Doomstead Diner Menu => Environment => Topic started by: RE on July 21, 2012, 04:45:42 PM

Title: The Environment Board
Post by: RE on July 21, 2012, 04:45:42 PM
If you look at the Forum Homepage Menu, you will now find a Board dedicated to Environmental topics. Many of these topics are currently scatterred around through the Economics, Geological & Cosmological Events and Doomsteading Boards.  I may move some of those topics onto this Board.

Any topics you create in the future which have the Environment as a primary focus should be started under this category.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: agelbert on July 21, 2012, 09:06:14 PM
Three great videos and background story of how a TV station reporter in Las Vegas exposed Coal plant ham handed tactics to try to control the reporting and lie about toxic chemicals and deny responsibility for deaths and diseases of nearby residents.

Cowan and crew take the sample to an independent scientific lab for testing, and oops! The concentrations of chemicals — chromium, arsenic, etc. — are high enough to be toxic. The chemist says, “If I had this kind of exposure in my laboratory, I would evacuate the laboratory until it got cleaned out.” Ouch.
The story finishes with a Moapa Paiute saying, “It’s as simple as death. Slowly but surely, we’re all dying off.”

A tragicomic tale of coal industry incompetence and disregard (
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: agelbert on July 25, 2012, 01:23:08 PM
High radiation levels in some Pacific seafood concerns university doctors

One of the comments on the article:
July 25, 2012 at 3:20 pm 
They export the fish because the Japanese middle and upper class have stopped buying local fish. The fish go everywhere there is an opportunity to sell the product. Since radiation my not show up in appearance they look for a market that skips radiation testing. Like the USA. (
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: agelbert on July 25, 2012, 03:31:48 PM
Environmental Collapse Event Horizon Draws Closer
Deep Fried Black Swan Goes Global As Drought Spreads From US To Asia, And Now To Southern Europe
The US drought, which as previously noted, is the worst in decades, has already caused corn prices to hit a record, and soy to soar. And as we first reported last week, and subsequently Bloomberg also caught, Asia could well be next to suffer soaring food prices next as "the monsoon season, which is critical for that country’s agricultural production, is 22% below normal conditions for the year." (
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: g on July 25, 2012, 05:24:57 PM
High radiation levels in some Pacific seafood concerns university doctors

One of the comments on the article:
July 25, 2012 at 3:20 pm 
They export the fish because the Japanese middle and upper class have stopped buying local fish. The fish go everywhere there is an opportunity to sell the product. Since radiation my not show up in appearance they look for a market that skips radiation testing. Like the USA. (

Unfortunately this is a problem that cannot ever improve. The poison from that horror is with us permanently and can only get worse. Amazing how everyone forgets about the problem from that accident like it was an old movie or TV show.   :icon_scratch:
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: agelbert on July 25, 2012, 05:33:49 PM
Golden Oxen,
Yep. We humans have, as EndofNigh and others have pointed out when quoting the book "Too smart for our own Good", have a cognitive impairment in dealing with threats that are out of sight or just invisible. It may be uncomfortable, but it behooves us to daily remind ourselves that it is bad and getting worse. That's the only way we can be motivated to overcome our cognitive blind spot and keep writing about it and talking about with those around us.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: JoeP on July 26, 2012, 06:41:11 AM
Drought could cause pork prices to soar in China. From Business Insider: (
Title: Re: The Environment Board: Are Nanofibers a Health Risk?
Post by: g on August 27, 2012, 04:39:29 AM
New research has suggested that nanofibers may prove as high a health risk as asbestos.

Asbestos is known to cause a number of health issues. Inhaling asbestos fibers can cause fibrosis of the lungs, swelling, weight loss, warts and a persistent cough — and the use of asbestos now faces regulation in the West.

In a new study published by Toxicology Sciences, researchers have suggested that inhaling tiny fibers created by the nanotechnology industry — airborne just as asbestos is carried — may cause similar problems.

Experiments on mice focused on how the varying length and shape of nanofibers suggested that longer nanofibers are the most dangerous –even though mice and human lungs are different. After injecting silver nanofibers into the lungs of mice, the scientists found that any fibers longer than five-thousandths of a millimeter were more likely to become lodged in the lungs and cause respiratory problems. (
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Surly1 on September 18, 2012, 09:56:26 AM
Scientific Paper: “The Fukushima Radioactive Plume Contaminated the Entire Northern Hemisphere During a Relatively Short Period of Time” (

 Posted on September 18, 2012 by WashingtonsBlog
“Little Dissipation Occurred … Due to the Nature of the Rapid Global Air Circulation System”

We warned mere days after the Japanese earthquake that the West Coast of North America could be hit with radiation.

Our concerns – unfortunately – have been validated.  See this and this.

The peer-reviewed scientific journal Science of the Total Environment reports:

    img 100 Sep. 18 02.30 Scientific Paper: The Fukushima Radioactive Plume Contaminated the Entire Northern Hemisphere During a Relatively Short Period of TimeMassive amounts of anthropogenic radionuclides were released from the nuclear reactors located in Fukushima (northeastern Japan) between 12 and 16 March 2011 following the earthquake and tsunami. Ground level air radioactivity was monitored around the globe immediately after the Fukushima accident. This global effort provided a unique opportunity to trace the surface air mass movement at different sites in the Northern Hemisphere.


    The analysis of the air mass forward movements during 12th -16th March showed that the air mass was displaced eastward from the Fukushima area and bifurcated into a northern and a southern branch outside of Japan (Fig. 3). This eastward bifurcation of air masses is in agreement with the simulation of the potential dispersion of the radioactive cloud after the nuclear accident of Fukushima (Weather OnlineWebsite of United Kingdom, UK, 2012).


    This work clearly demonstrates how little dissipation occurred during this time due to the nature of the rapid global air circulation system, and the Fukushima radioactive plume contaminated the entire Northern Hemisphere during a relatively short period of time.

Note:  The West Coast of North America is also at risk from ocean radiation.

The Department of Homeland Security and National Nuclear Security Administration recently sent low-flying helicopters over the San Francisco Bay Area to test for radiation. But they almost certainly will not make their findings public.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: agelbert on September 18, 2012, 04:18:29 PM
Yes, and the gooberment(s) scrambled all the way with media coordination pushing blatant lies to cover it up. Of course, this has a long history in the USA.

This is the the Cesium-137 contamination BEFORE Fukushima. It started in the 50s. This MIC "present" to the American public of radionuclide, cancer causing toxins was completed by the end of the above ground nuclear bomb tests. The cruel irony of the rapid growth of nuclear medicine used to cure cancer escapes most. It's like those mafia bosses that run a trucking bidness and a road repair bidness. They overload the trucks for plenty of guaranteed road repair bidness.

Estimates of Cancer Occurrence and Cancer Fatalities in the United States from Global Atmospheric Nuclear Testing

Type of cancer Dose type Deaths Occurrence Source
Thyroid Internal  ~2,500  50,000  IEER estimate from NCI 1997
Leukemia   Internal  550~1,000 CDC/NCI 2001 for deaths estimate, IEER for occurrence estimate
All radiogenic cancers  External 11,000   22,000 CDC/NCI 2001
All radiogenic cancers  Effective Dose Equivalent   ~3,000 ~6,000  IEER estimate from CDC/NCI 2001 maps and table
Total, rounded   -  ~17,000 ~80,000   -

Cesium-137 deposition
Cesium-137 deposition (

Full references and a map of GLOBAL fallout effects on the lower 48 as well at the following links: ( (

Putting U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policies on Trial in the Court of Public Opinion

by David Krieger
 August 31, 2012

The International Court of Justice, the highest and most authoritative court in the world, has stated that the use of nuclear weapons would be illegal if such use violated international humanitarian law.  Failing to distinguish between civilians and combatants would be illegal, as would any use resulting in unnecessary suffering.  Additionally, the Court found that any threat of such use would also be illegal.  It is virtually impossible to imagine any use or threat of use that would not violate international humanitarian law.
US nuclear weapons policy fails to meet the standards of international humanitarian law and to live up to its treaty obligations in the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.  Until the issue of US nuclear weapons policy can be properly litigated in in a US domestic court, US policies related to the threat or use of nuclear weapons need to be put on trial in the most important court in the world, the court of public opinion.  It is US citizens who may well determine the fate of the world, by their action or inaction on this most critical of all issues confronting humanity.
The Charges
1. The US has failed to fulfill its obligation to engage in good faith negotiations for nuclear disarmament.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty obligates the parties not only to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries, but also obligates good faith negotiations to achieve nuclear disarmament by the five nuclear weapons states parties to the treaty: the US, Russia, UK, France and China.  In interpreting this part of the treaty, the International Court of Justice stated in a 1996 Advisory Opinion, “There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.”  It has not been the policy of the United States to pursue such negotiations despite the passage of more than 40 years since this treaty entered into force and more than 20 years since the Cold War came to an end.
2. The US has failed to fulfill its obligation to engage in good faith negotiations to achieve a cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty also obligates parties to the treaty to engage in good faith negotiations for a cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date.  But rather than negotiating to bring an end to the nuclear arms race, the US has continued to modernize its nuclear weapons, their delivery systems and the infrastructure that keeps the arms race alive.  Doing so has been costly, provocative and illegal under international law.
3. The US threatens the mass annihilation of the human species (omnicide).
The consequence of a large-scale nuclear war could be the extinction of most or all of the human species, along with other forms of complex life.  This would be a most egregious violation of international humanitarian law.  In fact, it would undermine the very foundation of the law, which is the protection of innocent individuals from harm.  The indiscriminate nature of nuclear weapons and policies that threaten their use, such as nuclear deterrence policy, cannot be made to conform to the law, since any use of these weapons would cause a humanitarian disaster beyond our capacity to respond to the ensuing suffering and death.
4. The US is recklessly endangering life.
Certain policies of the United States may be viewed as recklessly endangering life on the planet.  These policies include reliance on its land-based missile force, maintaining nuclear weapons on high-alert status, launch-on-warning and first use of nuclear weapons.  Land-based missiles are attractive targets for attack in a time of tension between nuclear powers.  Maintaining the weapons on high alert and a policy of launch-on-warning could result in a launch in response to a false warning, with all attendant consequences of retaliation and nuclear war.  Although not well known to US citizens, their government has always maintained a policy of possible first use of nuclear weapons, rather than a policy of no first use. 

5. The US is committing crimes against the environment (ecocide).
The effects of nuclear war and its preparations cannot be contained in either time or space.  Radiation knows no boundaries and will affect countless future generations by poisoning the environment that sustains life.  The effects of nuclear war on the environment would be severe and long lasting and would include – in addition to blast, fire and radiation – global nuclear famine, even from a regional nuclear war.

6. The US is committing crimes against future generations.
The future itself is put at risk by nuclear weapons policies that could lead to nuclear war, and where there are nuclear weapons the possibility of nuclear war cannot be dismissed.  A nuclear war would, at best, deprive new generations of the opportunity for a flourishing and sustainable life on the planet.  At worst, such a war would end civilization and foreclose the possibility of human life on Earth.
7. The US has contaminated indigenous lands.
Nuclear weapons production, testing and the storage of long-lived nuclear waste have largely taken place on the lands of indigenous peoples.  The Hanford Nuclear Reservation, located on the reservation of the Yakama Indian Nation, is where the US produced the plutonium for some 60,000 nuclear weapons.  It is one of the most environmentally contaminated sites on the planet and the Yakama Indians, who were granted hunting and fishing rights in perpetuity in an 1855 treaty, have suffered disproportionately.  The US has also contaminated the lands of the Western Shoshone Nation and the Marshall Islands with nuclear and thermonuclear weapons tests.
8. The US has breached the trust of the international community.
The Marshall Islands were the Trust Territory of the United States from the end of World War II until they gained their independence in 1986.  Between 1946 and 1958, the US tested 67 nuclear and thermonuclear weapons in the Marshall Islands with the equivalent explosive power of one-and-a-half Hiroshima-size nuclear weapons every day for 12 years.  The people of the Marshall Islands who endured these tests and their offspring have suffered grave injuries, premature deaths, and displacement from their island homes, which can only be construed as a most serious breach of trusteeship of these islands.  The US continues to test nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missiles from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, which is on the land of the Chumash Indians, and targets most of these missiles at the Ronald Reagan Missile Defense Test Range in the Marshall Islands.
9. The US has conspicuously wasted public funds.
The public funds used to develop, manufacture, test, deploy and maintain the US nuclear arsenal and its delivery systems have been estimated to exceed $7.5 trillion.  Even now, more than 20 years after the end of the Cold War, the government continues to spend $60 to $70 billion annually and plans to maintain this level for the next decade.  These funds have been taken from the resources that could have been used to feed the hungry, house the homeless, provide education for our children and help restore our infrastructure and our economic well-being. 

10. The US has conspired to commit international crimes and to cover them up by silence.
US nuclear weapons policy threatens each of the three major Nuremberg Tribunal crimes: crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity.  The US government and major US media have conspired to prevent a full and open public discussion of nuclear weapons crimes.  Why are the US government and US mainstream media silent about these crimes?  Why is the mainstream media so accepting of US nuclear weapons policy, which threatens the destruction of civilization?  This conspiracy of silence has helped to assure the complacency of the American people.
Current US nuclear weapons policy is illegal, immoral and runs a high risk of resulting in nuclear catastrophe.  We cannot wait until there is a nuclear war before we act to rid the world of these weapons of mass annihilation.  The US should be the leader in this effort, rather than an obstacle to its realization.  It is up to the court of public opinion to assure that the US asserts this leadership.  The time to act is now. 

[1]David Krieger is President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.[/i] (

Guess what kind of "energy" they were REALLY able to produce "so cheaply they wouldn' t be able to to meter it..."

Title: Re: The Environment Board:Hunan has worst heavy metal pollution in China
Post by: g on December 09, 2012, 05:28:32 AM
Knowing China through Taiwan


Hunan has worst heavy metal pollution in China

    Staff Reporter
    12:45 (GMT+8)

Heavy metal waste from industrial zones has polluted more than 28,000 hectares of land in Hunan province, affecting the health of an estimated 40 million people, recent media reports in China say.

The website China Business Media has reported that industrial waste containing heavy metals and other hazardous substances are dumped directly into rivers in the south-central province without any processing.

Official statistics show that the amount of cadmium found in some rivers is 52 times higher than permitted levels. Hunan is the most polluted region in China with industries dumping huge amounts of mercury, cadmium, chromium and lead in rivers and on land.

The provincial government said that it is confident it will "basically resolve the problem" of heavy metal pollution by 2020. However, an official with the environmental protection department said that an estimated 500 billion yuan (US$80 billion) is needed to clean up the pollution.

Copyright © 2012
C108X90H 2006&#36039 &#26009 &#29031 &#29255 N71 copy1
C108X90H 2006&#36039 &#26009 &#29031 &#29255 N71 copy1

Collecting samples from a river polluted with cadmium. (Photo/Xinhua)  :(
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 09, 2012, 06:18:41 AM
The Chinese are absolutely screwed with poullution, more than demand destruction or corruption causing their woes. They have bought up mega farms all  around the world, and with the largest water extraction licences. Our politicians love to feather their nests and keep up their spending addiction with chinese bribes and "investment". Im not sure long term they will ship all the food back to China they think they will. Wars over water look likely at this rate too.
Title: Re: The Environment Board: Deadly Radiation Found 225 miles from Fukushima
Post by: g on April 13, 2013, 05:28:50 AM
Japan continues to withold information about dangerous levels of radiation. Crowd control, not safety, is the government's main concern,  :exp-angry:

New data released by Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW) shows once again that the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster is far from over. Despite a complete media blackout on the current situation, levels of Cesium-137 (Cs-137) and Cesium-134 (Cs-134) found in produce and rice crackers located roughly 225 miles (~ 362 km) away from Fukushima are high enough to cause residents to exceed the annual radiation exposure limit in just a few months, or even weeks.

According to, which posts up-to-date information about the Fukushima disaster, rice crackers and tangerines produced in the Shizuoka prefecture are testing high for both Cs-137 and Cs-134. Rice crackers, according to the data sheet, tested at 3.7 Becquerels per kilogram (Bq/Kg) of Cs-137, while tangerines tested at 1.46 Bq/Kg of Cs-134 and 3.14 Bq/Kg of Cs-137.

The Shizuoka prefecture is located about 80 miles (~ 128 km) southwest of Tokyo, which is highly concerning as it is actually farther away from Fukushima than Tokyo. This suggest that potentially deadly levels of radiation are still affecting large population centers across Japan, including those that are not even in close proximity to the Fukushima plant.

It is generally regarded that adult radiation workers should be exposed to no more than 50 millisieverts (mSv) of radiation per year in order to avoid serious health consequences. For children, this number is far lower, probably somewhere around 10 mSv, with this being on the high end. But the average adult and child eating these tainted foods at their current radiation levels will not only reach but exceed the safe maximum in just a few weeks.

Radiation levels continue to increase in lakes, rivers north of Tokyo

But food, of course, is not the only major source of radiation exposure in Japan. Other data also released by shows that radiation levels in rivers, lakes and shorelines around Kashiwa City in Chiba, located about 20 miles northeast of Tokyo, are dangerously high and getting even higher.

Since radiation levels were last tested in the Otsu River back in September, detected levels have nearly tripled, jumping from 5,700 Bq/Kg to 14,200 Bq/Kg of radiation. Similar jumps were observed in lakes and shore soils, the former increasing from 7,600 Bq/Kg to 8,200 Bq/Kg of radiation, and the latter increasing from 440 Bq/Kg to 780 Bq/Kg of radiation.

Any increase in disease or death resulting from these continued radiation spikes, however, will more than likely be blamed on other causes besides radiation, so as to cover up the severity of the situation. The radiation component of radiation-induced heart disease, organ failure, and cancer, for instance, will simply be ignored, and any uptick in deaths, particularly among the elderly, declared normal.

Meanwhile, a recent Rasmussen Report found that more than one-third of all Americans believe radiation from Fukushima caused “significant harm” in the U.S. This is likely due to the fact that high levels of radiation were observed in soil, water, and even food all across America in the wake of the disaster. (  :'( :icon_study:
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Surly1 on October 25, 2013, 03:09:03 PM
Published on Friday, October 25, 2013 by Common Dreams
Beyond Tipping Point: Global Warming Has Raised Arctic Temps to Hottest in 120,000 Years (

Citing global warming, new study shows current temps surpass early Holocene period when northern hemisphere was closer to sun
- Sarah Lazare, staff writer

Baffin Island in the Canadian Arctic (Photo: NASA / Michael Studinger)

Scientists have long known that climate change is warming the arctic at an alarming rate. But new research shows that in some areas—where human-caused climate change has driven temperatures higher than they've been for tens of thousands of years—melting polar ice caps are now beyond any hope of saving.

A study announced this week confirms for the first time that, because of global warming, the average summer temperature over the past 100 years in the Eastern Canadian Arctic is hotter than any other century in the last 44,000 years and likely the hottest over the past 120,000 years.

This means that current temperatures surpass those of the early Holocene period 11,000 years ago, when the northern hemisphere was closer to the sun, receiving 9 percent more energy from it, explained Colorado University at Boulder geological sciences Professor Gifford Miller, lead author of the study.

"The only possible explanation for today's hotter temperatures is global warming," Miller told Common Dreams in a phone interview. "This is the first study to find firm evidence that current arctic temperatures are warmer now than the early Holecene, when the sun was closer and it should have been a warmer time."

Researchers used radiocarbon analysis of clumps of dead moss emerging from a receding ice cap on Baffin Island to evaluate past temperatures, explains a statement about the study released by the University of Colorado. "At four different ice caps, radiocarbon dates show the mosses had not been exposed to the elements since at least 44,000 to 51,000 years ago."

Prior to 50,000 years ago, the earth was in a period of glaciation. Taking that into consideration, scientists concluded that Canadian Arctic temperatures have likely not been at their current warmth for 120,000 years.

The research found that a majority of the earth's warming has happened in the past 20 years. "All of Baffin Island is melting," said Miller in a statement. "And we expect all of the ice caps to eventually disappear, even if there is no additional warming,"
Title: Re: The Environment Board: Agriculture and its Discontents
Post by: g on November 10, 2013, 04:31:30 AM
My knowledge on this topic is 0, but I thought this article would be of much interest to many of our Diners.

This paragraph really caught my eye and is why it seemed to me a must posting.

    “The plow has destroyed more options for future generations than the sword,” [Jackson] says. “But soil is more important than oil, and just as nonrenewable.” Soil loss is one of the biggest hidden costs of industrial agriculture — and it’s created at literally a glacial pace, maybe a quarter-inch per century. The increasingly popular no-till style of agriculture reduces soil loss but increases the need for herbicides. It’s a short-term solution, requiring that we poison the soil to save it.

Agriculture and its discontents

Good on Mark Bittman for giving attention to the Land Institute in Salinas, Kansas, and Wes Jackson. Too bad this isn't considered part of the "solution" enough to have Silicon Valley sugar daddies pouring in millions to develop it like genetically modified seeds:

    “The plow has destroyed more options for future generations than the sword,” [Jackson] says. “But soil is more important than oil, and just as nonrenewable.” Soil loss is one of the biggest hidden costs of industrial agriculture — and it’s created at literally a glacial pace, maybe a quarter-inch per century. The increasingly popular no-till style of agriculture reduces soil loss but increases the need for herbicides. It’s a short-term solution, requiring that we poison the soil to save it.

    Annual monoculture like that practiced in the Midwestern Corn Belt is one culprit. It produces the vast majority of our food, and much of that food — perhaps 70 percent of our calories — is from grasses, which produce edible seeds, or cereals. For 10,000 years we’ve plowed the soil, planted in spring and harvested in fall, one crop at a time.

    In an essay he published 26 years ago, called “The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race,” Jared Diamond theorized that this was essentially our downfall: by losing our hunter-gatherer roots and becoming dependent on agriculture, we made it possible for the human population to expand but paid the price in the often malnourishing, environmentally damaging system we have today.

    That’s fascinating, and irreversible; barring a catastrophe that drastically reduces the human population, we’ll rely on agriculture for the foreseeable future. But if we look to the kind of systems Jackson talks about, we can markedly reduce the damage. “We don’t have to slay Goliath with a pebble,” he says of industrial agriculture. “We just have to quit using so much fertilizer and so many pesticides to shrink him to manageable proportions.”

    Perennial polysystems are one way forward, because they allow us to produce grains, legumes, oils and other foods with a host of benefits. Gesturing across the road from where we sat, Jackson said to me: “That prairie — a prime example of a self-sustaining system — doesn’t have soil erosion, it’s not fossil-fuel dependent, you have species and chemical diversity. If you look around you’ll see that essentially all of nature’s ecosystems are perennial polycultures; that’s nature’s instruction book.” In perennial polycultures, the plants may fertilize one another, physically support one another, ward off pests and diseases together, resist drought and flood, and survive even when one member suffers.

    In addition to domesticating wild food-producing species, the Land Institute staff has taken on a far more challenging task: converting annuals into perennials. Perenniality is a complex trait, controlled by multiple genes. Perennials put more energy into their roots and less into flowers and seeds and greens, they send reserve energy into storage to wake up in the spring and they seldom die. The work might go faster if Jackson had adequate funding, which isn’t much; he’d consider himself fully funded for the next 30 years with about one-third of the 2011 Federal subsidy for producing ethanol. ( :icon_study:
Title: Re: The Environment Board: Outcry as Canada Considers Nuclear Waste Facility on
Post by: g on November 17, 2013, 06:06:35 AM
Outcry as Canada Considers Nuclear Waste Facility on U.S. Border

By Oil Price
Created 15 Nov 2013

Canadian plans for a large nuclear waste facility on the US border are triggering a cross-border public outcry and a looming diplomatic backlash.

Canada is planning to build the nuclear waste facility in the town of Kincardine, on the Canadian side of Lake Huron and directly opposite the thumb of the US state of Michigan.

The facility would store 200,000 cubic meters of radioactive waste from Ontario’s 20 nuclear reactors.

While Ontario Power Generation insists that the facility would be kept safe for thousands of years due to the fact that it would be more than 2,200 feet underground in a layer of limestone and covered with a 660-foot layer of shale, the public is skeptical about the potential threat this poses to Lake Huron—one of the world’s largest fresh water bodies.

The Canadian government is expected to issue a recommendation in the coming weeks to the Cabinet, which will decide whether to approve plans for the facility. But on the diplomatic front, they will face pressure to reject the project.

US senators Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry urging him to seek the involvement of the International Joint Commission in asking the Canadians to reconsider the plans.

“The placement of this nuclear waste storage facility is of great concern given its location near Lake Huron and the importance of the Great Lakes to tens of millions of U.S. and Canadian citizens for drinking water, fisheries, tourism, recreation and other industrial and economic uses. Special consideration must be given to the potential environmental impacts of such a large radioactive waste site on the shores of our region’s most important natural resource,” Stabenow and Levin wrote.

U.S. federal officials have also joined the fight to oppose the plans.

[Hear More: John Hofmeister: Politics Raising the Cost of Energy in the US [1]]

The project has also sparked a public outcry, from both sides of the border. Lake Huron is one of the five Great Lakes that comprise the largest group of freshwater lakes in the world and provide 21% of all fresh water supplies. Tens of millions of Americans and Canadians rely on these lakes for fresh water.

Not only do 24 million Americans get their drinking water from the Great Lakes, but this also represents a $2.4-billion fishing industry and a $13-billion tourism industry.

Despite this, the residents of Kincardine itself—the proposed site of the waste facility—largely support the project, which will bring in new jobs to this small town.

By. Charles Kennedy of ( :icon_study:

Title: Re: The Environment Board/ Radiation- it's not just for Japanese anymore
Post by: Surly1 on February 26, 2014, 08:09:11 AM
Remember That Nuclear Dump Site That 'Was Never Supposed to Leak'? (

Nation's only underground nuclear waste storage site, located in New Mexico, believed to be leaking radiation into air--

Sarah Lazare, staff writer
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant pictured December 2004 (Photo: Wikimedia / Creative Commons)

A leak at the only underground nuclear waste dump in the United States is now believed to be releasing radiation into the air, the US Department of Energy (DOE) announced Monday, sparking alarm among residents near the southeastern New Mexico site.

"There's been radioactivity from nuclear waste released on the surface into the environment," said Don Hancock, Director of the Nuclear Waste Program at the Southwest Research and Information Center, in an interview with Common Dreams. "This was never supposed to happen. That's a very serious thing. We don't know yet what caused this release, or how much has been released."

Samples taken near the federally-run Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), 25 miles east of the town of Carlsbad, showed "slightly elevated levels of airborne radioactive concentrations, which are consistent with the waste disposed," according to the DOE.

"There is an awful lot more that should be known before we can assess the risk. The DOE has a long history of playing keep-away with the facts and promoting nuclear power."
—Arnie Gundersen, nuclear expert

WIPP holds plutonium-contaminated military waste, generated by nuclear weapons production across the United States, including Los Alamos National Laboratory in northern New Mexico. The waste is stored deep beneath the earth's surface in salt formations.

New Mexico Environment Secretary Ryan Flynn stated last week, “Events like this simply should never occur. From the state’s perspective, one event is far too many.”

Residents have long complained that WIPP, as well as nuclear waste transport across the state, puts local communities at risk, including the Native American reservations, school districts, and highways the waste passes through en route to the repository. Tewa Women United, an indigenous organization based in northern New Mexico, slams the "negative impacts that pollution and nuclear contamination have on our bodies, minds, spirits, lands, air and water" in a statement on their website.

The revelation of airborne radiation comes one week after the DOE announced detection of what they said was likely was an underground radiation leak at the facility — a leak that was later confirmed. Radioactive shipments to WIPP have been halted since February 5th when a vehicle caught on fire underground, forcing the evacuation of the facility.

In their statement released Monday, the DOE sought to downplay the danger from airborne radiation, claiming that the "concentrations remain well below a level of public or environmental hazard" with a "potential dose of less than one millirem." They compared this to the typical chest x-ray, in which the patient is exposed to approximately 10 millirems.

Yet, Arnie Gundersen, former nuclear industry executive turned whistleblower, told Common Dreams that this comparison doesn't work. "The difference is that the x-ray is broadly distributed externally over a large piece of mass. On the other hand, the radioactivity in the air is in a particular form that can deposit in your lung. Radioactive material is attracted to your lung tissue. What you breathe in does not come out. This comparison does not take into account the internal exposure these people receive."

"Very serious... unfortunate, but it is what it is."
—DOE Field Office Manager

Approximately 300 concerned Carlsbad residents crowded into a public meeting Monday night to demand answers from WIPP officials.

"I'm just a mom," said Anna Hovrud, according to the Associated Press. "[A]nd my first reaction was to start praying. [...] Is there a chance we could be exposed to radiation, that we are being poisoned somehow, while we are waiting for these samples?"

The situation is "very serious" and "unfortunate," acknowledged Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office Manager Joe Franco at the meeting, according to the Carlsbad Current-Argus. "But it is what it is," he added.

Yet, some attendees expressed doubt about the DOE's transparency. "I feel like they are not telling us everything," said area resident Leah Hunt, according to the AP.

Gundersen concurs. "The DOE is giving us one tenth of a percent of the information they really know," he said. "In fact there is an awful lot more that should be known before we can assess the risk. The DOE has a long history of playing keep-away with the facts and promoting nuclear power."

The DOE did not immediately respond to a request for an interview.

[But hell, it is what it is, right? Right?? --S.]
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on February 26, 2014, 08:22:06 AM
What it poison. Glenn Seaborg, the co-discoverer of plutonium once called it "the most fiendishly toxic substance known to man", if my memory serves me.

from ----Plutonium is a manmade element created in nuclear reactors. Plutonium is fiendishly toxic. A speck of it the size of a pollen grain, if caught in the lungs after inhalation or in bone after ingestion, can cause cancer.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Surly1 on February 26, 2014, 10:32:36 AM
What it poison. Glenn Seaborg, the co-discoverer of plutonium once called it "the most fiendishly toxic substance known to man", if my memory serves me.

from ----Plutonium is a manmade element created in nuclear reactors. Plutonium is fiendishly toxic. A speck of it the size of a pollen grain, if caught in the lungs after inhalation or in bone after ingestion, can cause cancer.

I keep reading these things and the image that obtains is Christopher Walken in the Deer Hunter playing Russian roulette. That's us and nuclear power. We keep spinning the chamber, convinced our luck will hold-- because it always has.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: JRM on February 28, 2014, 09:41:36 AM
Today's Santa Fe New Mexican carried an article on the WIPP plutonium leak and human exposures. The original article is a New York Times piece. Below I quote from the article and comment in the Comments section following the New Mexican article online.


"Sensors in the salt mine detected a leak at about 11:30 p.m. Feb. 14. At that hour, no one was in the mine, and automatic systems reduced the ventilation and ran the exhaust through high efficiency particulate filters, officials said, minimizing the flow of materials to the surface."

Sensors detected the leak when the "mine" was empty of workers, and these sensors triggered an automated response in ventilation and exhaust -- BUT DID NOT WARN WORKERS when they arrived on the surface, where the ventilation system ventilates to? This is outragious! Why were there no automatic gate shuttings, no automated flashing red lights or alarms? How could the designers of such automated systems not consider the workers and their need to be informed of what the sensors had detected? And how could the journalists reporting on this leave out this obvious failure? The article says nothing about this salient failure on the WIPP site! What gives? (
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on February 28, 2014, 10:29:47 AM
My guess is that there were or are alarms designed into the system, and that they might have been disabled by employees themselves because they gave false alarms or that they were just turned off by someone who had a false sense of security because the facility had a long track record of no problems.

In other words, the Homer Simpson Effect.

This is just pure surmisal on my part of course, but wait and see. I'd bet a pound of enriched uranium it turns out to be human error.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: JRM on February 28, 2014, 10:47:37 AM
As far as I can tell, the only two logical possibilities are

a) there was no such alarm system
b) there was such an alarm system

If (a) there appears to be gross negligence, since censors automatically triggered the ventilation system -- and could have warned workers.

If (b), either...

1. there was an unintentional technological glitch or failure
2. the system was intentionally disabled or turned off
3. ???

Since we're speculating without knowledge, and guessing...

My guess is that no such worker alarm was installed, though it could and should have been. 

We'll see.

That the article made no mention of this whole line of inquiry is telling about the state of "journalism" these days. When I learned how to write newspaper articles, in a college journalism course, we learned that the most BASIC JOB a journalist has is to anticipate the likely questions of the readers and to address these in the article.  I cannot tell you how many times I've seen this basic insight about news writing be neglected. >sigh<
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: JRM on February 28, 2014, 11:25:35 AM
Some goofball posted a blog entry with ...

"Radioactive Plutonium Plume Coming Out of New Mexico’s WIPP – Geological Nuclear Radioactive Waste Isolation Pilot Plant" (

As evidence for this claim, the blogger links to a PDF file which said blogger must not have read--or understood. The "plume" in question is deep under ground, not above the WIPP site in the atmosphere, as implied.

This "plume" story is being reblogged all over the internet, of course.

If bloggers are to improve upon the piss poor journalistic standards of the Big News sources (like the aforementioned New York Times) they are going to have to learn what "fact checking" means. It would also help if they would learn how to read PDF files.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: WHD on February 28, 2014, 07:06:59 PM
The situation is "very serious" and "unfortunate," acknowledged Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office Manager Joe Franco at the meeting, according to the Carlsbad Current-Argus. "But it is what it is," he added.

Stuff that fucker down the hole!  :angry4:

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: WHD on February 28, 2014, 07:19:03 PM
Radioactive particulate in the air from gov junk shop:

The situation is "very serious" and "unfortunate," acknowledged Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office Manager Joe Franco J6P/Illuminati Minion at the meeting, according to the Newz. "But it is what it is," he added.

Benzene/assorted carcinogens in the water:

The situation is "very serious" and "unfortunate," acknowledged Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office Manager Joe Franco J6P/Illuminati Minion at the meeting, according to the Newz. "But it is what it is," he added.


The situation is "very serious" and "unfortunate," acknowledged Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office Manager Joe Franco J6P/Illuminati Minion at the meeting, according to the Newz. "But it is what it is," he added.

Extinction of the Monarch butterfly:
The situation is "very serious" and "unfortunate," acknowledged Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office Manager Joe Franco J6P/Illuminati Minion at the meeting, according to the Newz. "But it is what it is," he added.

Mass Extinction:

The situation is "very serious" and "unfortunate," acknowledged Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office Manager Joe Franco J6P/Illuminati Minion at the meeting, according to the Newz. "But it is what it is," he added.

Human extinction:

The situation is "very serious" and "unfortunate," acknowledged Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office Manager Joe Franco J6P/Illuminati Minion at the meeting, according to the Newz. "But it is what it is," he added.

WHD  :'(

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: WHD on February 28, 2014, 07:44:15 PM
That's what we get, for calling it, "the environment." What an empty scientific/materialist phrase. A god-damned sensor deprivation torture cell is THE god-damned environment if you've been stuffed there. The biosphere? The earth, of which we are an integral part, and entirely, physically dependent upon? We mirror what we do to the earth. Eternal poison as a legacy. What genius!

What was that, Hannah Arendt noticed about the typical Nazi? Their banality. They were exceptional in their normality, functional in a systematic terror.


Title: The Environment - 2nd Biggest Contributor to Plastic Waste in Oceans Indonesia
Post by: g on March 02, 2015, 01:06:19 AM
Published on Feb 27, 2015

Millions of tons of plastic waste get dumped into our oceans annually and with Indonesia's infamous contribution to this, citizens there are trying to remedy the problem. CCTV's Andy Saputra filed this report from Jakarta, Indonesia.

