tagged w/ Moral Imperative
-
As a citizen of the world tired of watching governments especially the US government procrastinate in providing the adequate leadership necessary to avoid a climate tipping point that would forever change the world our children live in by putting politics over principle, I then suggest a Global Climate Impact Council be established to supersede the governments of the world that are not putting the best interests of our global citizens and our planet first.
This Global Climate Impact Council would be comprised of noted climate scientists, non governmental organizations, indigenous peoples of the world and those experiencing the firsthand effects of climate change currently, and farmers of the world who will be hurt the most by the climate changes now taking place, primarily drought. As those who provide the sustenance for our planet farmers have a distinct insight into the Earth and how best to deal with crises such as these.
This Global Climate Impact Council would meet to set emissions limits and the timeframe they must be met in. The following categorizations of countries would be considered in these emissions reductions in the order that follows:
Industrial nations
Developing nations
Indigenous/island nations
Limits and timeframes would be set based on industrial emissions and deforestation statistics over the last decade in tandem with per capita emissions. The top five countries would then not exactly be just industrial nations if emissions from deforestation, agriculture, etc. exceeded the emissions of other countries. Therefore, the first five nations based on this criteria would more than likely be:
U.S.
China
Australia
Canada (tar sands)
Indonesia (deforestation)
Emissions reductions according to scientists require at least a 40% decrease in emissions by 2020, with a 90% decrease in emissions by 2050. These are then the standards that would be applied to the first five nations, which could then combine fossil fuel emissions, industrial emissions, deforestation rates, and carbon lost through non sustainable agricultural practices as part of that 40- 90% thus not placing too much of a burden on any one categorization, but holding accountable industry as well.
{For example, the US, could then easily make this target of 40% by 2020 by allotting a 20% cut to industry, 10% cut in deforestation, and a 10% cut in carbon lost through non sustainable agricultural methods and other means. This could be accomplished through a massive reforestation effort, putting in place sustainable agricultural and irrigation methods that also limit slash and burn and clearing land for GM corn ethanol as we turn to solar energy, and a carbon tax applied to industry that would be placed in a Peoples Carbon Fund to fund alternate energy sources and other efforts to meet this emissions target.}
This is the end of part one. Part two will follow.
And in ending this part I will quote a great woman, Eleanor Roosevelt:
“Brilliant minds discuss ideas
Average minds discuss events
Small minds discuss people.”
This is now the time for ideas, regardless of where they come from. I am just an average working mother typing from a small house, but my mind is not small. It is full of hope for the future even in the face of these odds because my child is always at the end of my thoughts, and for him and his children all of this is definitely worth it. If I could go to Copenhagen in December and plead with these ‘leaders’ to look beyond their petty political differences and trying to grandstand to be ‘the one’ that ‘solved’ climate change to gain accolades or make money from it instead of doing the moral thing to save the sustainability of this planet, I would. But in lieu of that I offer this. So if you wish to add to it please do so.This planet will not be made sustainable for human habitation unless WE do it and unless those in these meetings HEAR US.As a citizen of the world tired of watching governments especially the US government... more
-
-
The End of the Line, directed by Rupert Murray, on release from 8 June
"BEAUTIFUL" and "vast" are words that come to mind when thinking of the world's oceans. "Inexhaustible" is another, which might explain why we think it is fine to plunder them for our dinner plates.
The End of the Line is a powerful wake-up call for anyone who heads straight to the menu's fish section. It documents how overfishing is decimating the oceans, and makes alarming predictions about how fish stocks might look in 30 years' time.
Adapted from the book by Charles Clover, the film opens with stunning footage of our reefs and oceans. Unusual camera angles explore fishing nets from the inside out. The film follows Clover as he asks top restaurants why they still serve critically endangered species like bluefin tuna, and speaks to industry whistleblowers about how our love of fish is driving some species to the brink of extinction.
This is investigative journalism at its best. More importantly, it is an engaging film that provokes anger and sadness in equal measure. Anger at the greed of multinational companies who seem intent on catching as many tuna as they can before stocks run out, and at the politicians who do little to stop them by setting their fishing quotas well above what scientists recommend. Sadness, too, at the loss of species, and the wasted by-catch casually tossed back into the sea.
end of excerpt
more at this link:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227112.600-the-end-of-the-line-plenty-of-fish-in-the-sea.htmlThe End of the Line, directed by Rupert Murray, on release from 8 June... more
-
-
To strengthen the Waxman-Markey clean energy bill, we need to be 16 times louder because we are outspent 16:1 by industries trying to weaken the bill’s potential to deliver a clean energy economy.
