% energy compared to conventional skyscrapers.

But this building is far from alone in saving energy and providing an inspiration for its workers and other architects and builders. Here is Ecogeek's list of Top 10 Green Buildings.

Let's hope that existing and future architects and builders find the courage to follow the leadership of these visionaries.

green building skyscraper Commerzbank ecogeek Design_E2

EDF: MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WANT ACTION ON CLIMATE TO REBUILD US. ECONOMY

2008-11-17T18:31:00.000-08:00

(Washington, DC – November 11, 2008) According to new post-election poll results released today by Environmental Defense Fund, a majority of Americans say that given the current economic crisis, now is the time to address climate change -- because investing in clean energy will create millions of new jobs and rebuild the economy.

The survey, conducted by respected Democratic pollster Douglas E. Schoen, also found that two-thirds of Americans think investments in economic stimulus should be funded with revenue from large companies paying for the global warming pollution they emit – rather than tax hikes or more borrowing that increases the national debt.

“The public thinks there’s not a minute to waste,” said Steve Cochran, national climate campaign director at EDF. “They want economic revitalization and action to address global warming to go together, and they want it paid for.”

The national survey was conducted on the evening of November 4th. Its goal was to measure public support for climate change legislation amid a time of economic recession and in anticipation of a new President and Congress.

Full results are available online at edf.org/electiondaypoll. Key findings include:

- Fifty-eight percent of respondents said investments in new, clean energy could create millions of new jobs, so now is the time to address climate change.

- Sixty-six percent said that Congress should fund economic stimulus with revenue generated from large companies that pay for the global warming pollution they create, rather than new taxes or more borrowing.

- Over three-quarters said it is important to address the problem of global warming, and half of the sample says that the issues of oil addiction and economic problems need to be addressed together.

The poll, conducted by telephone with a random sample of the American population, asked voters about the election, as well as a specific series of questions about environmental issues, climate change, and some of the tradeoffs facing the new administration. The margin of error for this poll is +/- 3.5%.

POLL: MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WANT ACTION ON CLIMATE TO REBUILD US. ECONOMY
Environmental Defense Fund press release
November 11, 2008

Contact:
Tony Kreindler, 202-572-3378 (office), 202-210-5791 (cell), akreindler@edf.org

###

Environmental Defense Fund, a leading national nonprofit organization, represents more than 500,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org.

Environmental Defense Fund EDF poll Americans climate_change climate change

Trees Giving Up Battle, But Sustainable Farming Offers Hope

2008-10-05T22:43:00.000-07:00

by Craig Mackintosh

Originally published here

The silver bullet solution to climate change in many people’s book is to simply ‘plant a tree’. A recent study indicates that it might not be quite that simple…

The ability of forests to soak up man-made carbon dioxide is weakening, according to an analysis of two decades of data from more than 30 sites in the frozen north.

The finding published today is crucial, because it means that more of the CO2 we release will end up affecting the climate in the atmosphere rather than being safely locked away in trees or soil.

The results may partly explain recent studies suggesting that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing faster than expected. If higher temperatures mean less carbon is soaked up by plants and microbes, global warming will accelerate.

… The surprise rethink concerns abundant evidence from around the world that winter is starting later and spring earlier. In northern latitudes, spring and autumn temperatures have risen by 1.1C and 0.8C respectively in the past two decades. That means a longer growing season for plants, which scientists thought should be a good thing for slowing warming….

The team focused particularly on the date in autumn at which the forests switched from being a net sink for carbon into a net source. Instead of moving later in the year as they had expected, this date actually got earlier - in some places by a few days, but in others by a few weeks. — Guardian

If the report is correct, this is a major additional feedback loop that has the potential to greatly accelerate climate change.

The most obvious solution in the battle against global warming, of course, is to significantly reduce the amount of fossil fuels getting pulled out of the ground and burnt (i.e. reduce greenhouse gas inputs into the atmosphere). Another is to utilise more powerful carbon sinks (i.e. increase greenhouse gas extraction from the atmosphere). There is one change we can make in our way of working that would accomplish both! Although trees might not be keeping up, there are still armies of plants and organisms waiting to lend a hand — if only we’d utilise them. I’m referring, in particular, to moving towards more sustainable agriculture.