Title: Re: The Environment Board - China's Toxic Truth Goes Viral
Post by: g on March 07, 2015, 03:53:49 PM


     Published on Mar 6, 2015

Pollution in China has gone viral with a documentary highlighting the problems caused by major industries. But awareness may not be enough to clean up dirty producers.
Title: No More Public Lands For You!
Post by: Surly1 on July 04, 2015, 05:25:45 AM
Happy Fourth. And be sure to thank your local Koch brothers tool.

Koch-Backed Group Calls For No More National Parks

Koch-Backed Group Calls For No More National Parks

 POSTED ON JULY 3, 2015 AT 9:30 AM


Just in time for the Fourth of July — when millions of people across the country will visit America’s national parks and other public lands — the Koch brothers are rolling out their latest campaign against these treasured places: pushing for no more national parks.

In an op-ed published in Tuesday’s New York Times, Reed Watson, the executive director at theKoch-backed Property and Environment Research Center (PERC), along with a research associate at the Center, call for no more national parks, citing the backlog in maintenance for existing parks.

“True conservation is taking care of the land and water you already have, not insatiably acquiring more and hoping it manages itself,” the op-ed reads. “Let’s maintain what we’ve already got, so we can protect it properly,” it concludes.

While the authors seem to push for “true conservation” from the federal government, in reality, PERC has a long history of advocating for the privatization of America’s national parks and other public lands, and has significant ties to the Koch brothers and fossil fuel industries.

PERC, which labels itself as “a property rights and environmental organization,” has received significant contributions from Koch-backed organizations, including from Donors Trust, which has been called the “dark-money ATM of the right.” Additionally, Watson, the lead author of the op-ed and current PERC Executive Director, previously worked at the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, and in a 2009 op-ed criticized a number of bipartisan bills to protect wilderness, arguing that “land management agencies [should] turn a profit” by removing restrictions on timber and energy development.

In addition to arguing for no new national parks, PERC’s op-ed also calls for an end to one of America’s best parks programs, the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). LWCF is a budget-neutral program that uses funds from offshore oil and gas development fees to fund federal, state and local outdoor projects across the country. The program has been used to support some of America’s most iconic national parks, including the Grand Canyon and Yellowstone, and has helped create tens of thousands of outdoor projects such as local parks and baseball diamonds in all 50 states.

Members of Congress from both parties have called for full funding and reauthorization of the LWCF before it expires permanently on September 30. However, PERC and a select few Republican leaders in Congress are instead advocating for diverting the funds to cover maintenance costs, despite continuing to cut the National Park Service’s budget.

PERC and its oil and gas allies have also ramped up involvement in an extreme right wing campaign to give control of America’s public lands to the states and sell them off to the highest bidder. In March, PERC released a study that claimed to provide economic evidence to support the transfer of national public lands to state control. The study was widely cited in a series of nearly identical op-eds written by a front group for the oil and gas-backed public relations firm of Richard Berman, nicknamed “Dr. Evil” by consumer-protection and organizations he has targeted.

However, an analysis by the Center for Western Priorities (CWP) shows that PERC’s economic analysis is “flawed,” ignoring billions of dollars spent every year fighting wildfires and “fail[ing] to account for the multiple values provided by national public lands,” beyond drilling, mining, and logging. The study’s “glaring flaws would suggest that the authors designed a study to specifically support the organization’s ideology, which prioritizes extractive industries, reduces public access through privatization, and ignores the benefits of balanced land management,” CWP wrote in April.

CWP also cites two recent studies in its analysis from economists in Utah and Idaho showing that states would not be able to afford to manage lands if they were transferred to state control. In addition to the serious economic concerns they raise for state budgets, these proposals to transfer America’s public lands to the states and sell them off to private interests are unpopularwith Western voters, and most importantly, unconstitutional.

Despite these concerns, PERC and its oil and gas allies in Congress have continued to ramp up efforts to seize and sell off America’s public lands and push an overall “No More National Parks” campaign. While these highly partisan and divisive attacks on the environment have taken priority in Congress, the conservation efforts supported by both parties, such as the reauthorization of the LWCF, are at risk of being left behind. Congress will have less than 100 days to act and reauthorize LWCF when it returns from recess next week.

Title: Re: The Environment Board -- No More Public Land
Post by: Eddie on July 04, 2015, 08:59:35 AM
I suppose it would be wrong to wish pray for their Gulfstream to fall out of the sky some day soon with both of their miserable asses aboard....

How do people get so twisted? Their mother must have beaten them with a coat hanger or something.
Title: Ecological Disaster After Disaster: Is Technology Worth the Price we Pay?
Post by: RE on January 25, 2016, 02:05:18 PM (

Ecological Disaster After Disaster: Is Technology Worth the Price Humans Have to Pay?
TOPICS:Catherine Frompovich Toxins

January 18, 2016

bento rodrigues

By Catherine J. Frompovich


Who pays the price when technology goes wrong, fails, makes a mistake, malfunctions, or is not developed or utilized properly? The answer is ordinary, everyday humans who work to provide food, clothing and shelter for themselves and their families.

The photograph above shows the devastation due to the breach of an iron ore millings dam in Bento Rodrigues, Brazil. That disaster occurred November 5, 2015 when, according to Wikipedia [1], 60 million cubic meters of iron waste flowed into the Doce River. It’s been called the worst environmental disaster in Brazil’s history, and yet the world seems not to care about it. Eleven people died and 12 went missing.

The toxic flow has killed most of the river’s wildlife, probably a source of food for many people.

The toxic mud, poisoned with arsenic and mercury, is flowing into the Atlantic Ocean.

Humans cannot continue to destroy the Planet’s oceans, as we do, with our technology and irresponsible ways: The Exxon Valdez oil spill from an ocean-going tanker that spilled 11 to 38 million gallons of crude oil into Prince William Sound off Alaska, March 24, 1989 [2]; the 2010 Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Horizon oil spill that pumped millions of gallons of crude oil, plus the chemical Corexit into the Gulf [3-4]; and then there’s the mother of all ocean disasters—Fukushima [5]—constantly spewing radioactive elements into the Pacific Ocean. In April of 2015, a report claimed that trace amounts of Fukushima radiation had reached America’s western shores [6].
Natural and Non-Toxic Products. Up to 50% Off – Every Day (Ad)

Oil spills raise toxic levels of arsenic in the ocean [7], and humans eat fish and seafood, especially bottom crawlers like shrimp and lobsters. How can “wild caught” be safe to eat?

And then there’s the great plastic island in the Pacific Ocean called the “great Pacific garbage patch.” Some media reports estimate it’s about twice the size of the continental United States [8]. Below is a photograph of a poor turtle caught in a six-pack plastic harness-carrier. Not being able to extricate itself from the plastic noose as a younger turtle, its body and shell grew around it into a most irregular shape.


Science, technology, business and industry, governments and ALL humans must realize the impact we are having upon the ability for the Planet to recoup the devastation that our modern, technological lifestyles and sciences have given us and plagued Nature with. What right do we have to do that? Have all our modern inventions really benefited humans and the Planet? We need to change course immediately IF we want to save our “Blue Jewel” orbiting in the Milky Way Galaxy.

Going to Mars will be money not well spent because we will do the same damn thing to Mars as we have done to Mother Earth: Trash it! Let’s spend that Mars project money on cleaning up Planet Earth and make Mother Nature proud of all of us who care about her and ALL living things.

This video illustrates the extent of some of ecological damage. (

No one really can understand, nor appreciate, not having unpolluted water to drink; having to flee and/or abandon one’s home; not knowing what’s happened to a loved one until you experience such misery.

Look what’s happening to the unfortunate residents of Flint, Michigan: Drinking municipal water contaminated with lead.

Nothing, however, can match the scientific chutzpah of weather geoengineering.

The ‘raiders of the sky’ probably are the most toxic crew of control-freaks ever to present daily assaults upon the Planet and humankind in the history of the Planet, if not this section of our galaxy.

But, then maybe there is something even more sinister: electromagnetic frequency energies as found in microwaves, cell phones and towers, smart meters, Wi-Fi and all the dumb “smart” gadgets we think are so great that track our every move, catalog our actions like some experiment, and EMIT non-ionizing radiation which is causing untold health harms to everyone, especially fetuses and young children. Furthermore, what gives with all the fetal ultrasounds? Are they heating up amniotic fluid, ‘cooking’ brain cells and growing organ tissue? Read this and realize what doctors probably are not telling every pregnant mom.

More and more, the Planet—Mother Earth—and we, Earth’s humans, are being damaged to the point where we, her tenants, probably won’t be able to call Earth home for very much longer.

Even though all the advances in science, technology and modern living seem like such wonders, we still have to wonder how, and if, we can survive in the 21st century. What a place to find ourselves!

[1] (
[2] (
[3] (
[4] (
[5] (
[6] (
[7] (
[8] (

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)
Title: What the ‘sixth extinction’ will look like: The largest species die off first
Post by: RE on September 15, 2016, 02:22:15 AM (

Energy and Environment
What the ‘sixth extinction’ will look like in the oceans: The largest species die off first
By Chris Mooney September 14 at 2:37 PM

Atlantic bluefin tuna are corralled by fishing nets during the opening of the season in 2011 for tuna fishing off the coast of Barbate, Cadiz province, southern Spain. (AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti, File)

We mostly can’t see it around us, and too few of us seem to care — but nonetheless, scientists are increasingly convinced that the world is barreling towards what has been called a “sixth mass extinction” event. Simply put, species are going extinct at a rate that far exceeds what you would expect to see naturally, as a result of a major perturbation to the system.

In this case, the perturbation is us, rather than, say, an asteroid. As such, you might expect to see some patterns to extinctions that reflect our particular way of causing ecological destruction. And indeed, a new study published Wednesday in Science magazine confirms this. For the world’s oceans, it finds, threats of extinction aren’t apportioned equally among all species — rather, the larger ones, in terms of body size and mass, are uniquely imperiled right now.

From sharks to whales, giant clams, sea turtles, and tuna, the disproportionate threat to larger marine organisms reflects the “unique human propensity to cull the largest members of a population,” the authors write.

“What to us was surprising was that we did not see a similar kind of pattern in any of the previous mass extinction events that we studied,” said geoscientist Jonathan Payne of Stanford University, the study’s lead author. “So that indicated that there really is no good ecological analogue…this pattern has not happened before in the half billion years of the animal fossil record.”

The researchers conducted the work through a statistical analysis of a 2,497 different marine animal groups at one taxonomic level higher than the level of species — called “genera.” And they found that increases in an organism’s body size were strongly linked to an increased risk of extinction in the present period — but that this was not the case in the Earth’s distant past.

Indeed, during the past 66 million years, there was actually a small link between smaller body sizes and going extinct, marking the present as a strong reversal. “The extreme bias against large-bodied animals distinguishes the modern diversity crisis from all potential deep-time analogs,” the researchers write.

The study also notes that on land, we’ve already seen the same pattern — and in fact, we saw it first. “Human hunting has been extensive for many thousands of years on land, whereas it’s been extensive for a couple of hundred years in the oceans,” says Payne.

Thus, humans already drove to extinction many land-based large animal species in what has been dubbed the Late Quaternary extinction event as the most recent ice age came to a close..

“These losses in the ocean are paralleling what humans did to land animals some 50,000 to 10,000 years ago, when we wiped out around half of the big-bodied mammal species on Earth, like mammoths, mastodons, saber-tooth cats and the like,” said Anthony Barnosky, executive director of Stanford Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve, who was not involved in the study but reviewed it for the Post. “As a result, terrestrial ecosystems were locked into a new trajectory that included local biodiversity loss over and above the loss of the large animals themselves, and changes in which kinds of plants dominated.”

Barnosky was the co-author of a study published last year that found an “exceptionally rapid loss of biodiversity over the last few centuries, indicating that a sixth mass extinction is already under way.”

A particular problem, says Payne, is that if you take out all the top predators, then the species they used to prey upon can run amok and explode in population, having large reverberating effects on the entire ecosystem.

“The preferential removal of the largest animals from the modern oceans, unprecedented in the history of animal life, may disrupt ecosystems for millions of years even at levels of taxonomic loss far below those of previous mass extinctions,” the authors write.

Interestingly, if climate change was the key driver of species losses, you’d expect a more evenly distributed set of risks to organisms.

“I’ve worked on the Permian mass extinction quite a bit, it shows environmental evidence of ocean warming, ocean acidification, and deoxygenation, the loss of oxygen from seawater,” says Payne. These are the very same threats to the oceans that we’re worried about now due to ongoing climate change. But the Permian extinction, some 250 million years ago, did not feature a selective disappearance of large-bodied organisms, Payne says.

Thus, as previous work has also suggested, the current study underscores ecosystem risks are not being principally driven by a changing climate — yet. Rather, they’re being driven more directly by humans which species hunt and fish, and where they destroy ecosystems to build homes, farms, cities, and much more. But as climate change worsens, it will compound what’s already happening.

Energy and Environment newsletter

The science and policy of environmental issues.

“The losses the authors describe in the oceans do not include the extinctions expected from business-as-usual climate change,” said Barnosky. “Adding those human-triggered losses onto those we’re already causing from over-fishing, pollution, and so on is very likely to put the human race in the same class as an asteroid strike–like the one that killed the dinosaurs–as an extinction driver.”

The study emerges even as the U.S. State Department prepares to open its third annual Our Ocean conference, where heads of state and ocean advocates convene to try to protect more and more of the oceans’ area from over-fishing and other forms of despoilment (and climate change). The study should only heighten the focus at that event.

But Payne says that, in a way, the research is in some ways heartening for those who care about ocean conservation – precisely because human-driven large animal extinctions in the sea are not as advanced as they are on land, there is still a huge amount of biological life that we can save.

“I talked to a couple of people who said they found this a very discouraging result,” Payne says. “I tend not to look at it that way. I think there are a lot of reasons to be optimistic about the oceans, because we haven’t impacted them much yet.”
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on September 27, 2016, 12:11:55 AM
as long as you feel good about yourself.
Title: Historic Paris Climate Pact Takes Effect Today. Now What?
Post by: RE on November 04, 2016, 01:23:04 AM (

Historic Paris Climate Pact Takes Effect Today. Now What?
“This is a moment to celebrate. It is also a moment to look ahead with sober assessment and renewed will over the task ahead.”
11/04/2016 01:56 am ET

By Valerie Volcovici

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The global accord to combat climate change agreed in Paris last year officially entered into force Friday, putting pressure on nearly 200 countries to start executing plans to slash their greenhouse gas emissions.

“This is a moment to celebrate,” said United Nations climate chief Patricia Espinosa. “It is also a moment to look ahead with sober assessment and renewed will over the task ahead.”

The Paris Agreement seeks to wean the world economy off fossil fuels in the second half of the century, limiting the rise in average world temperatures to “well below” 2.0 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above preindustrial times.

It takes effect as greenhouse gas emissions are projected by 2030 to exceed by 12 billion to 14 billion tonnes what is needed to keep global warming to the internationally agreed target, the United Nations said this week.

Representatives from nearly 200 countries on Monday will convene in Marrakesh, Morocco for two weeks to discuss the nuts and bolts of the Paris accord and the policies, technology and finance needed to ensure the Paris goals are achieved.

“The timetable is pressing because globally greenhouse gas emissions which drive climate change and its impacts are not yet falling – a fact which the Marrakesh meeting must have at the front of its concerns and collective resolve,” said Espinosa.

World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said the milestone also serves as a reminder to rich countries that pledged to help developing countries combat climate change.

“Donor countries made a strong commitment in Paris. And now we must turn those commitments into action,” he said.
Title: Donald Trump, in Louisiana, Says He Will End Energy Regulations
Post by: RE on December 10, 2016, 12:25:53 AM
So how fast can Trumpty Dumpty make America air quality as low as China's?

RE (

Donald Trump, in Louisiana, Says He Will End Energy Regulations


President-elect Donald J. Trump spoke Friday at a rally for Republican candidates in Baton Rouge, La., a state heavily dependent on the oil and gas industry. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times

BATON ROUGE, La. — President-elect Donald J. Trump on Friday promised that his administration would strip away “job-killing restrictions” on energy production and encourage the construction of refineries in the United States, as he campaigned for Republican candidates in a state heavily dependent on the oil and gas industry.

“We will cancel the job-killing restrictions on the production of American energy,” Mr. Trump said in an airplane hangar in Baton Rouge, the day before Louisiana voters go to the polls to vote for Senate and House candidates. “We haven’t had refineries built in decades, right? We’re going to have refineries built again.”

His comments came a day after he had announced his selection of Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma’s attorney general, as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Mr. Pruitt is a staunch ally of the energy industry who has teamed up with companies to undercut the Obama administration’s climate regulations.

Mr. Trump pledged to enact a “massive” tax cut for the middle class, roll back Obama-era regulations, pass a $1 trillion infrastructure program and build a wall on the southern border to prioritize American people and jobs.
Interactive Graphic
How Trump Can Influence Climate Change

A Trump administration could weaken or do away with many of the Obama-era policies focused on greenhouse gas emissions.
OPEN Interactive Graphic

“We’re going to rebuild our country with American hands by American workers,” Mr. Trump said, adding that his administration would be guided by “two simple rules: Buy American, and hire American.”

“Our country is being drained — drained of jobs,” Mr. Trump said.

He also suggested that he would make broader cultural changes, arguing that desecrating the American flag should be outlawed or bring a penalty.

“I think it’s a disgrace, O.K.?” Mr. Trump said of burning or stamping on the United States flag. “I’m a big believer in free speech, but maybe we’re going to be putting something in” to address the issue, he said. “I think we’re going to have to do something about that.”

The Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that flag burning was a form of free speech protected under the First Amendment.
Get the Morning Briefing by Email

What you need to know to start your day, delivered to your inbox Monday through Friday.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

    See Sample Privacy Policy

Mr. Trump, who has been traveling the country on a thank-you tour reliving his upset victory on election night, took time to gloat over his onetime critics in the Republican Party.

“Remember the ‘Never Trumpers’? They’re on a respirator right now, they’re gasping for air,” Mr. Trump said. “Some of them are saying, ‘I’d only vote for Trump — I love this guy.’ ”

Mr. Trump, who often encouraged supporters’ angry chants during the campaign, tried to quiet booing at his mention of President Obama on Friday.

“President Obama, who, by the way, I’ve gotten along with so well,” Mr. Trump said, as the crowd began to jeer. “No, no, no, he’s really doing great. He’s been so nice.”

It was the second appearance in a row at which Mr. Trump appeared to attempt to calm, rather than rile up, his audience, a stark departure from his behavior during the race. In Des Moines on Thursday night, as supporters booed and hissed at protesters who had unfurled a banner and were shouting about the Ku Klux Klan and fascism, Mr. Trump said it was “all right” and quickly moved on with his speech.
Title: Officials say damage to sewage plant in Discovery Park is catastrophic
Post by: RE on February 17, 2017, 07:01:50 AM
♫The most disgusting beaches you  ever saw were in Seattle...♫


 Officials say damage to sewage plant in Discovery Park is catastrophic
Originally published February 16, 2017 at 12:27 pm Updated February 16, 2017 at 8:50 pm

Mark Isaacson with King County West Point Treatment Plant said “This is a major catastrophe” He’s in the basement of the West Point Treatment Plant that was totally submerged in 12-feet of water. (Greg Gilbert/The Seattle Times)

Parts of the West Point Treatment Plant flooded on Feb. 9, and the plant in Seattle has since been operating at less than half its usual capacity. (King County)

1 of 2
Mark Isaacson with King County West Point Treatment Plant said “This is a major catastrophe” He’s in the basement of the West Point Treatment Plant that was totally submerged in 12-feet of water. (Greg Gilbert/The Seattle Times)

The plant suffered catastrophic damage on Feb. 9 and will not return to regular service for many weeks, according to Mark Isaacson, director of the King County’s wastewater-treatment division.
Share story
By Lynda V. Mapes
Seattle Times environment reporter

King County has stopped dumping raw sewage into Puget Sound from its crippled West Point treatment plant for now — but the county will likely start dumping again when rainy weather returns.

The plant, which treats sewage from 1.7 million people around the Seattle region, suffered catastrophic damage on Feb. 9 and will not resume regular service for many weeks, according to Mark Isaacson, director of the King County’s wastewater-treatment division.

Beaches at Discovery Park are closed, with no date yet for reopening, because of the risk to public health from raw sewage pumped from the plant into the Sound. “We are here for the health of the environment, and for public health, and right now, we are compromising that,” said Isaacson.

The trouble started when the pump station that sends treated wastewater out of the plant failed, according to a letter from plant managers sent Wednesday to King County’s regulators.
Featured Video
'We're all in this together': Thousands of Sounders fans celebrate MLS Cup victory (2:51)
Most Read Stories

    Richland florist discriminated against gay couple by refusing service, state Supreme Court rules
    I-90 reopens after mudslide trapped 13 vehicles  VIEW
    Seattle is close to breaking rain record for month
    T-Mobile one-ups Verizon’s new unlimited data plan; 4Q results top forecasts
    Disappearance of Seattle-based crab boat, crew a ‘mystery’

Save 75% on digital access today.

Staff on duty about 2:15 a.m., Feb. 9, worked to reduce the incoming flow while attempting — unsuccessfully — to restart the 2,250-horsepower motors on the pumps. As water levels in the plant continued to rise, staff next worked to manually intervene to stop pumps bringing more incoming flow.

That caused the upstream levels of sewage entering the plant to rise, triggering an emergency bypass gate to automatically open. That diverts raw sewage away from the plant and into an emergency outfall pipe to Puget Sound, as a desperate measure to save the plant.

By then the plant was already flooded, with a barrage of some 15 million gallons of water barreling through it, powerful enough to buckle and break down 25-foot-high garage doors, mangle equipment and leave a fur of untreated sewage 12 feet up the walls. Cavernous rooms filled with pumps and other equipment were flooded to the ceiling and steeped in muck.

“Water is impatient,” said operations and maintenance section manager Robert Waddle. “And the water won.”

Tens of millions of dollars of equipment, including more than 200 motors and more than 100 electrical panels, were destroyed. An uncounted number of pumps have to be taken apart, cleaned and repaired. Industrial-scale boilers, used in the treatment process, need to be replaced.

Since the flood, hazardous-materials crews have been steam-cleaning the plant, and electricians have been working their way, room by room, to make them safe to enter after water swamped the electric circuitry.

Next comes the slow process of cleaning and replacement and repair of motors, pumps, and electrical wiring and panels, expected to take many weeks.

King County has a $250 million insurance policy that is expected to cover the cost.

Isaacson, during a tour of the plant with reporters Thursday afternoon, said the event was catastrophic. It’s so damaging that the plant, which turned 50 years old this year, cannot perform secondary treatment that is required by its wastewater permit. That puts the county out of compliance with state regulators and facing possible fines.

The plant normally provides intensive treatment of up to 450 million gallons per day of sewage, wastewater and stormwater.

But right now, the plant is limping along at half capacity and is treating stormwater and raw sewage flowing to the plant with primary treatment only. That means solids are screened and settled out, and the rest is disinfected with chlorine, then dechlorinated before discharging the water offshore of the beach at West Point to Puget Sound.

Worse, when rain swells the amount of water entering the system because of stormwater from roads, roofs and other hard surfaces, the plant, operating at reduced capacity, bypasses what it can’t shed to other plants for treatment and sends it directly to Puget Sound.

Environmentally, untreated flows cause temporarily elevated levels of bacteria in some areas, spot tests by the Wastewater Treatment Division show. Currents dissipate the pollution. Large amounts of stormwater in the effluent also mean the sewage is greatly diluted.

The plant bypassed 260 million gallons of untreated flows to Puget Sound beginning early in the morning Feb. 9 and stopped about 19 hours later, said Doug Williams, spokesman for the county.

Dumping of untreated flows began again about 3:30 a.m. Wednesday because of the wet weather and lasted until about 10:30 a.m., spilling an estimated six to 10 more million gallons of untreated effluent into Puget Sound from an emergency overflow pipe 35 feet below the surface, nearly 500 feet offshore. Most of the effluent is stormwater, but about 10 percent is raw sewage.

The emergency overflows resumed from 4 p.m. Wednesday and continued overnight until about 6:30 a.m. Thursday, when heavy rain resumed. Totals from that bypass event had not yet been calculated.

The county has notified its regulators at the state Department of Ecology and Department of Health of the situation, and has also informed tribes with treaty-fishing rights.

The trouble comes just as the region is experiencing record heavy rains that are expected to continue into the middle of next week. That is sure to mean more raw sewage bypassed to Puget Sound.

Isaacson said right now the county’s top priorities are worker safety and getting the plant back in working order. Still to come is what he promised would be a “deep dive” to figure out exactly what went wrong. “We owe that to ourselves and to the region. We are going to learn from this.”

King County operates a far-flung and diverse network of pipes, vaults and treatment plants from large, regional facilities, such as Brightwater and West Point, that collect and treat flows from local sewer agencies to a community septic system on Vashon Island.

The county’s Wastewater Treatment Division serves about 1.7 million people within a 424-square-mile service area, which includes most urban areas of King County and parts of south Snohomish County and northeast Pierce County.
Title: This Oil Nation Aims To Colonize Mars
Post by: RE on February 20, 2017, 01:40:17 AM
Good Idea, since the UAE will be uninhabitable inside 20 years.  ::)

RE (

This Oil Nation Aims To Colonize Mars
By Irina Slav - Feb 17, 2017, 5:46 PM CST Mars


The UAE may not be the first country that comes to mind when one thinks of space exploration, but it has big plans to colonize mars, and it’s got the oil money to do it. The plan is already in the works, complete with a concept design for a mini city, to be built by robots.

Though space exploration usually conjures up visions of Russia and the U.S., the UAE has a long history of high-profile, futuristic technological developments, for everything from artificial islands to the world’s first rotating skyscraper and 3D printing.

This time, however, the Emiratis are in no rush: their project is called Mars 2117 and media have praised them for not being overambitious, unlike, some say, Elon Musk and NASA, with their plans to start sending people to Mars some time over the next few decades. As one author points out, neither SpaceX, nor NASA have the money needed to advance space transportation technology quickly enough.

The Emiratis, however, are starting slow, from square one. According to a press release from the government of Dubai, the initial stage of the project will focus on developing the skills and expertise necessary to move forward. This stage will in effect involve a change in the educational system of the emirate, to enable future generations to sprout the engineers who will take the project further.
Related: How Long Can The Permian Craze Continue?

In a poetic summary, the emirate’s ruler, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed, said that “The new project is a seed that we plant today, and we expect future generations to reap the benefits, driven by its passion to learn to unveil a new knowledge.”

One cannot help but appreciate the sober, rational approach, devoid of the urge for quick results. It is this approach that has the biggest chance of success, after all, and we – or rather our descendents – may see the Emirati-international team in a nose-to-nose race with SpaceX because, to be fair, Elon Musk has not set a tight deadline for SpaceX’s manned mission to Mars. It could take place in 40 to 100 years.
The No.1 Mining Stock For 2017

This small lithium company is on the verge of becoming the next big thing in the resource space. With incredible assets and a management dream team – this company should be on all investors radar.

Click here to find out more

So, the interesting question is: will the Emiratis team up with Musk to take people to Mars? It’s not unlikely, to say the least.

The UAE’s space agency was set up just three years ago and has yet to build sufficient expertise and experience to enable the education of those future engineers we mentioned. SpaceX, on the other hand, has been around for 13 years and is already sending rockets to space and getting them back, too. The company has scheduled its 10th commercial launch for tomorrow, to take supplies and science reports to the International Space Station.
Related: Is The Bakken A Bust?

It’s a perfect fit, really. SpaceX and Elon Musk have the expertise, the experience, and the skills, and Dubai has the money. Of course, just because they look like a perfect fit this doesn’t mean they will team up. And yet, on a speculative note, let’s recall that Musk last week opened a Tesla showroom in Dubai. That’s the first Tesla presence in the Middle East and many considered it an exceptionally bold move, given the Emirates’ oil focus.

The Emiratis, despite the oil price crash, still have a respectable stash in their sovereign wealth fund, the Investment Corporation of Dubai. The fund was worth US$175 billion three years ago, when it launched its international expansion strategy, and now, according to one author, it has reached US$500 billion. With that kind of money—and technological prowess—Mars seems feasible.

By Irina Slav for
Title: Global Environmental Pollutants: Is Anthropogenic Activity Despoiling the Planet
Post by: RE on March 05, 2017, 02:15:16 AM
A fairly comprehensive list of the Crimes Against Humanity by our Illuminati Overseers.

RE (

Global Environmental Pollutants: Is Anthropogenic Activity Despoiling the Planet?
Or is it Mainly the Anti-Human Activity of Multinational Corporations?
By Dr. Gary G. Kohls
Global Research, March 04, 2017
Region: USA
Theme: Environment

Definition of Anthropogenic: “an adjective used to describe the environmental pollution and pollutants that originate from human or corporate activity.”

Conscientious whistleblowers in the honor-the-earth, protect-the-water and assorted other environmental movements regularly point out the glaring reality that it is actually the amoral, conscienceless multinational corporations that are the main cause of local, regional and planetary environmental pollution.

But if an investigative journalist accidentally allows those assertions to be published or voiced, the media’s propaganda machine predictably goes into defensive mode or attack mode, first casting doubt on the whistle-blower’s assertions or else it issues an ad hominem attack upon the whistle-blower.

The corporation’s stable of lawyers and public relations department  – with the assistance of assorted media mouthpieces – start mis-directing the public’s perceptions by repeatedly using the “time-honored” phrase of “human activity” or “man-made activity” for causing the problem (even though all the credible truly scientific evidence implicates “corporate activity” for the damage).

Thereafter, especially if the media outlet depends on advertising revenue from the corporate polluter, the whistle-blower will likely be black-balled from further interviews.

Every polluting, fossil fuel-burning multinational corporation could be indicted in any unbiased court of law for crimes against humanity and for crimes against the planet – if any courageous lawyer could be found to prosecute the case. Plenty of solid scientific data exists to convict polluting corporations for their crimes against the planet – if a fair-minded judge could be found that is not beholden to corporate interests.

And any legislative body containing a majority of honorable politicians (that have not taken corporate campaign bribes) would easily pass legislation protecting the planet rather than listening for even another minute to the corrupted “pseudoscience” that is spouted so regularly by the highly-paid mercenary lobbyists that do the bidding their industry paymasters.

It is the rare corporation that does not pollute the earth in the process of mining the earth’s natural resources and in the manufacturing of their products. And then the end-products invariably cause serious pollution in many ways, including the act of disposing of the often toxic used-up product.

Pentagon SuperFund Sites, the Worst of the Worst

The Pentagon and its military-industrial complex of weapons suppliers are acknowledged to be the worst and most plentiful polluters on the face of the earth, with hundreds of military bases and weapons production sites that qualify for the designation of SuperFund sites. Those sites contain the most toxic by-products of war-making and the environmental pollution is so bad that the government and the taxpayers are on the hook for doing the impossible clean-up!

The same can be said of the mining industry, so that when a mine shuts down, the metallic ore plays out or the mining company goes belly-up, the government and the taxpayers are on the hook to do the clean-up. (The so-called clean-up is particularly difficult in the deadly residue and toxic tailing ponds at the sites of sulfide (sulfuric acid-producing)  mines where gold, silver, copper and zinc had been mined.

(For much more information about sulfide mining, see my column on the Butte, Montana SuperFund open pit copper mine that is located just outside of the dying community of Butte, Montana. The Butte mine clearly illustrates the long-term pollution that just one abandoned copper mine invariably causes as it gradually fills up with heavy metals that are dissolved in  sulfuric acid that has a  highly acidic pH of 2.5 [approximating stomach acid].) The Butte SuperFund site is just one of 16 Montana SuperFund sites that the has been assigned to remediate.

Here is the link: (

Minnesota’s 25 EPA SuperFund Sites

Incidentally, Minnesota at one time had over 40 SuperFund sites, with 25 remaining on the EPA’s list, including Duluth’s St. Louis River site at the old US Steel Plant, where there are carcinogenic PAHs (Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), carcinogenic VOCs [volatile organic chemicals) , cyanide, naphthalene, and heavy metals - including mercury - in the sludge at the bottom of the river, where US Steel dumped its chemical and metallic refuse. Most of the Minnesota sites are either corporate refuse site, municipal landfill sites or weapons manufacturing sites. All have serious heavy metal and/or carcinogenic contaminants that are poisoning the ground water, soil and even the air.

The recently discussed irremediable pollution in the slip near Duluth’s Canal Park, where the decommissioned ore boat, the William A. Irvin, is moored, is not large enough to warrant SuperFund status, nor has the upstream St. Louis River Cloquet Paper Mill operation, which, for many decades, discharged toxic paper-processing by-products (especially carcinogenic chlorinated hydrocarbons from the bleaching process) directly into the St. Louis River before it was forced to change its manufacturing operations.

Corporate Disinformation Tactics

When confronted by damaging information about their corporate processes, one of the early disinformation tactics that CEOs order is to have their public relations propagandists play the “doubt card”, which tries to deflect blame for the malfeasance on some other entity, often by producing some pseudoscientific research that the industry concocted in secrecy.

Wealthy corporations have the monetary resources to use that tactic for decades if necessary, thus delaying real remedies while the profits keep rolling in. The “doubt card” tactic is currently being used by climate change deniers, especially the accused, amoral corporations in the Big Tobacco, Big Oil, Big Coal, gas, energy, pipeline, mining, pharmaceutical and weapons industries, despite the evidence for global warming that is everywhere that an unbiased, well-informed person might look.

Big Tobacco particularly has become infamous for casting doubt on whether or not cigarette smoking was a public health problem. Big Tobacco’s executives have even expressed pride in inventing that tactic, stating that doubt was their greatest weapon in delaying government interference in their obscenely profitable industry. Casting doubt delayed the public’s perception that cigarettes were carcinogenic or could cause respiratory illnesses, and thus they got away with murder for decades longer than they should have.

Science-minded physicians like US Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, who served under Ronald Reagan (who was Big Pharma’s, Big Food’s, Big Agribusiness’s and the nuclear weapons industry’s hero), knew the facts about tobacco’s lethality. But Koop and many other unbiased scientists were essentially accused of being conspiracy theorists when they tried to warn the public about the tobacco industry’s dangerous products. Selling highly addictive but highly lucrative products creates life-long customers and patients who will pay almost anything to get their next caffeine, nicotine, opioid or prescription drug fix in order to avoid the painful symptoms of withdrawal.

Is there a more devious way for an entity to make money than to sell customers a highly addictive product that also sickens and even kills its customers, while simultaneously lying about the addictive quality and lethality of its products?

Illicit vs. Legal Addictive Drugs

Welcome to the world of sociopathic Big Businesses that profit by pushing illicit – but highly addictive – street drugs like heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine and speed, each of which are intended to get customers addicted, thus becoming regular customers.

And welcome to the world of sociopathic Big Pharma industries that maximize profits by marketing legal – and oftentimes highly addictive – psychopharmaceutical prescription drugs such as “anti-depressants”, tranquilizers, opioids, the so-called ADHD drugs, the various anorexic/weight loss drugs and psycho-stimulating drugs like Ritalin, Strattera, Wellbutrin, Effexor and Provigil. Any adverse effects from these prescription drugs are iatrogenic.

Big Pharma and Iatrogenocide

Big Pharma’s psychotropic drug marketing programs are virtually indistinguishable from Big Tobacco’s. Until they were caught in the lie, both industries (falsely) asserted that their products were safe, effective and not addictive, and to this day, they both continue to co-opt their partners in deception (the tobacco sellers and the prescribing physicians, allied health professionals, psych drug salespersons and pharmacists) by convincing those groups to continue prescribing or dispensing these dangerous synthetic chemicals long enough to make their clients physiologically dependent.