We could have as little as two weeks before a vote on the House floor, where we have one more chance to strengthen this bill. Congress needs to hear from you right now.
Fax your representative now and urge them to make the Markey-Waxman bill (H.R. 2454) stronger so we can get our economy back on track and start to tackle global warming.
_____________
The Earth will not wait for us to get it right.To strengthen the Waxman-Markey clean energy bill, we need to be 16 times louder... more
-
-
Rivers like the Thames and the Severn are predicted to drop between 50-80% in summer months by mid century as climate change takes hold. Conservation now is key to preserving water for the future. According to the Environment Agency's plans however, desalination would have to be implemented down the road along with mandatory water restrictions to meet demand.
Amazingly, this article did not mention that if people didn't demand so much the supply would increase. So again, this goes back to the GHG emissions spewed that contribute to the greenhouse effect that contributes to climate change that contributes to water evaporation in concert with water waste by humans that starts from home consumption and mainly agriculture.
It seems unfortunate to me that people would not be willing to cut their usage voluntarily in order to not see their landscapes dotted with more desalination monstrosities that will only contribute to the very CO2 emissions causing the problem in the first place while bringing the cost of their water above what many could afford and not guaranteeing quality. As with the climate crisis, there is still a bit of time for people to understand that it is their actions or lack thereof that determine the ending to this story for us and those species affected by our actions.Rivers like the Thames and the Severn are predicted to drop between 50-80% in summer... more
-
-
According to this scientific report, CO2 has been increasing by 2.3 % yearly doubling every 30 years since its first recording in 1958 (it actually increased 3% between 2006/2007.) Pre-industrial levels were at 280 PPM. Now, we are at 385 PPM inching ever closer to 450 PPM. At the current rate of CO2 emissions should they continue unabated (which I don't even know if that includes rates of deforestation) by 2050 the planet will likely surpass 500 PPM. And this is according to actual scientists who know what they are talking about and take these readings.
There are those scientists (James Hanson for example) who claim that to surpass 450 PPM will lead us into territory we do not want to visit. And while some scientists are hesitant to now use the term "tipping point" as they fear it will generate a lack of apathy towards action (which I can understand on one level,) should we not be trying to make people understand what is truly at stake here and that we still have time to head this off if we do what is necessary?
This is why when I read articles stating that governments including our own are still touting the 80% emissions cut by 2050 line I now have to shake my head. This is the same goal that was mentioned five years or more ago... and still we are waiting for action. With such an exponential rise in CO2 emissions as has been recorded and predicted taking into account deforestation, ocean CO2 saturation, and yes, natural cycle forcings, I do not see how continuing to tout that same goal is going to get us anywhere.
This is a moral crisis that now challenges the human species to answer this question: Just how much do you really care for this planet and your future on it? What are you prepared to do to not see these tipping points be reached? Reaching a higher level of consciousness about this is indeed necessary. I think about Carl Sagan and his wisdom in understanding the pale blue dot we live on and that it is the only home we have to sustain us. Does that really not matter? Have we become so blinded by politics, apathy, distractions, and lets face it, hatred for others that it blinds us to the issue at hand?According to this scientific report, CO2 has been increasing by 2.3 % yearly doubling... more
-
-
We are currently at 385PPM. At 450PPM, we enter a world where the tipping points begin to come one by one. It won't take long to get there now, and scientists are relatively sure we will reach even 600PPM by mid century. My child and his children will still be here. Heck, I may even be here still if I somehow live into my nineties. So why aren't more people truly concerned about this even with all we know and with all scientists are saying?
Well, I think the reason is obvious. It is because it is the human species that is entrusted with doing the right thing. Right there I believe there could be evidence to dispute the presence of a higher power. How could any such higher power think to place humans as stewards of anything? We seem to only destroy all we touch. I have stated many times that I have faith in humans and that we will do the right thing to save ourselves. I don't feel that way today.
I think about the future a lot. I think about the world our children will live in... and then I cry. I sign petitions, I speak out, I blog, I post, I scream, I support environmental organizations, I speak out to politicians, and I live my life in a way that I walk as lightly on this planet as I possibly can. Is it to be all for naught because of the selfish, apathetic, ignorant ones who think this is just some political game?