Full article here

Mackintosh permaculture sustainable farming trees climate_change

Algae Oil?

2008-09-29T14:05:00.000-07:00

When many of us think about algae or seaweed, we think of something leafy, but there has recently been quite a bit of buzz in the world of research and development about the potential for algae oil as the new biofuel:

Google Links about Algae as a Biofuel

Similarly, as consumers start to learn of the environmental devastation from farmed fish and the resulting toxics in fish oil, there has been a move to accessing these same oils from algae as a great source of long chain omega 3 fatty acids called DHA and EPA.

Dr. David Steele gives us a backgrounder on a product called "V-Pure", though he equally claims that these oils can be derived from flax oil, walnuts and tofu.

So, it's likely worth a look, though the economics of such operations is not all that clear as of this writing.

algae seaweed biofuel essential_fatty_acid DHA EPA

Chicken and Egg

2008-09-29T13:58:00.000-07:00

By Douglas Brown

This weekend I attended Earthsave's Annual Taste of Health event.

Of course the mandate of the organization is to help save the world by helping humanity find their way back to a plant-based diet.

However, another mandate of the organization is to reduce cruelty to animals. Of course, it has been acknowledged that much of the toxics that end up in human beings comes from the foods we eat.

Here a spokesperson for the Vancouver Humane Society explains how to differentiate between different quality standards for eggs:

Check out this great site, Chickenout.ca, which explains in greater detail.

Earthsave free_run free_range chicken chickenout.ca egg COABC OCIA SPCA

Greening the Desert

2008-09-14T14:54:00.000-07:00

Watch this inspiring video which describes how with minimal inputs and permaculture Geoff Lawton of the Permaculture Research Institute and a group of locals regreened 10 acres of desert:

And, since the original article, there was this follow-up done on it. Lots of great ideas to meet our climate change initiatives:

Greening the Desert Project Outcomes

permaculture sustainable water natural_capitalism green desert Jordan

Permaculture: Danger of Falling Food

2008-09-14T12:16:00.001-07:00

by Douglas Brown

Here's a great video which goes over the basic principles of permaculture, a term which "initially meant "permanent agriculture" but was quickly expanded to also stand for "permanent culture" as it was seen that social aspects were an integral part of a truly sustainable system. Bill Mollison and David Holmgren are widely considered to be the co-originators of the modern permaculture concept." Permaculture wiki.

If you are at all interested in working with us in putting something like this in your community, please do not hesitate to contact us at whemedia (at) gmail.com or natcap (at) ymail.com .

In my opinion, permaculture is one of the most tangible and meaningful definitions of sustainable development and/or natural capitalism.

Otherwise, here is a great place to start - the Permaculture Institute.

Mollison Holmgren permaculture sustainable water natural_capitalism organic_food Tasmania Australia Canada

The Writing's on the Wall: frogfile helps businesses go green!

2008-09-12T21:29:00.001-07:00

by Douglas Brown

I was really impressed with the line-up of vendors, videos and speakers at the Frogfile Green Business Expo at the Vancity Theatre this past week.

Although I already buy the Harbor/100 because it's 100% Post-consumer Recycled. But I didn't realize until that day just how truly green the product is. It is also Green-E and Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) - certified.

The Grays Harbor Paper Mill is a story in itself, it recycles its biomass energy to power itself. In addition, they have nearly completely closed their waste cycle, where one of its byproducts from the process is a Grey Lime that is used as a fertilizer. Of course this is one of the aspects that makes the plant Carbon-Neutral. Without a doubt, the Grays Harbor Paper Mill is a model for other mills and other processing operations looking to go green in a meaningful way.

So if you want a real green paper product, you can buy it.

Now for the writing instruments...

Pilot, Staedtler and newcomer Auspen are leading the charge, not only providing recycled plastic replacing PVC or using reusable containers, but also providing healthier inks.

Apparently since it has been found that the toxic substances (Volatile Organic Compounds - VOCs) such as toluene and xylene commonly found in budget-grade whiteboard markers cause dizziness and headaches and other health problems, many companies are now choosing to provide the healthier alternatives often using a base of alcohol and water. As a user of whiteboard markers over the years and sufferer from the effects, I can say that I laud the new product.