And then, when the patient who has been taking brain-altering substances long enough and then realizes that he might be addicted, or feels sick or out of control and then  to get off the drug, he is at high risk of developing withdrawal symptoms (that are usually totally different from the symptoms that caused him to start the drug in the first place).

When withdrawal from addictive drugs occurs, the prescribing physician often erroneously makes a knee-jerk diagnosis that the patient’s initial “mental illness” is “relapsing”. And then, because of the unfounded assertion that the withdrawal syndrome is just the old disorder coming back, the patient is often told that he will have to take a cocktail of drugs for the rest of his life.

Of course the longer a potentially addictive brain-altering drug is taken, the more likely it will be that the patient will have difficulty overcoming the brain’s dependence on the substance, and it doesn’t matter whether the drug was legal or illicit. There is also a great likelihood of long-term brain damage as these drugs accumulate with each dose and therefore can continue their neurotoxic adverse effects.

Whether using Big Tobacco’s or Big Pharma’s addictive products, smokers and drugged-up patients are likely to become lifelong consumers of the products and will be helping both industries keep the drug prices high, the next quarter’s financial report positive and the corporation’s stock price up; all of which keeps the gravy train going strong for the CEOs who regularly take home tens of millions of dollars annually.

Immediately below is one formula for the successful marketing of prescription psychotropic drugs. These principles are just a variation of how people get hooked on nicotine, heroin and other assorted street drugs.

1) Brain-wash prospective targets so they will want to try the potentially addictive drug;

2) Convince the target to demand a prescription from their physician;

3) Cheer-lead the patient to tolerate the inevitable adverse effects so that the patient will continue taking the drug until they are hooked;

4) Get the patient to take the drug even though it can be obscenely expensive;

5) Be ready for the patient to fail at trying to stop taking the drug;

6) Recommend additional drugs to cover-up the drug’s adverse effects (rather than quitting the drug altogether);

7) Encourage the patient to increase the dose of the addictive drug when he gets drug-withdrawal symptoms or even encourage the patient to take additional drugs to cover-up the symptoms (rather than taking the time to help the patient get off the drug completely).

Industries that sell addictive entertainment (such as videogames, online gambling and pornography), alcohol, caffeine, nicotine, sports, etc) are examples of addictive products that are regarded as good investments for the investor class, no matter what are the consequences for the patient.

Those examples of corporate amorality, malfeasance and greed could be called crimes against humanity and crimes against the planet. And just below is another crime against Mother Earth that has been essentially ignored by the national media. Pretending that the disastrous algae blooms in the Great Lakes aren’t there is irresponsible behavior whether corporations or individual humans are to blame. And to acknowledge the disaster might lead to criminal prosecution.  Of course, if the root causes of the algae blooms are identified, the next step is to identify the guilty entities (usually corporations) that should be legally responsible for the clean-up.

Toxic Algae Blooms in Herbicide and Pesticide-poisoned Lake Erie

The environmental catastrophe that has been well-documented in a multitude of satellite photographs (see one of them below) has been slowly killing off Lake Erie, the 11th largest “fresh” water lake in the world. The pro-corporate, anti-regulatory, neoliberal and neoconservative entities (from all political persuasions except for Greens and Social Democrats) from the rust-belt states of Michigan and Ohio have been negligent in their duty to ensure the sustainability of the environment. But all those politicians took large campaign contributions – and then acquiesced to pressure – from regional and multinational corporations to do what was best for the polluting industries and not for the environment. The corporations most responsible were the ALEC-associated Big Agribusiness, Big Chemistry, Big Mining, Big Energy, Big Food and Wall Street industries in whose interest it has always been to see abolished the common-sense efforts of the Department of Natural Resources and the Environmental Protection Agency for the regulation of toxic pollutants. Immediately below are named some of the corporate pollutants.

1) Pesticides and insecticides used in corporate agribusiness,

2) Phosphorus- and nitrogen-containing nutrients in corporate agribusiness-promoted fertilizer and phosphate detergents (PO4),

3) Corporate sewage treatment plants,

4) Corporate garbage-burning facilities,

5) Corporate mining waste runoffs,

6) Corporate pharmaceuticals that are excreted by humans and livestock animals,

7) Organochlorine toxins (often carcinogenic, from upstream corporate paper mills, chlorinated drinking water, etc),

8) Fluoridated drinking water,

9) Corporate farm animal manure (virtually always contaminated with antibiotics),

10) PCBs and mercury from coal-fired corporate electric power plants,

11) Other synthetic, non-organic, toxic food waste and water in aquifers, lakes, rivers and streams (even water that is intended for drinking!), and

12) Global climate change because of the fossil fuel industry’s refusal to change to sustainable energy sources.

The following satellite image is of a massive toxic algae bloom from the summer of 2015, which was the worst bloom in years. The summer of 2016 was expected to be worse than 2015. The photo shows Michigan’s Lake St. Clair and the western part of Lake Erie, Both fresh water lakes received enormous amounts of Agribusiness-facilitated, fertilizer-laden, herbicide-laden, pesticide-laden, highly polluted water from streams and rivers that drain the area’s chemically-treated, corporate-managed farm land. Normal lakes should be uniformly blue with zero green color! The green, of course, represents the algal bloom.

These algae are often toxic. They are able to thrive partly because of the warming water (more proof of global climate change), but the bloom is made much worse because of the combination of high nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient load from farm fertilizer and livestock manure and because algae are resistant to the above list of cellular toxins that kill off algae’s competitors, such as fish and other aquatic life.


Highly toxic herbicides and insecticides are commonly found in the watersheds leading into Lake St Clair and Lake Erie. The poisons that are secreted by the algae can be lethal to fish and animals, including humans, given a large enough exposure. Some of the toxic chemical herbicides and pesticides listed below are commonly sprayed on farm fields of large American corporate farming operations, thanks to Big Agribusinesses like Monsanto. They include:

1) Metolachlor, atrazine, deethylatrazine, cyanazine, simazine and Round-up are among the most frequently detected herbicides.

2) Diazinon, chlorpyrifos, and carbaryl were among the most frequently detected insecticides.

Algae are simple plant species that do not thrive in unpolluted cold water. Under certain conditions, the overgrowth of some algae species can produce deadly toxins that can kill or sicken fish, shellfish, mammals, birds and humans, and, of course, will make the water smelly and undrinkable.

When masses of algae die and decompose and de-oxygenate the water, massive fish die-offs – if there are any fish left – will occur.

Non-human corporations are the major culprits, not individual human persons. Corporations are not persons, no matter what the Supreme Court said in 2010, but they should be held responsible.

In a strict law and order society like Donald Trump claimed his presidency was all about, such crimes against humanity and the earth should be punished with the death penalty.

I say take the culprits to court and lock ‘em up before they kill again.

Dr Kohls is a retired physician from Duluth, MN, USA. He writes a weekly column for the Duluth Reader, the area’s alternative newsweekly magazine. His columns deal with the dangers of American fascism, corporatism, militarism, racism, malnutrition, Big Pharma’s psychiatric drugging and over-vaccination regimens, and other movements that threaten the environment, health, democracy, civility and longevity of the populace. Many of his columns are archived at; (; or at (

The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Dr. Gary G. Kohls, Global Research, 2017
Title: On climate change, Scott Pruitt causes an uproar — and contradicts the EPA’s own
Post by: RE on March 09, 2017, 05:07:27 PM
Somehow, I don't think too many lower level apparatchiks in the EPA are going to be cooperating much with their new boss.  ::)

RE (

Energy and Environment
On climate change, Scott Pruitt causes an uproar — and contradicts the EPA’s own website
By Chris Mooney and Brady Dennis March 9 at 3:22 PM

Does the Trump administration believe in climate change?
Embed Share
Play Video3:19

This story has been updated.

Scott Pruitt, the nation’s top environmental official, strongly rejected the established science of climate change on Thursday, outraging scientists, environmentalists, and even his immediate predecessor at the Environmental Protection Agency.

“I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see,” Pruitt, the newly installed EPA administrator, said on the CNBC program “Squawk Box.”

“But we don’t know that yet,” he continued. “We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis.”

His comments represented a startling statement for an official so high in the U.S. government, putting him at odds not only with other countries around the globe but also with the official scientific findings of the agency he now leads. President Trump in the past has called the notion of human-fueled climate change a hoax. And other cabinet members, including Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, have previously questioned the scientific basis for combating global warming.

[This climate lawsuit could change everything. No wonder the Trump administration doesn’t want it going to trial]

But Pruitt’s attempt to sow scientific doubt where little exists alarmed environmental advocates, scientists and former EPA officials, who fear he plans to use such views to attack Obama-era regulations aimed at reining in pollution from the burning of coal and other fossil fuels.

“The world of science is about empirical evidence, not beliefs,” Gina McCarthy, the EPA’s most recent administrator, said in a statement. “When it comes to climate change, the evidence is robust and overwhelmingly clear that the cost of inaction is unacceptably high. Preventing the greatest consequences of climate change is imperative to the health and well-being of all of us who call Earth home.”

She added, “I cannot imagine what additional information the Administrator might want from scientists for him to understand that.”

Pruitt’s climate change comments resulted in instant headlines on Thursday. As criticism mounted, White House press secretary Sean Spicer batted back a question about Pruitt’s comments from a reporter who cited Pruitt’s words and how they contradict the scientific consensus on climate change.

“That’s a snippet of what Administrator Pruitt said,” said Spicer. “He went on and said I don’t think we know conclusively, this is what we know. I would suggest that you touch base with the EPA on that. But he had a very lengthy response and that is just one snippet of what the Administrator said.”
Spicer downplays EPA chief's carbon dioxide emissions denial

Embed Share
Play Video0:32

But Pruitt, who was visiting the energy industry conference CERAWeek in Houston, also waded into related controversial topics during his CNBC interview. In particular, he questioned whether it was EPA’s role to regulate carbon dioxide emissions — something undertaken through the agency’s Clean Power Plan, the Obama administration’s most significant policy to combat climate change — and challenged the Paris agreement on climate change.

“Nowhere in the equation has Congress spoken,” said Pruitt on whether his agency is obligated to regulate carbon dioxide. “The legislative branch has not addressed this issue at all. It’s a very fundamental question to say, ‘Are the tools in the toolbox available to the EPA to address this issue of CO2, as the court had recognized in 2007, with it being a pollutant?’”

(Pruitt was apparently referring to the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, in which the court ruled that “harms associated with climate change are serious and well recognized” and that the EPA had been “arbitrary and capricious” in failing to issue a determination on whether greenhouse gases endanger the health and welfare of the public.)

The remarks appeared to fundamentally call into question whether the EPA has a role in the regulation of greenhouse gases that drive global warming, including not only carbon dioxide but methane. Last week, Pruitt’s agency withdrew an agency request to oil and gas companies to report on their equipment and its methane emissions, which could have laid the groundwork for tighter regulations.
Pruitt talks about the future of the EPA at CPAC
Embed Share
Play Video3:19

Pruitt also dismissed the international Paris climate agreement, which the Obama administration helped to lead and which was joined by nearly 200 countries in late 2015, as a “bad deal” for the United States.

“It’s one thing to be talking about CO2 internationally,” Pruitt said. “But when you front-load your costs, as we endeavored to do in that agreement, and then China and India back-loaded their costs for 2030 and beyond, that’s not good for America. That’s not an America first type of approach.”

On the science of climate change, Pruitt’s statements fly in the face of an international scientific consensus, which has concluded that it is “extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.” For that matter, they also contradict the very website of the agency that Pruitt heads.

The EPA’s “Climate Change” website states the following:

    Recent climate changes, however, cannot be explained by natural causes alone. Research indicates that natural causes do not explain most observed warming, especially warming since the mid-20thcentury. Rather, it is extremely likely that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming.

For this conclusion, the EPA cites the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the leading global scientific consensus body that assesses the state of the science roughly every five years.

Pruitt spoke with CNBC amidst growing anticipation that the Trump administration will soon move to begin a formal rollback of President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, an EPA policy capping emissions from electricity generating stations, such as coal-fired power plants.

Pruitt himself sued the EPA over the Clean Power Plan in his previous role as the attorney general of Oklahoma.

And that’s just one of multiple lawsuits that he filed against the EPA – others were over mercury and air pollution, the agency’s attempts to regulate pollution of waterways, and methane emissions from oil and gas facilities, to name a few.

The EPA chief has made several statements in the past that are similar to the present one, perhaps, but not so strongly worded.

For instance, writing for National Review in 2016, he stated that “Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind.” In his Senate confirmation hearing, meanwhile, he stated in a tense exchange with Senator Bernie Sanders that “the climate is changing, and human activity contributes to that in some manner.”

Another of Pruitt’s predecessors — now in the business community — also commented on the science of climate change in the context of his remarks.

“The time for debate on climate change has passed,” Lisa Jackson, President Obama’s first EPA administrator and now vice president of Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives at Apple, told the Post.

“Certainty is what business needs,” said Jackson. “And relying on science is something that we do every single day. So now if we’re going to question science, I think it has an impact on more than just some federal rules, or some law, it has a huge impact on human health, the environment, and our economy.”
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on March 10, 2017, 10:45:08 AM
When people say good things about Trump, I have to think of this bozo, who was obviously chosen because he's (a) in the oil companies' pocket, and (b) a known climate change denier, and (c) a fairly smart lawyer who has a record of winning against environmental interests.

He was selected to dismantle environmental protections in the USA.. Period. End of story.

Let's see if he does it, or if the entrenched bureaucracy can fight a rear guard action for the next four years as he pursues them and tries to give them all pink slips.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on March 10, 2017, 07:16:32 PM
On the other hand, the big polluters may have closed down in 4 years time due to general economic collapse, and everyone left alive will be growing local food, so maybe EPA will not be required!

The up side of collapse. :evil4:

Title: A Record-Setting Climate Going Bonkers
Post by: RE on March 27, 2017, 05:40:45 PM (

March 27, 2017
A Record-Setting Climate Going Bonkers

by Robert Hunziker

Photo by Ian D. Keating | CC BY 2.0

Never before in the history of the human species has climate set so many spine-chilling new records as last year, 2016. That dire assessment comes via analysis of the World Meteorological Organization’s (“WMO”) annual report d/d March 21, 2017, prompting a thought: Does a wildly out of control climate threaten lifestyle and/or life as we know it?

The answer is a resounding yes it does! It’s just a matter of time.

Still, nobody knows for certain, meaning 100%, whether an out of control climate is truly life-threatening or not (it is a new experience, so nobody knows what to expect), but on the other hand, who can possibly know for sure until it is way too late. As for example, nobody knows if and/or when runaway global warming kicks into high gear as the result of massive methane eruptions, the Big Burp, across the Arctic’s shallow East Siberian Sea, which is fast losing its protective icy cap, in turn sizzling agriculture as excessive methane in the atmosphere traps heat, which a small core of scientists believes will happen within a decade, taking temperatures up so high so fast as to sear and blacken the landscape.

As such and in consideration of the all-powerful rightward shift in U.S. politics, which embraces an off-the-wall oddball denial of science, threatening climate/environmental regulation, analysis, and critical funding, it is imperative to expose the upshot of the impending thrashing of public science institutions by this mean-spirited right wing cabal. That upshot is easily identified as an abrupt end to America’s comfy lifestyle metamorphosing into societal riots in the streets, rampant theft, gang warfare labeled as terrorism, and non-premeditated murder, in certain respects similar to Syria today.

Trump has already spotted impending trouble because of an overheated climate. The Middle East is home to 350 million people, more people than the U.S. Trump intends to keep them out of the U.S., as drought has forced massive movement and unrest for years now. The southern Mediterranean coastline and the Middle East are drying up. Look to Europe for the impact. It’s not just Syrians escaping war but middle easterners throughout the region hightailing it out.
“The World Resources Institute (WRI) claims water shortages were a key factor in the 2011 Syria civil war. Drought and water shortages in Syria likely contributed to the unrest that stoked the country’s 2011 civil war. Dwindling water resources and chronic mismanagement forced 1.5 million people, primarily farmers and herders, to lose their livelihoods and leave their land, move to urban areas, and magnify Syria’s general destabilization, says the report” (Source: John Vidal, Middle East Faces Water Shortages for the Next 25 Years, Study Says, The Guardian, August 27, 2015).
Science is nearly 100% unanimous that anthropogenic (human-influenced) climate change is happening, and it is happening with a swagger; it is ugly and a threat to lifestyles and to life in multiple ways, for example, forcing hundreds of thousands of Middle Easterners to migrate to Europe. The leading indicators of impending climatic trouble are found in reams of data that threaten to turn civilization upside down.

Across the board, record-setting climate data has been identified by the World Meteorological Organization Highlights of Global Climate 2016, Geneva, published March 21, 2017: “Climate Breaks Multiple Records in 2016, With Global Impacts,” to wit: (1) Global warming new record; (2) Atmospheric CO2 new record; (3) Global sea-ice drop new record; (4) Global sea level rise new record; (5) Global sea-surface temperatures new record; (7) Arctic sea ice new record low; (5) Severe droughts displace hundreds of thousands; (8) 18,000,000 people seek drought-related emergency assistance, and more….

Everything that can go wrong with the climate is happening altogether at the same time, including an overheated overtaxed ocean, exerting maximum stress on the ecosystem, prompting the question of the century: Can our trusty life-supporting biosphere hang in there?

Even as the climate signals deepening trouble, the Trump administration is dead set against science, at war with environmental regulations, and remarkably
(really mouth-dropping) oblivious to the status of the biosphere. Regrettably, this calculated ignorance is fact. Just look at Trump appointments of radical right wing nutcases, and they are truly nutcases that believe a pluralistic society doesn’t work. They are the antithesis of pluralism with a feudalistic bent but yet in charge of a multifaceted complex modern government.

Still, they are not stupid, rather smart political operatives that appeal to a right wing mentality that abhors regulation. In point of fact, they, i.e., Trumpeters, are a throw back to America’s frontier spirit as epitomized by Frederick Jackson Turner’s (American historian) “Frontier Thesis” circa 1893, which highlighted “rugged individualism,” as the major mover and shaker of American democracy. For Turner, American democracy was shaped via rejection of highbrow culture (aristocratic stuff), rejection of establishment principles but embracing a brand of violence (six-shooters) unique to survival on the edge of the frontier.

Nowadays however, that frontier is gone, and rugged individualism doesn’t square so well within a pluralistic society already jam-packed with multi-ethnicity. Notably, gun toting white guys no longer fit in like they did in the 1800s, but Trump has given ‘em a new lease on life.

The Trumpeters say “balderdash,” science is a joke and not to be believed, interestingly enough emulating those same 19th century gun-toting white guys, shoot first, questions later. The proof of their Planet Pluto line of thinking is easily found in the administration’s behavior and policies, cut, cut, cut science and critical thinking arenas, whereas if they truly believed the science, spending for NOAA and EPA and NASA would double or triple as panic sets in, fearing climatic Armageddon. After all, the climate is signaling big time trouble down the road with bells, whistles, and red flashing lights warning of impending crises immediately ahead, right around the bend, a surprise attack.

Ad interim, America’s 19th century frontier mentality, which helped to shape democracy in the first place, has come back to overturn democracy and dictate climatic upheaval and destruction with its concomitant sharp turn away from democratic spirits in favor of a return to Gunfight at the O.K. Corral, circa 1881.
Join the debate on Facebook

Robert Hunziker lives in Los Angeles and can be reached at
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on March 27, 2017, 06:21:33 PM
When people say good things about Trump, I have to think of this bozo, who was obviously chosen because he's (a) in the oil companies' pocket, and (b) a known climate change denier, and (c) a fairly smart lawyer who has a record of winning against environmental interests.

He was selected to dismantle environmental protections in the USA.. Period. End of story.

Let's see if he does it, or if the entrenched bureaucracy can fight a rear guard action for the next four years as he pursues them and tries to give them all pink slips.

I'm not taking Trump's side here, however, what the fuck is there left to save ? Seriously...
Everything is parabolic in one direction or another.
Maybe our Golden Boy knows this & says "fuck it" like he did with O'Bla-Bla care
Title: Re: A Record-Setting Climate Going Bonkers
Post by: agelbert on March 27, 2017, 06:57:18 PM
Great article.  :emthup:

There is only one side here, it's the side of scientific objectivity. The issue of whether homo sap is worth saving is a separate matter.  8)

This video covers it ALL. Prof Veerabhadran Ramanathan, a thoroughly credentialed scientist, was FORCED, after DECADES of a career believing we could "handle" the climate change from homo sap produced greenhouse gases, to alter his view DRASTICALLY because of irrefutable empirical evidence he was observing. That's right, he was collecting the data for DECADES until a pattern emerged that shocked him out of complacency. If you ever plan to watch ANYTHING about Global Warming, THIS is the video to watch over and over. I WISH Palloy would watch it and see every argument he has presented here (that he claims lets fossil fuels off the hook as the main cause) taken apart piece by piece.

'Climate change morphing into an existential problem' with Prof Veerabhadran Ramanathan 

Oxford Martin School

Streamed live on Mar 10, 2017

This is a joint event with the Oxford Martin School and the Oxford Climate Research Network (OCRN)

With unchecked emissions of climate pollutants, there is a 50% probability for the planetary warming to cross the so-called dangerous threshold of 20C by 2050; and there is at least a 5% probability the warming can exceed a catastrophic 60C in about 80  years.

For the bottom three billion in rural areas, 20C would be enough to pose existential threats. With a 60C warming accompanied by 10 billion population, loss of bio diversity and species extinction, we should ask: whether civilisation as we know it can be extended beyond this century? ???  (   Is there still time to avoid such catastrophes?  ( answer is Yes. (  But, we need to reinforce the technological and the market-based solutions with societal transformation. An alliance between scientists, policy makers, religious institutions and health care providers has a good chance to bring the needed transformation.

Oxford Martin School,
University of Oxford (

Agelbert NOTE: I do not see the proposed "solutions" materializing any time soon. Have a nice day.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on March 27, 2017, 07:52:50 PM
Yeah, I'm watching it now. Thanks.
Title: Macondo Oil Well Blowout Explained (Clarke & Dawe Classic)
Post by: RE on April 01, 2017, 12:21:08 AM
Title: Trading Death
Post by: RE on April 02, 2017, 12:35:55 AM (

Stuff that matters

Trading Death

Global trade causes more than 20 percent of air-pollution deaths.

A new study in the journal Nature investigated what triggers the nearly 3.5 million annual deaths worldwide stemming from airborne particulate matter. It attributed more than 750,000 of them to goods being made in one part of the world and consumed in another.

The grim statistics center on Asia, home of cheap exports and lax environmental protections. Nearly 500,000 people succumb to smog-related illness each year on the continent, including more than 200,000 in China and more than 100,000 in India. The incidence of heart disease, lung cancer, and stroke are ratcheted up by breathing filthy air.

The main culprits behind this tragic phenomenon are buyers in the West. The study links consumption in Western Europe to almost 175,000 yearly deaths abroad and consumption in the U.S. to more than 100,000.

“It’s not a local issue anymore,” says study coauthor Dabo Guan, a professor of climate change economics at the University of East Anglia.

Asian health could benefit if the Trump administration is successful in reviving American manufacturing. Some of that health burden could shift to the U.S., which has higher air-quality standards that should result in fewer smog-related fatalities. Then again, if Trump has his way with environmental rules, all bets are off.
Title: Trump’s latest environmental evildoing: More pollution, less protection
Post by: RE on April 07, 2017, 01:53:39 AM (

Trump Tracker
Trump’s latest environmental evildoing: More pollution, less protection
By Lisa Hymas on Mar 31, 2017


In a single day, President Trump did more environmental damage than during his previous 67 days in office. That’s no small achievement.

With an executive order signed on March 28, he supercharged the process of demolishing President Obama’s climate initiatives, including his signature one, the Clean Power Plan. It’s not just climate hawks, treehuggers, and grandstanding Democratic politicians who are aghast. Mainstream media outlets are, too.

“President Trump’s move to rip up Mr. Obama’s climate policies [is] beyond reckless. Children studying his presidency will ask, ‘How could anyone have done this?’” the Washington Post editorial board wrote. The New York Times ran its own anxious editorial under the headline “President Trump Risks the Planet.”

Trump’s move means the U.S. will pump out a lot more greenhouse gases than it would have if Obama’s policies had been continued.

And it will make climate change still worse by weakening the resolve of other countries to curb their emissions.

Here’s a rundown of what Trump is aiming to do with his executive order as well as other recent moves:
Motley spew
Let power plants emit more pollution

What happened? Old coal-fired power plants may get to keep polluting the air we breathe and the atmosphere that sustains life on earth, thanks to Trump’s call to toss out the Clean Power Plan. And future power plants may not be held to tougher standards that would have largely prevented new coal plants from coming online.

What does it really mean? This is A Big F’ing Deal. These power plant rules were the most significant part of the Obama administration’s effort to meet its emission-cutting pledge under the Paris climate agreement. If the U.S. is wimping out on Paris, other countries will be more inclined to wimp out, too.

But undoing the Clean Power Plan will likely take years and will definitely be challenged in court, so it’s far from a done deal. Plus, cheap natural gas means utilities aren’t likely to build new coal-fired power plants anyway, because gas plants are less expensive to run.
Frack addicts
Make it easier for companies to frack and emit methane

What happened? The Obama administration tried to tighten regulations on fracking on federal and tribal lands to prevent water pollution. It also tried to rein in methane pollution from oil and gas operations on public lands. Trump’s executive order calls for those rules to be reviewed and rewritten.

What does it really mean? The Trump administration is working to remove all obstacles that stand in the way of the oil and gas industry, pure and simple.
Full speed ahead!
Trash other rules that restrain the oil, gas, and coal industries

What happened? Trump’s executive order tells federal agencies to review regulations and actions that potentially “burden” domestic energy development, and gives them 180 days to come up with plans to scale the regulations back.

What does it really mean? We don’t know how many rules will get dragged into this process and ultimately be weakened or tossed out, but the message is clear: Drill, baby, drill. Mine, baby, mine.
The coal ball and chain
Sell off coal from public lands again

What happened? The federal program that leases land to coal companies for mining is a big money loser as well as a climate killer. In January 2016, the Obama administration put a moratorium on the program so it could consider how to improve it, potentially by charging more for coal leases and taking into account the climate impacts of mining. With his executive order, Trump called for the moratorium to be reversed, and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke promptly did just that. Zinke also cancelled the big review of the program, so major reforms won’t be coming anytime soon.

What does it really mean? This won’t lead to much new coal mining immediately, as there’s currently a glut of coal on the market and companies already have plenty of reserves. But it means that the coal-leasing program will continue to waste taxpayer money, subsidize coal companies, and worsen climate change.
Global what?
Stop thinking about climate change

What happened? Under Obama, federal agencies were required to consider the full economic cost of climate change when making decisions about projects. The administration determined that a metric ton of CO2 pollution currently costs society about $36 — that’s called the social cost of carbon — and this number has been factored into cost-benefit analyses for regulations and other government actions, often supporting regulations that require emissions cuts.

The Obama administration also asked federal agencies to account for climate change when writing environmental impact statements for federal projects.

With his executive order, Trump is calling for a new review of the social cost of carbon, and he’s tossing out the requirement to consider climate in impact statements.

What does it really mean? Expect the social cost of carbon to drop, even though experts say it’s already way too low. Essentially, these are yet more ways for the administration to say it doesn’t give a damn about climate change.

Phew, that was quite the executive order. But wait, there’s more: Trump found time to pull some other scary moves between trips to Mar-a-Lago.
Having their spray
Allow use of a dangerous pesticide

What happened? Under Obama, the EPA proposed banning agricultural use of the toxic pesticide chlorpyrifos, but didn’t finalize the rule. Under Trump, the EPA did an about-face: On March 29, the agency officially declined to impose a ban.

What does it really mean? Scientific studies have linked even low doses of chlorpyrifos to developmental problems in kids. So children will continue to be exposed — especially the children of farm workers — while Dow AgroSciences, manufacturer of the pesticide, will continue to make lots of money selling it.
Dude, where’s my cleaner car?
Roll back auto fuel economy rules

What happened? Just before Obama moved out of the White House, his administration finalized a review of its ambitious gas-mileage standards for future cars and trucks. On March 15, the Trump administration sent those standards back to the drawing board, calling for more review after automakers complained that they were too strict.

What does it really mean? Cars will likely guzzle more gas than they need to, and the shift to electric cars may slow down.
Romancing the Keystone
Clear the way for the Keystone XL pipeline

What happened? Just as promised during his first week in office, Trump revived the Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry some of the filthiest oil on the planet down from the tar sands of Alberta, across the American farm belt, and toward refineries on the Gulf Coast. Obama denied the pipeline builder a permit to cross the U.S.-Canada border. On March 27, Trump reversed course and granted the permit.

What does it really mean? Within days of Trump’s move, environmentalists filed two lawsuits attempting to stop the pipeline’s construction. Pipeline builder TransCanada still needs approval from Nebraska and may face financial hurdles. Even so, chances are better than ever that the world’s most controversial pipeline will get built.

Meanwhile, that other highly controversial pipeline, Dakota Access, is now finished and being filled up with oil, thanks to the OK it got from the Trump administration on Feb. 6.

Let’s end on two slivers of good news:

Trump did not pull the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement, as some right-wingers have been calling for. The White House says a decision on that will be made by May 26, and maybe Ivanka Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson can convince the president to stay in.

Trump did not ask the EPA to reverse its finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health, which is the basis for the agency’s climate actions. The conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute has petitioned the agency to review that finding, hoping to overturn it. We don’t know how that will turn out, but in the meantime, the situation is making EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt very uncomfortable.
Title: Depressed about climate change? There’s a 9-step program for that.
Post by: RE on April 09, 2017, 04:38:32 AM
I'm surprised I haven't heard from Carolyn Baker and Dr. McStinksion on this one yet.

Only 9 Steps?  That's 3 less than getting over a Booze Addiction!

RE (


climate desk
Depressed about climate change? There’s a 9-step program for that.
By Caroline Preston on Apr 8, 2017

This story was originally published by Fusion and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

One recent weeknight, ten people gathered around a knotty walnut table in a living room in suburban Salt Lake City. Laura Schmidt, a 31-year-old environmental advocate, spoke first. This being the group’s eighth gathering, their discussion centered on seeking beauty and meaning. Schmidt, an athletic woman with a dry sense of humor and shoulder-length brown hair, talked about the importance of exercising the neocortex, the part of the brain that mediates advanced mental functions, in order to access deeper meaning. With the Earth tilting toward climate catastrophe, the capacity to build resiliency through beauty and meaning is critical for preserving the self and planet, Schmidt said. Each member of the group took a few minutes to share. One read a poem by Rilke; another, words by Terry Tempest Williams, the American writer and conservationist. They spoke about their feelings of anxiety and grief, and of finding strength in the natural world. One man told the story of wheeling his terminally ill wife to a hospital room window to watch a final sunset.

Imagine Alcoholics Anonymous mixed with an environmental humanities course, and you’ll begin to get a sense of the “good grief” group started by Schmidt. Its goal is to help people cope with what’s been called “climate grief” — anxiety, sadness, depression, and other emotions provoked by awareness of the planet’s march toward a hotter, less biologically diverse, and potentially unsustainable future. The psychological consequences of climate change have been the subject of greater study in recent years, with the Obama White House releasing a report in 2016 that predicted growing numbers of people would experience direct mental-health effects from exposure to weather-related natural disasters as well as indirect stress and anxiety. In March, the American Psychiatric Association approved a policy committing to mitigate the adverse mental health effects of climate change.

In the United States alone, “we’ve seen a reflooding of Louisiana, we’ve seen terrible fires in the Southwest, we know there are water wars,” says Lise Van Susteren, a psychiatrist in private practice and a founding member of the Climate Psychiatry Alliance. “Even if you’re lucky enough to be at a distance … boy, is that going to weigh on you heavily. Among the activists, those of us watching, listening, hearing, and sensitive to what’s going on, we’re going to be the tip of the spear.”

Schmidt grew up in rural Michigan, off a dirt road surrounded by corn and soy fields and near the woods. Her home life was tumultuous — her father was an alcoholic and her mother eventually left Schmidt and her sisters to raise themselves. As a child, Schmidt sought sanctuary in the nature around her and, in her mid-20s, she began attending Adult Children of Alcoholics, a spin off of Alcoholics Anonymous. She found its 12-step approach, which focuses on understanding one’s past and how it influences the present, to be a bulwark against feelings of self-pity and helplessness. It was in graduate school at the University of Utah, where she took interdisciplinary courses on the environment, that she began to consider how climate change, habitat destruction, pollution, and other threats were now causing her similarly intense emotions. For Schmidt, species loss was of particular concern — the idea that dozens of species are blinking out of existence each day, at a pace 1,000 to 10,000 times faster than the natural rate of extinction. “We’re eliminating species before we even identify them, hear what noises they make, see what colors they are,” she says.

Good Grief Gathering at the International Peace Gardens in Salt Lake City.Leah Hogsten

Schmidt reached out to dozens of social-justice activists and environmentalists, people like Derrick Jensen and Bill McKibben, to learn how they were personally affected. What she found was that feelings of sadness and anxiety, and even literal nightmares, were common. Last year, with the help of her partner, Aimee Reau, Schmidt developed a nine-step program for building resiliency loosely modeled on AA (The steps begin with “admitting there’s a problem,” and include “acknowledging the ways in which we’re complicit,” “taking breaks and respecting your limits,” and “letting go.”) While she initially intended it for environmental professionals, most of those who signed up are employed in other fields but are personally committed to a greener planet. About a dozen people attend each session and 50 subscribe to its mailings. Schmidt, who now works as an outreach coordinator at the environmental group HEAL Utah, hopes to soon evaluate the pilot, incorporate the program as a nonprofit, and potentially expand it to other cities.

Kiera Bitter first learned of the group through a web listing in a local newspaper. A case manager in the court system whose family all supported Donald Trump, Bitter says she felt isolated in her views on climate change and eager for a way to add more meaning to her life. The first time she attended a grief group session, she cried. An introvert, this surprised her. “I told them that I could tell they were like me and it was just such a relief to be there and have hope and be surrounded by people who think like myself,” she says. Bitter is newer to environmentalism than some other participants. She began experiencing deep concern about the Earth after visiting a landfill not long ago and since then has thought often about her carbon footprint — when she drives, eats off a paper plate, makes a purchase. The group has been educating her about the consequences of climate change, which has caused her more short-term anxiety, but also about ways to take action, which she says is easing some of her frustrations. “Hopefully this group keeps growing and growing,” says Bitter.

Good Grief Gathering in Salt Lake City.Leah Hogsten

The meetings have been held at the home of Alli Harbertson, who met Schmidt three years ago through a wilderness “vision fast” program. Harbertson works as a caterer, and she recalls once standing in a Costco aisle, surrounded by carts with packaged foods up to people’s shoulders. She retreated to her car for a while before she could face the store again. “We live in a destructive culture environmentally and I have a lot of pain and sadness and helplessness being part of systems I feel are not working,” she says. Like Bitter, she has sometimes felt isolated in her beliefs, or at least the strength they have over her. “It’s not exactly cocktail party chatter,” she says. Harbertson says she appreciates the structure of the grief group and its nine steps, which underpin but don’t limit the discussions. She led the fifth session, on “feeling your feelings,” in which she and others spoke about the tendency to minimize or repress more fatalistic views on consumerism and the environment.

Thomas Doherty, a psychologist who specializes in applying an environmental perspective to mental health, believes the AA approach could provide valuable inspiration for coping with the planet’s warming. “The philosophical realization that there are certain things beyond your control is a big part of AA,” he says. “We are also on some level powerless against climate change.” But the “key question,” according to Doherty, is “where we can claim some power on these issues.” If done correctly, these sorts of groups could help people overcome the numbness they may feel regarding the existential threat of climate change and determine strategic ways to take action, he says.