We must cap CO 2 emissions NOW. Not in five years, or ten years, or by 2050. NOW. So considering that scenario along with the fact that we are dealing with a system built on greed that blinds man to all that is important, I think it is safe to say we are screwed. Our procrastination for the last thirty years has brought us to this point, and STILL politicians play footsy with the sustainability of this planet as if we have time to sit and waste another thirty years. And people are still arguing over whether humans even cause it. All over the voices of the scientists speaking the truth to us and saying, you are failing morally in your duty to preserve this planet for your existence.
Shame on us all for still not paying attention.We are currently at 385PPM. At 450PPM, we enter a world where the tipping points begin... more
-
-
It is inevitable. Clean energy is coming more into demand not only because of the effects of climate change, but because of the economy and because clean energy will keep us from the Middle East sand. A change is coming because people are tired of the old ways that produce the same results with pollution, disease, war, and economic upheaval.
Reports state that because of the financial downturn climate change is not important? Well, I think they are wrong. I think the financial downturn will make more people see that to move towards clean alternate energy sources will improve our economy by providing more jobs as we move towards a sustainable future. It really is a no-brainer.
To have 100% renewable energy in a decade is a definite goal that can be accomplished. I believe it will be through a mass grassroots movement pushing political will that has already begun. I believe it will do much to bring America back into the world and bring the world back from the brink of catastrophic climate change because it is simply a moral imperative and failure is not an option.
Our planet is already nearing a 2.5 degree increase. Three degrees or above will see this world drastically changed and our relationship to it much harsher and more dangerous than we ever imagined. Now is not the time to delay and use a financial downturn as an excuse to push climate change onto the backburner. It is time to bail out our Earth!
It is the right time to embrace a clean energy future to infuse our economy and to come full circle to our moral purpose on this planet and to bring health to our people. You want a healthcare plan that works? This is part of it too. It will be the greatest gift we could give our children. It is something I look forward to with great anticipation because it has been a long time coming.It is inevitable. Clean energy is coming more into demand not only because of the... more
-
-
They say music is the universal language. If so, perhaps music is the one way to get across the urgency of what this planet and the species that inhabit it face if we do not pull together to take urgent action on climate change and pollution now.
Just a side comment: i really wish Current would work out the kinks here that keep pictures from showing on posts.They say music is the universal language. If so, perhaps music is the one way to get... more
-
-
We need a USDA head who will move us in a more sustainable direction, not in the direction we are going in now. You can sign a petition to Obama at the link here to voice your opposition to Tom Vilsack being appointed USDA head. Monsanto has had a hold on the food industry for far too long, and agribusiness companies on the whole have had a chokehold on farmers that has seen a decline in food quality and an increase in pollution, poverty, famine, and climate change worldwide with only an increase in their own profits. It is time for a real change. We can bring that change if we take action now.
From the link:
It has been widely reported that former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack is being considered for the Secretary of Agriculture position in the Obama Administration. Vilsack is no friend of organic food and farming and his appointment would represent a major disappointment for the Organic Consumers Association and its members. But there is still time to make your voice heard.
1) Contact the office of the President-Elect and urge him to appoint a Secretary of Agriculture that reflects your organic values.
2) Call the office of President-Elect Obama at 202-540-3000 and make sure your concerns about Vilsack are heard.
3) Sign the OCA's petition below to the President-Elect and urge him to appoint a Secretary of Agriculture that is supportive of organic food and farming.We need a USDA head who will move us in a more sustainable direction, not in the... more
-
-
There is energy to be harvested in deserts of Southern California, Arizona, Spain and Africa: Sunlight focused so intensely it can melt salt, vaporize water and run air conditioners from Phoenix to Seville long after the sun has set.
This is concentrated solar power, and it represents the best hope for utility-scale power from renewable energy and the surest way to get energy-sucking Sun Belt cities off carbon.
It’s also a technology you’ve likely never heard of, given the attention and credits lavished on rooftop photovoltaic kits.
Concentrated solar power, or solar thermal, is a world apart from photovoltaic solar, the world’s fastest-growing energy technology. Rather than use silicon-based panels to chemically convert sunlight to electricity, solar thermal uses mirrors to focus the sun’s rays on pipes carrying oil or other heat-absorbing fluid. Sunlight heats the oil to 500° C or more; hot oil flashes water to steam; steam spins a turbine; the turbine makes juice.
Simple? That’s the attraction.