I also enjoyed the inspiring story of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and learned of its strategic methods to influence the consumer purchasing and thereby affecting how organizations like the Home Depot purchase forest products. Well worth watching.

frogfile green_business_expo westworld_paper grays_harbor_paper FSC carbon_neutral Auspen Canada

Why not go nuclear? Read On!

2008-09-11T22:11:00.000-07:00

By Douglas Brown

You'd figure with the whole green movement happening around the world that the last thing that we would have seen is a nuclear revival. But there it is, with a crew of missionaries out there in the media claiming that if we don't hurry up we'll miss out on all of the great things that nuclear energy has to contribute to solving the climate change crisis.

Oh yeah, just in case you forgot, that's an image of Chernobyl.

There's Duane Bratt, political science instructor at Calgary's Mount Royal College, touting its promise recently urging Alberta and Saskatchewan to go in that direction. His report, funded by Canada West Foundation, claims that "Alberta and Saskatchewan need to take advantage of a worldwide nuclear revival, which will happen with or without their participation." Whoa! Might there not have already been considerable research done in the past exploring why both of those provinces didn't want to go nuclear already?

The organization, Briarpatch, apparently galvanized public support against uranium mining in the 70s, effectively mobilizing public support against it. Let's hope the spirit of Briarpatch will resurface to meet this revival.

And don't forget ol' James Lovelock, the guy who popularized the Gaia concept, thereby justifying his position of suggesting that nuclear is the only 'green' option. Of course, the theme again is that we are in a rush and should get on with it or again, miss the boat.

Well, I don't know about the credentials of the above promoters, but I figure that Warren Buffett might have some ideas about the viability of nuclear energy as a business. Apparently after spending USD13M on a study, his company, MidAmerican Nuclear Energy Company, determined that nuclear energy was unviable.

I don't know about you, but I was planning to invest some money into something and determined that one of the most successful investors in the world wasn't investing in something, I don't think I would either, wouldn't you?

nuclear_energy Alberta Saskatchewan Duane_Bratt James_Lovelock Warren_Buffett Vancouver Canada

Going Green at the Office

2008-08-22T23:35:00.000-07:00

Of course as the green revolution takes hold, it's impressive to see everyone doing their bit and the Bentall folks hosted a number of vendors who shared their products and services on a beautiful sunny day in Downtown Vancouver.

Let's see, there was Wa-2, with their water service and hi-tech biodegradeable styrofoam cups...

Van Houtte was there with their coffee and tea products, Spud was there with their organic food delivery business, frogfile was there with their ethical office products, Fairware was there presenting the true value of fairly-sourced office products, BC Hydro was there with cool things like their Mail-in Rebate coupons and of course the Bentall staff with their various green initiatives happening in their buildings.

We also learned about Carbon Credit Corp's Carbon Smart programme, a company that helps companies get into the carbon-trading market:

And last but not least, Teck Cominco was there promoting their new service to recycle electronics:

green office bentall wa2 carbon_smart teck_cominco elements_for_life Vancouver Canada

BC Starts Canadian Electric Vehicle Tsunami: Oak Bay allows electric cars on streets

2008-08-21T21:33:00.000-07:00

Originally published here

Kim Westad, Times Colonist

Published: Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Electric vehicles are legal in Oak Bay today.

The municipality -- famous for being somewhat slow-moving -- became the first community in Canada to allow the innovative zero-emission vehicles on all its streets.

Council voted unanimously in favour of the bylaw last night.

But drivers should be prepared to park at the Saanich and Victoria borders when they leave Oak Bay. Other municipalities haven't allowed the vehicles on their streets yet, although many are thinking of it and the Capital Regional District is interested in drafting a bylaw that could apply to the entire region.

Electric vehicles run on batteries and are plugged in to recharge. They are popular and legal in many U.S. states, but the Canadian government has been slower to embrace them.

However, provincial legislation changed earlier this summer and Oak Bay jumped on it.

The province amended the Motor Vehicle Act regulations to allow zero emission vehicles on roads with a maximum speed limit of 40 kilometres per hour. There are few if any communities with a maximum speed of 40 km/h on all their streets.

But the province also said individual municipalities could approve the vehicles for streets up to 50 km/h, so that's what Oak Bay did.