Schmidt’s nine steps launched in January, after Trump’s election, an event that inflamed frustration, rage, and despondency among those who want the United States to acknowledge decades of science and curb planet-warming pollution. Without reductions in carbon emissions called for by the Paris climate agreement, experts warn, the world will be locked into a future of devastating droughts, frequent flooding, and food shortages. Even if countries do meet their commitments, it may already be too late to mitigate many of climate change’s destructive effects. For members of the grief group, anger at Trump, and at the Utah legislature, which recently shrugged off a handful of pro-environment bills, is a given. Schmidt wants to help others acknowledge this anger without suffocating from it, to encourage people to move from instinctive responses (the flight-fight-freeze impulses of the “reptilian brain”) to empathy and analysis (the neocortex).

Dick Meyer, a 67-year-old landscaper who joined the grief group after learning about it from public radio, says he’s seen conservationists become paralyzed by frustration and anger. Meyer passed through a grieving process after his work on a horticultural project in Santa Fe prompted him to research sustainable ecology. “I came to the conclusion that mankind is pretty much screwed,” he says. The grief he experienced was similar to the intense sadness that accompanies the death of a loved one, but it felt more solitary, and less socially accepted. He credits Schmidt’s group for moving beyond grousing to processing and healing. The refusal of policymakers to act on climate change’s extensively documented, urgent threats is maddening, and yet Meyer doesn’t think the problem can be solved by politicians alone. The grief group, he says, is “a seed of a community we need to build around living sustainably.” It’s teaching people to acknowledge fallacies we’ve come to accept, that the Earth is immutable and economic growth is infinite. Meyer thinks that local efforts like this one need to bloom before legislation can follow. “We all live, don’t we, with the notion that if we need it, someone will come save us?” he says. “Well, no one is coming to save you. Certainly not someone from Washington.”
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: JRM on April 09, 2017, 12:22:47 PM
Anyone not grieving over what humans are doing to our only home is probably either oblivious or incapable of much feeling at all.

This short video is hugely worth the time investment!  Weller is extraordinary.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: JRM on April 09, 2017, 12:32:43 PM
Title: NASA puts the Earth up for adoption
Post by: RE on April 10, 2017, 01:55:52 PM
Maybe the Vulcans will adopt us!  They'll fix all the problems with Logic!  :icon_sunny:


Fucking stupid Greenie publicity stunts are depressing.

RE (

NASA puts the Earth up for adoption


By Madeline Holcombe, CNN

Updated 9:57 AM ET, Mon April 10, 2017

(CNN)Wondering how to show that special planet some affection this Earth Day?Adopt it.
NASA has sectioned off 64,000 individual pieces of Earth to be "adopted" by supporters on their website.
The pieces are about 55 miles wide and assigned randomly. Similar to adopting a highway or naming a star, participants do not get legal or property rights to their section. So whether you get the 55-mile section that contains the Taj Mahal or the one that is square in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, you benefit the same.


What NASA can give is individualized scientific data about the adopted sections. Or users can explore and interact with a world map to print certificates from anywhere in the world—from a childhood street to the streets of Paris.

Both come with a certificate to share (or brag about) on social media.
NASA hopes to have every piece adopted by Earth Day, April 22. Once the adoptions fill up, they will be reassigned to allow everyone the opportunity to celebrate their own little corner of the Earth.
Title: Re: NASA puts the Earth up for adoption
Post by: azozeo on April 10, 2017, 05:54:19 PM
Maybe the Vulcans will adopt us!  They'll fix all the problems with Logic!  :icon_sunny:


Fucking stupid Greenie publicity stunts are depressing.

RE (

NASA puts the Earth up for adoption


By Madeline Holcombe, CNN

Updated 9:57 AM ET, Mon April 10, 2017

(CNN)Wondering how to show that special planet some affection this Earth Day?Adopt it.
NASA has sectioned off 64,000 individual pieces of Earth to be "adopted" by supporters on their website.
The pieces are about 55 miles wide and assigned randomly. Similar to adopting a highway or naming a star, participants do not get legal or property rights to their section. So whether you get the 55-mile section that contains the Taj Mahal or the one that is square in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, you benefit the same.


What NASA can give is individualized scientific data about the adopted sections. Or users can explore and interact with a world map to print certificates from anywhere in the world—from a childhood street to the streets of Paris.

Both come with a certificate to share (or brag about) on social media.
NASA hopes to have every piece adopted by Earth Day, April 22. Once the adoptions fill up, they will be reassigned to allow everyone the opportunity to celebrate their own little corner of the Earth.

Another fine example of taxpayer sponsored funny-money lunacy.
These psychopath's just can't stop diveying  up the planet.
Title: Re: NASA puts the Earth up for adoption
Post by: RE on April 10, 2017, 06:06:55 PM

Another fine example of taxpayer sponsored funny-money lunacy.
These psychopath's just can't stop diveying  up the planet.

I'm thinking of adopting a Hexagon for the Diner.  :icon_sunny:

Title: Re: NASA puts the Earth up for adoption
Post by: RE on April 10, 2017, 06:14:24 PM

Another fine example of taxpayer sponsored funny-money lunacy.
These psychopath's just can't stop diveying  up the planet.

I'm thinking of adopting a Hexagon for the Diner.  :icon_sunny:


We are now the Proud Parents of a Hexagon on the Earth!

We got a pretty good location off the coast of Newfoundland south of Greenland.  Where all the Icebergs are floating now.

Title: Re: NASA puts the Earth up for adoption
Post by: RE on April 10, 2017, 06:23:56 PM

Another fine example of taxpayer sponsored funny-money lunacy.
These psychopath's just can't stop diveying  up the planet.

I'm thinking of adopting a Hexagon for the Diner.  :icon_sunny:


We are now the Proud Parents of a Hexagon on the Earth!

We got a pretty good location off the coast of Newfoundland south of Greenland.  Where all the Icebergs are floating now.


Collapse Cafe adopted a Hexagon in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.  :icon_sunny:

Title: It's the Planet, Stupid- Clarke & Dawe
Post by: RE on April 15, 2017, 12:52:30 AM
Title: Re: NASA puts the Earth up for adoption
Post by: azozeo on April 15, 2017, 03:25:28 AM

Another fine example of taxpayer sponsored funny-money lunacy.
These psychopath's just can't stop diveying  up the planet.

I'm thinking of adopting a Hexagon for the Diner.  :icon_sunny:


We are now the Proud Parents of a Hexagon on the Earth!

We got a pretty good location off the coast of Newfoundland south of Greenland.  Where all the Icebergs are floating now.


Can we get a google earth pic of "junior"
Title: Climate Change Maps Reveal Our Changing Planet
Post by: RE on April 21, 2017, 08:11:56 AM (

Climate Change Maps Reveal Our Changing Planet

See the Effects of Climate Change

We hear it so much that we don’t really hear it. Climate change.

…But climate change is a real and serious issue.

The climate has changed throughout history. Most of these changes were caused because of variations in the Earth’s orbit.

97% of scientists agree that climate change is not caused by Earth’s orbit but human activity.

Today, climate change is characterized with an abrupt increase in average temperature. rising sea levels, warming oceans and shrinking ice sheets adds to the evidence.

But how much evidence can be seen on Earth?

Today, we highlight some of the key evidence and potential outcomes of climate change:

Google Planetary Earth Engine Reveals Environment Impacts from Human Activity

Timelapse Landsat Satellite

With a few clicks of the mouse, Google Earth Engine reveals startling transitions of our planet.

Using Landsat data, these climate change maps show how the desert-city of Dubai has grew into the megacity today… in just 40 years.

Observe the rate at which glaciers like Alaska’s Columbia Glacier has melted… and is actually speeding up.

If an old tree falls in the forest and nobody’s around to hear it, does it make a sound? Rainforests in Brazil are vanishing at an accelerating rate. With timely satellite data from Landsat, everybody can hear it.

From the lakes of Las Vegas lakes drying up as Sin City sprawls… to the disappearance of farming villages across the Yangtze River Delta in China… to the oil boom in Alberta and its environmental impact…

These climate change maps are breathtaking…

But are living-proof of just how much humans impact their environment.

READ MORE: Human activities are reshaping Earth’s surface

NASA’s Earth Climate Change Maps

Nasa Earth Climate Change

Remote sensing satellites reveal a unique perspective of our planet. Sensors in orbit gain new perspectives taking advantage of the electromagnetic spectrum at its fullest.

Like clockwork, Nasa’s Earth Climate Change Global Map carves out a view of what’s happening on our planet with a full set of climate change maps.

The atmosphere, the land, the water, the ice and all living things – NASA keeps score of them all.

NASA tracks aerosols, snow cover and sea surface temperature monthly so we can understand how our planet works relative to climate change.

Through the lens of satellite sensors like MODIS, AMSR-E, TRMM and MOPITT – never in our history have we understood Earth’s climate as we do today.

Surging Sea Level Analysis

Surging Seas

How much will the sea level rise at our current pace?

The Surging Sea Map charts out two possible futures:

1. Sea levels at the course we are on now; and

2. Sea levels with extreme carbon cuts.

…And this depends entirely on the total amount of carbon we put into the atmosphere.

When glaciers and ice caps melt, sea levels rise. These sea level projects are based on that expansion

Sea level projections are based on the expansion of ocean water as it warms; melting glaciers and ice caps; and the decay of Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.

Carbon choices. Sea level choices. The future is yours to decide.

The Impact of a Four Degree Temperature Rise

Impact 4 Degrees

The Met Office Four Degree interactive map map out all the effects of global warming.

Climate change maps like this exemplifies the impacts of a four degree temperature rise on our planet.

How are aquatic environments affected by global warming? Ocean acidification will be the destructor of fish habitat.

How do rising temperatures affect crop production?

Yields of cereals crops such as rice and maize could decrease up to 5% across Southeast Asia.

These handy climate change maps takes you on a geographic journey. It hits the bull’s eye because it paints a complete picture.

It provides concrete examples of how and where forest fires, agriculture, water availability, sea level rise, marine life, drought and weather patterns will be transformed as a consequence of climate change.

If All the Ice Melted

National Geographic  -If All Ice Melted

These National Geographic Sea Level maps show the world as it is now, with only one difference:

All the ice on land has melted and drained into the sea.

The world would look very different if five million cubic miles of ice melted on Earth.

Waters would consume most of Florida and California. Ocean-front properties would cease to exist. Inland cities like Denver and Minneapolis would be affected the least.

The picture isn’t so bright anywhere in the world if sea levels rose 216 feet.

The island of Japan would suffer substantially. A highly dense population with a relatively small landmass. The ramifications for Japan, a country with a coastline that is almost 30,000 km long would be huge – as many citizens would be forced to relocate.

Disappearing Glaciers

Disappearing Glaciers

A grim consequence of climate change is retreating glaciers and the overall increase in sea levels.

The Disappearing Glaciers story map takes you on a journey highlighting the realities of climate change on glaciers on Earth.

From the Canadian Athabasca Glacier to the Upsala Glacier in Argentina – at one point these glaciers extended well beyond their current extent.

This map digitizes the global retreat of glaciers showing just how much glaciers have disappeared. Like the Storbreen Glacier in Norway, the glacier extent dates back to 1750.

These climate change maps catalog six retreating glaciers around the world and the irrefutable evidence of a warming world.

Esri’s Global Footprint Story Map

Esri Global Footprint

The Esri Global Footprint is a genius, timeline series map story designed by Global Footprint Network.

Which countries are ecological debtors?

The countries in red are ecological – which means that they rely on resource reserves from ecological creditors (in green).

What makes it so special is the charting interface.

In 1961, you can see how the vast majority of countries around the globe had ecological reserves.

…As you slide the cursor down the timeline, these resources have slowly dwindled as human activities consume more than 150 percent of Earth’s yearly biocapacity.

Carbon Emissions

Carbon Emissions

The Carbon Emissions map uses a cartogram-style technique to display data..

Each map is distorted to reflect a particular dataset – so high values bulge out, and low values contract.

For example:

Who are the people at risk due to climate change?

It’s scary to think of the number of people injured, left homeless, displaced or requiring emergency assistance due to floods, droughts or extreme temperatures in a typical year.

Climate change is expected to exacerbate many of these threats.

Climate Commons

Climate Commons

Despite the lack of updates, the Climate Commons is basically climate change news mapped.

Each climate news story is aggregated and relates to a geographic area. It’s all put together and represented in a hexagonal thematic map.

Users can explore the correlation between climate change data and its coverage in the media. You can filter by type of news story.

Climate change maps like this were interesting when it was alive and kicking.

ElkanoData Pollution Map

Elkano Data

Just how much have we polluted?

Siphoning data from the World Bank master database, ElkanoData puts together a cartographic masterpiece.

The ElkanoData pollution map sheds new light on carbon monoxide emissions over time.

The elephant in the room is the United Arab Emirates. At a whopping 24.98 metric tons per capita – this is more than double than any European country CO2 rate.

While Africa and South America are the pollution angels of the bunch. These continents in general pollute the least per capita.

Pro Tip: Use the time slider to see how much countries pollute over time.

Climate Change Maps Add Perspective

Atmosphere CompositionAtmosphere Composition

At a turtle’s pace, we shift over to environment-friendly green technologies.

Weather, sea level rise, warming oceans, declining Arctic sea ice, extreme events – these are all tell-tale signs of global warming.

Today, you’ve seen how climate change maps like these give us new perspective.

…and some of the effects are already taking place.

Our climate has immeasurable importance.

From crop production to changing weather patterns, grasping a clear understanding of our changing climate is the best investment we could ever make.

What are your thoughts on climate change?

Do you have any more visuals to add to our list of climate change maps?

Title: Happy Earth Day. Enjoy It While You Last.
Post by: RE on April 23, 2017, 12:35:32 AM (

Happy Earth Day. Enjoy It While You Last.


April 21, 2017 1:29 PM EDT
Faye Flam

The people who know the most about life on Earth tend to be the most impressed by its staying power.

Harvard professor Andrew Knoll marvels that our planet has sustained life continuously for four billion years -- most of its 4.5 billion years in existence. This is not just a matter of location, said Knoll, who is an earth and planetary scientist. Mars and Venus are both in what astronomers would consider a “habitable” zone, getting sunlight in a range suitable for living organisms. Now both are barren (or close to it).

Earth has special features that may or may not be present on many of the other planets detected around the galaxy. Earth’s geology helps regulate the climate through the cycling of carbon dioxide. When exposed rocks weather, carbon dioxide gets pulled out of the atmosphere, allowing the globe to cool. When those rocks get covered in ice, the weathering stops, and carbon can build up as it’s replenished by volcanoes.

We can thank Earth’s system of plate tectonics for this, said Peter Ward, a paleontologist from the University of Washington and co-author of the book “Rare Earth: Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe.” As new crust continues to be exposed in some places and old crust is buried, carbon can cycle in and of the atmosphere. We’re also very lucky, said Ward, that the Earth got just the right amount of water. It’s thought that most came from impacts with comets early in the history of the solar system. If we’d gotten a bit more, and ended up like that third-rate Kevin Costner movie, he said, Earth would be a lot hotter -- maybe too hot for complex life.

Complex life, including plants and animals, are particular. They didn’t get going until the most recent 600 million years. Bacteria are another story. It’s hard to put a date on the origin of simple life because it happened so early. What we know, said Harvard’s Knoll, is that the very oldest rocks on Earth were formed 3.8 billion years ago, and they hold preserved signatures of life.

That’s fast given the widely held view that a few million years after its formation, the infant Earth collided with another early planet, creating debris that became the moon. After the crash, some scientists have calculated that the Earth’s surface temperature reached 3,600 degrees Fahrenheit and our planet shone like a star.

After it cooled off, there were further radical changes: periods when tropical plants grew at the poles, and periods when ice flowed down to the equator. But the extremes always eventually gave way to more moderate periods, and life was never extinguished.

All this recovery and cycling may sound reassuring, backing a longstanding popular belief in an inherent balance of nature. As historian Spencer Weart describes it in his book “The Discovery of Global Warming”: “Hardly anyone could imagine that human actions, so puny among the vast natural powers, could offset the balance that governed the planet as a whole. This view of Nature -- suprahuman, benevolent and inherently stable -- lay deep in most human cultures.”

But in the last few decades, scientists have learned that there’s no real barrier between the physical processes of the planet and the biological ones. Earth was not born a blue planet rich with oxygen. Single-celled organisms called cyanobacteria started releasing oxygen into the atmosphere. The emergence of plants changed the climate. Animals changed the climate. Even the evolution of poop changed the physical world, said Ward, by creating a new mechanism by which carbon and other materials would get packaged up and sink to the bottom of the ocean.

That still leaves the argument that human-generated greenhouse gases -- like early fish poop -- represent nothing the Earth can’t handle. Knoll said he recalled a newspaper column by George Will, still available online, arguing that current climate change is nothing to worry about because the past periods of climate change were not the end of the world. But the column focused on recent, small blips in the climate, not on the bigger, longer-term upheavals.

Some periods of climate change were terrible. Take one 252 million years ago called the End Permian extinction. Large volcanic eruptions, possibly combined with ignition of coal beds, led to a rapid enough global warming to kill off about 90 percent of the planet’s species. This was good for some -- especially sulfur-excreting bacteria -- whose flourishing is preserved in the fossil record. But it was bad for plants and animals. In another of his popular books, “Under a Green Sky,” Ward describes the End Permian seashore this way: “No fish break its surface, no birds of any kind. We are under a pale green sky and it has the smell of death and poison.”

So life went on, in an altered form, and plants and animals again flourished after a few million years. Knoll doesn’t find this particularly reassuring. “We are changing the climate at a geologically unusual rate,” he said -- changes comparable to an era of volcanism a million times more powerful than anything in human history. Earth’s climate will probably recover from this human-fueled round of global warming, but “on time scales that are unimaginable to humans.” And perhaps without humans.
Title: The Unspoken Failures of “Save the Earth Science”
Post by: RE on May 01, 2017, 02:26:32 AM (

The Unspoken Failures of “Save the Earth Science”: World Destruction with Nuclear Weapons, The Poisoning of the Earth’s Ecology
By Edward Curtin
Global Research, May 01, 2017
Theme: Environment
In-depth Report: Nuclear War

“In our society those who have best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion: the more intelligent, the less sane.” – George Orwell, 1984

“This has inspired me to new heights, to wage war against these forces [‘the unfruitful ocean’] and subdue them.”  Faust from Goethe’s Faust

The recent marches on April 22nd to promote science and to celebrate Earth Day were perhaps well-intentioned, but they were delusional and conducted without any sense of irony. They served power and its propaganda. Obviously science has benefited us in certain ways, but it has become untethered from any sense of moral limits in its embrace of instrumental rationality and its unending efforts to sabotage faith in human freedom by rationally “proving” its illogical deterministic credo. And in doing so it has created and sustained a nightmarish world on the brink of destruction and undermined people’s will to resist this death march. Ostensibly rational, it has engendered a spiritual alienation that goes to the roots of the world crisis.

“In short,” says Dostoyevsky’s underground man,

    “one may say anything about the history of the world – anything that might enter the most disordered imagination.  The only thing one can’t say is that it’s rational.”

For two of the major problems the world faces – world destruction with nuclear weapons and the poisoning of the earth’s ecology and atmosphere – are the result of the marriage of science and technique that has given birth to the technological “babies” (Little Boy and Fat Man) that were used by the U.S. to massacre hundreds of thousands of Japanese and now threaten to incinerate everyone, and the chemical and toxic inventions that have despoiled the earth, air, and water and continue to kill people worldwide through America’s endless war-making and industrial applications.

The Save-the-Earth-Science marchers failed, for self-serving reasons or ignorance, to see the obvious.  But their failure goes even deeper than omitting the links between science, war, and pollution.

In our technopoly, logical thinking has become illogical; cause and effect, means and ends have been inverted.  The causes of our problems are touted as the means to end them. These “solutions” are always offered with a straight face, as if they made perfect sense.  This is how societies operate when in the grip of myths.  In this case, the myths of science, progress, and history.  Such myths render the obvious invisible as they create a hopeless inevitability in people who can imagine no alternative and have been convinced that science is the secret to salvation and the means to the things they have learned to desire, including longevity and perhaps “immortality.”And these things have become the means to additional means in an endless loop from which, by definition, ends are absent.  As a result, the search for truth, celebrated as a goal of science, is slyly eliminated.

In this comforting yet absurd myth, science is viewed as the “miraculous knight of reason.”  John Saul Ralston elaborates:

    Science led the way in the battle against the forces of darkness. Discoveries were celebrated as if new territories were won on the road to a place of eternal light where knowledge would reign. And yet these very real advances in the uncovering of nature’s secrets seemed increasingly to create a world which escaped the control of society. New knowledge and new positive powers in the hands of man seemed inevitably to be matched with new inaccessible elites and a new sophistication in the arts of violence and destruction….As for the scientists, the vast majority of whom continue to believe in the inviolability of progress, they still do so with the driven purity of terrorists.

Comforted and paradoxically terrorized by our creations, yet immobilized by our myths, we seem to lack the imaginations to conceive a different approach.  So we applaud what seems so “sensible”: marching for science to save the planet.  Meaning well becomes a substitute for missing the meaning of our contradictory thinking and the myth that sustains it.

Delude ourselves as we might, the probability of making all possibility impossible is very real.  Poised on the edge of nuclear conflagration and environmental collapse, we tell ourselves that reasonable minds will prevail, knowing, if we choose to think at all, that the central experiences of the past century – the mass slaughter of human beings with progressively more “advanced” weapons and ecological destruction as a result of scientific/technological “advances” (we are always advancing in the myth) – were not prevented by such “reasonableness.” In fact, instrumental reason and its perverted logic of efficiency – our Gods – caused them.

We inhabit a nightmare, and reason is insufficient to awaken us.

    “The madman,” wrote G. K. Chesterton, “is the man who has lost everything except his reason.”

This is true even when the reasoning is faulty.

This scientific/technological nightmare is a world where everything has become a means and the ends no longer exist.  We are travelling at breakneck speed to nowhere, but as long as long as we keep moving in our “usefulness,” no one seems to notice that we are travelling in circles and getting nowhere.

    He’s a real nowhere man
    Sitting in his nowhere land
    Making all his nowhere plans for nobody

    Doesn’t have a point of view
    Knows not where he’s going to
    Isn’t he a bit like you and me?

 I’d say the boys – the Beatles – have a point, wouldn’t you?  But what do artists know?

We can’t conceive of our ends since they conjure up nothing, having been swallowed by the means, while the purpose of our lives is reduced to staying alive as long as possible.  The Faustian goal has always been immortality, and we have been infected with the fear that death, and therefore life, may be meaningless.  The quest for scientific “immortality” is a means to a means without end.  It is a symptom of the profound spiritual crisis of the age.

Writing about our twisted logic that has banished anything “useless” or “gratuitous,” – including art, people, and nature – the great French sociologist Jacques Ellul says this about modern science:

    Once, knowledge of truth was what mattered, but then after the philosophers came the scientists.  They developed their theories, which were then applied, first in order to prove the truth of these theories, and then because of their usefulness. From that point on, science was lost!  Technical means gradually came to dominate the search for truth.  Science became more and more about the effectiveness of technical means. Science today takes its meaning from technique; it is completely oriented to application.  It is in the service of means.  It has become a means of perfecting the means.  The ab- straction ‘science,’ to which we still pay lip service, has replaced the search for truth.

Yes, marching for science is marching for science, but not in the way the demonstrators think.  It is marching for a means to a means.  Wedded to government support and instantaneously applied to technical applications, science serves no ultimate end but its own existence. Holding signs supporting science as a cure for the planet’s ills that science has created is like taking psychotropic drugs for depression because you were told the “cause” of your depression is a brain abnormality for which no causal scientific evidence exists since there are no definitive empirical lab tests. In the former case the cause becomes the solution; in the latter, the imagined cause is remedied by an imagined solution. In both cases, delusional thinking prevails.

Such inverted logic about cause and effect is the way the myth of science works today. No evidence required. The cause is the solution. The means justifies the means.

It is the same “logic” used to support the materialistic, murderous, and imperialistic American empire. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. – bomb, invade, kill, destroy – and when those means don’t work, double down on them.

Paul Virilio, the great scholar of dromology (the study of speed), asks:  “Has the prohibition to prohibit – the basic law of scientific progress – become the only law of a lawless globalism?”  His answer: Yes.  This prohibition to prohibit informs our science, war-making, rapacious globalization, and capitalist death trip – everything – as we accelerate toward global suicide.

It was Dostoevsky who long ago warned us of the path we were on and the spiritual nihilism that lay at its heart:

    That is not all; then, you say, science itself will teach man (though to my mind it’s a superfluous luxury) that he never has really had any caprice or will of his own, and that he himself is something of the nature of a piano-key or the stop of an organ, and that there are, besides, things called the laws of nature; so that everything he does is not done by his willing it, but is done of itself, by the laws of nature.  Consequently, we have only to discover these laws of nature, and man will no longer have to answer for his actions and life will become exceedingly easy for him.

But “easy” turned out to be hard, as an uneasiness of profound proportions wed to the spiritual crisis of free will created by science has been dismissed as the rantings of religious fanatics who want to return us to the dark ages.  Blinded by the myth of science, we fail to see that the loss of our belief in our own freedom is connected to the instrumental rationality that threatens all life.

Nature and all living creatures, including ourselves, have become our enemies and are rejected as ends in themselves. Everything and everyone is a means. We must bomb, bulldoze, manipulate, drug, control, poison, etc.– all in the service of a diabolical willfulness that brooks no resistance.

American society is nihilistic and the ruling political and intellectual elites are of course the leading nihilists. But this nihilism is widespread because it works at the mythic level. Unable to grasp the circular and repetitive nature of instrumental reason and its propaganda that have resulted in a spiritual/existential crisis that is leading to world destruction, average people fall into a deeper malaise that leads to widespread despair, unhappiness, and hopelessness. Everything becomes a means to a means in a kaleidoscopic death trap.

The question is: how can we break out of this mystification of experience that has resulted in a double-bind that has trapped us?

I thing Goethe hints at a solution in a “warning” that the devil, Mephistopheles, gives to a student in Faust, and which Faust failed to heed:

    Who would study and describe the living, starts

    By driving the spirits out of the parts:

    In the palm of his hand he holds all the sections,

    Lacks nothing, except the spirit’s connection.

But are we capable of taking such a hint? Or have we passed a point of no return?

I will take up this hint in a sequel to this article, and explore the possibility of a path out of the seeming impossibility of escaping the cul-de-sac of our spiritually disinherited current condition.

Edward Curtin is a writer whose work has appeared widely.  He teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. His website is (
The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Edward Curtin, Global Research, 2017
Title: The Unspoken Failures of “Save the Earth Science”...
Post by: knarf on May 01, 2017, 04:31:20 AM
"it is not guns that kill people, it is people who kill people". I think the same goes for the scientific method. Science has given us many very constructive things that we take for granted daily. It has had a basic means to create almost everything we use today. Apparently humankind was evolving into having the ability to become logical and experiment with the elements that our earth produces. No weapon there. So I do not think "science" is at fault. It seems to be that mankind is not ready for the technology that has been created, and especially the technology that fell into the hands of unscrupulous people. The root of this tragedy, IMHO, is the lie of infinite growth married to very wealthy, unethical, greedy, and selfish people who use money to make and control the the dystopian world we now live in.
  The Trump administration are those greedy, unethical people who wish to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It is all about the manipulation of huge amounts of "money", caring nothing for the human suffering and environmental repercussions of their vision to "make America great again".  They are dismantling the progress we had made in almost all areas of human life. THAT is the situation. Trump and his minions ( including those who voted for him ), were not satisfied with their lot in life. This says more about the worldview of those people, and it is like their view is retarded.  Now the scientists are concerned about not being heard, and possibly losing their jobs. I am sorry, but we all made this bed we are jumping up and down on, and the outcome looks like a broken bed.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on May 12, 2017, 04:21:34 PM
PDF attached and here is link to original article: (

The Deaths of Millions of California Trees Endanger the Lives of Thousands of California Humans
The Los Angeles River in Long Beach, CA borer, a brown-black beetle from southeast Asia,
never gets bigger than a tenth of an inch. It breeds inside trees; pregnant females
drill into trunks to create networks of tunnels where they lay their eggs. The
beetles also carry a fungus called Fusarium; it infects the tunnels, and when the
eggs hatch, the borer larvae eat the fungus.
Unfortunately Fusarium also disrupts the trees’ ability to transport nutrients and
water. Holes where the beetle bored into the tree get infected and form oily lesions.
Sometimes sugars from the tree’s sap accumulate in a ring around the hole—that’s
called a “sugar volcano.” The tree dies, and the wee baby beetles fly off to continue
the circle of disgusting life.
This would just be a scary story for arborists and tree-huggers, except: Fusarium
dieback is on track to kill 26.8 million trees across Southern California in the next
few years, almost 40 percent of the trees from Los Angeles to the Nevada border
and south to Mexico. That’s more than just an aesthetic tragedy. It means that
thousands of human beings are going to die, too.
I’m not just being a monkeywrenching fearmonger. Dead trees mean dead people,
and scientists are finally starting to figure out why. In the 1990s, spurred by a
program to plant half a million trees in Chicago, researchers started trying to
quantify the value of a tree beyond the fact that one is, like, at least slightly more

The Deaths of Millions of California Trees Endanger the Lives of Thousands of California Humans | WIRED
lovely than a poem. It’s a field of study today called ecosystem services. “I’ve been
trying to quantify the impacts of trees on rainfall interception, pollutants in the
atmosphere, cooling and energy used by buildings, CO 2 stored and emitted,” says
Greg McPherson, a research forester with the US Forest Service who conducted the
latest study of SoCal’s trees. “But I think those are the tip of the iceberg.”
And at the base? Public health impacts—and differences in illness and death in
populations that live near greenery versus those that don’t. It’s only been in the
past few years that anyone has been willing to go out on a limb and associate
morbidity and mortality numbers with nature. Oh, sure, everyone agrees that trees
pull particulate-matter pollution out of city air. Simply by dint of being shady,
trees reduce the “urban heat island” effect that drives people to run their AC all
the time, a contributor to climate change. And, yes, trees inhale carbon dioxide,
another win for the climate.
But fighting disease is a whole other question. What is a “dose” of nature? What’s
the response curve? By what mechanism would a walk in the park alleviate, let’s
say, heart disease? Is it the park? Or the walk? (Some Japanese researchers think
trees literally emit life-giving chemicals, like that weird M. Night Shyamalan movie
where trees kill people, but in reverse. No, wait, that’d be people killing trees,
which actually happens. The converse, then.)
Whether the mechanism is stress reduction, pollution reduction, or increased
physical activity, somehow trees make a difference. The biophysics is less
important than the epidemiology. In 2013 another researcher with the US Forest
Service named Geoff Donovan took advantage of the fact that another beetle, the
emerald ash borer, killed 100 million trees across 15 states in the US. Using
statistical models to rule out the impacts of a whole bunch of other potentially
confounding factors—race, education, income—Donovan’s team was able to
connect illness with places that had ash borer infestations and concomitant loss in
tree cover (which you can see in satellite imagery).
His result: Counties with borers had 6.8 additional deaths per year per 100,000
adults from respiratory disease, and 16.7 deaths from cardiovascular disease. Over
the arc of the paper, that means 100 million dead trees—roughly 3 percent of tree
cover on average—killed 21,193 people. “The implicit thing I’m saying here is that if
you either kept the trees or increased the amount, you’d get the opposite effect,”
says Donovan, now on a sabbatical at Massey University’s Center for Public Health
Research in New Zealand. “I don’t think it’s the worst assumption in the world.”
Donovan isn’t the only one on the case. A 2015 meta-analysis of the few studies
that had tried to take up the issue showed that higher exposures to green space, (
The Deaths of Millions of California Trees Endanger the Lives of Thousands of California Humans | WIRED
even controlling for things like poverty and education level, indeed resulted in a
statistically significant reduction in death from cardiovascular disease. Other
outcomes, like higher-birthweight babies and lower rates of antidepressant
prescriptions, have also shown up in the literature.
That means that if Southern California doesn’t somehow stave off the loss of 11
percent of its tree cover, that loss is going to be deadly over time. “It’d probably be
unwise to try and just turn the crank and say, ‘That’s going to be X thousand
people,’” Donovan says. But the risk isn’t one of overstatement. Southern
California has a much higher population density than the area he studied. “You
might anticipate a major public health impact.”
That’s what McPherson is worried about, too. He was collecting data on California
trees and Fusarium dieback for a journal article when he met John Kabashima, an
entomologist working for the University of California on the Fusarium problem—
an invasive pest that wasn’t jeopardizing crops but landscape. Kabashima realized
that McPherson’s data might be what he needed to get some bureaucratic
attention. What McPherson had come up with was, as he says, “the first statewide
assessment for California, and probably the first nationally to combine satellite
data and field plot data, and to incorporate the benefits and services of trees.” By
his count, if the beetles spread as widely as he’s predicting, it could cost $1.4 billion
in lost ecosystem service benefits—not counting the public health cost.
The next step will be figuring out what to do about the bugs. “A normal response to
an invasive pest means millions of dollars would be thrown at it,” Kabashima says.
“This one has received hundreds of thousands.” The people he’s working with at
least know that it’s not enough to cut down an infected tree. If you don’t chip it, the
beetles inside survive to infect another host. And the little holes and sugar
volcanoes tend to show up first 1 on the north side of the trunk or limb. “You have to
get out and walk around each tree, which we’re doing in Orange County parks,”
Kabashima says. “We go out on off-road Segways. We can cover square miles in a
Meanwhile, all over the state, McPherson and other forestry researchers are
looking for new species of trees to replace the ones sure to be lost. Resistance to
shot borers and Fusarium won’t be the only criteria. “We developed a five-step
process for identifying promising trees, scoring them on factors like drought
tolerance, salinity tolerance, invasiveness,” McPherson says. Even characteristics
like root depth might be important—deeper roots mean less destruction of
sidewalks. “We’ve narrowed it down to 12 new species for coastal Southern
California and 12 for the inland.” (
The Deaths of Millions of California Trees Endanger the Lives of Thousands of California Humans
The problem is, it takes a lot longer to grow experimental tree species and see if
they’re up to spec than it does for drought, polyphagous shot borers, and fungus to
do their work. The race is on—and not for all the usual reasons. “We don’t think of
trees as something essential to our urban infrastructure, like roads or sewers. In
fact, we see them as something that can interfere with those things,” Donovan
says. “But health benefits are where it’s at. Trees are an essential part of our public
health infrastructure.” If you believe that the ballpark value of a statistical human
life, stated most coldly, is around $7 million, then the potential of tens of
thousands of additional lives lost makes the cost of saving trees, and getting
healthier ones planted, a bargain.
UPDATE 5/9/17 10:20 AM Corrected to more accurately reflect the progress of
polyphagous shot hole borer infestation. (
Title: Nature Does Not Grade On A Curve
Post by: RE on May 14, 2017, 12:50:54 AM (

Nature Does Not Grade On A Curve
2017 May 13

tags: Capitalism, climate change, Democracy
by Ian Welsh

One of the problems with how we are educated and how we work is that almost all of it is “grading on a curve”. What matters is what our teacher thinks of us; what our boss thinks of us. Except when it comes to sickness, nothing else matters even nearly as much.

It’s all “on a curve”, it’s all social bullshit. If you can convince your boss or teacher to pass you, you pass, and there’s no objective level required in most cases: the difficulty is set by a person.

Nature does not grade on a curve.

If a bear is chasing you and you can’t run fast enough, you’re probably dead.