This is big-time electricity. Utilities have inked power purchase agreements for almost 5,000 megawatts from developers building solar thermal plants. Sixty plants worldwide are on the drawing board or being built. The price of power from these plants is competitive with the gas-fired peaker plants keeping the electric grid afloat as demand skyrockets on hot afternoons.
And hot afternoons are precisely when solar thermal plants do their best work.
“This is just so obvious it’s going to be huge,” said Terry Collins, Thomas Lord Professor of Chemistry at Carnegie Mellon and director of the university’s Institute for Green Science. “It’s going to completely change the country.”
snip
Yet there are signs solar thermal is about to claim its moment in the sun.
First, prices are converging. A modern solar thermal plant produces power in the 12- to 18-cents-per-kilowatt-hour range. By comparison a photovoltaic system generates juice for about 40 cents a kilowatt-hour, a baseload coal plant churns out power for three to five cents per kilowatt-hour, and wind enjoys a 2.1 cent tax credit on every kilowatt-hour produced, bringing it into coal’s upper range. Natural gas runs between 12 and 20 cents a kilowatt-hour.
But solar won’t ever be baseload, utilities say – what if it rains for a week? – and wind, though cheap, is often most plentiful at night when demand is lowest.
That leaves natural gas, which, conveniently enough, is the fossil fuel solar thermal is best suited to replace. Gas-fired peaker plants are designed to quickly bring juice online as demand spikes throughout the day.
“You essentially take the pressure off the grid system,’’ said Collins, the Carnegie Mellon professor. “We already have much more expensive peak-time electricity…. And that’s smack in the middle of when these things are doing their best work.”
There’s also solar thermal’s trump card: Storage.
The ability to store power for later use is a holy grail of sorts for renewable energy developers. Wind and photovoltaic plants force utilities to use the power on the spot or dump the load. Various batteries and capacitors are in the works for those technologies, but none so far match the smooth efficiency or low cost of solar thermal’s ability to hoard sunlight.
_________________
It is exciting innovations like this that keep me hopeful about the future.There is energy to be harvested in deserts of Southern California, Arizona, Spain and... more
-
-
This is why any pledge to reduce CO2 emissions 80% by 2050 is not enough. That pledge is deceptive as it makes it look as though emissions would be decreased by 80% before 2050. However, it only gives polluting industries more time to conduct business as usual and bring us closer to 450ppm in the interim which we cannot allow to happen. We are already at 385ppm which has now been concluded to already be in the danger zone... that does not leave much room or time to work to bring down CO2 emissions.
We spew 70 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every day and that does not even include the rate of deforestation and other global warming polluting gases. When you then add that to the acidification of oceans which are now at the saturation point, you are looking at a recipe for disaster in our future if we do not get serious about cutting emissions drastically within the next five to ten years.
Pledging to do what every other politician pledges just to appease all sides at the expense of our survival is not going to get us there and is not change. We need a truly bold plan based on a moral not politically expedient principle. We have one if only politicians would embrace it. And the time is fast coming when they must.This is why any pledge to reduce CO2 emissions 80% by 2050 is not enough. That pledge... more
-
-
All I can state in response to this is that if it does not happen we can kiss this planet s sustainability for humans and other species goodbye unless we stand up enmasse. If not, we humans deserve what we get. If we are going to sit and continue to allow governments putting their own selfish priorities ahead of the one crisis that trumps them all and will decide our economic and environmental fate, then we will prove just how stupid we are as a species.
However, I and many others will not go down without a fight. Should no treaty come to pass in December 2009 and the next administration renege on anything promised, prepare for the demonstrations that will follow. That is of course, unless Obama signs the Homegrown Terrorist Act and we are all considered terrorists for trying to protect our Earth to save ourselves.
After eight years of the Bush regime s total destruction of this planet I am not about to watch four more years of promises not come to fruition because other excuses will take precedence as a reason to not do the right thing. That is simply unacceptable.All I can state in response to this is that if it does not happen we can kiss this... more
-
-
While the world dithers about tackling climate change, in some parts of the world people are running out of time. In Florida sea level rises can be worked around to some extent - condos can be put on stilts and moved away from the shoreline. But on some islands you can only move back so far before you have to start worrying about the water at your back door as well as the water in front.
Here are five islands whose inhabitants are going to need a new home soon:
1. The Guardian reports today that the new president of the Maldives will be putting part of the country's profits from tourism into a very special - and unusual - fund: one that will be used to buy a new, climate-change-friendly home. With its highest point reaching only 2.4 metres, the Maldives is one of the lowest-lying nations in the world and risks being submerged by rising sea-levels.