Oak Bay does not have roads with a speed limit higher than 50 km/h.

Since vehicles must meet provincial Motor Vehicle Act safety standards to travel on public roads, vehicles such as golf carts would not qualify and would not be affected by the new bylaw.

kwestad@tc.canwest.com

E-SUV electric_vehicle tsunami electric vehicle VEVA Vancouver Canada

Revive your battery...

2008-08-14T21:08:00.000-07:00

Once you decide to go over to electric, you'll likely want to dote on your batteries, which are the most expensive component.

Rob Matthies, a member of VEVA has some proven methods for doing so. We also recommend you take a look at his great selection of videos on his Youtube site.

battery electric vehicle VEVA Vancouver Canada

CNN: Gas to Electric Conversions

2008-08-14T20:56:00.000-07:00

Originally published on CNN's Tech site

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Larry Horsley loves that he doesn't buy much gas, even though he drives his '95 Chevy S-10 back and forth to work each day.

Larry Horsley's pickup has a set of neatly arranged electronics where his engine once was.

Horsley, a self-described do-it-yourselfer, simply plugs his truck into an electric wall outlet in his Douglasville, Georgia, garage and charges it overnight, instead of buying gasoline refined from mostly imported oil.

"If I can keep a dollar from going overseas, I'll spend two dollars," he said. The whole conversion, including the truck, cost him about $12,000, which parts dealers say is about standard.

Another Atlanta-area tinkerer, David Kennington, converted his Honda Civic del Sol from gasoline to electric for a different reason: "I'm a raging greenie," he said.

Both Horsley and Kennington are fed up. They're among a growing number of Americans who are refusing to wait for big-car manufacturers to deliver mainstream electric vehicles, called EVs. Not only have they rebelled against the status quo by ripping out their gas-guzzling engines and replacing them with zero-emission electric motors, they say just about anyone can do it.

Don't Miss

In Depth: Fueling America
Hurdles remain for GM's electric car
iReport.com: Would you drive an electric car?

Another electric DYI-er in Wolfeboro, New Hampshire, Bob Batson, has formed a company called Electric Vehicles of America that sells vehicle parts for other anti-gasoline rebels looking to convert.

Batson said business has more than tripled in the past year. "Sales trends are definitely up as the price of gasoline goes up," he said.

60 mph on 20 batteries

Outside his metal roofing business, Horsley opened up the hood of his converted Chevy truck to show how he did it. How do the engines work? We explain »

The entire process is "basically straightforward," he said, after four months driving it on electric.

"Anyone who has basic mechanical skills can build one of these," Horsley said. "But it takes time," he said, about three months. Most of that period was spent waiting for the parts to be shipped.

He's got the motor of his maroon S-10 pickup set up to run on 20 six-volt batteries, the same kind used in golf carts. The motor connects to an existing manual transmission to propel the truck up to 60 mph.

Horsley removed the vehicle's radiator to make room under the hood for a few of the batteries. The rest are concealed in the back, under the pickup's bed.

Other components such as a fuel injector were replaced with their electric counterparts and some, like the exhaust system, were removed completely.

Horsley started the conversion amid cool temperatures in January, so he didn't install air conditioning. But in August, sweltering in Georgia's brutal 90-degree heat and humidity, Horsley calls that decision a mistake -- one he won't make next time.

He said his wife won't let him convert her car, but he's looking for another used truck to convert.

The truck can travel about 40 miles without damaging the lead-acid batteries before the vehicle needs recharging, Horsley said. But he said 40 miles is enough to get to and from work and run errands around town.

While limited range is the main disadvantage of electric vehicles, most people don't need to drive very far on a regular basis, said Batson.

"What people don't always realize is that the average person only drives 20 miles per day," he said.

Cost versus savings

For his part, Kennington describes his sports-car red Honda as a "science experiment." He first converted the two-seater into an electric vehicle four years ago and has been tinkering with it ever since. He's swapped out components and tried multiple battery configurations.

With his current nine-battery setup Kennington gets about 20 miles per charge, so he only drives it on short trips a couple times a week from his Austell, Georgia, home.

"I did it for the learning experience," he said.