If your capitalist democratic system can’t handle climate change, a problem predicted decades ago, with plenty of time to fix it, billions of people will die.

It doesn’t matter whether there are “reasons” why we couldn’t handle it, not to the dead.

It also doesn’t matter if there are “reasons” why we can’t come up with a better way of running the world than capitalism with a side of democracy or autocracy, depending on the country.

People are always nattering on about how capitalism is the bestest system ever. (Although what has really produced the changes they like is mostly industrialization, not capitalism, though that’s a different article.)

It’s nice that we can’t come up with something better than capitalism (er, ok, not nice), but capitalism has failed. That it hasn’t blown up yet is irrelevant to this. If my brakes and steering fail at 90 miles an hour as I’m heading towards a mountain cliff, well, no catastrophe actually happens till I not only go off the cliff, but hit the ground, but the future is set.

That’s where we are, the future is essentially set. We aren’t going to stop climate change, it’s doubtful we even can (it would, even theoretically, take massive geo-engineering at this point), so capitalism and the political systems attached to it, like democracy and Chinese one-party autocratic rule, have failed.

It is that simple. And nature does not give a fuck if capitalism is the “bestest bestest system that we ever came up with” or if, qua Churchill “democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

They have failed.

And what people are not getting thru their heads is that they will be seen to have failed by those who have to suffer the consequences of our monstrous abnegation of responsibility.

They will be loathed; even as we who live in this era and especially those who were adults in the 80s and 90s, will not just be loathed, but treated as lepers, similiar to how we consider Nazis. (Yeah, I went there, deal.)

One of the problems with de-naturing; with living in almost entirely human made systems, and with pushing those bits we don’t control like illness off into ghettos, is that it means most people almost never experience a benchmark that isn’t set by other human beings. They feel, in their guts, that if only other people are convinced, any problem can be fixed or finangled.


The bear doesn’t care that you can’t run fast enough because TV is funner than going for a jog; and nature doesn’t care that shareholders needed value and that oil barons didn’t want to be a little poorer (or whatever).

And neither will those who suffer climate change due to our ethical monstrosity and sheer incapability.

Capitalism is a shit system in a number of ways. It can be made to work, by people who stay right on top of it, as between the 30s and 70 or so, but it is prone to going off the rails. If all that meant was that the poor suffer what they must and the powerful do as they will, well, so be it, but it isn’t.

We must come up with better ways to run our societies. We are creating existential threats to our very existence by failing to do so, and our infatuation with capitalism risks taking democracy down with it.

Worse worlds are always possible. So are better ones, and no system is ever “the best”.

And nature doesn’t grade on a curve.
Title: Nature Does Not Grade On A Curve
Post by: knarf on May 14, 2017, 05:01:07 AM
I don't think nature "grades" at all. The anthropomorphic influence on nature, has changed it extremely fast. It is trying to adapt to it's own set of mysterious ways to this rapid change, and those changes are affecting the ignorance of what us homo saps have done with it. We are all feeling like collapse is inevitable. Even with any change in our political leaders, and law makers. This ignorant use of nature has caused a sort of fuse to be lit, and it is heading for a catastrophe. It has happened in history many times. In fact it seems that homo saps repeat it like it is a collective habit. We have fought to survive by killing each other, there have been numerous plagues, famine and pestilence, and extreme flooding, etc.... Now that we have 7 billion people, still as ignorant about nature, what else would anyone expect?
  Yep, we get a F/failing grade, by our own standards of warped success. It is basically why I dropped out of formal education when I was a junior in high school. I did graduate, but by the skin of my teeth. I was considered gifted, put ahead in school, and then tested like a lab rat. My instincts were already telling me that their standards and teaching bias were not for me. So I taught myself, reading two-three books a week, and contemplating their message.
  Atom bombs don't kill people, it is the prehistoric animal in us that uses our retarded logic to drop that object. We have made our bed, now we have die in it. Maybe that was natures plan all along.   
Title: The World’s Trashiest Beach Is on a Remote Island in the South Pacific
Post by: Surly1 on May 18, 2017, 06:03:20 AM
The World’s Trashiest Beach Is on a Remote Island in the South Pacific ( Obscura Daily Newsletter&utm_campaign=183342818f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_05_16&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f36db9c480-183342818f-62991937&ct=t(Newsletter_5_17_2017)&mc_cid=183342818f&mc_eid=ff106f68ab)

And yes, we should all feel terrible.

Plastic trash on Henderson Island. Plastic trash on Henderson Island. JENNIFER LAVERS/UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA

Imagine the most perfect square meter of white sandy beach you can. It is powdery and warm in the sun, but cooler once you burrow a hand into the wetter sand beneath. Now take 671 separate bits of plastic—buoys, scraps of fishing nets, water bottles, every manner of unidentifiable junk—and cram it into the sand before you lay down your towel.

That’s what researchers from the University of Tasmania and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds recently found on Henderson Island, at 14-square-mile fleck of sand, jagged coral, and palm trees in the middle of the South Pacific. They estimate the entire island’s current total at 38,000 pounds of plastic, all in a place that, according to Henderson’s Wikipedia page at the time of this writing, “is one of the world’s last two raised coral atolls whose ecosystems remain relatively unaffected by human contact.” This is what relatively unaffected looks like now. And this is why we can’t have nice things.

Hermit crab living in an Avon bottle, Henderson Island. Hermit crab living in an Avon bottle, Henderson Island. JENNIFER LAVERS/UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA

Henderson is one of the most remote places in the world, more than 3,000 miles from the nearest significant population center. It has some human history—a few generations of Polynesians, some explorers, the wreck of a whaler, visits from timber harvesters from Pitcairn Island—but nothing to suggest the tide of garbage all over it. We’re on the hook for that, all of us, as it comes from the South Pacific Gyre, a current that sucks in floating debris and keeps it on a perpetual tour of the better part of a hemisphere. Henderson Island is unfortunately right in the path of this current, so it filters the debris out of the ocean. This has made it the trashiest beach ever documented, and there are some trashy beaches out there. Also alarming is just how quickly it all seems to have accumulated. Researchers estimate that 3,570 new pieces of litter washed up on just one beach in a single day.

Plastic trash on Henderson Island. Plastic trash on Henderson Island. JENNIFER LAVERS/UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA

“It’s likely that our data actually underestimates the true amount of debris on Henderson Island as we were only able to sample pieces bigger than two millimeters down to a depth of 10 centimeters, and we were unable to sample along cliffs and rocky coastline,” said study leader Jennifer Lavers, of the University of Tasmania, in a statement.

Title: The Point of No Return: Climate Change Nightmares Are Already Here
Post by: Surly1 on July 21, 2017, 08:28:20 AM
Noting new under the sun here, but the news is that rolling stone published it, and that so many familiar threads are wound together in one piece.

The Point of No Return: Climate Change Nightmares Are Already Here (http://)

Nightmares Are Already Here

The worst predicted impacts of climate change are starting to happen — and much faster than climate scientists expected

Walruses, like these in Alaska, are being forced ashore in record numbers. Corey Accardo/NOAA/AP

Historians may look to 2015 as the year when shit really started hitting the fan. Some snapshots: In just the past few months, record-setting heat waves in Pakistan and India each killed more than 1,000 people. In Washington state's Olympic National Park, the rainforest caught fire for the first time in living memory. London reached 98 degrees Fahrenheit during the hottest July day ever recorded in the U.K.; The Guardian briefly had to pause its live blog of the heat wave because its computer servers overheated. In California, suffering from its worst drought in a millennium, a 50-acre brush fire swelled seventyfold in a matter of hours, jumping across the I-15 freeway during rush-hour traffic. Then, a few days later, the region was pounded by intense, virtually unheard-of summer rains. Puerto Rico is under its strictest water rationing in history as a monster El Niño forms in the tropical Pacific Ocean, shifting weather patterns worldwide.

On July 20th, James Hansen, the former NASA climatologist who brought climate change to the public's attention in the summer of 1988, issued a bombshell: He and a team of climate scientists had identified a newly important feedback mechanism off the coast of Antarctica that suggests mean sea levels could rise 10 times faster than previously predicted: 10 feet by 2065. The authors included this chilling warning: If emissions aren't cut, "We conclude that multi-meter sea-level rise would become practically unavoidable. Social disruption and economic consequences of such large sea-level rise could be devastating. It is not difficult to imagine that conflicts arising from forced migrations and economic collapse might make the planet ungovernable, threatening the fabric of civilization."

Eric Rignot, a climate scientist at NASA and the University of California-Irvine and a co-author on Hansen's study, said their new research doesn't necessarily change the worst-case scenario on sea-level rise, it just makes it much more pressing to think about and discuss, especially among world leaders. In particular, says Rignot, the new research shows a two-degree Celsius rise in global temperature — the previously agreed upon "safe" level of climate change — "would be a catastrophe for sea-level rise."

Hansen's new study also shows how complicated and unpredictable climate change can be. Even as global ocean temperatures rise to their highest levels in recorded history, some parts of the ocean, near where ice is melting exceptionally fast, are actually cooling, slowing ocean circulation currents and sending weather patterns into a frenzy. Sure enough, a persistently cold patch of ocean is starting to show up just south of Greenland, exactly where previous experimental predictions of a sudden surge of freshwater from melting ice expected it to be. Michael Mann, another prominent climate scientist, recently said of the unexpectedly sudden Atlantic slowdown, "This is yet another example of where observations suggest that climate model predictions may be too conservative when it comes to the pace at which certain aspects of climate change are proceeding."

Since storm systems and jet streams in the United States and Europe partially draw their energy from the difference in ocean temperatures, the implication of one patch of ocean cooling while the rest of the ocean warms is profound. Storms will get stronger, and sea-level rise will accelerate. Scientists like Hansen only expect extreme weather to get worse in the years to come, though Mann said it was still "unclear" whether recent severe winters on the East Coast are connected to the phenomenon.

And yet, these aren't even the most disturbing changes happening to the Earth's biosphere that climate scientists are discovering this year. For that, you have to look not at the rising sea levels but to what is actually happening within the oceans themselves.

Water temperatures this year in the North Pacific have never been this high for this long over such a large area — and it is already having a profound effect on marine life.

Related: Apocalypse Soon: 9 Terrifying Signs of Environmental Doom

Eighty-year-old Roger Thomas runs whale-watching trips out of San Francisco. On an excursion earlier this year, Thomas spotted 25 humpbacks and three blue whales. During a survey on July 4th, federal officials spotted 115 whales in a single hour near the Farallon Islands — enough to issue a boating warning. Humpbacks are occasionally seen offshore in California, but rarely so close to the coast or in such numbers. Why are they coming so close to shore? Exceptionally warm water has concentrated the krill and anchovies they feed on into a narrow band of relatively cool coastal water. The whales are having a heyday. "It's unbelievable," Thomas told a local paper. "Whales are all overthe place."

Last fall, in northern Alaska, in the same part of the Arctic where Shell is planning to drill for oil, federal scientists discovered 35,000 walruses congregating on a single beach. It was the largest-ever documented "haul out" of walruses, and a sign that sea ice, their favored habitat, is becoming harder and harder to find.

Marine life is moving north, adapting in real time to the warming ocean. Great white sharks have been sighted breeding near Monterey Bay, California, the farthest north that's ever been known to occur. A blue marlin was caught last summer near Catalina Island — 1,000 miles north of its typical range. Across California, there have been sightings of non-native animals moving north, such as Mexican red crabs. 


Salmon on the brink of dying out. Michael Quinton/Newscom


No species may be as uniquely endangered as the one most associated with the Pacific Northwest, the salmon. Every two weeks, Bill Peterson, an oceanographer and senior scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Northwest Fisheries Science Center in Oregon, takes to the sea to collect data he uses to forecast the return of salmon. What he's been seeing this year is deeply troubling.

Salmon are crucial to their coastal ecosystem like perhaps few other species on the planet. A significant portion of the nitrogen in West Coast forests has been traced back to salmon, which can travel hundreds of miles upstream to lay their eggs. The largest trees on Earth simply wouldn't exist without salmon.

But their situation is precarious. This year, officials in California are bringing salmon downstream in convoys of trucks, because river levels are too low and the temperatures too warm for them to have a reasonable chance of surviving. One species, the winter-run Chinook salmon, is at a particularly increased risk of decline in the next few years, should the warm water persist offshore.

"You talk to fishermen, and they all say: 'We've never seen anything like this before,' " says Peterson. "So when you have no experience with something like this, it gets like, 'What the hell's going on?' "

Atmospheric scientists increasingly believe that the exceptionally warm waters over the past months are the early indications of a phase shift in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a cyclical warming of the North Pacific that happens a few times each century. Positive phases of the PDO have been known to last for 15 to 20 years, during which global warming can increase at double the rate as during negative phases of the PDO. It also makes big El Niños, like this year's, more likely. The nature of PDO phase shifts is unpredictable — climate scientists simply haven't yet figured out precisely what's behind them and why they happen when they do. It's not a permanent change — the ocean's temperature will likely drop from these record highs, at least temporarily, some time over the next few years — but the impact on marine species will be lasting, and scientists have pointed to the PDO as a global-warming preview.

"The climate [change] models predict this gentle, slow increase in temperature," says Peterson, "but the main problem we've had for the last few years is the variability is so high. As scientists, we can't keep up with it, and neither can the animals." Peterson likens it to a boxer getting pummeled round after round: "At some point, you knock them down, and the fight is over." 


Pavement-melting heat waves in India. Harish Tyagi/EPA/Corbis


Attendant with this weird wildlife behavior is a stunning drop in the number of plankton — the basis of the ocean's food chain. In July, another major study concluded that acidifying oceans are likely to have a "quite traumatic" impact on plankton diversity, with some species dying out while others flourish. As the oceans absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, it's converted into carbonic acid — and the pH of seawater declines. According to lead author Stephanie Dutkiewicz of MIT, that trend means "the whole food chain is going to be different."

The Hansen study may have gotten more attention, but the Dutkiewicz study, and others like it, could have even more dire implications for our future. The rapid changes Dutkiewicz and her colleagues are observing have shocked some of their fellow scientists into thinking that yes, actually, we're heading toward the worst-case scenario. Unlike a prediction of massive sea-level rise just decades away, the warming and acidifying oceans represent a problem that seems to have kick-started a mass extinction on the same time scale.

Jacquelyn Gill is a paleoecologist at the University of Maine. She knows a lot about extinction, and her work is more relevant than ever. Essentially, she's trying to save the species that are alive right now by learning more about what killed off the ones that aren't. The ancient data she studies shows "really compelling evidence that there can be events of abrupt climate change that can happen well within human life spans. We're talking less than a decade."

For the past year or two, a persistent change in winds over the North Pacific has given rise to what meteorologists and oceanographers are calling "the blob" — a highly anomalous patch of warm water between Hawaii, Alaska and Baja California that's thrown the marine ecosystem into a tailspin. Amid warmer temperatures, plankton numbers have plummeted, and the myriad species that depend on them have migrated or seen their own numbers dwindle.

Significant northward surges of warm water have happened before, even frequently. El Niño, for example, does this on a predictable basis. But what's happening this year appears to be something new. Some climate scientists think that the wind shift is linked to the rapid decline in Arctic sea ice over the past few years, which separate research has shown makes weather patterns more likely to get stuck.

A similar shift in the behavior of the jet stream has also contributed to the California drought and severe polar vortex winters in the Northeast over the past two years. An amplified jet-stream pattern has produced an unusual doldrum off the West Coast that's persisted for most of the past 18 months. Daniel Swain, a Stanford University meteorologist, has called it the "Ridiculously Resilient Ridge" — weather patterns just aren't supposed to last this long.

What's increasingly uncontroversial among scientists is that in many ecosystems, the impacts of the current off-the-charts temperatures in the North Pacific will linger for years, or longer. The largest ocean on Earth, the Pacific is exhibiting cyclical variability to greater extremes than other ocean basins. While the North Pacific is currently the most dramatic area of change in the world's oceans, it's not alone: Globally, 2014 was a record-setting year for ocean temperatures, and 2015 is on pace to beat it soundly, boosted by the El Niño in the Pacific. Six percent of the world's reefs could disappear before the end of the decade, perhaps permanently, thanks to warming waters.

Since warmer oceans expand in volume, it's also leading to a surge in sea-level rise. One recent study showed a slowdown in Atlantic Ocean currents, perhaps linked to glacial melt from Greenland, that caused a four-inch rise in sea levels along the Northeast coast in just two years, from 2009 to 2010. To be sure, it seems like this sudden and unpredicted surge was only temporary, but scientists who studied the surge estimated it to be a 1-in-850-year event, and it's been blamed on accelerated beach erosion "almost as significant as some hurricane events." 


Biblical floods in Turkey. Ali Atmaca/Anadolu Agency/Getty


Possibly worse than rising ocean temperatures is the acidification of the waters. Acidification has a direct effect on mollusks and other marine animals with hard outer bodies: A striking study last year showed that, along the West Coast, the shells of tiny snails are already dissolving, with as-yet-unknown consequences on the ecosystem. One of the study's authors, Nina Bednaršek, told Sciencemagazine that the snails' shells, pitted by the acidifying ocean, resembled "cauliflower" or "sandpaper." A similarly striking study by more than a dozen of the world's top ocean scientists this July said that the current pace of increasing carbon emissions would force an "effectively irreversible" change on ocean ecosystems during this century. In as little as a decade, the study suggested, chemical changes will rise significantly above background levels in nearly half of the world's oceans.

"I used to think it was kind of hard to make things in the ocean go extinct," James Barry of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in California told the Seattle Times in 2013. "But this change we're seeing is happening so fast it's almost instantaneous." 

Thanks to the pressure we're putting on the planet's ecosystem — warming, acidification and good old-fashioned pollution — the oceans are set up for several decades of rapid change. Here's what could happen next.

The combination of excessive nutrients from agricultural runoff, abnormal wind patterns and the warming oceans is already creating seasonal dead zones in coastal regions when algae blooms suck up most of the available oxygen. The appearance of low-oxygen regions has doubled in frequency every 10 years since 1960 and should continue to grow over the coming decades at an even greater rate.

So far, dead zones have remained mostly close to the coasts, but in the 21st century, deep-ocean dead zones could become common. These low-oxygen regions could gradually expand in size — potentially thousands of miles across — which would force fish, whales, pretty much everything upward. If this were to occur, large sections of the temperate deep oceans would suffer should the oxygen-free layer grow so pronounced that it stratifies, pushing surface ocean warming into overdrive and hindering upwelling of cooler, nutrient-rich deeper water.

Enhanced evaporation from the warmer oceans will create heavier downpours, perhaps destabilizing the root systems of forests, and accelerated runoff will pour more excess nutrients into coastal areas, further enhancing dead zones. In the past year, downpours have broken records in Long Island, Phoenix, Detroit, Baltimore, Houston and Pensacola, Florida.

Evidence for the above scenario comes in large part from our best understanding of what happened 250 million years ago, during the "Great Dying," when more than 90 percent of all oceanic species perished after a pulse of carbon dioxide and methane from land-based sources began a period of profound climate change. The conditions that triggered "Great Dying" took hundreds of thousands of years to develop. But humans have been emitting carbon dioxide at a much quicker rate, so the current mass extinction only took 100 years or so to kick-start.

With all these stressors working against it, a hypoxic feedback loop could wind up destroying some of the oceans' most species-rich ecosystems within our lifetime. A recent study by Sarah Moffitt of the University of California-Davis said it could take the ocean thousands of years to recover. "Looking forward for my kid, people in the future are not going to have the same ocean that I have today," Moffitt said.

As you might expect, having tickets to the front row of a global environmental catastrophe is taking an increasingly emotional toll on scientists, and in some cases pushing them toward advocacy. Of the two dozen or so scientists I interviewed for this piece, virtually all drifted into apocalyptic language at some point.

For Simone Alin, an oceanographer focusing on ocean acidification at NOAA's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, the changes she's seeing hit close to home. The Puget Sound is a natural laboratory for the coming decades of rapid change because its waters are naturally more acidified than most of the world's marine ecosystems.

The local oyster industry here is already seeing serious impacts from acidifying waters and is going to great lengths to avoid a total collapse. Alin calls oysters, which are non-native, the canary in the coal mine for the Puget Sound: "A canary is also not native to a coal mine, but that doesn't mean it's not a good indicator of change."

Though she works on fundamental oceanic changes every day, the Dutkiewicz study on the impending large-scale changes to plankton caught her off-guard: "This was alarming to me because if the basis of the food web changes, then . . . everything could change, right?"

Alin's frank discussion of the looming oceanic apocalypse is perhaps a product of studying unfathomable change every day. But four years ago, the birth of her twins "heightened the whole issue," she says. "I was worried enough about these problems before having kids that I maybe wondered whether it was a good idea. Now, it just makes me feel crushed." 


Katharine HayhoeKatharine Hayhoe speaks about climate change to students and faculty at Wayland Baptist University in 2011. Geoffrey McAllister/Chicago Tribune/MCT/Getty


Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist and evangelical Christian, moved from Canada to Texas with her husband, a pastor, precisely because of its vulnerability to climate change. There, she engages with the evangelical community on science — almost as a missionary would. But she's already planning her exit strategy: "If we continue on our current pathway, Canada will be home for us long term. But the majority of people don't have an exit strategy. . . . So that's who I'm here trying to help."

James Hansen, the dean of climate scientists, retired from NASA in 2013 to become a climate activist. But for all the gloom of the report he just put his name to, Hansen is actually somewhat hopeful. That's because he knows that climate change has a straightforward solution: End fossil-fuel use as quickly as possible. If tomorrow, the leaders of the United States and China would agree to a sufficiently strong, coordinated carbon tax that's also applied to imports, the rest of the world would have no choice but to sign up. This idea has already been pitched to Congress several times, with tepid bipartisan support. Even though a carbon tax is probably a long shot, for Hansen, even the slim possibility that bold action like this might happen is enough for him to devote the rest of his life to working to achieve it. On a conference call with reporters in July, Hansen said a potential joint U.S.-China carbon tax is more important than whatever happens at the United Nations climate talks in Paris.

One group Hansen is helping is Our Children's Trust, a legal advocacy organization that's filed a number of novel challenges on behalf of minors under the idea that climate change is a violation of intergenerational equity — children, the group argues, are lawfully entitled to inherit a healthy planet.

A separate challenge to U.S. law is being brought by a former EPA scientist arguing that carbon dioxide isn't just a pollutant (which, under the Clean Air Act, can dissipate on its own), it's also a toxic substance. In general, these substances have exceptionally long life spans in the environment, cause an unreasonable risk, and therefore require remediation. In this case, remediation may involve planting vast numbers of trees or restoring wetlands to bury excess carbon underground.

Even if these novel challenges succeed, it will take years before a bend in the curve is noticeable. But maybe that's enough. When all feels lost, saving a few species will feel like a triumph.        

Title: Cancer-Causing Pollutants Found In Scarsdale Drinking Water, Study Shows
Post by: RE on July 28, 2017, 05:31:03 AM
You can bet this will be cleaned up faster than Flint.  Scarsdale is where RICH people live.


Cancer-Causing Pollutants Found In Scarsdale Drinking Water, Study Shows
A new study found 11 harmful contaminants in the state's drinking water. How clean is your community's water supply?


By Michael Woyton (Patch Staff) - Updated July 27, 2017 4:45 pm ET
ShareTweetGoogle PlusRedditEmailComments0
Cancer-Causing Pollutants Found In Scarsdale Drinking Water, Study Shows

SCARSDALE, NY — When water flows out of the faucet and into a glass, it usually appears clean and healthy. A report released Wednesday, though, found hundreds of harmful contaminants across the American water supply that can cause cancer, developmental issues in children, problems in pregnancy and other serious health conditions.

In the communities served by Westchester County Water District #1, nine contaminants above health guidelines were detected across the district's water supply, according to data from the Environmental Working Group that was released on Wednesday.

EWG notes, however, that tap water provided by this water utility was in compliance with federal health-based drinking water standards in the latest quarter address by the Environmental Protection Agency, which was from January to March 2017.

From 2010 to 2015, EWG collected results of tests conducted by the water utility, which was provided to them by the New York Department of Health-Bureau of Public Water Supply Protection, as well as information from the U.S. EPA Enforcement and Compliance History database.

The following contaminants were detected above health limits in communities served by Westchester County Water District #1:

    Dichloroacetic acid
    Radiological contaminants
    Trichloroacetic acid

Long Island Water Conference Legislative Committee Co-Chair Paul Granger did not agree with this study. "This report is nothing more than a fear mongering scare tactic for the sole purpose of selling unnecessary water filters," he said.

Read Granger's full statement below:

    "The premise of this report is patently false and the information portrayed is extremely misleading. This report is nothing more than a fear mongering scare tactic for the sole purpose of selling unnecessary water filters. The water being delivered to our customers is meticulously regulated by federal, state and local authorities on a weekly basis. Under no circumstances would water containing harmful levels of these chemicals, or any other chemical for that matter, come out of our treatment plants and be sent to the public. In fact, water providers publicly release information about their water quality on an annual basis. The authors of this report should be ashamed of themselves for purposely broadcasting misinformation about the safety of drinking water to the public for the sake of selling water filters."

“There are chemicals that have been linked to cancer, for example, that are found above health-based limits, or health guidelines, in the water of more than 250 million Americans,” said Nneka Leiba, director of Healthy Living Science at EWG.

In New York, EWG tracked 140 contaminants across the state’s water supply. The following contaminants have been detected above health limits in New York (contaminants in bold have been linked to cancer):

    Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) which are linked to bladder cancer, skin cancer and fetal development issues
    Chloroform which is linked to cancer and fetal development issues
    Bromodichloromethane which is linked to harm to child and fetuses, as well as reproductive difficulties
    Radium-226 and -228 which is linked to cancer
    Dibromochloromethane which is linked to cancer and harm to fetuses
    Dichloroacetic acid which is linked to cancer and harm to reproduction and child development
    Trichloroacetic acid which is linked to cancer, and harm to reproduction and child development
    Chromium (hexavalent) which is linked to cancer, liver damage and productive system damages
    1,2,3-Trichloropropane which is linked to cancer

These contaminants were detected above legal guidelines:

    Trihalomethanes which are linked to bladder cancer, skin cancer and fetal development issues
    Haloacetic acids (HAA5) which is linked to cancer and harm to fetuses
    Arsenic which is linked cancer, harm to the central nervous system, harm to the brain and nervous system, skin damage, changed to the heart and blood vessels, heart disease, stroke and diabetes
    Barium which is linked to harm to the kidney, high blood pressure and harm to the heart and blood vessels
    Radium which is linked to cancer

EWG, in conjunction with outside scientists, assessed health-based guidelines for hundreds of chemicals found in drinking water across the country and compared them to the legal limits. The law often permits utilities to allow these dangerous chemicals to pollute our waters.

Contaminants in Your Water

EWG has released a public database cataloguing contaminants in water systems in every state in the country — the first comprehensive database of its kind that took two years to build. First select the state where you live, and you'll see state-level data. For more local information, enter your zip code.

After you enter your zip code, you'll be directed to a page showing the water utilities in your county. Select your town to see which contaminants put your families at risk.

No single group has collected all this information for all 50 states in an easily searchable database — until now. And it’s incredibly easy to use it to see what contaminants are coming through your faucet.
What You Can Do

Once people know about the high levels of dangerous contaminants lurking in their water, the question becomes what they can do to protect their health.
Get free real-time news alerts from the Scarsdale Patch.
By clicking "Subscribe", you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

”There’s a way to reduce those levels simply by buying a water filter,” said Leiba.

“We don’t want to scare the population by saying there are 250 chemicals and just leaving it there,” she continued. “As a consumer you may look at it and get a little overwhelmed."

For this reason, EWG provides a guide to buying water filters.

Hudson Valley based-Consumer Reports also has a buyers guide for water filters. See it here.

The EWG website allows you to search for filters that block particular chemicals and pollutants. If you find that your local water supply has a particularly high level of a dangerous chemical, you can search for a filter that blocks that substance.

There are many types of filters, including carbon filters, deionization filters and distillation filters. Each type has its own strengths and weakness, so sometimes a filter will include multiple filtration methods to eliminate more potential threats.

To find the most effective filter, look for certifications from the Water Quality Association and NSF International. Different filters remove different contaminants.

It’s important to remember, though, that even high-quality filters are not 100 percent effective.

“Filters don’t remove everything,” Scott Meschke, professor of environmental and occupational health sciences at Washington University, told Patch. He emphasized that it’s important to make sure you’re using a filter that is designed to fit your local needs.

He also said that users should change water filters on a regular basis. Old filters that are never replaced can host bacterial, which also pose potential dangers.

People who don’t get their water through a public utility will have different needs.

“If you are on a private well, I would say that you need to be monitoring your water. You should be paying on a regular basis to have it tested,” Meschke said.
Title: Re: The Environment Board - The Grind: Whaling in the Faroe Islands
Post by: g on October 14, 2017, 09:14:25 AM
Just blew me the fuck away. Speechless. Don't know what to think or say.  :icon_scratch:

The photography is so special you will be put into a trance if you watch it.

The Grind: Whaling in the Faroe Islands (Full Length)

There’s not much agriculture in the Faroe Islands, an archipelago in the North Atlantic, roughly equidistant from Norway, Iceland, and Scotland. Aside from the sheep that freely roam the fjords and a few root vegetables, the Faroese have always relied on the surrounding sea as a source of fish, seabirds, and the pilot whales they slaughter in a hunt known as the grindadráp, or grind. "Grind,” which rhymes with wind, is Faroese for pilot whale, and can refer to the event of the whale slaughter, the whale meat, or the whales themselves. Hunting whales for food is a tradition as old as the islands have been inhabited. But in the past few decades, animal activists have taken issue with the grind, despite Faroese insistence that it is sustainable and humane. Motherboard visited the Faroe Islands to see a grind first hand as the Faroese defend their way of life against pressure from a visiting Sea Shepherd operation.


Title: 'This is a Really Big Deal': Canada Natural Gas Emissions Far Worse Than Feared
Post by: g on October 18, 2017, 07:19:04 PM
You won't find me pretending to know much about this stuff, but it sure sounds pretty bad to me.
Came across it a while a few minutes ago and know it is a Diner topic of interest.

      Oil sands at Fort McMurray. Alberta is home to 68% of Canada’s natural gas production, 47% of its light crude oil production as well as 80% of all crude oil and equivalents. Photograph: Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images
'This is a really big deal': Canada natural gas emissions far worse than feared | World news
Ashifa Kassam

Alberta’s oil and gas industry – Canada’s largest producer of fossil fuel resources – could be emitting 25 to 50% more methane than previously believed, new research has suggested.

The pioneering peer reviewed study, published in Environmental Science & Technology on Tuesday, used airplane surveys to measure methane emissions from oil and gas infrastructure in two regions in Alberta. The results were then compared with industry-reported emissions and estimates of unreported sources of the powerful greenhouse gas, which warm the planet more than 20 times as much as similar volumes of carbon dioxide.

“Our first reaction was ‘Oh my goodness, this is a really big deal,” said Matthew Johnson, a professor at Carleton University in Ottawa and one of the study’s authors. “If we thought it was bad, it’s worse.”

Carried out last autumn, the survey measured the airborne emissions of thousands of oil and gas wells in the regions. Researchers also tracked the amount of ethane to ensure that methane emissions from cattle would not end up in their results.

In one region dominated by heavy oil wells, researchers found that the type of heavy oil recovery used released 3.6 times more methane than previously believed. The technique is used in several other sites across the province, suggesting emissions from these areas are also underestimated.

In the second region, home to a mix of gas and light oil wells, researchers found results that were roughly equal to those reported by industry and unreported sources. However, they found that only 6% of methane emissions in this region were from industry-reported sources, with the remaining emissions, known as fugitive emissions, from unreported sources such as unintentional equipment leaks.

The finding could have major implications as Alberta and Ottawa strive to reduce methane emissions by 45% from 2012 levels by 2025, said Johnson. “It shows how much isn’t captured in current reporting requirements, and therein is a challenge and an opportunity all wrapped in one.”

The study then sought to conservatively extrapolate the findings, correcting only for sites that are home to heavy oil. What they found was in Alberta – home to 68% of Canada’s natural gas production, 47% of its light crude oil production as well as 80% of all crude oil and equivalents – total emissions were likely 25 to 50% higher than previous government estimates. The findings excluded mined oil sands, which are believed to be responsible for about 11% of methane emissions.

Canadian advocacy group Environmental Defence described the findings as alarming. “The methane gas currently being wasted would supply almost all the natural gas needs of Alberta, and is worth $530m per year,” Dale Marshall of the organisation said in a statement. “This represents an economic cost for governments in the form of lost royalties and taxes, and for industry in terms of revenue.”

Marshall pointed to the readily available solutions for controlling leaks and intentional releases of methane gas, portraying them as some of lowest cost strategies available to reduce carbon emissions.

Researchers said they have already begun presenting their findings to various levels of government, depicting it as a chance for industry and regulators to more effectively tackle emissions of methane – a gas far more potent than CO2 but which persists for less time in the atmosphere.

“When you take methane emissions and convert them to CO2 emissions so you can compare to cars, for Alberta, the total methane we’re talking about on a 100-year scale is 8 to 9.7 million vehicles. If we do it on a 20-year timescale, we’re talking maybe 28 to 33 million vehicles,” said Johnson. “This is a real opportunity.” ( :icon_study:

Title: Recycling Chaos In U.S. As China Bans 'Foreign Waste'
Post by: RE on December 10, 2017, 12:36:47 AM
Now we get to keep our own garbage.

RE (

Recycling Chaos In U.S. As China Bans 'Foreign Waste'

December 9, 20178:00 AM ET

Cassandra Profita

Jes Burns

Oregon Public Broadcasting

China's ban means recycling is piling up at Rogue Waste System in southern Oregon. Employees Scott Fowler, Laura Leebrick and Garry Penning say their only option for now is to send it to a landfill.
Jes Burns/OPB/EarthFix

Like many Portland residents, Satish and Arlene Palshikar are serious recyclers. Their house is coated with recycled bluish-white paint. They recycle their rainwater, compost their food waste and carefully separate the paper and plastic they toss out. But recently, after loading up their Prius and driving to a sorting facility, they got a shock.

"The fellow said we don't take plastic anymore," Satish says. "It should go in the trash."

The facility had been shipping its plastic to China, but suddenly that was no longer possible.

Portland residents Satish and Arlene Palshikar want to see the U.S. become less dependent on China for recycling.
Cassandra Profita/OPB/EarthFix

The U.S. exports about one-third of its recycling, and nearly half goes to China. For decades, China has used recyclables from around the world to supply its manufacturing boom. But this summer it declared that this "foreign waste" includes too many other nonrecyclable materials that are "dirty," even "hazardous." In a filing with the World Trade Organization the country listed 24 kinds of solid wastes it would ban "to protect China's environmental interests and people's health."

The complete ban takes effect Jan. 1, but already some Chinese importers have not had their licenses renewed. That is leaving U.S. recycling companies scrambling to adapt.

"It has no value ... It's garbage."

Rogue Waste Systems in southern Oregon collects recycling from curbside bins, and manager Scott Fowler says there are always nonrecyclables mixed in. As mounds of goods are compressed into 1-ton bales, he points out some: a roll of linoleum, gas cans, a briefcase, a surprising number of knitted sweaters. Plus, there are the frozen food cartons and plastic bags that many people think are recyclable but are not.
Warriors Against Waste: These Restaurants And Bars Are Aiming For Zero
The Salt
Warriors Against Waste: These Restaurants And Bars Are Aiming For Zero
Plastic Is Everywhere And Recycling Isn't The End Of It
The Two-Way
Plastic Is Everywhere And Recycling Isn't The End Of It

For decades, China has sorted through all this and used the recycled goods to propel its manufacturing boom. Now it no longer wants to, so the materials sits here with no place to go.