2. Tuvalu is another small pacific island state, and after the Maldives the second-lowest nation in the world. At its highest, it is 5 metres above sea-level and could be gone by the middle of this century. In 2002, the government was said to have hired two international law firms to look into suing polluting nations for effectively evicting its citizens.
3. Kiribati is a group of 32 atols and one island that peaks at 6.5 metres above sea-level. The World Bank has been involved in assessing the nation's vulnerability to climate change. I attended a talk by one of the project leaders some years ago in Paris. She quoted a few of the changes which the islanders were noticing. The one that has always stuck with me was "the first line of coconut trees has disappeared". Salt-intrusion was killing off the trees that were closest to the water.
4. The inhabitants of the Carteret Islands of Papua New Guinea may be among the first climate refugees - their home lies just 1.2 metres above the waves. The government of Papua New Guinea adopted a plan in 2005 to evacuate the locals to the neighbouring island of Bougainville. The relocation was initially scheduled for 2007, then delayed. According to this report, there was a trial earlier this year, which created some tension as relocated citizens were used as labourers in coconut plantations on Bougainville.
5. In 1995, 500,000 inhabitants on Bangladesh's Bhola Island were forced to move in when half their island was permanently flooded. Some claim they were the first climate refugees. Scientists predict that 20 million Bangladeshis could suffer the same fate by 2030.
__________________________
How many more will it take for urgent action to begin? The longer we wait the more CO2 and other greenhouse gases continue to be spewed into the atmosphere. I recall sitting here last year asking the same question, and still no global treaty on climate change that addresses the true urgency of this, nor any significant bills by this Congress. And Obama still touts the 80% by 2050 line as if we actually have that kind of time. We don't.While the world dithers about tackling climate change, in some parts of the world... more
-
-
'Extreme weather events' such as the hot summer of 2003, which caused an extra 35,000 deaths across southern Europe from heat stress and poor air quality, will happen more frequently.
Britain and the North Sea area will be hit more often by violent cyclones and the predicted rise in sea level will double to more than a metre, putting vast coastal areas at risk from flooding.
The bleak report from WWF - formerly the World Wildlife Fund - also predicts crops failures and the collapse of eco systems on both land and sea.
And it calls on the EU to set an example to the rest of the world by agreeing a package of challenging targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions to tackle the consequences of climate change and to keep any increase in global temperatures below 2C.
The agency says that the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - a study of global warming by 4,000 scientists from more than 150 countries which alerted the world to the possible consequences of global warming - is now out of date.
WWF's report, Climate Change: Faster, stronger, sooner, has updated all the scientific data and concluded that global warming is accelerating far beyond the IPCC's forecasts.
As an example it says the first 'tipping point' may have already been reached in the Arctic, where sea ice is disappearing up to 30 years ahead of IPCC predictions and may be gone completely within five years - something that hasn't occurred for a million years.
It could result in rapid and abrupt climate change rather than the gradual changes forecast by the IPCC.
The findings include:
* Global sea level rise could more than double from the IPCC's estimate of 0.59m by the end of the century.
* Natural carbon sinks, such as forests and oceans, are losing their ability to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere faster than expected.
* Rising temperatures have already led to a major reduction in food crops resulting in losses of 40m tonnes of grain per year.
* Marine ecosystems in the North and Baltic Sea are being exposed to the warmest temperatures measured since records began.
* The number and intensity of extreme cyclones over the UK and North Sea are projected to increase, leading to increased wind speeds and storm-related losses over Western and Central Europe.
The report was issued to coincide with a meeting of EU Environment Ministers today to discuss new laws aimed at tackling climate change. Some countries, including Italy and Poland, have already rejected proposals for higher cuts in emissions claiming they are unaffordable and unrealistic when many countries are facing recession.
The UK is the only country so far to commit to a legally binding 80 per cent cut in emissions by 2050 which the Government claims can be achieved by a switch to renewable energy sources - such as wind and wave - combined with a new generation of nuclear power stations.
In the report WWF urges the EU to commit to a reduction target of at least 30 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 without relying on offsetting overseas and to provide financial support so developing countries can cut their own emissions and prepare for unavoidable impacts of climate change.
WWF-UK's Head of Climate Change, Dr. Keith Allott, said: "Climate change is a major challenge to the future of mankind and the environment, and this sobering overview highlights just how critical it is that EU environment ministers, who are meeting today to discuss EU legislation to tackle climate change, commit to a strong climate and energy package, in order to ensure a low carbon future.