Kennington said he's waiting for better battery technologies, like nickel-metal-hydride and lithium-ion, to become more affordable. Those batteries can provide more power with less weight for increased range, but currently cost $10,000 to $20,000 per set, compared with about $2,000 for lead acid batteries, he said.

"I hope at some point that I will be able to drive it on a more regular basis and that it will be more useful," he said. "Do I expect it to someday to be my only car? No."

He said most people who own electric cars also have a gasoline or hybrid vehicle for longer trips.

Kennington is president of the EV Club of the South, a group of electric vehicle owners and enthusiasts. He said interest in EVs is directly tied to gas prices.

"When gas goes up, more people call me and more people come to the meetings," he said.

Horsley estimated that he has saved $700 since switching to electric four months ago. He's quick to point out that that's just the savings on gas. He also doesn't have to pay for oil or filter changes, since there is no engine oil or fuel filters to change.

"I was originally skeptical," he said. "But now I'm convinced."
-30-

Of course, the a number of members of Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association will be enjoying getting in on the bandwagon when Electric Autosports opens its conversion facility in September 2008, in Vancouver, BC.

electric vehicle conversion Vancouver Canada

Power Poles and Power Outage Woes

2008-07-17T12:38:00.000-07:00

Vancouver
Thursday, July 17th 2008

Betty Krawczyk

Trust us, Gordon Campbell seems to assure the Mothers Against Power Poles in Tsawwassen, those high voltage power lines I’ve agreed to put into your back yards and the school yard aren’t really dangerous to your kids even though they will constantly zap their growing bodies and bathe their budding brains with voltages high enough to supply Vancouver Island with lots of additional electricity.

But I suspect it isn’t even Vancouver Island Mr. Campbell is worried about. It’s his American friends. The ones who want to privatize the entire electrical and hydro electrical fields of BC so they can suck it all up. Or most of it. But a growing worry among citizens is that our own people who build, repair, maintain important infrastructures might not actually know what they are doing. At least some of the time.

For instance, Monday’s blow out in Vancouver’s City Centre. How could the maintenance people who inspect underground vaults in substations around the city not know when one is approaching a dangerous condition of blow out? Or is there no way to tell? If not, why not? If it’s matter of aging wires and things, why in heaven’s name haven’t they been replaced long ago? Who is in charge of this? Whoever they are, why aren’t they on the radio and TV explaining what happened and why, instead of all the media speculation?

Sam Sullivan is calling for an independent investigation. At least that’s something. However, with the provincial government’s love of ruling as an oligarchy, and the mayor and council’s history of following Campbell’s lead, will we ever know the truth of it? Probably not. However, I don’t see how aging infrastructure can be hidden forever. As most of the public money is earmarked for Gateway expansion and other Olympic construction and the bloated overruns is there any money for tending to the nitty gritty things like upgrades on the power supplies in Downtown Vancouver? Surely Peter Ladner and Gregor Robertson might help us out here. After all, they’re biting at the bit for the job of mayor. Is the Work Less Party the only municipal party who think it disgusting that so much of our communal money is going into the corporate games while our infrastructures rot? Speak up, guys. It’s your chance to shine.

And a word to the Mothers Against Power Poles: I think you are wise to be skeptical of the people who supposedly know about electricity when they give you advice on what’s healthy or not healthy for your kids. This is the same provincial government who thinks cutting welfare to mothers with dependant children will make the children strong and healthy. Why would they act more intelligently about children anywhere in the province? They don’t and won’t. But when enough mothers find they can’t protect the health of their children and all three levels of government have in reality combined to become the enemy of the health of children, things will start to happen. I know they will.

Betty Krawczyk

Blog: http://bettysearlyedition.blogspot.com/

For more information contact:

Betty Krawczyk

Mayoral Candidate, City of Vancouver

www.worklessparty.org

betty_krawczyk@shaw.ca

mothers_against_power_poles Betty_Krawczyk Vancouver BC
Tsawwassen

Solar Taxi: 300-400 km per day on Electricity

2008-07-05T07:11:00.000-07:00

The Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association in cooperation with the Swiss Consulate and Day4Energy had the honour of hosting Louis Palmer and his Solar Taxi crew on the Vancouver leg of their World Tour.