"It just keeps coming and coming and coming," says Rogue employee Laura Leebrick. In the warehouse, she is dwarfed by stacks of orphaned recycling bales. Outside, employee parking spaces have been taken over by compressed cubes of sour cream containers, broken wine bottles and junk mail.

And what are recyclables with nowhere to go?

"Right now, by definition, that material out there is garbage," she says. "It has no value. There is no demand for it in the marketplace. It's garbage."

For now, Rogue Waste says it has no choice but to take all of this recycling to the local landfill. More than a dozen Oregon companies have asked regulators whether they can send recyclable materials to landfills, and that number may grow if they can't find someplace else that wants them.

At Pioneer Recycling in Portland, owner Steve Frank is shopping for new buyers outside of China.

"I've personally moved material to different countries in an effort to keep material flowing," he says.

Without Chinese buyers, Frank says U.S. recycling companies are playing a game of musical chairs, and the music stops when China's ban on waste imports fully kicks in.

"The rest of the world cannot make up that gap," he said. "That's where we have what I call a bit of chaos going on."

Adina Adler, a senior director with the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, says China's new standards are nearly impossible to meet. The group is trying to persuade China to walk back its demanding target for how clean our recycling exports need to be. But Adler doesn't think China's decision is all bad.

"What China's move is doing is probably ushering in a new era of recycling," she says.

A helping (mechanical) hand

Bulk Handling Systems is betting that robots can be the future of recycling. At its research facility, bits of waste pass by on a conveyor belt as robotic arms poke down, sucking up plastic bags and water bottles then dropping them into bins.

CEO Steve Miller says the robot uses cameras and artificial intelligence to separate recycling from trash "in the same way that a person would do it," but faster and more accurately.

"It actually moves at a rate of 80 picks per minute," he says. "A person might only get 30 picks per minute."

Miller believes technology like this could let the U.S. make its recycling clean enough for China. But the robots are expensive, and few companies have them.

For now, the best bet may come back to the curbside bin.

Recycling companies are considering changing the rules for what's allowed in them or adding an additional bin for paper only to help streamline the sorting process. Steve Frank says Pioneer Recycling is even looking into adding cameras to collection trucks to catch people putting trash in their recycling bins.
Title: From hotumn to meatmares: The words that defined our planet this year
Post by: RE on December 23, 2017, 04:00:41 AM (


Grist / Amelia Bates
Year in Review
From hotumn to meatmares: The words that defined our planet this year
By Kate Yoder on Dec 22, 2017

Every December, dictionary editors declare their picks for “Word of the Year,” expressions that encapsulate the year’s defining spirit, its zeitgeist. The choices so far reflect 2017’s biggest stories: Donald Trump and sexual misconduct, with a complementary ray of hope. selected complicit. Merriam-Webster picked feminism. Oxford Dictionaries introduced us to youthquake — “a significant cultural, political, or social change arising from the actions or influence of young people.”

In an explanation for the selection process, Casper Grathwohl, president of Oxford Dictionaries, lamented the lack of new or revived words to describe our changing environment. Had there been any, Grathwohl implied, they might have been in the running for Word of the Year:

    As our process got underway we scoured the language corpora for a 2017 coinage giving voice to Mother Nature’s anguish and wrath. Alas. We may have talked until we were arctic blue in the face, but we found no evidence of a new or re-emerging word that embodies what’s happening to the Earth.

For the record, people did try to apply words to the vast planetary changes that occurred this year: the fast-melting Arctic ice, the balmy autumn days, the monster hurricanes that flattened entire islands. I set out to document them. After scouring news stories, conducting a few calculated Google searches, and begging Twitter for ideas, here’s what I came up with: the top 11 terms that shaped environmental discussion in 2017 — the kind that could end up in a dictionary a few years from now.

500-year flood (n.) A flood event that has a 1 in 500 chance of occurring in a given year. The phrase comes from flood-risk maps used for disaster preparedness.

Hurricane Harvey, for instance, hit Houston with the city’s third 500-year flood in the past three years. The phrase keeps popping up because climate-charged weather has made a mess of previous estimates. Flood risk maps look increasingly outdated since they often ignore increased risks from climate change and rising seas. After the media used the phrase widely, even President Donald Trump tweeted about it.

Antevernals (n.) Spring flowers that bloom uncannily early in the year.

The term antevernals, coined by Michelle Nijhuis, is one we might hear more often as climate change drives earlier springs and premature flower buds. The United States experienced its second warmest February on record in 2017. East of the Rockies, temperatures averaged as much as 11 degrees Fahrenheit above normal.

Category 6 (adj.) An unofficial category given to a hurricane so powerful that it breaks the scale.

The widely used Saffir-Simpson measure of hurricane strength goes from Category 1 (very dangerous winds) to Category 5 (widespread catastrophic damage). So, there’s no such thing as a Category 6 hurricane. But that didn’t stop people from talking about it. In September, scientists pointed out that if the traditional scale was extrapolated, Hurricane Irma’s intense wind speed would have put it at a Category 6. With intense hurricanes happening more frequently (thanks again, climate change!), we’re likely to hear more talk of Category 6 storms in the future. Or we may wind up with new scales that take more than wind speed into account.

Climate dismissive (n.) A person who dismisses any evidence of climate change.

In an interview with NPR in May, the renowned climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe called for a new name for climate deniers, one that’s more accurate and less likely to immediately end a conversation. For these folks, “dismissing the reality of climate change and the necessity for action is such a core part of their identity,” she said. So asking them to consider the evidence and change their minds is like asking them to “cut off an arm.” A climate dismissive took over the White House at the start of the year, and, well, we’ve seen the consequences.

Climate tourism (n.) Hurried travel to landscapes that are expected to melt or disappear. An offshoot of “disaster tourism.”

A CBS video earlier this year posed the question: “Is climate tourism the key to funding future environmental research?” As in, given Trump’s proposed cuts to the science budget, are we going to have to fund climate research with the help of tourists flocking to the world’s vanishing landscapes? With soon-to-be-Glacierless National Park getting overcrowded, maybe it’s not such a bad idea.

Ecoanxiety (n.) Anxiety or worry provoked by the unfolding damage from climate change and other ecological threats.

This spring, the American Psychological Association warned that climate change is beginning to trigger a mental health crisis on a vast scale. Climate change directly affects the mental and physical health of people at the frontlines of disasters, as in the case of post-Hurricane Maria Puerto Rico. But ecoanxiety — a cousin of climate anxiety and climate grief — can also afflict people at a distance, those who feel helpless watching such disasters unfold. A Gallup poll this year found that 45 percent of Americans “worry a great deal” about global warming.

Hotumn (n.) A swelteringly hot fall that’s too unseasonable to call “autumn.”

This fall, New England saw record-breaking temperatures. So did Southern California. And from the Pacific Northwest to the Midwest, swaths of the country saw average September temperatures soar several degrees above average. Climate models project we’ll be basking under the hotumn sun more and more frequently.

Meatmare (n.) A nightmare in which a vegetarian or vegan dreams about accidentally eating meat, then wakes up feeling guilty about it.

Our culture’s preoccupation with meat takes a huge toll on the environment (livestock represent about 15 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions). Sometimes, it also takes a toll on the sleep of vegetarians. To learn what experts in psychology, anthropology, and food studies believe causes meatmares (yes, they’re real), read my in-depth investigation from this summer. The short version: “It’s the culture’s way of getting back at you and calling into question the decision to reject meat,” Samuel Boerboom, author of The Political Language of Food, told me.

Medicane (n.) Short for “Mediterranean hurricane,” a rare weather system with the characteristics of a subtropical cyclone in the Mediterranean Sea.

A medicane caused deadly flooding in Greece this year. Last year, one struck Malta. They are — or were — so uncommon that scientists haven’t yet established clear criteria for them. But those who study them say that warmer Mediterranean waters could fuel stronger medicanes going forward.

New Arctic (n.) The new name for the Arctic, which has become so altered by human-caused climate change that it’s well on its way to becoming ice-free.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration coined the term in a recent report on the Arctic’s health. Basically, the Arctic as we knew it is already gone, so scientists decided the melting region needed a new name. The loss of sea ice is disrupting cycles that have occurred for millennia and altering global weather patterns.

Weather extremes (n.) A euphemism for climate change.

In August, the Guardian reported that Trump administration officials had instructed staff at the U.S. Department of Agriculture to avoid using the term “climate change” in their work. Instead, they were to say “weather extremes.” It follows a pattern of censorship under the Trump administration that’s having effects beyond official documents. An NPR report found that scientists have begun censoring themselves and omitting climate change from summaries of their research, using alternative phrases like extreme weather instead.
Title: Animals (anti-poaching music video 3:14)
Post by: RE on December 24, 2017, 12:26:20 AM
Title: Oil Spill at Sea From Burned Ship off China Spreads ‘Noticeably’
Post by: RE on January 16, 2018, 12:29:04 AM (

Oil Spill at Sea From Burned Ship off China Spreads ‘Noticeably’
Bloomberg News
January 15, 2018, 7:12 PM AKST

    Oil slick now covers 52 square miles, up from 3.9 square miles
    A fire, which was burning off fuel, has now dissipated

A rescue ship sails near the burning Iranian oil tanker Sanchi in the East China Sea on Jan. 14. Photographer: Ministry of Transport via AP Photo

The oil slick caused by the stricken Iranian tanker in the East China Sea has spread “noticeably,” raising the prospect for wider environmental damage from what could be the worst spill in decades.

The fuel from the sunken tanker Sanchi, which was carrying 1 million barrels of condensate, expanded to cover as much as 52 square miles at 12 p.m. local time on Monday, up from about 3.9 square miles the previous day, according to Chinese authorities. A fire, which had been burning off some of the highly flammable type of light oil, has dissipated, the authorities said.

The blaze, which started Jan. 6 after the tanker collided with another ship, had been seen as helping to limit the fallout. The cargo is four times larger than the heavier crude on the Exxon Valdez spilled off Alaska in 1989, affecting about 1,300 miles of shoreline and destroying thousands of marine fauna. If all the condensate leaked into the sea instead of burning off, the spill would be one of the biggest from a ship over the past five decades.

The East China Sea is a large fishing area, and species such as mackerel could be affected by a spill, Greenpeace said last week. If there were a large-scale leak, then there would be an impact on creatures like the small yellow croaker and hairtail, according to the environmental group.

“It is virtually certain that much of the condensate went into the sea in solution, and that toxic underwater hydrocarbon plume will injure marine life exposed to it,” said Richard Steiner, an oil spill specialist based in Alaska. “Even the burned fraction will leave a toxic residue on the water.”

The Chinese authorities are still assessing the damage, the country’s State Oceanic Administration said on Monday. Because the oil slick is drifting southeast away from the coastal area where it sank in the East China sea, the spill isn’t having a significant impact on the marine ecological environment around the shore, according to a report by China National Radio Monday.

— With assistance by Sarah Chen
Title: Dumpster Fire
Post by: RE on January 29, 2018, 01:14:53 AM (

Dumpster Fire


Two decades after its scheduled closure, a zombie garbage incinerator divides a working-class town in Massachusetts.

By Greta Jochem   on Jan 25, 2018

Sitting on a park bench next to the Pines River on a sunny afternoon in Revere, Massachusetts, a few miles north of Boston, RoseLee Vincent recalls her childhood spent waterskiing on the river.

“This is where poor kids had fun,” the fourth-generation Revere resident remembers.

When she surveys the river today, her gaze often wanders to a garbage incinerator just over Revere’s border, in the neighboring town of Saugus. The facility, run by Wheelabrator Technologies, sits near the confluence of the Pines and the Saugus River. Vincent has spent nearly four years as a member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives trying to close it.

Wheelabrator Saugus, as the incinerator is known, burns trash gathered from surrounding neighborhoods and turns it into electricity. According to Wheelabrator, the facility can generate as much as 37 megawatts of energy — enough to power close to 40,000 homes. It also generates ash, which can contain hazardous heavy metals like arsenic, cadmium, and lead, that gets dumped in an adjacent landfill.

More in this series :

Rising from the ashes, a Buffalo suburb ends its dependence on coal

This army base once drove West Oakland’s economy. Now it drives discrimination.

This Kansas City neighborhood wrote the blueprint for transforming a community

How coal communities can outlive coal [video]

And that’s what concerns Vincent.

The 50-foot-high ash landfill is located in state-protected marshland, and its dump doesn’t have a plastic liner system underneath, as most modern landfills do. Without that boundary between the waste and the marsh, critics say poisons in the ash can leach into the surrounding marshland, threatening the health of the snowy egrets, herons, and a wide variety of wildlife inhabiting the wetlands as well as people living nearby.

Many residents worry the facility creates health issues — and have plenty of anecdotes related to early cancer diagnoses and development of autoimmune disorders — but finding evidence of this has remained elusive. And the company insists that it follows all local, state, and federal regulations.

“It’s a money maker — it’s very easy to burn and dump, burn and dump,” Vincent says. “It’s a disaster for my constituency.”

Vincent first drew up legislation that would limit the Wheelabrator facility’s activities in 2015, and she’s proposed new legislation in every session since she’s been a member of the Massachusetts House.
RoseLee Vincent   Greta Jochem

But every effort to rein it in keeps getting quashed.

In 1988, when Massachusetts designated the marshland where Wheelabrator’s landfill is located as a protected area, it seemed like the incinerator’s days were numbered. Who would allow a toxic waste pile in a conservation area? In fact, the state planned to close the facility in 1996.

But the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection gave it a critical reprieve, allowing it to stay open until its landfill reached capacity.

Today, the Saugus incinerator’s landfill is nearly full. And Wheelabrator told Massachusetts that as of November 2016, the dump had one year of capacity left. But rather than closing down the facility as the state had decreed, the company requested permission to extend the dump’s life for an estimated five years by changing the gradient on parts of the landfill. The project would expand the size of the dump by 25 percent. The state issued a provisional decision last year allowing the project to move forward.

After more than four decades of operation and an expansion on the horizon, some residents like Vincent wonder when the landfill will actually reach the end of its life — putting to rest their worries about its pollution and their health. Worse, Wheelabrator’s opponents point out that with climate change bringing more forceful hurricanes up the Eastern seaboard, a storm surge could literally empty the landfill’s contents into the surrounding wetlands.

“People said, ‘She’s a crazy environmentalist!,’” Vincent recalls. “I felt compelled to craft legislation that would end this environmental injustice.”

In the town of more than 25,000 residents, the incinerator is a divisive topic. I spoke to Saugus residents in diners and coffee shops. A few would talk in hushed tones only after looking around to see who else was in earshot. Some consider Wheelabrator a steward of the community, a model corporate citizen that provides much-needed tax dollars. For others, it’s a nasty neighbor that’s poisoning their friends and families.

Loretta LaCentra has lived in Riverside, a Revere neighborhood less than a half-mile downwind of Wheelabrator, for more than 30 years. Her home is across the river from the facility, and she regularly kayaks through the Rumney Marshes. The fact that Wheelabrator can keep operating a dump in a protected marshland simply dumbfounds her.

“It’s 50 feet now,” LaCentra says about the ash pile. “How high is high enough for them?”

When trash is incinerated in a typical energy-from-waste facility, two types of ash are created: fly ash and bottom ash. Fly ash is typically 10 to 20 percent of the total ash, and it usually contains most of the dangerous metals.

In 1994, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling mandated that ash from municipal solid-waste incinerators be considered hazardous when toxic chemicals reach a certain threshold, as determined by the Environmental Protection Agency. But the agency’s regulations allow facilities to test their waste-toxicity from the total ash they generate — as opposed to simply testing the more-dangerous fly ash — making it less likely for tests to turn up hazardous levels.

Among the dangerous byproducts of trash incineration are dioxins, which the World Health Organization links to reproductive and developmental issues, damage to the immune system, and even cancer. According to the environmental advocacy group the Conservation Law Foundation, dioxins “have been described as the most toxic chemicals known to mankind.”

Back in 2011, Wheelabrator agreed to pay a $7.5 million fine — at the time Massachusetts’ largest alleged environmental violation settlement — for incidents at multiple facilities they own in the state. Sparked by two whistleblowers who worked at the Saugus incinerator, the state attorney general’s complaint alleged that thousands of gallons of ash spilled into the Wheelabrator parking lot and the Rumney Marshes after a filter broke. The complaint said that the company failed to immediately report the spill to the state and instead tried to clean it up on its own. In addition, according to the attorney general, a hole in the facility’s roof had allowed ash from burning trash to escape.

The company never admitted wrongdoing. But they’ve acknowledged more spills since then, including at least two in 2016.
The Rumney Marshes Area of Critical Environmental Concern   Greta Jochem

Concerns about the toxicity of the ash stem in part from the fact that the plant’s landfill has no liner. According to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Wheelabrator is one of only two unlined, active landfills in the state.

In Wheelabrator’s case, the disposal pile is built directly on top of an old solid-waste landfill which, in turn, sits on top of natural clay. Joseph Ferson, a spokesman for the state’s Department of Environmental Protection, said that it was “not feasible” to construct a conventional liner system because the ash landfill was built on top of another dump.

Without a liner, critics say there’s little protection for the salt marshes and tidal flats that make up the 2,800-acre Rumney Marshes Area of Critical Environmental Concern. In its comments when the marshes received their protected designation, The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service called the site “one of the most biologically significant estuaries in Massachusetts north of Boston” but notes that shellfish from the wetlands are too contaminated for human consumption.

Jim Connolly, the company’s vice president of environmental health and safety, told Grist, “The ash monofill adjacent to the Wheelabrator Saugus facility includes a clay/soil barrier wall system that provides the equivalent groundwater protection as a traditional plastic.” He adds that this system complies with federal and state standards.

In 2015, Connolly appeared in a video interview with public policy master’s students at the University of New Hampshire. In it, he argued that because the current ash landfill is built on top of an old landfill, they aren’t dumping in the marsh — though official state documents have described the landfill as being situated within Rumney Marshes.

“The ash has always been placed on the footprint of where waste had previously been placed,” Connolly explained. “The previous landfill was in the marsh. When we got here and started placing ash, the marsh was no longer a marsh.”

Last May, the Conservation Law Foundation filed a notice of intent to sue Wheelabrator for allegedly failing to monitor the groundwater around the landfill and thus violating the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Their intent letter further alleges that Wheelabrator is violating the Clean Water Act by discharging contaminated groundwater into the nearby surface waters without a permit.

“This is a highly sensitive ecological area that deserves a very, very high level of protection,” says Heather Murray, a staff attorney at the foundation. “A new landfill would never be allowed to be sited there in the first place.”

Last February, members of the Saugus Town Meeting voted in new rules that would limit the height of any ash landfill. They would effectively cap  Wheelabrator’s dump at its current height 50 feet. The Massachusetts attorney general’s office struck the regulations down six months later — saying they intruded on the power of the Department of Environmental Protection.

Before the town voted, Wheelabrator had threatened to sue to have the restrictions reversed (and promised to pass any costs to the company onto the town). It was a serious concern for some residents. “We are forcing Wheelabrator to take the town to court,” Town Meeting member Bill Brown commented to the Saugus Advertiser. “And that will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.”

That’s an expense the community of Saugus — where the per-capita income is nearly 10 percent below the state’s — likely could not bear. The facility is next to several communities that are either low-income or have sizable minority contingents that the state has designated as “environmental justice populations.” In Massachusetts there are six other municipal waste incinerators like the one Wheelabrator operates in Saugus. According to state data, all seven are in or near communities with the designation.
The Wheelabrator Saugus waste-to-energy plant   Google Earth

Complicating Saugus’ relationship with Wheelabrator is the fact that the company is one of the town’s largest taxpayers. The company is quick to remind the community of its financial clout. In an ad the company placed in the Saugus Advertiser in January 2017, Wheelabrator claimed it paid $4 million to the town in taxes and philanthropy.

The company donates to local schools, and provides 60 full-time jobs, according to its website. It won a community service award in 2013 after sponsoring the Saugus High School golf tournament and donating a new scoreboard to the school’s gym. In a series of videos touting its relationship to Saugus, the company said that it gave land to the high school’s golf team to use as a driving range.

“Every time we ask Wheelabrator for help, they not only come through, but in many cases Wheelabrator employees contribute time, energy, and funding beyond what we have asked for,” Mike Nelson, the former Saugus High School athletic director, told The Daily Item, a local newspaper in nearby Lynn.

The company also promotes its maintenance of the 370-acre Bear Creek Wildlife Sanctuary, an area near the facility that plays host to snowy egrets, great blue herons, and buffleheads. The sanctuary popular with local bird watchers — some of whom credit Wheelabrator with providing open habitat for grassland-breeding birds, like sandpipers.

Saugus Town Meeting member Bill Brown Greta Jochem

Americans generate a lot of garbage — 254 million tons of trash in 2013, according to the EPA. If it’s not reused or recycled, there are two main options for it: a solid-waste landfill or an incinerator.

“Neither is good for the environment,” says Anne Marie Desmarais, a lecturer in civil and environmental engineering at Tufts University. “But probably landfilling is worse.” Incinerators, she says, are somewhat of a necessary evil.

Bill Brown, the Saugus Town Meeting member, says that when it first opened in the 1970s, many community members saw the Wheelabrator facility — which burns 1,500 tons of trash per day — as environmentally friendly.

“We’re producing electricity, and we’re getting rid of our trash all at once,” Brown recalls town folk thinking.

And thus far, Brown says, no one’s made a convincing case for an alternative. Advocates working to close or limit the incinerator’s operations have yet to present conclusive proof — such as increased rates of cancer or asthma — that living near the facility has harmed their health.

That’s what keeps Brown from joining the crowd aligned against Wheelabrator.

“In everything that they’ve done,” he says, “they’ve never ever offered clinical data, studies, reports, brought forth scientists or anyone that could say the problems in this area are directly related to Wheelabrator.”

But LaCentra, who lives across from the facility, is concerned the incinerator is sickening people. In 1996, her husband, a lifelong Revere resident, was diagnosed with kidney cancer when he was 42. The doctor was shocked he’d developed it so young, LaCentra recalls, because it’s rare for the disease to strike anyone younger than 45. Kidney cancer is linked to exposure to toxins in drinking water, including arsenic.

“I am suspect of Wheelabrator after having seen too many cancer cases, respiratory issues, and autoimmune issues in my 30 years of living in the Riverside neighborhood,” LaCentra wrote in a letter to the state in 2016, asking the state to close the ash landfill.

The data that has been collected doesn’t back up LaCentra’s suspicion. A March 2016 paper by the state health officials looked at incidence of cancer in Saugus and concluded that, overall, there is not an unusual pattern of cancer in the town.

Soon after the report, RoseLee Vincent co-founded the Alliance for Health and Environment, which advocates for closing Wheelabrator’s ash landfill. Members of the organization argue that the study isn’t complete because it only looked at Saugus — leaving out sections of Lynn and Revere that are within a tight radius of the facility. Further, they argue, cancer is not the only potential public health problem: asthma and other respiratory issues are, too.

According to the Bureau of Environmental Health, their cancer study was done at Wheelabrator’s request — though the agency did not evaluate the impact of the company’s incinerator, specifically. The Conservation Law Foundation points to a 2015 report by Massachusetts Department of Health that did find that between 2007 and 2011, residents of Saugus, Revere, and Lynn reported “higher than expected” numbers of new cancer diagnoses — though no underlying cause was identified.

Brown notes that Wheelabrator is not the only industrial facility that’s polluting the area. He points out a General Electric plant across the Saugus River where he worked for 34 years.

“Yeah, Wheelabrator is a contributor,” Brown says. “But so is GE.”

Back by the Pines River, Vincent, the state representative, continues to try to reconcile her carefree childhood on the waterway with the incinerator on its shores today. She’s convinced that now is the time to stop Wheelabrator from increasing its footprint in the Rumney Marshes.

If the company can’t be pushed back now, she says, there’s no end to how tall their ash pile will get.

“This wasn’t here when I was a kid,” Vincent says, looking across the river at the incinerator and landfill. “I would like it to be gone for future generations.”
Title: 🌎 Climate Strange
Post by: RE on February 07, 2018, 01:20:31 AM

Climate Strange


The eco-obsessed often get labeled as weirdos -- even by their peers. Weird, however, is looking better and better.

By Eve Andrews   on Feb 1, 2018

Alec Mitchell doesn’t like praise for what he’s doing. Not for loaning out reusable coffee mugs at farmers markets near his Arcata, California home, nor running a compost collection service on a bike, nor renting out dishware at events to discourage disposable plates. Mitchell spent months sleeping in a tent on the beach to conserve housing-related resources. He never, ever gets in a car.

“Great job!” so many would say. “You’re doing such wonderful work!”

Ask Umbra

But the cars and the disposable coffee cups don’t seem to diminish, so the praise feels meaningless. “You try and you try and you try, and you don’t know what you can do, so you do what you can,” he told me over the phone. (We had to plan the call in advance, as Mitchell does not keep his cellphone on unless he knows he needs to use it, to conserve battery life.)

Why keep it up? Why be such a weirdo? What can you possibly change?

Even within the environmental movement, there’s a fraught and often ugly debate over people like Mitchell, who radically change their lives to fight climate change. Critics say they are wasting their time and scaring away the critical audience of the unconverted. Major voices in the climate movement are dismissive of the choice to, say, forego a major flight. Why sacrifice, they chide; focus on what matters.

But Mitchell has also worked on the kind of systemic change that many environmentalists would criticize him for distracting from. He’s volunteered for habitat restoration, worked at the local recycling facility, run for local office, knocked on doors for voter registration campaigns. He’s just upset that for so much talk about wanting to fight climate change, most people don’t reflect it in their daily lives.

As much as policy shapes behavior, a mass shift in behavior can push policy and change the world. The shift has to start somewhere — and it starts with the weirdos.

Mitchell, who is 25, would have fit right in at a radical cooperative that existed a few hundred miles south in San Francisco in 1970: Ecology Action. The group espoused an “environmental awareness starts at home” ideology: reuse everything, bike everywhere, mend and compost and say no to meat. In an organizational manifesto, Ecology Action described their activities as “doing new things for new reasons.”

In 2018, Ecology Action has grown up into an advocacy organization behind a lot of pro-climate legislation in California. And, nearly a half-century later, the activities they “lived” are no longer new. (One could easily argue that they were never new — they’re simply resurrecting the old.) They’re not even particularly strange.

But neither are they remotely mainstream — which is mind-boggling to people like Mitchell in the face of runaway climate change. While vegetarian and vegan options proliferate, only about 3 percent of U.S. adults don’t eat meat. Bike share programs have multiplied by a factor of nearly 90 since 2010, but they struggle to survive and are criticized for only reaching a small, elite portion of urban populations. The amount of stuff an average person throws away peaked in 2000 and recycling rates are on the up-and-up — but we still don’t even know how to do that that well.

Still, these commitments persevere in different houses, on different streets, on different social media accounts. Because there is still the hope that the environmental awareness that starts at home (particularly as “home” expands in the digital age) can be contagious.

Behavior normalization is a powerful driver of climate-conscious lifestyles. A 2014 study in the International Journal of Psychology examined the values, social forces, and personality traits that correlate with pro-environment actions. “If one believes that the ‘usual thing to do’ is to recycle, one is likely to recycle,” the authors write. (The most important “usual things” to change, according to a major study last year, include our diets and transportation habits.)

Basically, in “norm activation theory,” we make decisions based on our sense of personal moral obligation, expected consequences, and, significantly, the expectations of our peers. It’s why it’s easier to quit smoking if people around you quit smoking.

Peter Kalmus, a climate scientist, has transformed his own lifestyle based on moral obligation (save humanity from climate change) and the consequences of his actions (everything we do makes the climate change a tiny bit more). Now, he’s working on changing that whole “expectations of our peers” part.

Kalmus described to me his “climate awakening” moment: As a physics grad student at Columbia University, he attended a James Hansen talk on the idea that the Earth absorbs more heat than it releases — a death sentence for everyone on the planet. But immediately after the talk, he went to lunch with his classmates and tried to talk about this impending doom, and no one seemed to care.

That is the entire point of Kalmus’ book, Being the Change: Live Well and Spark a Climate Revolution. In his opinion, there wasn’t a satisfying discussion of what a regular person can do to fight climate change so he set out to create a point of reference, a guide, for anyone nervous and curious. When I told him it’s currently on a deep wait list at the Seattle library, he laughed delightedly.

This is what he did: He challenged himself to de-fossil-fuel his own lifestyle in all the most important ways. First, flying less. (“Hour for hour, there’s no better way to contribute to climate change than to get on a commercial plane,” he says.) Then, vegetarianism. (“I felt lighter, more energetic.”) Then, even in the suburbs, giving up his motorcycle for a bicycle. And after that, it became a sort of game. He asked: “What are the most radically emissions-free lifestyle changes that I can make, and still enjoy myself?”

For Shia Su, it started with the Cake Invasion. That was the name of her baking blog, which gradually turned vegan as she began to experiment with that most maligned of diet choices. (“It took a couple of years; I’m not very good with change,” she confides. “I always need to ease into things.”) She wanted to challenge herself to create vegan baked goods that were as delicious as their dairy-laden counterparts: Perfectly moist chocolate cakes, flaky apple pies, delicate puddings made of tofu. It became an obsession.

Cake Invasion spurred her interest in things like palm oil boycotts and, eventually, the zero-waste movement, which launched the spinoff blog Wasteland Rebel. (Not to be confused with the model of assault rifle.) There, Su documented the various measures that she and her husband implemented to not use any disposable things: housing everything in glass jars; bringing their own containers to get restaurant takeout; buying as much as possible from the bulk foods section. It became a challenge to see how much they could cut down, and, again, an obsession.

The Wasteland Rebel Instagram account — a sunlit grid of wholesome grains in glossy glass jars, exquisite rainbow arrangements of farmers market produce, and cloth-swaddled loaves of bread — has 60,000 followers. In fact, there’s an entire #zerowastemovement Instagram community rife with accounts such as these.

“I think the first time people hear about ‘zero waste,’ it’s seen as this hippie thing,” Su says. “The notion is that it’s a bit dirty and not mainstream enough, so people just dismiss the idea as something that crazy people do! Making it visually appealing speaks to so many more people. They think, ‘I want a beautiful home, I want a beautiful pantry, I can do that.’ Because it is doable!”

Su experienced a lot of resistance to both going vegan and zero waste when she started. A close friend and her mother, in particular, were insistent that they weren’t going to be converted by her behavior. But then, gradually, they began to adopt those practices themselves, sans any insistence or even encouragement from Su — simply by being around her. The friend started sending photos of how little trash she accumulated in a week; her mom became a devotée of the organic foods bulk section.

The shift in environmentally inclined behavior from “gross hippie” to “aspirational” is something that Kalmus, the climate scientist, hopes for.

But there are some pitfalls, too, in the aspirational approach. For example, urban biking advocacy organizations have been criticized for selling cycling as an “urban chic” activity, alienating the lower-income cyclists that actually make up the majority of the national biking community.

This comes back to the great bugaboo of the environmental movement: That it’s associated with whiteness and wealth. People of color very rarely see themselves reflected in the messaging of some of the most significant individual-level environmental changes, like biking.

Bike share is one CO2-fighting tool in the urban transit arsenal, and it’s struggled in a lot of cities, because people aren’t using it. And the ones that do tend to be white, wealthy-ish, and from out of town. But Kerdia Roland, a 25-year-old African-American bike delivery messenger was the No. 1 user of Chicago’s Divvy bike share system in 2017. It wasn’t to save the climate, but because it fit his lifestyle.

The Chicago Reader reported that Roland clocked in over 6,000 miles of rides on the powder-blue, 50-pound “tourist bikes” while making deliveries around an endless city that is seasonally unbearable in both summer and winter. Six thousand miles, for context, is roughly the bikeable length of South America.

Roland adores traversing the city on two wheels, no matter the weight of them. He feels freer, healthier, happier, more in tune with his city. And he loves to talk to people about it, particularly in neighborhoods of color, where he gets a lot of “outlandish looks” until he starts a conversation. “If there are more bikers, the city’s gonna want to take care of them — if it gets to be a large enough demographic,” he explains.

At the end of our call, he thanked me for asking about his experience. “I usually am really listening to people in all of these conversations” about bike sharing, he says. “I don’t get that many opportunities to do the majority of the talking. This is a breath of fresh air.”

Let’s go back to Alec Mitchell. He enjoys his lifestyle, but he is frustrated that other people don’t, and this is the first mistake — if a very understandable one.

In the New York Times feature on the radical collective Ecology Action, a girl was quoted: “Every time I go visit the Humphreys, they make me feel like a pig.” So much environmental behavior is seen as threatening, judging, morally superior. (Look no further than public perception of vegans.)

That is because it challenges norms. But, Alec, pal, the norms are changing, even if you can’t see it directly in front of you. Biking across freezing cities and Instagram accounts fetishizing grain organization (!) are actually beloved — because enough people, relatable people, happy people, find genuine joy in doing those things, and they are sharing that with others.

Take a deep breath, abandon some of your frustration with the people who haven’t caught up, and be the weirdo you want to see in the world. And just love being that way. It will become contagious.
Title: ☁️ Who is Guilty of Climate Crimes?
Post by: RE on February 18, 2018, 12:46:25 AM (

Published on
Friday, February 16, 2018
Common Dreams
Who is Guilty of Climate Crimes?

These are the key perpetrators of the largest human rights violation in history.
Margaret Klein Salamon

"The Kochs are bigger than either of the Democratic or Republican parties, manipulate both, and are determined to keep the Senate Republican...A major focus of Koch money has been to ensure that no legislation is passed to curb the burning of fossil fuels."(Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

"The Kochs are bigger than either of the Democratic or Republican parties, manipulate both, and are determined to keep the Senate Republican...A major focus of Koch money has been to ensure that no legislation is passed to curb the burning of fossil fuels."(Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

A fascinating exposé of the climate crisis awaits you in Peter Carter and Elizabeth Woodworth’s, “Unprecedented Crime: Climate Science Denial and Game Changers for Survival.”  It is a comprehensive look at the climate crisis through a legal frame, discussing the relevant national and international statutes and lawsuits, with a focus on the perpetrators of the climate emergency that confronts us all.

Human rights are explored at length, including the critical concept of “basic rights,” the right to things necessary for human life-- fresh water, food, and non-toxic air, which must come before non-basic rights. The author’s quote the 1980 Presidential Commission on World Hunger on basic rights: “Whether one speaks of human rights or basic human needs, the right to food is the most basic of all. Unless that right is first fulfilled, the protection of other human rights becomes a mockery.” With that frame, it becomes obvious that the climate crisis is indeed an “unprecedented crime,” as it strips people from their access to the building blocks of life, and it is happening on an almost incomprehensibly massive scale.

State-Corporate Crime

Not surprisingly, the authors’ focus is primarily on the fossil fuel corporations--who are engaged in an elaborate, multi-billion dollar misinformation campaign — and on the governments who have subsidized them and colluded with them through inaction. These are the key perpetrators of the largest human rights violation in history.           

It was fascinating, and sickening, to learn more about how the climate-denial machine actually works, such as the Heartland Institute mailing a climate-denying DVD to 200,000  high school science teachers. The description of the Koch brothers’ activities was particularly staggering:                                                       

‘The Kochs are a vertically integrated fossil fuel conglomerate, and they have a vertical integrated influence-peddling apparatus to go with it’… The Kochs are bigger than either of the Democratic or Republican parties, manipulate both, and are determined to keep the Senate Republican...A major focus of Koch money has been to ensure that no legislation is passed to curb the burning of fossil fuels.