'Extreme weather events' such as the hot summer of 2003, which caused an... more
-
-
Six people were arrested after an attempt to recreate the suffragettes' "rush" on parliament 100 years ago, during an otherwise peaceful protest in Westminster.
Rosie Boycott, the writer and broadcaster who spoke at the protest, said that the campaigners were "determined, organised and mobilised", and ready for further action.
A new coalition of groups known as the Climate Suffragettes, which includes stalwarts of middle England the Women's Institute as well as more extreme environmental movements Climate Rush and Plane Stupid, are calling for reform of environment policy, a halt to building more coal fired power stations and an end to airport expansion.
Wearing Edwardian clothes and handing out cake, the protest started peacefully in Parliament Square with speeches from each group,
However arrests were made when individuals attempted to recreate the "rush" on Parliament and get through police lines at St Stephen's Entrance. It is understood one person was taken to hospital with an injured foot.
One 23-year-old woman was arrested for a breach of court bail conditions and five others for incidents relating to breach of the peace. Climate Rush said the 23-year-old is Tamsin Omond, who was seen being led away in handcuffs. The grand-daughter of a baronet is awaiting trial for climbing onto the roof of the Houses of Commons last February in protest against the third runway at Heathrow. She and four others who became known as the "Commons Five" were kept in custody for 12 hours before being released on bail to await their trial on 11 November, at which they could receive a maximum penalty of 51 weeks' custody and a £5,000 fine.
Part of Miss Osmond's bail conditions were to stay away from the Houses of Parliament and she could now be held on remand.
The Cambridge graduate, who earlier in the day sat her final exam for an MA with the Open University on Ecology and Social Justice and has considered training to become a priest, is now likely to become a figurehead for the environmental movement.
Speaking before the protest, she said: "I think this is the defining issue for our generation. We all need to be taking every action we can to stop climate change at the moment. The government targets are inadequate and the likelihood of achieving them is poor. It is up to us and our generation to take the action we need."
Joy Greasley, vice chairwoman of the Women's Institute, said it was not just "eco-warriors" concerned about climate change. She said WI members were glad to be protesting alongside groups like Climate Rush, who take part in illegal actions, in the name of climate change.
She said: "We believe women can make a difference by acting collectively and taking the common sense approach."
Caroline Lucas, leader of the Green Party, said it was a time for action not words.
"We are here to do everything we can within the law and possibly without the law to peacefully prevent our descent into climate chaos," she said.
Mrs Boycott said: "The threat facing us today is even more serious than the issue that brought our predecessors here. In a hundred years from now the world as we know it won't he here unless we take action. Like the suffragettes (without whom we would not be here), we are determined, organised and mobilised."
Abour 60,000 people gathered to call for the suffragettes rush in 1908. During the protest 37 people were arrested and 10 people taken to hospital. One woman managed to get onto the floor of the House of Commons whole a debate was in progress.
______________________
Six people were arrested after an attempt to recreate the suffragettes'... more
-
-
As an environmentalist this is the one reason why Obama (and McCain to clarify) will not get my vote, because neither of them have gained my trust on this. I was looking this time for someone who would truly lead on the environment to bring the country to a higher consciousness to see that solar, wind, geothermal, biofuels (not ethanol) were what this country must have now to lead us into the 21st Century not only to save our planet but ourselves. It is an understatement to say that I am disappointed that there is not one candidate who is on that higher level of consciousness about this important crisis.
There is no change and there will not be significant progress regarding the climate crisis and political will if Obama (and yes, others as well) still plays to the coal industry while touting an environmental plan. As the article states, there is no such thing as clean coal... and it isn't only about that. It is about the cancer, and the mercury, and the asthma, and the lung diseases, and the toxicity, and the pollution... and the mountaintop removal that is destroying the beauty of this country. Yet, we didn't hear any of them talking about this in any campaign speech or in any debate.
Nothing about the devastation done to Virginia, West Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky and other states in blowing up the mountains that will continue to be blown up regardless of how the coal is burned. This is why I concentrate on Obama. I know McCain is not going to care... I was hoping Obama would, but have seen more and more that he does not and I will not give him a free ride on it. I expect better and I expect truth from those who claim to want 'change' because real change means telling the people the truth. Yet he continues to lie every single time he discusses clean coal technology when he doesn't tell people the truth about the availability or feasability of it.