What is the most exciting about this visit is that with the skyrocketing cost of oil that a solar and battery-powered vehicle would arrive to focus the public's attention on the immediate solutions and alternatives provided by solar and battery-powered transportation.

Enjoy a Virtual Ride in the Solar Taxi:

Share in the festivities at Canada Day in North Vancouver, Canada:

Listen to Solar Taxi's visionary leader Louis Palmer's impressions on the immediate alternatives to oil offered by electric power:

Swiss solar taxi solartaxi
Louis Palmer Louis Palmer Day4Energy VEVA Vancouver

So much for the 100 bucks...!

2008-06-29T22:31:00.000-07:00

Vehicles drive over Vancouver's Lions Gate bridge on June 26, 2008. Starting Tuesday, B.C. residents will pay a carbon tax that will add 2.34 cents a litre to the price of gasoline, rising to 7 cents when the tax is fully implemented in 2012.

Original Article (Canadian Press):
B.C. carbon tax kicks in on Canada Day, fuels debate at gas pumps

June 29, 2008

VICTORIA — On Canada Day, British Columbians will likely be paying the highest gas prices in the country, thanks to a new provincial carbon tax that adds almost 2.5 cents to a litre of fuel and has turned service stations into the province's latest political battle ground.

Motorists are doing more than filling up at their local gas stations. They're fuming about gas politics.

Premier Gordon Campbell admits his government has a selling job to do on its new green tax, the first escalating consumer tax on carbon in Canada.

"The government should look at themselves first before they look at tackling little guys like me," said Trish O'Brien as she filled up her fuel efficient Suzuki Aerio. "I do what I can. I recycle everything that's not nailed down. I drive a small car and take the bus when I can, and I walk."

O'Brien said she wants to see consumer incentives to go green from the government before being hit with taxes.

The Liberal government's carbon tax , introduced in last February's budget and effective July 1, will be phased in over five years to give consumers and businesses time to adjust and begin to understand there is a cost associated with generating harmful greenhouse gases.

The carbon tax starts at a rate based on $10 per tonne of carbon emissions and rises $5 a year to $30 per tonne by 2012. The tax works out to an extra 2.4 cents a litre on gasoline, rising to 7.24 cents per litre by 2012.

The carbon tax on diesel and home heating oil will start at 2.7 cents per litre and increase to 8.2 cents per litre over the five-year period.

The tax is being billed as revenue neutral, meaning the government will not use money generated from the tax to fill its coffers. The revenue, estimated to hit $1.8 billion over three years, will be returned to taxpayers through personal income tax and business tax cuts.

British Columbians already pay a 3.5-cent-per-litre gasoline tax to help fund transportation projects.

With gas prices already at $1.46.9 per litre in Victoria and on the rise, consumers already are aware that fuel is a commodity that shouldn't be wasted, said O'Brien.

"I drive a little dinky car," she said. "Yes, OK, I'm doing some damage, but it's not a fleet of limousines and it's not cross-country flights."

Campbell said the government is about to launch a public campaign touting its Climate Action Plan, including the carbon tax.

The B.C. premier, who calls global warming a threat to life of earth, wants to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the province by one-third by 2020. He said his plan is the most aggressive green agenda in North America.

British Columbia is already on the way to that goal, he said.

The plan includes entrenching greenhouse gas reduction targets in law and targets all sectors of the B.C. economy. Campbell said it aims to educate British Columbians on the need to fight global warming and ensure they adapt to the realities of climate change.

Last week households in B.C. began receiving a $100 Climate Action Dividend, a one-time cheque for every residents of the province aimed at funding environmental change at home.

"It is aimed at making sure that everyone is part of the solution and everyone has the opportunity to make their own choices," he said. "There's lots there (in the plan) that people can use to reduce their carbon footprint to save themselves literally hundreds and hundreds of dollars and for British Columbia to be out front, building an economy that is actually going to be at the leading edge of economic growth in the future."

But at the pump, the government message doesn't appear to be getting through.

"I think it's b.s.," said Margaret Moon of Victoria. "If they wanted to fight climate change they should have done it a long time ago."

She said she's not convinced that fossil fuel use is entirely responsible for global warming, citing past ice ages, and she considers the $100 government cheque a form of hush money.