Carter and Woodworth also cast their withering gaze on the media. They convincingly argue the media is guilty of criminal negligence for giving airtime to deniers and for failing to warn the public about the true nature of the climate crisis and about the banks that put billions of dollars into fossil fuel projects.

Are Ordinary Americans Guilty?

Clearly, there is a lot of guilt to go around. The authors cast some-- though in my view probably not enough--blame onto the citizens of rich countries, for their their complicity in the climate crisis.

The authors speak of the “moral collapse” that most Americans and other westerners experience regarding the climate crisis, and they quote Clive Hamilton, “there are three kinds of actors in this process of subversion: those who tell the lies, those who repeat the lies, and those who allow themselves to be seduced by the lies.” Most Westerners act as though the climate crisis was not happening, and as if they have no responsibility to help prevent catastrophe.

Americans tend to feel like victims rather than perpetrators. And indeed, we are victimized by the corrupt and cruel system that is deeply unequal and driving hard towards ecocide. But when we are complicit in “business as usual,” we are also perpetrators. My grandmother was a Holocaust survivor, and she impressed upon me the moral duty to confront evil. She felt so betrayed by the former friends who would not stand up for her and who avoided her on the street. One didn’t have to be a Nazi to be guilty, but just to go along with the genocide.

As citizens, we must start taking personal responsibility for preventing the full and horrific unfolding of the climate emergency.  Even though we did not directly cause the climate crisis, we still have — it is still our job to fix it. More specifically, we must orce our government to treat the climate crisis like the emergency it is. 

One of the most difficult things about climate crimes, is that they are primarily crimes of omission. All we need to do to ensure the deaths of billions of people is…. Nothing. Just continue with our lives and our business as usual. In order to act in accordance with our highest ideals, our morality, and our basic common sense, we need to activate ourselves, and the world’s governments-- we need to enter “emergency mode”.

A Non-Criminal Response

What would an adequate, non-criminal response to the climate crisis would look like? Carter and Woodworth describe it. It starts with a declaration of climate emergency, and that then leads to a program which rapidly transitions our economy to zero emissions and draws-down of excess C02 from the atmosphere. Their ideas are largely compatible with The Climate Mobilization’s Victory Plan. that they cite.

They include many fresh and exciting examples that The Climate Mobilization should be incorporate into our next version. I will just share a few items that were new and exciting to me: 1) retrofitting fossil fuel cars as electric (indeed 30,000 already have been-- by amateurs!) 2) using small nuclear fission, the type of reactors that power nuclear submarines, to provide industrial power and heating, 3) covering skyscrapers-- not just roofs-- with solar panels.

I believe that it is my moral duty-- and yours, and everyone’s-- to do all we can to ensure that this emergency mobilization for rescuing our climate gets started as soon as humanly possible. Thank you, Peter Carter and Elizabeth Woodworth, for your important contribution to this necessary effort.
Title: 🌎 Someone Tell a Reporter: the Rich are Destroying the Earth
Post by: RE on March 04, 2018, 02:48:26 AM (

Someone Tell a Reporter: the Rich are Destroying the Earth
March 3, 2018 Posted by Addison dePitt




“I Said Why? They Said They Didn’t Know”
Let history record that on Wednesday, September 6th, 2017, 14 days after climate change-fueled Hurricane Harvey made landfall in Texas and 4 days before Hurricane Irma hit southern Florida, the climate-denying President of the United States Donald Trump went to North Dakota to deliver a “tax reform” speech before hundreds of workers and managers at a major oil refinery. The president made comments so senseless and stupid that one must read them twice to believe they were uttered:

    “I…want to tell the people of North Dakota and the Western states who are feeling the pain of the devastating drought that we are with you 100 percent — 100 percent.  (Applause.)  And I’ve been in close touch, numerous times, with our Secretary of Agriculture, who is doing a fantastic job, Sonny Perdue, who has been working with your governor and your delegation to help provide relief.  And we’re doing everything we can, but you have a pretty serious drought.  I just said to the governor, I didn’t know you had droughts this far north. Guess what?  You have them.  But we’re working hard on it and it’ll disappear.  It will all go away.”

Then Trump got into the real eco-cidal meat of the matter – the de-regulation of energy and the lifting of restrictions on fossil fuel extraction and burning:

    “We’re getting rid of one job-killing regulation after another.  We’ve lifted the restrictions on shale oil.  We’ve lifted those restrictions on energy of all types.  We’re putting our miners back to work.  We’ve cancelled restrictions on oil and natural gas.  We’ve ended the EPA intrusion into your jobs and into your lives.  (Applause.)  And we’re refocusing the EPA on its core mission:  clean air and clean water.  (Applause.). In order to protect American industry and workers, we withdrew the United States from the job-killing Paris Climate Accord.  Job killer.  People have no idea…And right here in North Dakota, the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) is finally open for business.  (Applause.)  Now, what other politician, if elected President, would have done that one?  They would have stayed so far away.  And I did it immediately…It was the right thing to do.  And that is flowing now beautifully.  So it was the right thing to do.  (Applause.)”

    “…We opened it despite so many people that were on the other side calling and asking for this not to happen:  Please, we don’t want it to happen.  I said, why?  They didn’t know.  There was no — they just didn’t want it to happen…So I did that.  I also did Keystone.  You know about Keystone.  (Applause.)  Another other one, big one — big.  First couple of days in office, those two — 48,000 jobs. “

Where to begin in gaging the absurdity of the president’s words in North Dakota?  We’re “working hard” on the drought and “it will disappear”? Seriously?

His militantly anti-environmental EPA was working for “clean air and water.” For real?  The truth was precisely the opposite.

Job-creation?  Renewable energy would generate far more and better paying positions – jobs that would save livable ecology rather than destroy it (and there’s no jobs on a dead planet).

The really mind-blowing statement for me was Trump’s assertion that the people who fought the DAPL – the tens of thousands who camped and protested in Standing Rock, the pipeline resisters (I was one of them) across Iowa – “didn’t know why” they opposed the pipeline.

What was someone supposed to say in response to something that soul-numbingly idiotic? Anti-DAPL activists spoke loudly and clearly about the reasons for their opposition: defense of tribal lands, water-protection, and climate sanity.

Trump’s bizarre Bismarck address included this creepy little daddy-daughter interlude:

    Donald Trump: “And, by the way, Ivanka Trump — everybody loves Ivanka.  (Applause.)  Come up, honey.  Should I bring Ivanka up?  (Applause.)  Come up.  Sometimes they’ll say, ‘You know, he can’t be that bad a guy.  Look at Ivanka.’  (Laughter.) …Now, come on up, honey.  She’s so good.  She wanted to make the trip.  She said, ‘Dad, can I go with you?’  She actually said, ‘Daddy, can I go with you?’  I like that, right?  ‘Daddy, can I go with you?’  I said, ‘yes, you can.’ ‘Where you going?’  ‘North Dakota’.  Said, ‘oh, I like North Dakota.’  Hi, honey.  (Applause.)  Say something, baby.

    Ivanka Trump: “Hi, North Dakota.  (Applause.)  We love this state, so it’s always a pleasure to be back here.  And you treated us very, very well in November and have continued to, so we like sharing the love back.  Thank you.  (Applause.)”

    Donald Trump. “Thank you, honey.  Thanks, baby.  Come.  (Applause.)”

You can’t make stuff like this up.  (In case you think this is a satire and that I am making Trump’s comments up, read his Bismarck speech here).

Missing: The Biggest Story of Our or Any Time
Michael Wolff’s instant bestseller Fire and FURY: Inside the Trump White House is chock full of disturbing quotes from – and alarming reflections on – the malignant orange beast who fouls the White House and makes a laughingstock out of the U.S. Wolff even replicates in its entirety of the  mind-bogglingly moronic, delusional, and disjointed “speech” that the Sick Puppy-in-Chief gave at the CIA’s headquarters on the first day of his presidency – the one where the new president blustered that “we should have kept [Iraq’s] oil” and that “maybe you’ll have another chance.” Reading this weird rant in its entirety is a disturbing experience.  It’s enough to make you cringe (as did most of the CIA agents and managers who heard it) again at the “holy shit!” realization that a man stupid enough to say such things sits in the world’s most powerful job. “In the seconds after [Trump’s CIA monologue] finished,” Wolff notes, “you could hear a pin drop.”

The equally weird Bismarck oration did not make it into Fire and Fury.  Neither does anything else relating to climate, fossil fuels, and the environment.

That is quite an omission, since anthropogenic – really capitalogenic– climate change (CCC) has clearly emerged as the biggest issue of our or any other time in human history and Donald Trump and the Republican Party have shown themselves to be militantly dedicated to the Greenhouse Gassing-to-death of life on Earth – a crime that promises to surpass all others in the ruling classes’ long rap sheet.  Even more than how Trump ups the risk of nuclear war and emboldens the proto-fascist right, this has always been the gravest danger posed by Agent Orange – his threat to advance Big Carbon’s mad determination to trump livable ecology once and for all.

I really shouldn’t single out Wolff.  He is hardly alone in this deletion.  It’s been chilling to watch the entire corporate U.S. media fail to cover the climate question in any serious or sustained way under Trump – this even as epic storms, fires, floods, and landslides rooted in CCC ravage the nation and world, even as the planet speeds to 500 carbon parts-per-million by 2050 (if not sooner), and even while scientists report the ever-more near-term peril of true, species-threatening catastrophe. The news cycle has been dominated by a seemingly endless series of outrageous Trump Tweets and statements, by a constant White House soap opera (with a bizarre and shifting cast of characters),  and by the related interminable Russiagate story.

The last constant news story is about how Moscow supposedly stole something that doesn’t actually exist – “American democracy” – in 2016. So what if actually existing livable ecology is burning to death under the command of carbon-addicted capital?

Jeff Zucker: “Okay, a Day or So but We’re Moving Back to Russia”

    “So, my boss, I shouldn’t say this. … Just to give you some context, Trump pulled out of the climate accords and for a day and a half, we covered the climate accords. … The CEO of CNN [Jeff Zucker, the flagship cable news network’s president] said in our internal meeting … ‘Good job everybody covering the climate accords, but we’re done with that. Let’s get back to Russia.’ … So, even the climate accords, he was like ‘OK, a day or so, but we’re moving back to Russia.’ ”

So said CNN co-producer John Bonifield to an undercover guerilla journalist with the conservative media watchdog group Project Veritas (PV) last summer.

By “the climate accords,” Bonifield was referring to President Trump’s decision in June of 2017 to keep his campaign promise to pull the United States out of the Paris climate agreement. The accord, at least symbolically, committed the U.S. to joining the rest of the world in reducing carbon emissions with the hope of averting human extinction through anthropogenic global warming.

PV caught Bonifield on the same tape expressing doubts about the Russia and Trump story. Bonifield told PV that CNN had been running with this story to an extraordinary degree in pursuit of liberal eyeballs—and the advertising dollars that follow with a growing audience:

    PV journalist: So you think the Russia thing is a little crazy, right?

    Bonifield: Even if Russia was trying to swing the election, we try to swing their elections, our CIA is doing shit all the time, we’re out there trying to manipulate governments. You win because you know the game and you play it right. She [Hillary] didn’t play it right.

    PV: Then why is CNN like constantly, Russia this, Russia that?

    Bonifield: Because it’s ratings. Our ratings are incredible right now. … There are a lot of, like, liberal CNN viewers who want to see Trump get really scrutinized. If we would have behaved that way with President Obama, and scrutinized everything he was doing with as much scrutiny as we applied to Donald Trump, I think our viewers would have been turned off. They would have felt like we were attacking him. … I’m not saying all of our viewers are super-liberals, but there’s just a lot of them.

    PV: So Trump’s good for business, you’re saying.

    Bonifield: Trump is good for business right now.

Ecocide is bad for business and ratings.  This Week in Terrible Trump and Russia (TWITTR) is good for business (including those parts of the U.S. military-industrial complex invested in the weaponization of Eastern Europe) and ratings.

(For those who like sound empirical data produced by respectable scholars [I do], please see this excellent report by communications professor Jennifer Brook on how the seven leading U.S. corporate television networks severely downplayed the relevance of climate change while obsessing over “Trump” in its coverage of last year’s epic hurricanes. Trump throwing paper towels at Puerto Ricans after Hurricane Maria was a huge story.  The role of climate change in the lethal intensification of hurricanes was not. How childish.)

“Everything Else Won’t Matter”
It’s not just the climate issue that has been trumped by TWITTR. Also unduly pushed too far to the margins have been the really big problems of racism, sexism, nativism, class inequality, plutocracy, militarism, nuclear escalation, urban despair, mass incarceration, police shootings, and the general trashing of democracy by the profits system. Arguably, though, the environmental problem has emerged as the most urgent matter of all. It’s not just good jobs, health care, social justice and democracy that are going in the tank while dominant media obsesses endlessly over TWITTR. It’s life itself that’s at risk – yes, life itself.

CCC (global warming) is not just one among numerous “single issues”that should concern progressive and serious liberals. If this unfolding environmental cataclysm isn’t averted soon, Noam Chomsky explained six years ago, then “everything else we’re talking about won’t matter.” All bets are off on prospects for a decent future unless homo sapiens acts quickly to move off fossil fuels and on to renewable energy – a technically viable project. Standard liberal and progressive struggles over how the pie is distributed, managed and controlled (and for whom) lose their luster when the pie is poisoned. Who wants to turn the world upside down only to find it riddled with disease and decay? Who hopes to inherit a dying earth from the wealthy few?

Unlike many of the other issues ordinary citizens, liberals and progressives rightly care about, there are no letter grades with the climate issue. It’s pass-fail. We either quickly (historically speaking) make the leap across the chasm and move from fossil fuels and the madness of nuclear power to water, wind and solar, or we fail to survive. There’s very little room for cutting an incremental deal here. You don’t negotiate with physics.

Of all the endlessly infuriating and insane things about the malignant narcissist Trump, the most dangerous of all is his climate change-denialist promise to “deregulate energy” – rightly described by Chomsky as “almost a death-knell for the species.” Not that the Paris agreement offered anything like a full solution, but Bonifield was right to be disturbed to see “even the climate accords” trumped by the Trump-Russia story at CNN.

There are some Americans who have been paying rapt attention to Trump and the GOP’s exterminist war on livable ecology – a network of hard-right millionaire and billionaire political donors under the direction of carbon ecocide kings and fossil fuel uber-capitalists Charles and David Koch.  According to an important recent reportfrom The Intercept:

    “In the background of a chaotic first year of Donald Trump’s presidency, the conservative Koch brothers have won victory after victory in their bid to reshape American government to their interests.”

    “Documents obtained by The Intercept and Documentedshow that the network of wealthy donors led by billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch have taken credit for a laundry list of policy achievements extracted from the Trump administration and their allies in Congress.”

    “The donors have pumped campaign contributions not only to GOP lawmakers, but also to an array of third-party organizations that have pressured officials to act swiftly to roll back limits on pollution, approve new pipeline projects, and extend the largest set of upper-income tax breaks in generations.”

    “’This year, thanks in part to research and outreach efforts across institutions, we have seen progress on many regulatory priorities this Network has championed for years,’ the memo notes. The document highlights environmental issues that the Koch brothers have long worked to undo, such as the EPA Clean Power Plan, which is currently under the process of being formally repealed, and Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement, among their major accomplishments. The memo also highlighted administration efforts to walk back planned rules to strengthen the estate tax in a list of 13 regulatory decisions favored by the network.”

The evil geocidal Koch brothers and their planet-melting billionaire brethren get it – and they approve. They’ve been paying attention, even if CNN hasn’t.

“The rich,” as Le Monde’s ecological editor  Herve Kempf reported 11 years ago, “are destroying the Earth” – and enjoying themselves a great deal along the way. Some of the oligarchs doing that today are Russians.  A much bigger and more significant number of them are U.S.-Americans. Someone tell a U.S. reporter!
 Paul Street’s latest book is They Rule: The 1% v. Democracy (Paradigm, 2014) 
Title: 🌎 Extreme Weather Events: There Is No Planet B
Post by: RE on March 17, 2018, 12:44:57 PM
Great charts!

RE (

Extreme Weather Events: There Is No Planet B


Extreme Weather Events: There Is No Planet B

In-depth Report:
 0  0

The current warming of Earth (Figure 1), manifest in the rise in extreme weather events (Figures 2 and 3), including collapse of polar ice sheets, melting of the Arctic Sea ice, penetration of snow storms into mid-latitudes, permafrost thaw and methane release, hurricanes and wildfires (Figure 4), manifests a shift in state of the atmosphere-ocean system, constituting an existential threat to humanity and much of nature.

As extreme temperatures, the rate of sea ice melting, the collapse of Greenland glaciers, the thawing of Siberian and Canadian permafrost and increased evaporation in the Arcticdrive cold snow storms into Europe and North America, and as hurricanes, cyclones, heat waves and wild fires (Figure 4) affect tropical and semitropical parts of the globe, itis becoming clear Earth is entering a shift in state of the atmosphere-ocean system associated with destructive climate tipping points including hurricanes such as in the Caribbean, SE USA and the SW Pacific (Figure 5). With hundreds of Gigaton carbon stored in Arctic permafrost, its thawing and methane release by analogy with geological methane-release and mass extinction events is becoming more likely (Figure 6).

Figure 1. The rise of mean temperatures over the last 1800 years, since the onset of the industrial age and future IPCC projections (after W. Steffen).

Figure 2. The frequency of extreme weather events between 1980 and 2015 (Munich Re- insurance)

Figure 3. Global warming vulnerable tipping points

Figure 4. Climate change sets the world on fire. Southern Europe and  British Columbia have been devastated by wildfires this summer.

Figure 5. The 2017 hurricane season in the Caribbean and Southeast USA

Figure 6 (A). A crater on the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia. (source); (B) Vulnerable carbon sinks. ( a ) Land: Permafrost – 600 GtC;  High-latitude peatlands – 400 GtC; tropical peatlands – 100 GtC; vegetation subject to fire and/or deforestation – 650 GtC; ( b ) Oceans: Methane hydrates – 10,000 GtC; Solubility pump – 2700 GtC; Biological pump – 3300 GtC

It is reported that climate change will lead to the death of some 500,000 people a year due to food supplies by 20501 and hundreds of thousands of people due to extreme weather events.2

Developments in the atmosphere/ocean system reported by major climate research organizations (including NASA, NOAA, NSIDC, Hadley-Met, Tyndall, Potsdam, the World’s academies of science), and in Australia the CSIRO and BOM, include:

The current rates of greenhouse gas level rise and temperature rise exceed those observed in the geological record (Figures 8 and 9).

Global warming, amplified by feedbacks from polar ice melt, methane release from permafrost, and extensive fires, may become irreversible, including a possible collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation [14] (Figure 10).

According to Professor James Hansen, NASA’s former chief climate scientist “Burning all fossil fuels would create a different planet than the one that humanity knows. “ [15] According to Professor Joachim Schellnhuber, Germany’s chief climate scientist “We’re simply talking about the very life support system of this planet” [16].

While the Paris Accord remains non-binding, governments world-wide are presiding over a large-scale demise of the planetary ecosystems, which threatens to leave large parts of the Earth uninhabitable [15, 16].

Tackling the root causes of an unfolding climate tragedy requires a wide range of methods, the main ones being (1) sharp reduction in carbon emissions, and (2) effort at draw-down of atmospheric CO2, using methods such as sea weed plantations, soil biochar, soil re-silicification (applying basaltic rock dust), air-streaming through basalt and serpentine, sodium hydroxide pipe systems and so on.

There is no Planet B.

Figure 7(A) Sea level rise

Figure 7(B). Sea level rise

Figure 8. The fastest temperature rise rate in over the last 65 million years

Figure 9. Current warming compared to geological temperature rise rates

Figure 10. The likelihood of intermittent freeze events (stadial)


Dr Andrew Glikson, Earth and Paleo-climate science, Australia National University (ANU) School of Anthropology and Archaeology, ANU Planetary Science Institute, ANU Climate Change Institute, Honorary Associate Professor, Geothermal Energy Centre of Excellence, University of Queensland.









[8] ;

[9] ;








[17] Title: 💀 On Track for Extinction: Can Humanity Survive?
Post by: RE on March 18, 2018, 01:03:04 AM

2025 to 2040!  RJB must be reading Dr. McStinksion!


On Track for Extinction: Can Humanity Survive?


by Robert J. Burrowes / March 17th, 2018

Anyone reading the scientific literature (or the progressive news outlets that truthfully report this literature) knows that homo sapiens is on the fast track to extinction, most likely some time between 2025 and 2040.

For a taste of the evidence in this regard focusing on the climate, see here; here; here; and here.

Unfortunately, of course, the climate is not the only imminent threat to human survival. With an insane leadership in the White House in the United States, we are faced with the prospect of nuclear war. And even if the climate and nuclear threats to our survival are removed, there is still a substantial range of environmental threats – including rainforest destruction, the ongoing dumping of Fukushima radiation into the Pacific Ocean, extensive contamination from military violence… – that need to be addressed too, given the synergistic impacts of these multiple and interrelated threats.

Can these extinction-threatening problems be effectively addressed?

Well, the reality is that most (but not all) of them can be tackled effectively if we are courageous enough to make powerful personal and organizational decisions and then implement them. But we are not even close to doing that yet. And time is obviously running out fast.

Given the evidence, scientific and otherwise, documenting the cause and nature of many of these problems and what is required to fix them, why aren’t these strategies to address the problems implemented?

At the political and economic level, it is usually explained structurally – for example, as an outcome of capitalism, patriarchy and/or the states-system – or, more simply, as an outcome of the powerful vested interests that control governments and the corporate imperative to make profits despite exacerbating the current perilous state of the Earth’s biosphere and its many exploited populations (human and otherwise) by doing so.

But the reality is that these political and economic explanations mask the deeper psychological drivers that generate and maintain these dysfunctional structures and behaviours.

Let me explain why and how this happens using the climate catastrophe to illustrate the process.

While scientific concern about the increase in carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere had been raised more than a century ago it wasn’t until the 1980s that this concern started to gain significant traction in public awareness. And despite ongoing agitation by some scientists as well as climate and environment groups, corporate-funded climate deniers were able to stall widespread recognition of, and the start of serious official action on, the climate catastrophe for more than two more decades.

However, as the truth of the climate catastrophe was finally being accepted by most people and the climate deniers were finally forced into full-scale retreat on the issue of whether or not the climate catastrophe was, in fact, so serious that it threatened human extinction, the climate deniers implemented their back-up strategy: they used their corporate media to persuade people that action wasn’t necessary ‘until the end of the [21st] century’ and to exaggerate the argument about the ‘acceptable’ increase above the pre-industrial norm –  2 degrees? 3 degrees? 1.5 degrees? – to obscure the truth that 0.5 degrees was, in fact, the climate science consensus back in 2007.

But, you might ask: ‘Why would anyone prefer to ignore the evidence, given the extinction-threatening nature of this problem?’

Or, to put the question more fully: ‘Why would anyone – whether an “ordinary” worker, academic, lawyer, doctor, businessperson, corporate executive, government leader or anyone else – prefer to live in delusion and believe the mainstream narrative about “the end of the century” (or 1.5 degrees) rather than simply consider the evidence and respond powerfully to it?’

And what is so unattractive about the truth that so many people run from it rather than embrace it?

Obviously, these questions go to the heart of the human (psychological) condition so let me explain why most humans now live in a delusional state whether in relation to the climate, environment issues generally, the ongoing wars and other military violence, the highly exploitative global economy or anything else.

People do not choose to live in delusion nor do they choose their delusion consciously. A delusion is generated by a person’s unconscious mind; that is, the part of their own mind of which the individual is normally unaware. So why does a person’s unconscious mind generate a delusion? What is the purpose of it?

A person’s unconscious mind generates a delusion when the individual is simply too terrified to contemplate and grapple with reality. Instead, the person unconsciously generates a delusion and then lives in accord with that delusion for the (obvious) reason that the delusion does not frighten them.

This unconscious delusional state is the fundamental outcome of the socialization, which I call ‘terrorization’, of the typical child during their childhood.

Endlessly and violently coerced (by a variety of threatened and actual punishments) to obey the will of parents, teachers and religious figures in denial of their own self-will, while simultaneously denied the opportunity to feel the fear, anger, sadness and other feelings that this violence causes, the child has no choice but to suppress their awareness of how they feel and the reality that caused these feelings. As a result, this leaves virtually all children feeling terrified, full of self-hatred and powerless.

However, and this point is important, each of these feelings is extraordinarily unpleasant to feel consciously and the child never gets the listening they need to focus on feeling them.

As a result, these feelings are suppressed below conscious awareness and this fear, self-hatred and powerlessness become the primary but unconscious psychological drivers of their behaviour and, significantly, results in them participating mindlessly in the widespread ‘socially acceptable’ delusions generated by elites and endlessly promulgated through elite channels such as education systems, the corporate media and entertainment industries.

Hence, as a result of being terrorized during childhood, delusion is the most common state of human individuals, irrespective of their role in society.

And, as one part of their delusional state, most people must engage in the denial of reality whenever reality (unconsciously) frightens them (or threatens to bring their unconscious self-hatred or powerlessness into their awareness). This, of course, means that they are frightened to take action in response to reality but also deny it is even necessary.

So what can we do about all of this? Well, as always, I would tackle the problem at various levels.

If you are one of those rare people who prefers to research the evidence and to act intelligently and powerfully in response to the truth that emerges from this evidence, I encourage you to do so. One option you have if you find the evidence of near-term human extinction compelling in light of the lacklustre official responses so far, is to join those participating in ‘The Flame Tree Project to Save Life on Earth.’

Obviously, tokenism on your part – such as rejecting plastic bags or collecting rubbish from public places – is not enough in the face of the profound changes needed.

Of course, if you are self-aware enough to know that you are inclined to avoid unpleasant realities and to take the action that this requires, then perhaps you could tackle this problem at its source by ‘Putting Feelings First.’

If you want intelligent, compassionate and powerful children who do not grow up living in delusion and denial, consider making ‘My Promise to Children.’

If you want to campaign on the climate, war, rainforest destruction or any other issue that brings us closer to extinction, consider developing a comprehensive nonviolent strategy to do so. See Nonviolent Campaign Strategy.

And if you want to participate in the worldwide effort to end violence in all of its manifestations, you are welcome to consider signing the online pledge of ‘The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World‘.

In summary, the primary threat faced by humanity is not the synergistic multitude of complex social, political, economic and technological forces that are precipitating our rush to extinction.

The fundamental threat to our survival is our psychological incapacity (particularly because of our fear, self-hatred and powerlessness) to perceive reality and respond powerfully to it by formulating and implementing appropriate social, political, economic and technological measures that address our multifaceted crisis systematically.

Unless we include addressing this dysfunctional individual and collective psychological state in our strategy to avert human extinction, we will ultimately fail and extinction will indeed be our fate.

Robert Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of Why Violence? He can be reached at: Read other articles by Robert, or visit Robert's website.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Palloy2 on March 18, 2018, 08:07:36 AM
The kids and adults are not living a delusion, they are indeed powerless.  So they think, and say, "Yeah its ridiculous, but I can't fix it, so we'll just have to put up with it."  Some will be more assertive than that, and will go on protest marches.  That won't work, because they are powerless and can be ignored.  Some will even more assertive than that, and will join a political party.  That won't work, because they are powerless, especially in the field that their enemies are experts in.  Some will be even more assertive that that, and join a truly revolutionary vanguard.  Surveillance will follow their activities and put them on The List, ready to be arrested when the Emergency Powers kick in.

"the ongoing dumping of Fukushima radiation into the Pacific Ocean" - only someone who doesn't know about all the US nuclear industry's fuck ups could be worried about Fukushima radiation being dumped in the Pacific Ocean.

His solution "formulating and implementing appropriate social, political, economic and technological measures that address our multifaceted crisis systematically." Duh.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on March 18, 2018, 09:56:06 AM
"formulating and implementing appropriate social, political, economic and technological measures that address our multifaceted crisis systematically." Duh./i]

Talk about delusional.

Just bend way over and kiss your ass goodbye.
Title: 🏭 Struggling with pollution, Philippines orders closure of popular holiday
Post by: RE on April 05, 2018, 03:01:34 AM

Struggling with pollution, Philippines orders closure of popular holiday island

A 2012 photo of a polluted Bulabog beach on Boracay island, Philippines.
Image: Getty Images
By Johnny Lieu
1 hour ago

One of Philippines' most popular tourist destinations will be off-limits to visitors in a few weeks.

The entire island of Boracay will be closed to visitors from Apr. 26, so that it can receive a massive clean-up of dumped sewage and upgrades to its drainage systems, a spokesperson for President Rodrigo Duterte confirmed Thursday. It will be shut for a maximum of six months.

SEE ALSO: Indonesia's orangutans are watching their rainforest habitat get destroyed

Duterte, who has been criticised for his stance on human rights, had previously described the island as a "cesspool," and was concerned the island could be turned into a "fishpond or a sewer pool" if its environmental needs weren't addressed.

Boracay had 2 million visitors in 2017, a number that was described as moving toward the "alarming" by the country's department of environment, as the island struggles with sustainable development and waste.

The island is very much dependent on tourism. Up to 36,000 jobs ranging from hotel workers to street vendors could be lost in the shutdown, with authorities rejecting pleas by locals to consider a partial closure of the island.

Tourists pose for photos along a beach on Boracay island.

Tourists pose for photos along a beach on Boracay island.

Image: -/AFP/Getty Images

The president's spokesperson argued that Boracay's environmental rehabilitation has to be completed in total.

"We were expecting some sort of compromise between a partial or total closure or at least given more time to adjust to a closure, but I guess the president made up his mind and we’re taken aback by it. We’re a bit depressed right now in the industry," Jose Clemente III, president of the Tourism Congress of the Philippines, told ABS-CBN.

"If given the opportunity, yes, we would like to present our case. The private sector did not have a face-to-face dialogue with the president. We were doing it through the various agencies. Unfortunately, I guess this is the result of the recommendations of those agencies."

The island generates 90 to 115 tonnes of garbage a day, but current infrastructure only allows for 30 tonnes to be removed. Authorities say they've also discovered illegal, "hidden" pipes on the island used to dispose waste.

"Boracay island is seen as a major, world-class tourist destination," Epimaco Densing, assistant secretary of the Philippines' interior department, told reporters.

"Yet in fact we're not able to address the major issue that it is not in terms of public safety, public order, road systems and of course, the issue of environmental degradation."

Frederick Alegre, a secretary from the country's tourism department, said his department is still calculating the financial cost of the closure, but stressed it was "being done to sustain and save Boracay." He said the island is the first of several Filipino tourist destinations that will be looked at.

Boracay's closure comes after Thai authorities decided last week to close Maya Bay, also for a period of six months, due to the impacts of tourism on the beach's environment.
Title: Environment Board - McPherson Calls It, Extinction Sept. '18
Post by: azozeo on June 15, 2018, 10:25:33 AM
Title: Re: It Can't Be September '18!
Post by: agelbert on June 15, 2018, 10:43:19 AM
Environment Board - McPherson Calls It, Extinction Sept. '18

Az, McPherson is wrong. It Can't Be September '18! Superman died on November 18!

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on June 15, 2018, 10:45:17 AM
Where the F am I gonna' get my nachos & Pepsi for football season. NO SUPERBOWL ?
Title: Re: Don't worry Az, you'll get lots of this high energy density stuff to eat
Post by: agelbert on June 15, 2018, 10:54:14 AM
Where the F am I gonna' get my nachos & Pepsi for football season. NO SUPERBOWL ?

Don't worry Az, you'll get lots of this high energy density stuff to eat while watching the Extinction show:


Who needs a SUPERBOWL when you've got THIS kind of action (see below) to witness? ENJOY!

Title: Five Steps to Environmental Apocalypse ☠️ by Three-Eyed Billy (Video)
Post by: agelbert on June 15, 2018, 11:00:49 AM
Five Steps to Environmental Apocalypse ☠️ by Three-Eyed Billy (Video)  ;D

by MARK FIORE  ( MARCH 29, 2018 (
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on June 15, 2018, 12:27:45 PM
You know someone's come to end of their leash when they start throwing dates at doom.

Guy's gone complete Harold Camping  :coffee:
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: agelbert on June 15, 2018, 02:49:12 PM
You know someone's come to end of their leash when they start throwing dates at doom.

Guy's gone complete Harold Camping  :coffee:

Guy has often talked about suicide, though he claims he would never do it. However, the fact the he harps so much on his claim that there is NO HOPE, may ultimately cause him to off himself. I hope and pray he does not do this. I hope he just keeps practicing what he preaches about being good and kind to those one cares about.

I've listened to and watched many of his presentations. He tries to be, oh so calm about the threat of extinction (that he thinks is a sure thing). However, I detect an undertone of raging anger at the stupidity of mankind, particulaly TPTB. Guy is VERY angry, though he pretends it's all like water off a duck to him. I don't believe that for a second. It eats at him.

Also, he has a confirmation bias problem that, when these dire predictions DO NOT come to pass on Guy's timetable, might cause him to resist having to admit he was wrong due to excessive pride in his intellectual and analytical powers.

Shutting himself off from any potential solutions is a sure way to get clinically depressed, and dangerously suicidal. (

Where there is life, there is hope. Unfortunately, McPherson claims that is not so, due to Confirmation Bias.
Title: Re: Environment Board - McPherson Calls It, Extinction Sept. '18
Post by: Eddie on June 15, 2018, 04:39:22 PM

I can believe it will come in September, but I don't think it will be this September.

"It" being an event one could clearly tag as being "the end of industrial civilization".

And even if it is this September, we sure as hell won't be able to confirm that it WAS this September by the first of October, as Guy seems to think.

The collapse is clearly ongoing and incremental. Waterfall events will surely occur that make it more obvious, as time goes on.

As usual. Guy is guessing. He used to be guessing human extinction by 2030 if I remember right. I can believe that more readily than I believe that industrial civilization will collapse this September.

Another case of confirmation bias.

I find myself in the position that I have often found myself over the past few years. I agree with most of the data that shows that collapse is imminent, and that real catastrophic climate change is imminent. But I disagree with Guy's take on timing. And the take of others who think economic disaster will come this year. It is coming, but we have a bit longer to wait.

Not the worst thing, for most of us.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on June 15, 2018, 04:43:51 PM
Well said, however with earth changes on the up tick, we could be in for a bumpy rest of '18.

It appears that there is a lot more human displacement currently. If the hurricane season is huge than
who knows.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Palloy2 on June 15, 2018, 06:17:19 PM
Eddie: Not the worst thing, for most of us.

For you, anyway. But for the starving billions, and for the millions of refugees on the move, and for the rainforests and all their wildlife, and for the fish in the rivers and oceans, it can't come soon enough.  For those lucky enough to be surviving on mailbox money for now, the amount they enjoy this BAU life is only a little above zero, and when it reaches zero, watch out.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on June 16, 2018, 01:59:55 PM
Eddie: Not the worst thing, for most of us.

For you, anyway. But for the starving billions, and for the millions of refugees on the move, and for the rainforests and all their wildlife, and for the fish in the rivers and oceans, it can't come soon enough.  For those lucky enough to be surviving on mailbox money for now, the amount they enjoy this BAU life is only a little above zero, and when it reaches zero, watch out.

It will come unwound soon enough. I live my life one day at a time. There is no reason to feel guilty for having a decent life. Every day is a gift that I gratefully accept.

I am not in charge of what happens to the starving billions, just what happens to me. Your concern for them is admirable, though.  I suggest donating your living body to them when the cannibalism starts, if you're still kicking. Maybe if they're hungry enough, you can be of some service to 3 or 4 individuals, out of those crazed hordes.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: agelbert on June 16, 2018, 02:40:32 PM
Eddie: Not the worst thing, for most of us.