Some say this isn't enough to change their vote... all well and good. It is for me, because the longer candidates think they can still get votes no matter how much they fail us they won't ever try to keep their promises and earn them. I have had enough of politicians who claim to want to do the right thing but then turn around and do exactly what everyone else does or as the money dictates. And pushing 'clean coal' out of political expedience at a time when our Earth's delicate climate balance is on the brink of tipping instead of taking a true and bold moral stand is not the right thing to do now. As an environmentalist this is the one reason why Obama (and McCain to clarify) will... more
-
-
Will this verdict set the precedent for climate activists to stand up more vigorously in protesting climate change and the plans of coal and oil companies? I sure hope so. It is time for governments to be made aware that people are onto them. That when they say they want renewable energy we know they mean "clean coal" and nuclear and not TRUE renewable energy because it doesn't bring them $$$$$$$ in their campaign coffers. We are on to their lies and their smoke and mirror tactics to keep to the status quo... and we aren't going to be silent any longer. If scaling a chimney to write a warning will save one life from the effects of climate change or cancer, I will do it myself. This is also an issue of Democracy as well as environment. These plants being built are without the consent of the governed and part of deals made behind closed doors, and therefore, the governed have every right to protest them for the betterment of the whole, their families, and this planet. For these companies to continue to build coal plants knowing what they do to our health and our environment knowing there are cleaner, safer, better ways is simply willful negligence.
Photo credit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8068270@N04/2414246369/
From the article:
The Maidstone verdict has changed all that and could prove a turning point both for the protest movement and industrial policy. It gave the clear political message that 12 people with - one must assume - no great scientific knowledge, had listened to the evidence of one of the best scientists in the world and concluded that climate change is now so serious and so urgent an issue that it is legally justifiable for people to invade a power station and do £30,000 worth of damage.
Out of the blue, the environmentalists say, the legitimacy of the government to pursue an expanding coal policy has been undermined and it may have become impossible for E.ON, the German owners of Kingsnorth, to go ahead with a new plant without fitting a £500m carbon capture and storage plant to collect and dispose of the greenhouse gases.
What is particularly galling for the backers of coal-fired power stations is that, because of the amount of damage alleged to have been done at Kingsnorth, the case went to a jury rather than a magistrate. The crown prosecution service and many corporations know that campaigners who challenge the law by non-violent action are being regularly acquitted by juries. In the past decade, prosecutions of protesters against GM crops, incinerators, new roads and nuclear, chemical and arms trade companies have all collapsed after defendants argued that they had acted according to their consciences and that they were trying to prevent a greater crime. Greenpeace itself has a four-nil record against the crown using the same defence and was widely known to be seeking a jury trial to present complex arguments about coal and climate change.
"They were pretty confident that a jury would listen to them more than the government," said one lawyer yesterday. "It gives them a platform. I doubt that we will see another climate change jury trial for many years."
"We are seeing a pattern emerging. The public is increasingly speaking through the courts," says Martyn Day, a partner with Leigh Day solicitors, which specialises in environmental cases. "These cases are a good guide to public mood and politicians should take close heed of them. It shows that society is greatly concerned about what is happening with the environment and that it is suspicious of government and business when they say they are acting responsibly.
"We're looking at a society which is far more in tune with the environment than in the past. Politicians and companies have not understood that most people now understand the issues. There's a feeling that government and the authorities have not been paying sufficient heed, and that the courts are righting the balance," he said.
Will this verdict set the precedent for climate activists to stand up more vigorously... more
-
-
With over a million people and 250,000 homes damaged due to the recent floods this prediction does not bode well for India, especially the poor of India. And without governments and social mores changing to accomodate a moral standing regarding this crisis, many will die and that is not an exaggeration. In the recent flooding, "untouchables" were either the last to be rescued or were not rescued at all. So how will that play out in the event of other major environmental climate change catastrophes? Those deemed unworthy of aid will simply be left to die?
From the article:
With over 2.7 million people affected by the floods caused by the change of course of the Kosi river in Bihar, researchers have now warned of more floods in northern India in coming years following changing stream flow patterns in the Himalayan rivers. The researchers from Pune University and College of Military Engineering, Pune, found an increase in the number of ‘high-magnitude flood’ events in four rivers - Chenab, Ravi, Satluj and Beas in northwestern Himalayas in the last four decades.
The researchers analysed the discharge of glacial melt into these rivers and found changing water flow patterns in the river due to global warming.