"That's kind of like giving a baby candy to keep us quite for a while," said Moon.

Opposition New Democrat Leader Carole James opposes the Liberal carbon tax even though her party supports taxing carbon. Campbell's plan is a government tax grab that punishes consumers while allowing big industry to continue polluting, she said.

The issue has made for some strange bedfellows.

The federal Conservatives, B.C.'s fledgling Conservative party, rural politicians from northern communities, and the right-leaning Canadian Taxpayers' Federation have all joined the NDP chorus against the carbon tax.

But their opposition hasn't prevented the provincial NDP from asking British Columbians to donate their $100 to the party.

"Join me and donate your $100 tax rebate to the B.C. NDP," said a letter from the . "You'll be helping Carole James stop Gordon Campbell and start making real progress on climate change."

Political scientist Dennis Pilon said the Liberals have a lot of ground to make up to with voters on the carbon tax.

The introduction of the tax suffered from too little debate and a lack of understanding of what the average Joe might think about paying more for a tank of gas, he said.

"As long as it was just the pundits and the experts, there seemed to be a broad consensus. In fact, the parties seemed to agree," said Pilon. "I'm sure that the Liberals thought they had really squared the circle on this policy. It seems to be there's been far too much consensus and not enough showcasing of a genuine debate here."

climate action dividend
climate action dividend electric car next

Cure for Homeless Situation: Homes!

2008-06-28T12:59:00.000-07:00

Check out these cabins that can be assembled in a weekend by Bonnie Builder. They are made in pieces, like IKEA, and brought or sent to your site.

Here is short Youtube video of the outside.

They typically cost around CAD20K, so contact us if you are serious. We also have other designs and can work with you and your designs to ensure that they meet your specifications.

We can often help you arrange financing. If you are really interested, please contact us here:

homeless home cure Bonnie_Builder Bonnie Builder MakePovertyHistory

ideaCity and the Grandmother Hypothesis

2008-06-28T12:22:00.000-07:00

Vancouver, Friday June 27th 2008
Betty Krawczyk

What’s ideaCity? And the Grandmother Hypothesis? First, if you’ve never heard of ideaCity it’s a yearly coming together of think tankers from around the world hosted by Moses Znaimer of Toronto. This three day symposium is big on brains. Mostly scientists. How did I get involved? Well, I’ve been writing and speaking about the Grandmother Hypothesis, which fit in with one section of the symposium that dealt with aging. This must have sounded scientific to somebody so I was invited to go to Toronto to speak to this subject which I did last week end. And the Grandmother Hypothesis was a big hit. Especially with the women.

The Grandmother Hypothesis goes this way: Remember how we’ve all been taught that man the hunter fed his wife and children even in the earliest hunter-gatherer societies? Well, it doesn’t appear to be so. The truth of the matter, according to current reading of anthropology, is that men probably didn’t even know which particular children were theirs, if any. And making a kill of any wild animal was a dicey thing in those days. Often the men didn’t bring anything back to the clan. And when they did it was shared with the clan as a whole. So the daily feeding of children which centered on gathering wild tubers and berries and bird’s eggs, was left to the women.

The anthropologists who first brought this theory forward looked at calorie requirements. They calculated how many calories a young early hunter gather woman needed per day and concluded that this young woman could gather enough calories to feed herself, and could feed herself if she became pregnant, and even with a suckling infant manage to feed herself. But when the infant became a toddler and the young woman found herself pregnant again she could not feed herself, a baby, and an older child. She had to have help. Enter Granma.

Medical scientists, people who study the human body and evolution, still being mostly male, have long wondered about human menopause. What was it for, they wondered? It had to be important, because it was unique among the animal kingdom and every human woman who lived long enough had menopause. And no other animal lived so very long after the reproductive process was finished. In all other animals the individual female died as her reproduction process stopped. The scientists largely decided that menopause must be a relative new thing in woman because they thought in the past human females also died when they stopped being reproductive.

Not so, we are told by the Grandmother Hypothesis. In fact, it was because of the menopause that grandmothers, still well and hearty, and no longer being burdened with infants of their own, could turn their attention to their daughter’s and nieces’ and cousins’ older children and help provide the calories needed to bring them to adulthood. The menopause was the gift nature gave to the human species that enabled our species to multiply and spread out over the globe. In fact, the entire development and evolution of Homo sapiens has turned over the wheel of grandmothers. Now, isn’t that the darndest thing?

Betty Krawczyk

Blog: http://bettysearlyedition.blogspot.com/

For more information contact:

Betty Krawczyk
Mayoral Candidate, City of Vancouver
www.worklessparty.org
betty_krawczyk@shaw.ca

Betty Krawczyk Betty_Krawczyk ideaCity Grandmother_Hypothesis Grandmother Hypothesis

Water Hope Earth

David Suzuki speech at Occupy Vancouver, Oct. 22, 2011.

EV Tsunami Starts in Canada: Fully electric car makes debut in Canada

Cannabis in food gets stamp of approval from watchdog

3 Mile Island Redux - Japan's Nuclear Meltdown

Analysis: Why the Wivenhoe Dam Failed

Australia Flooding: Bag of Hammers Award: Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce, "The reason Brisbane doesn't flood is because they have Wivenhoe Dam."

Australian Flooding - Queensland and Western Australia

UBC Students Beat Major Auto Manufacturers to Cross Canada in E-Beetle

Falcon and the Snowman Redux: Gough Whitlam's Dismissal

LA Times: Doubts surface on North Korea's role in ship sinking: "I couldn't find the slightest sign of an explosion..."

Behind the Korean crisis: North Korea has denied any involvement in the incident that killed 46 people.

Another blow at our rivers by Campbell: Flood Valleys, Destroy Rivers for Power for Export

Sydney Australia Goes Electric (Vehicle)!

Decoding the Climate Change Skeptics

Copenhagen ends in failure

Green pot of carbon gold lures politicians

Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak

Climate Change Denier Plimer addresses Copenhagen 'heretics'

The Cove: They're Killing Flipper!

Mounting Debilities and Deaths from H1N1 Vaccine

Warren Buffett rejects Nuclear Plant in Idaho due to high cost

New South Wales, Australia launches Gross Feed In Tariff Scheme for Solar Panels!

Visualing Sustainability

U.S. passes historic health care legislation

Food or Fuel for Supper tonight? Farmers protest against coal

CBS Reveals that Swine Flu Cases Seriously Overestimated

Plastic Blob Threatens to Cover the Earth

Related articles

United States vs. New Zealand and Canadian Healthcare

Lennon rolls over in grave: "Harper plays grand piano and sings the Beatles' "With a Little Help from My Friends."

'Psycho Chook" Rudd still leading in the polls

EPIC 2009: Blowing the doors off sustainability

Do Not Take A Swine Flu Vaccine!

How to get into the Carbon Trading Market

Debate: Single Transferable Vote versus First Past The Post

Easy Gas to Electric Vehicle Conversion

Easy STV

Fish farm critics win major court victory

No more PCBs or Sea Lice? Salmon farming spawns aboriginal class-action suit against B.C. government

Top BC Scientists Speak Out vs. Private River Power

Parched: Australia faces collapse as climate change kicks in

Build Your Dreams 1: Revving China's auto industry

Harper on Canada 1997

Australia Catches Up With Kyoto?

The Australian: Bittersweet prize

The Single Transferable Vote

Hansen: Dion was right

Fair Market Value and the Cheque Exchange

Is there a bridge over Troubled waters?

Scraping the Sky with Green

EDF: MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WANT ACTION ON CLIMATE TO REBUILD US. ECONOMY

Trees Giving Up Battle, But Sustainable Farming Offers Hope

Algae Oil?

Chicken and Egg

Greening the Desert

Permaculture: Danger of Falling Food

The Writing's on the Wall: frogfile helps businesses go green!

Why not go nuclear? Read On!

Going Green at the Office

BC Starts Canadian Electric Vehicle Tsunami: Oak Bay allows electric cars on streets

Kim Westad, Times Colonist

© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2008

Revive your battery...

CNN: Gas to Electric Conversions

Don't Miss

Power Poles and Power Outage Woes

Solar Taxi: 300-400 km per day on Electricity

So much for the 100 bucks...!

Cure for Homeless Situation: Homes!

ideaCity and the Grandmother Hypothesis