“The high-magnitude events in Himalayan rivers are generally in monsoons; hence they may lead to floods in plains too,” researcher M.R. Bhutiyani, professor at the College of Military Engineering, told IANS.
Bhutiyani said a “high magnitude flood event” is defined as an event when river flow at a particular point exceeds its average value.
“The data analysis shows that there was a significant number of high magnitude flood events in the rivers in the last four decades and the frequency of such events has been increasing,” he said.
The researchers found that due to global warming smaller glaciers in the Himalayas have receded at a relatively faster rate than the larger ones. This may ultimately lead to their disappearance in the near future.
“It is the glacier contribution which is going to be impacted because of global warming. There will be variations in response to the monsoon rainfall. Glaciers, which acted as natural regulators of discharge, will no longer play an important role in the hydrological regime of such basins,” Bhutiyani said.
The researchers found a significant increase in the glacial discharge in the Chenab and Satluj rivers, attributing this to a larger number of glaciers in the basin being on the retreat.
With over a million people and 250,000 homes damaged due to the recent floods this... more
-
-
Spain is experiencing its worst drought in 40 years. Climate experts warn that the country is suffering badly from the impact of climate change and that the Sahara is slowly creeping north - into the Spanish mainland.
Yet in Spain itself there is little consensus about what is to be done. Indeed, such is the disagreement that journalists and politicians alike are calling it "water wars".
A farmer and politician, Angel Carcia Udon, said: "Water arouses passions because it can be used as a weapon, a political weapon, just as oil is a political weapon".
And water in Spain has set region against region, north against south and government against opposition.
When the city of Barcelona nearly ran out of water earlier this year, the fountains were switched off and severe restrictions were introduced.
The government of Catalonia pleaded for water to be transferred from rivers like the Ebro, in neighbouring regions, but they refused.
Instead, the city imported tonnes of litres of water from France and accelerated work on the giant desalination plant on the edge of Barcelona, which promises to provide 180,000 cubic metres of water a day.
Parched land
But Barcelona is not alone in its insatiable thirst. Apart from the far north, the entire country is suffering, especially the parched areas on the Mediterranean coast, from Catalonia, down through Valencia, Alicante, Murcia and Almeria.
Mr Udon, whose Popular Party (PP) believes in transferring water around the country, said: "It's incomprehensible that, in one country, there is an excess of water in one place and a deficit in another.
The landscape of eastern Spain looks more parched than usual
"Even more incomprehensible is that they expect us to use water from desalination plants, which is expensive and would force us to raise prices."
But when the present PSOE Socialist government of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero got into power in 2004, they cancelled all the PP's plans to send water from the north-west to the arid zones of the south-east.
Instead, the government is building more desalination plants, adding to the more than 900 already in Spain - the largest number in any one country outside the Middle East.
They are working night and day at the one at Llogrebat, close to Barcelona airport. The general manager, Juan Compte Costa, assured me that it was the most cost-effective and energy-efficient desalination plant yet.
Spain is experiencing its worst drought in 40 years. Climate experts warn that the... more
-
-
Thousands of people rallied in southern Australia Sunday to protest the dwindling water levels in one of the country's greatest rivers, claiming the loss was causing an environmental disaster.
The 5,000-strong crowd gathered near the mouth of the 2,530 kilometre (1,569 mile) Murray to hold two minute's silence to mark the 'death' of the river, which forms part of Australia's most important agricultural region.
Kym McHugh, mayor of the local Alexandrina Council, said the ceremony near the South Australian town of Goolwa was to "underscore this eleventh hour bid to save the nation's greatest river." "It sent a very clear message by saying we've had a lot of talk about the river system, a lot of science, we all know what the problem is -- we just want politicians to have the will to fix it up," he told national news agency AAP.
"They need to secure water upstream and send it down."
Water levels are so low in the Murray River, due to drought and irrigation, that the freshwater lakes the river feeds into are turning to acid.
The federal government last week said there was not enough water in the system to save the freshwater lakes, leading to suggestions that ocean water could be used to prevent the lakes from drying out.
But the council wants the government to release water held in storage in upstream states into the river so it can flow down and prevent an environmental, economic and social disaster in the region.
"We need to give these lakes another chance," McHugh said.
The Murray, along with the 2,740-kilometre Darling River and 1,690-kilometre Murrumbidgee River, form the Murray Darling Basin, which accounts for some 40 percent of the nation's agricultural production.
photo credit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/95438214@N00/2306721603/Thousands of people rallied in southern Australia Sunday to protest the dwindling... more
-