For you, anyway. But for the starving billions, and for the millions of refugees on the move, and for the rainforests and all their wildlife, and for the fish in the rivers and oceans, it can't come soon enough.  For those lucky enough to be surviving on mailbox money for now, the amount they enjoy this BAU life is only a little above zero, and when it reaches zero, watch out.

It will come unwound soon enough. I live my life one day at a time. There is no reason to feel guilty for having a decent life. Every day is a gift that I gratefully accept.

I am not in charge of what happens to the starving billions, just what happens to me. Your concern for them is admirable, though. I suggest donating your living body to them when the cannibalism starts, if you're still kicking. Maybe if they're hungry enough, you can be of some service to 3 or 4 individuals, out of those crazed hordes.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Palloy2 on June 16, 2018, 05:53:49 PM
Eddie: There is no reason to feel guilty for having a decent life.

There is when you do nothing to speak out on the side of Right, when all around you is poverty and exploitation, and you have houses galore, and whine about your taxes.  Didn't Jesus say "Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."  To which you will argue that you are not rich, I suppose.  Rich enough in comparison to the poverty all around you.  It all depends on how much of your effort goes into worldly riches, (money, houses, cars, solar panels) and how much into good works, charity, etc.

I suggest donating your living body to them when the cannibalism starts, if you're still kicking.

They would even bother cooking me - way too thin.  My way of helping was to campaign for wildlife and forest protection, and all it earned me was a broken neck from the police thugs.
Title: ⛰️ Climbers have turned Mount Everest into the highest pile of trash
Post by: RE on June 19, 2018, 01:25:51 AM
Homo Sap... making sure no place on earth is left unspoiled.


Climbers have turned Mount Everest into the highest pile of trash

By Tamar Lapin

June 18, 2018 | 2:09pm | Updated
Modal Trigger
Climbers have turned Mount Everest into the highest pile of trash

Discarded climbing equipment and rubbish scattered around Camp 4 of Mount Everest. Getty Images

More On:
mount everest
Crypto stunt on Mount Everest turns deadly
Two climbers found dead trying to scale Mount Everest
Double amputee climbs Everest after losing limbs near summit
Whole Foods worker plans 9th Mount Everest climb

Mount Everest is turning into a garbage dump.

Wealthy thrill-seekers forking over between $20,000 and $100,000 to climb the highest mountain on Earth are leaving a devastating trail of trash in their wake, according to an Agence France-Presse report published Sunday.

“It’s disgusting. An eyesore,” said Pemba Dorje Sherpa, who has summited the mountain 18 times. “The mountain is carrying tons of waste.”

Tourists are leaving behind tents, climbing equipment, empty gas canisters and feces.

Melting glaciers caused by global warming are also exposing trash that’s accumulated in the 65 years since Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay made the first successful summit.

Longtime climbers say the increase in trash goes hand in hand with the uptick of inexperienced tourists attempting to make their way to the 29,029-foot peak. At least 600 people have scaled the mountain so far this year.

Newbie climbers let their Sherpas schlep almost all their gear — meaning the guides aren’t able to carry trash down the mountain too.

“They have to carry their client’s gear so they are unable to carry down the rubbish,” said Damian Benegas, who has been climbing Everest for over 20 years with his twin brother, Willie.

But Nepal and Tibet are both making efforts to clean up the Himalayan mountain.

About five years ago, Nepal instituted a system in which it takes a $4,000 deposit from climbing teams and only refunds it if each climber brings down at least 18 pounds of waste.

In Tibet, mountaineers are required to bring down the same amount and are fined $100 per every two pounds they don’t.

But many rich climbers just don’t care about the $4,000 deposit, when they’re already shelling out so much for the experience, Pemda said.

Some experts, like Nepal Mountaineering Association president Ang Tsering Sherpa, are calling for a special Everest cleanup force to fix the problem.

“It is not an easy job. The government needs to motivate groups to clean up and enforce rules more strictly,” Ang said.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: edpell on June 19, 2018, 04:52:33 AM
Long past time for the big cull.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on June 19, 2018, 06:26:31 AM
No, just getting warmed up. But it's coming. It is coming.
Title: 🐻 ECOLOGY CHRONICLES—The Sinister Underbelly of Climate Change Denial
Post by: RE on July 18, 2018, 12:23:52 AM (

ECOLOGY CHRONICLES—The Sinister Underbelly of Climate Change Denial
July 12, 2018 Posted by Addison dePitt




Polar bears are among the most prominent big mammal species likely to vanish in the near geologic future.

The last few days of June 2018 saw most people in the United States sweltering in an epic heat wave. High temperatures were uniformly between 90 and 110 degrees in a mind-boggling 17 states [1]. Heat indices in parts of the East and Midwest approached 120 degrees. Heat Advisories or Excessive Heat Warning were issued by the National Weather Service for all or parts of 21 states. Hazardously poor air quality arising from the reaction of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides with sunlight and heat compounded the agony in 9 states.

On top of this, catastrophic drought gripped the southwestern US [2], largely the product of a devastatingly dry winter. Snowpack during the winter of 2017-2018 in mountains south of a line running roughly through mid-Nevada, Utah, and Colorado was nearer 0% than 100% of normal—hardly worth even being called “snowpack.”

And virtuous Americans were not the only ones suffering. Near-record heat and drought was scorching northern Europe, fanning peat fires in England. Plus an all-time record minimum temperature of 109 degrees was recorded amidst the baseline excessive heat of Oman.

Meanwhile, the northern Rocky Mountains, where I live, was basking in near-normal June temperatures while being bathed in near 170% of normal rainfall—a factoid that will no doubt be seized upon by people obsessed with denying the reality of human-driven climate warming.

Climate Warming is Real

But climate warming is real, as is the role of humans. All of the recent weather patterns we’ve been experiencing—locally, as well as globally—are precisely what climate scientists have predicted will accompany climate warming. Extremes will amplify, especially of heat, storms, seasonal precipitation, and drought. But these extremes will be—and have been—piggy-backed on a steady increase in average annual and seasonal temperatures going back to the 1980s, with increases greatest for minimum daily temperatures [3].

I am in good company when I invoke this evidence and unambiguously assert the reality of climate warming. Contrary to the claims of conservative demagogues, there is near unanimity about the reality of human-driven climate warming among scientists who have studied climate and climate change. In fact, more than 95% of such scientists agree on this fact [4]. And to claim that such consensus is the result of a conspiracy requires either mind-boggling ignorance about the nature of scientific inquiry or highly disturbing and deeply sinister motives. Yet roughly 30% of Americans don’t believe that climate warming is happening and/or that recent warming is largely caused by human activities [5].

Interestingly, this is roughly the same percentage of American adults who offer Trump their unwavering support, despite him being the vilest politician to take center stage in living memory. (I will return to this consilience shortly.)

How Can This Be?

Scientists of all sorts, but especially those studying climate, are confounded and distressed by the fact that there are so many doubters among American adults, and that so many more, even among believers, dismiss the consequences of unfolding climate change and are unwilling to make the radical changes needed to avert a catastrophe, not just for humans, but for all life on Earth.

How can this be?

This simple question has led to a veritable cottage industry of inquiry into the psychological, social, and political drivers of climate warming denial. After roughly 20-years of experiments and surveys, some more-or-less definitive conclusions have been reached, several of which initially surprised me. Yet the proffered explanations make a disturbing sort of psycho-pathologic sense.

Drivers of Disbelief

One unsurprising result is prominent, though. People who are more scientifically literate tend to be more trusting of science, put more credence in a scientific consensus, and, as a result, believe that human-driven climate warming is happening [e.g., 6]. So we humans are not completely irrational or craven.

But then things get interesting—even disquieting. Even when considering all sorts of psychological and social factors, it turns out that political ideology and affiliation is, at least proximally, a dominant determinant of belief in anthropogenic climate warming [7]. Not religiosity nor as much other worldviews, attitudes, and orientations. In other words, everything else aside, self-identified political conservatives cum Republicans are the most committed disbelievers and, among those, the best educated (paradoxically) the most strident of all [8]. In other words, conservative elites of a Republican persuasion are the standard bearers of skepticism. Surprisingly, they are expressly less amenable to persuasion by evidence than their more poorly educated political base. As a corollary, those who are most devoted to a free-market ideology (think conservative Wall Street tycoons and their minions) are also committed disbelievers [9].

But, then, there is more lurking beneath the veneer of political conservatism, party affiliation, and current articles of faith.

An additional ample corpus of research has shown that political conservatives have a definitive modal psychological profile. For one, they live in a heightened state of existential terror fueled by fear of death and alien “others” that inclines them to seek solace in hard cognitive and societal boundaries [10]. As a derivative, they tend to be more committed to tradition and the status quo, especially to the extent that such arrangements privilege them [e.g., 11]. As a further derivative, they are often eager to perpetuate the harm embedded in inequality and hierarchical social arrangements [e.g., 12]. All of this is infused with a bestiary of bigotry, including sexism, racism, and ethnic narcissism [e.g., 13, 14]. In this country such folks are disproportionally white males who, not coincidently, are feeling increasingly beset by global dynamics enforcing a sort of inevitable leveling.

Manipulating the Masses

An evidence-based reconstruction of climate warming skepticism then follows:

Educated but mostly-white conservative businessmen and political servants/allies recognize a threat to their current near strangle-hold on power and wealth arising from calls to address rampant climate warming. They see those who promote alternative climate-cooling lifestyles and technologies as enemies to their existing entitlements, certainly profits and power. They are, moreover, inclined to be bigots. Being clever, they mobilize their equally bigoted but less educated, less cognitively capable, and exceedingly fearful base comprised largely of increasingly disadvantaged white males by appealing to their interest in maintaining the status quo and inflaming their fear of an alien intrusive world, manifest as “immigration” and “immigrants.” National chauvinism also plays well. Onto this, the conservative elites graft a disbelief in climate warming [15, 16] and aversion to socialized health care, neither of which is axiomatic to being white, threatened, and not particularly well-educated. But both threaten profit-making engines benefiting established capitalist elites. Adherence to these agendas then becomes part of a larger self-reinforcing and polarizing belief system that will not abide deviation [17, 18].

And it is not by coincidence that these very people, churned by the a similar manipulative machinery, voted en masse for Donald Trump, the most egregious denier of anthropogenic climate warming to ever attain high political office. He is—also not coincidently—the most blatant presidential spokesperson for bigotry as well as inequality, privilege, and corporate interests that we have seen in the last 80 years.

Yes, a bit speculative, but I am again in the good company of many intelligent as well as diligent scholars who have tried to make sense of an ostensibly irrational, superficially inexplicable, phenomenon.

Yet More Mystery

But, then, given all of this, there is something even more ostensibly mystifying that has intruded upon the national stage, again involving the issue of climate warming. In this instance it involves federal government bureaucrats employed by the US Fish & Wildlife Service and charged by society with implementing the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to recover and restore imperiled species—the very sorts of people you would expect to deploy science with the highest integrity.

But they haven’t…and don’t.

A Brief History of Grizzly Bears

The treatment of grizzly bears by Fish & Wildlife Service bureaucrats is emblematic. Grizzlies were listed as threatened under the ESA in 1975, including the population centered on Yellowstone National Park. Shortly after this population began to register a numeric recovery from its 1980s nadir, the Fish & Wildlife Service began plotting to remove protections. Time after time they tried, and time after time they were thwarted in Court, and for good reason. Early in the last decade, in a series of court dramas lasting from 2007 to 2009, Federal Judges essentially reprimanded agency managers for egregiously mishandling—even ignoring—highly relevant science. Such reprimands by a Court are highly unusual. Almost invariably federal agencies are given deference on technical scientific matters. But in these cases the malfeasance by agency bureaucrats was so blatant that Judges at the District and Appellate Court level felt compelled to act.

The Fish & Wildlife Service took another run at removing ESA protections from Yellowstone grizzly bears beginning in 2013. This time round, the effects of climate warming were in much greater focus, whether because of direct or indirect effects on bear foods and bear behaviors—recent or foreseeable. Much to the amazement of every outside scientist, the Service concluded in a final 2016 rule removing ESA protections [19] that climate change had not had and would never have any detrimental effect on this isolated and relatively small population of bears.

Yes Fish & Wildlife Service, Climate Change is Real

In reality, climate warming had already entrained several damaging and demonstrable changes, with more promised for the future. Three of four critical bear foods had suffered major if not catastrophic declines, with the fourth likely to nearly disappear during the next 75 years, all directly or indirectly attributable to climate warming. By contrast, there are no foreseeable positive changes on the climate-warming horizon.

To wit, we have lost between 50 and 70% of seed producing whitebark pine in a single decade due to an outbreak of bark beetles unleashed by increasing warmth. Spawning cutthroat trout had been functionally extirpated as a bear food by a combination of predation by non-native lake trout and deteriorating hydrological conditions, the latter driven by climate change. Elk populations had declined substantially—in instances to near local extirpation—in part attributable to deteriorating summer range conditions, in turn caused by increasing late-summer drought. And the last food, alpine-dwelling army cutworm moths, is almost certain to disappear from the high country with projected 90% losses of alpine habitats during the next century. (For more on all of this, see [20]).

And in the wake of these losses, Yellowstone grizzly bears have been increasingly turning to eating human-associated meat that draws them into conflict with people and eventual near-certain death. As a result, retaliation for livestock depredation and encounters with elk hunters have become the most common causes of mortality for grizzlies in this ecosystem.

Yes, climate warming is real, with real-life past and prospective future dire consequences for grizzly bears.

Yet More Willful Denial

As with willful ignorance on the part of the conservative electorate, the willful denial of climate warming by people who are scientifically literate and presumably concerned about the environment—but buried within the bowels of a technocratic federal agency—begs for some sort of explanation. In the case of grizzly bears, an explanation is not too hard to find.

The reasons have to do with basic human motivations—primarily access to money, power, and privilege, but mediated by the machinery and culture of a federal natural resources management agency. Ultimately, though, all roads lead back to one of two factors: the political elites who hold agency purse strings, and a hoary culture of wildlife management organized around the precepts of domination and use, shared with wildlife managers in bureaus lusting for power over grizzly bear management in Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho.

Considering purse strings, there is a long history of conservative politicians from conservative states manipulating the budgets of agencies such as the Fish & Wildlife Service to achieve conservative ends, leading, ultimately, to an internalized aversion among Service bureaucrats to antagonizing conservative elites—a sort of aversive conditioning. As a consequence, the insidious narrative of climate warming denial has subtly insinuated itself into decision-making by agency employees.

The ethos of domination and use amplifies all of this by naturally aligning with a conservative worldview and with the interests of those who, in the end, value wildlife such as grizzly bears primarily for opportunities to kill them. The impulse to kill is reflected in the primacy of sport hunting among wildlife managers pretty much everywhere. In somewhat complex ways, all of this translates into a natural sympathy, even within the Service, for state-based wildlife management. But more important, the domination-use worldview creates a powerful impulse on the part of state managers and their political allies to wrest all power over wildlife management away from the federal government, in this instance, ESA-based authority by the Fish & Wildlife Service over grizzlies.

In other words, as with the impetus for climate-warming-denial, the impulse is to maintain a power and wealth status quo in defiance of an emerging threat organized around fundamentally different values and constituencies.

How do I know this? I’ve lived it for over 60 years.

An Inescapable Imperative

The fundamental mechanisms of climate warming are not rocket science. The basic chemistry and physics of green-house gases and possible effects on climate had been worked out by the mid-1800s. The evidence of climate warming is, moreover, amply evident for anyone who has eyes to see. I’ve witnessed inescapable manifestations even during my lifetime. For one, nighttime temperatures are not as consistently cool. As a kid in the Black Hills, nighttime frost was pretty much guaranteed any time high temperatures weren’t able to get out of the 60s. Not anymore.

Likewise, the implications of rising CO2 levels were known to even the  least prescient of the scientific community as early as the 1970s and 80s—even implications for wildlife such as grizzly bears. I authored papers published in 1986 and 1991 [21]—roughly 30 years ago—in which I flagged the problem of climate warming for Yellowstone grizzly bears. Yet, emblematic of the current spate of climate-warming denial in the Fish & Wildlife Service, the Service’s Recovery Coordinator at that time likened my concerns to those of “chicken little.” Not by coincidence, he continued on to author the 2007 and 2016 Fish & Wildlife Service rules dismissing the threat of climate warming and lifting ESA protections for Yellowstone’s grizzly bears. Current manifestations of denial do, indeed, have deep roots, as do the cultural and political dynamics spawning it.

But all of this is rendered trivial in comparison to our unfolding reality and what it promises for life on Earth. I recently read an engaging book by Peter Brannen entitled “The Ends of the World.” Much of the book is devoted to describing and explaining the causes and consequences of Earth’s past epic mass extinctions. It is a sobering read, and a guide to what humanity’s obsessive consumption of profit-generating fossil fuels promises to spawn. As it turns out, rapid increases in concentrations of CO2 and methane triggered most of the near sterilizations of Earth that occurred during the last 500-million years. Alarmingly, our current discharge of CO2 into the atmosphere is more breakneck than during any previous mass extinction. The implications are stark, and not just for grizzly bears.

We need to act now. And our first order of business will necessarily be overthrowing the elites and their conservative regime that currently strangles all aspects of our national life.
 Dr David Mattson worked for the grizzly study team for 2 decades. He retired from the US Geological Survey two years ago. 

Meantime, this goes on all the time, with the politicians in the pocket of the hunting and ranching lobbies (to which they often belong), while scientists and their humane recommendations go begging on deaf ears. Obviously our system of government —which includes an equally worthless and complicit media system—is worthless due to terminal corruption.
Over Seventy Scientists Call on Wyoming Governor to Halt Grizzly Hunt
Wednesday, April 25, 2018
Contact: Dr. David Mattson (406) 222-1485

Dr. Rob Wielgus (509) 595-1232

Jackson, WY— Today, 73 scientists released a letter opposing the state of Wyoming’s proposed grizzly bear trophy hunt— calling on Wyoming Governor Matt Mead to put the hunt on hold pending an independent peer review process. Designed to significantly reduce bear numbers within a core monitoring area and eradicate virtually all bears outside of this area, the scientists noted the plan is unsustainable. Co-signers call the hunt “ethically irresponsible, unwarranted, and not in the public’s interest.” See their full letter here.  Dr. David Mattson, the letter’s author and a retired 30-year-long grizzly bear biologist, and Prof. Rob Wielgus  are available for interview and comment.

In addition to the letter, wildlife biologists released the following statements:

“Wyoming’s plans to reduce numbers of grizzly bears outside of the National Parks will, in some zones, amount to an unmitigated slaughter. The decision is based on flawed science, flawed logic, and an utter disregard for the national public’s values in ethics, humaneness and conservation of wildlife,” said Dr. David Mattson, United States Geological Survey Research Wildlife Biologist and Research Station Leader (retired) and Lecturer and Senior Visiting Scientist, Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies (retired).

“Grizzly bears, one of the slowest producing of terrestrial animals, did not evolve to be hunted. Wyoming’s plans to hunt 24 grizzly bears of an isolated population is aggressive and fails to use sound science. Wyoming’s plan will result in the deaths of multiple national park grizzly bears,” said Dr. Rob Wielgus,Professor and Director of the Large Carnivore Conservation Laboratory at Washington State University.

“Ignoring the biology and the intrinsic value of grizzlies, Wyoming’s proposal to kill them for trophies is narrowly directed towards the idea that grizzly bears are just a commodity. The concept, however, that anyone would wish to kill grizzlies for pleasure is increasingly repulsive to most people. This way of thinking differs sharply from values of  wildlife conservation,” said Dr. Paul Paquet, Professor at University of Victoria’s Geography Department and Senior Scientist at Raincoast Conservation Foundation.

Creative Commons License
Title: Fossil fuel industry spent nearly $2 billion to kill U.S. climate action
Post by: Surly1 on July 20, 2018, 03:57:21 AM
Fossil fuel industry spent nearly $2 billion to kill U.S. climate action, new study finds-- ( Industry has out-lobbied environmentalists 10-to-1 on climate since 2000.

Activists rally in New York City to support the state's investigation into whether oil giant Exxon covered up its knowledge about climate change, February 22, 2017. CREDIT: Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Legislation to address climate change has repeatedly died in Congress. But a major new study says the policy deaths were not from natural causes — they were caused by humans, just like climate change itself is.

Climate action has been repeatedly drowned by a devastating surge and flood of money from the fossil fuel industry — nearly $2 billion in lobbying since 2000 alone.

This is according to stunning new analysis in the journal Climatic Change on “The climate lobby” by Drexel University environmental sociologist Robert J. Brulle.

The most important conclusion of Brulle’s is that spending by those in favor of climate action was dramatically overwhelmed by the big fossil fuel suppliers and users: Environmental organizations and the renewable energy sector lobbying expenditures were dwarfed by a ratio of 10:1 by the spending of the sectors engaged in the supply and use of fossil fuels.” 


The study serves to help put to rest notion that the effort to pass climate legislation has ever been a fair fight. But then, the big corporate producers and consumers of fossil fuels have hundreds of billions of dollars in annual revenue — thus dwarfing the funds available to major environmental groups and the emerging clean energy sector.

Brulle analyzed the “countervailing power ratio,” which is the total lobbying expenditures by the big fossil fuel trade associations along with the transportation, electric utility, and fossil fuel sectors divided by the total lobbying expenditures of the renewable energy sector along with environmental organizations (see the chart below).

The ratio of lobbying expenditures by opponents of climate action compared to proponents. CREDIT:Climatic Change

“Special interests dominate the conversation, all working for a particular advantage for their industry,” as Dr. Brulle told ThinkProgress in an email. “The common good is not represented.”

Indeed, the other key point of the study is that a truly staggering amount of money has been spent lobbying Congress on climate change this century, more than $2 billion.

The biggest surge came, unsurprisingly, during the 2009-2010 period — when Congress came the closest it ever did to passing serious climate legislation

US national climate change lobbying expenditures total by year 2000–2016 (green) and as a percent of total lobbying (blue). CREDIT: Climatic Change.

During 2009 and 2010, total lobbying expenditures on climate change accounted for a whopping nine percent of all lobbying expenditures.

The House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act, often called the Waxman-Markey bill, by a slim margin in June 2009. At that point, the fossil fuel industry launched an all-out — and ultimately successful — lobbying push to undermine any effort by the Senate to pass their own version of the climate bill over the next 12 months. 

Indeed, of the top nine energy companies with the biggest lobbying expendituresbetween January 2009 and June 2010, six were Big Oil companies (led by ExxonMobil), and the other three were a coal producer and two coal-intensive utilities.

“It’s clear that when the greatest threat presents itself — like when Congress and the Executive branch are aligned and favorable to and recognize climate change as a major issue,” explained Brulle, “these corporations that engage in the supply and use of fossil fuels work the hardest to upend legislative efforts by increasing their lobby spending ten-fold.”

Finally, it’s worth noting, as Brulle does, that electric utilities, which collectively have spent vast sums lobbying on climate change, were not all lobbying uniformly against the climate bill in 2009 and 2010.

But the biggest carbon polluters at the time, such as Southern Company and American Electric Power (AEP), were among the very biggest spenders.

Also, as the study notes, “several corporations’ apparent support for climate policy is a sophisticated strategy to simultaneously attempt to appear to support such legislation, while actually supporting efforts to undermine it.”


To do this, some companies had memberships in coalitions that both supported climate legislation (U.S. Climate Action Partnership) and that opposed it (American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity).

And it appears to be the case that the opponents of the climate bill were very actively trying to kill the bill, while many of the so-called proponents were mainly lobbying to shape the bill “as a hedge against unacceptable climate legislation in case their first preference (no action) is defeated,” as the study notes.

Post 2010, the fossil fuel industry has maintained its consistent large edge in lobbying over environmentalists and clean energy companies.

Sadly, brand new IRS rules from the Trump administration “will no longer force Kochs and other groups to disclose donors,” as the New York Times reportedTuesday. That means major anti-climate groups, like Americans for Prosperity, will not have to report that it is heavily backed by the Koch brothers, who are billionaire fossil fuel barons.

In short, tracking the role of dirty money in politics just got a lot harder.

The bottom line is that one major reason for the lack of action on climate change is that, for nearly two decades, the opponents of serious action have been vastly outspending the proponents.

Title: Potatoes stop growing in parched earth of north County Dublin
Post by: Surly1 on July 28, 2018, 11:20:59 AM
Potatoes stop growing in parched earth of north County Dublin (
Farmer says shortage of various staple vegetables will hit in next two to three weeks

David Rodgers says dry weather has forced his potato plants into “shutting down”. Photograph: Cyril Byrne/The Irish Times


David Rodgers, the second generation of his family growing potatoes in Ballyboughal, and his father have never experienced anything like it.

So parched is the earth in this famously lush and fertile north Co Dublin countryside – renowned for its food produce – that potatoes are not growing at all.

There is definitely going to be a scarcity of potatoes and vegetables in Ireland, ” he says gloomily, “I think it will start hitting in the next two to three weeks.

“You might go to the shop and see there is no carrots, parsnips or turnips for sale. You might have to look for pasta or rice instead of potatoes,” he says.

One of four brothers who grow Queens, Kerr’s Pinks and mostly Roosters over 250 acres, they supply Country Crest, which in turn supplies Tesco.

Rodgers says the unprecedented conditions over recent weeks – from an exceptionally cold spring to a record-breaking hot summer – have forced his potato plants into “shutting down”.

Even more unusually, as they come out of dormancy with milder temperatures returning, they are essentially “going to seed underground”. This means no potatoes.

“We’re looking at half of the crop not making it,” he says.

“We have never seen this before, we don’t know what to do. We’re very concerned.

“Our native varieties never really had to withstand temperatures of 30C before.

Irrigation access

“I know there was a trial done to try and grow Roosters in Spain, and they wouldn’t grow – maybe now we know why.”

The experts appear to be equally flummoxed and are ringing around their counterparts in the UK and further afield for solutions.

Mr Rodgers spent €50,000 on irrigation equipment and drilling a well, but the new water system can only reach 50 acres – a mere fifth of his crops. He is up during the night checking on it.

David Rodgers with his potato plant farm at Ballyboughal, Co Dublin. Photograph: Cyril Byrne/The Irish Times
David Rodgers with his potato plant farm at Ballyboughal, Co Dublin. Photograph: Cyril Byrne/The Irish Times

There are 250 potato growers in Ireland, from small farmers with a few acres to big commercial firms. The top-producing 150 are behind nine out of every 10 spuds eaten in Ireland.

But even the big growers do not have ready access to irrigation.

Three-quarters of the national crop is not getting any water, says Shay Phelan, a potato expert with State agriculture and food agency Teagasc, who is battling to help growers cope with the crisis.

In many cases, where fields are rented for a year, it makes no financial sense to bore a well. The failed crops will be left to nature.

Phelan estimates that the tonnage of potatoes harvested in Ireland this year will fall by a fifth “easily”. If the dry spells continue, this could plunge much more dramatically.

East coast

Donegal growers are doing better than most. The country’s core band of producers, running from Meath along the east coast to Wexford and into Cork, are worst hit by the drought.

While restaurants and chip shops face higher costs for their usually imported supply – a global shortage is also looming – households around the country could be forced to ration the nation’s favourite staple.

“I don’t think we’ll be running out in the chip shops come December or January, but they will be supplied at a price,” says Mr Phelan.

“They will be scarcer.”

In Ballyboughal, Mr Rodgers is sombre, looking over his fields.

Like everyone he has his outgoings – not least, three sons: one studying agriculture in UCD; one just finished his Leaving Certificate and hoping to go to DCU; and the youngest studying for his Junior Certificate.

“It doesn’t look good. Growers are only realising it now when they look at the crop and see these sprouts growing out of the potato,” he says, “It could be devastating, I don’t even want to go there.”

Title: 🔥 🌎 On the Edge of Hothouse Earth
Post by: RE on August 08, 2018, 12:40:45 AM
The Dr. McStinksion Hypothesis goes MSM.

RE (

The world could hit a tipping point that causes warming to spiral out of control — a scenario scientists call 'Hothouse Earth'
Kevin Loria

earth from space apollo 8 nasaEarth could cross a sort of tipping point that would trigger further warming. NASA

    Humans have changed the world's climate systems by emitting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
    According to a new paper, humans could warm the world so much that we'd cause the planet's natural climate systems to trigger further warming — a scenario called "Hothouse Earth."
    In that world, the average temperature could rise 4 or 5 degrees Celsius more than it already has, leading to extreme heat and up to 200 feet of sea-level rise .

Our ability to keep Earth habitable may be more limited than we realize.

Human activity could push the planet over a number of tipping points that would cause global temperatures to rise even higher than we've driven them already, according to a new paper published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences .

The research suggests that certain natural systems on the planet could be activated by warming and consequently trigger further warming. In that situation, Earth's average temperature might reach 4 or 5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures. (For context, the goal of the Paris agreement was to prevent temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees C.)

The paper's authors refer to this scenario as "Hothouse Earth."

"These tipping elements can potentially act like a row of dominoes," Johan Rockström, a co-author of the paper and the executive director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre, said in a news release . "Once one is pushed over, it pushes Earth towards another. It may be very difficult or impossible to stop the whole row of dominoes from tumbling over. Places on Earth will become uninhabitable if 'Hothouse Earth' becomes the reality."

If this were to happen, the world would become far warmer than it's been for at least the past 1.2 million years. Sea levels around the globe would likely rise between 33 and 200 feet higher than they are now.

The rise of the Anthropocene

hottest year REUTERS/Stringer

Over many hundreds of thousands of years, Earth's temperature has naturally crept up and down by a few degrees.

Just a few degrees make a huge difference over time: those seemingly small fluctuations took the world between glacial (cold) and interglacial (warmer) conditions.

Studies of these past systems indicate that the last time the world was about 4 degrees C cooler than now, there was an ice age. Glaciers covered large parts of North America.

In the present era, humans have played a major role in changing the global temperature. By releasing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, we've altered Earth's atmosphere in a way that has led it to trap more heat from the sun. That has caused global temperatures to creep up — they've already risen more than 1 degree C higher than in pre-industrial times.

That is why many scientists refer to this era as the Anthropocene.

This human-created system will continue to raise temperatures: the more greenhouse gases we pump into atmosphere, the more heat we'll trap. That's the reason so many scientists see cutting emissions as an urgent priority.

The world is not on track to accomplish the goal of the Paris agreement, which aims to prevent some of the worst effects of climate change by cutting emissions enough to keep the global temperature from rising more than degrees Celsius.

And even if we could stay below that threshold, there are still big questions about how human-caused climate change will influence major natural systems on the planet. Depending on how much and how quickly global temperatures change, some systems that affect climate could be triggered, according to the new paper.

"Our analysis suggests that the Earth System may be approaching a planetary threshold that could lock in a continuing rapid pathway toward much hotter conditions — Hothouse Earth," the authors wrote. "This pathway would be propelled by strong, intrinsic, biogeophysical feedbacks difficult to influence by human actions."

Tipping points that could trigger a 'Hothouse Earth'

If these tipping points were to cascade, a high level of warming could be locked in no matter what humans tried to do.

The list of potential tipping points or cascading systems that the paper discusses includes the thaw of permafrost, which would release trapped greenhouse gases; the death of the Amazon rainforest, which would eliminate one of the most powerful natural ways that atmospheric carbon dioxide gets reduced; and the loss of ice sheets.

pnas hothouseStockholm Resilience Centre

Each of these changes would cause rippling effects that could further warm the world.

Take, for example, the melting and collapse of the Greenland ice sheet. If this were to happen, it could alter a major ocean current: the Atlantic Meridional Ocean Circulation. That in turn could cause sea-level rise (as would the ice sheet loss) and lead heat to build up in the Southern Ocean. Warmer waters, then, would accelerate ice loss in the Antarctic and create a feedback cycle of warming.

The authors emphasize that we don't know when these other processes would be triggered. By changing the world as much as we already have, it's possible humans have already put the planet on a new path.

"The Earth System may already have passed one 'fork in the road' of potential pathways, a bifurcation taking the Earth System out of the next glaciation cycle," the authors wrote.

They think it's possible to take steps that would decrease our chances of a Hothouse Earth scenario. But without action, the world could pass a turning point that we wouldn't be able to undo.
king tide flooding floridaA motorbike navigates through floodwater caused by a seasonal king tide, Monday, Oct. 17, 2016, in Hollywood, Fla. King tides bring in unusually high water levels and can cause local tidal flooding.

AP Photo/Lynne Sladky

Avoiding the worst

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, a co-author of the paper, directs the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.

"What we do not know yet is whether the climate system can be safely 'parked' near 2 degrees C above preindustrial levels, as the Paris agreement envisages," he said in a statement. "Or if it will, once pushed so far, slip down the slope towards a hothouse planet."

Because we don't know when these feedback processes will kick in, we need to take action to restore Earth's systems back to their natural states as much as possible, the paper says. That means doing more than cutting emissions. It requires planting and improving forests, managing biodiversity, and potentially creating technologies that can remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

"Avoiding this scenario requires a redirection of human actions from exploitation to stewardship of the Earth system," lead study author Will Steffen from the Australian National University said in a statement.

If we don't do that, we could end up on the Hothouse Earth path — though it'll take hundreds or thousands of years to see the full extent of those changes.

Some changes are already apparent, though, and many more will be in the coming decades. Researchers say we can already attribute some heat waves to human-caused climate change, and rising seas now threaten coastal cities like Miami .

Many of the extreme weather events we see, including hurricanes and fires, will only become stronger and more frequent in a warmer world. And with heat comes drought and more air pollution, which has particularly bad effects on children .

The tipping points the authors note would take these and other effects of climate change to levels that humans have never experienced.
SEE ALSO: The world faces a future of floods, famine, and extreme heat — here’s what it’ll take to bounce back
NOW WATCH: Neil deGrasse Tyson explains the real problem with climate skeptics
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on August 08, 2018, 11:17:39 AM
Given, as C5 pointed out this morning, that the current fairly rapid changes we're all noticing are the effects of CO2
that hit the atmosphere 30-40 years ago, and that most experts say things are happening faster, not slower than they'e anticipated by the models that  exist, the only reasonable conclusion is that we're headed for deep shit climate-wise.

All this " might happen" stuff is not only gonna happen, it's happening as we speak. Guy's only real error is that he cherry picks the data to make it look as bad as he can, and that he had the unfortunate hubris to put a definite timeline on what is basically an unknowable future. It will happen, but the certainty of what year it will wipe us all out, is completely misplaced, and it makes a smart guy look like an idiot. Guy is probably right. More or less.

The only thing I ever saw him get real wrong was the "by 2030" part. The basic premise of the loss of the food chain looks pretty inevitable. Makes me want to go sailing and dive the coral reefs before they're all gone.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on August 08, 2018, 11:43:51 AM
And Guy COULD be a good guesser, and we might have one more decade to perfect human consciousness.

 AZ, are we gonna make it in time?
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on August 08, 2018, 02:29:54 PM
Well said Eddie.
My thoughts exactly.
Disruption is coming, its just the timing that's in dispute.
Shit is starting to happen all at once all around the world right now. Smells a bit like climate change to me, but also a product of population overshoot. We just hit 25 million here in Oz. Big country with not many people, but probably already more than we can sustain. We have a lot of deserts.

Guy could be right.
I hope he is not.
Better to do something now than find out in 2030 he was more accurate than hoped.

PS: Despite what is said, nice cigars and cognac are definitely an antidote to despair!
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on August 08, 2018, 02:44:56 PM
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.

                 Hunter S. Thompson----
Title: A 'Hothouse' Future for Humanity: Scientists Behind Terrifying Climate Analysis
Post by: Surly1 on August 09, 2018, 03:41:26 AM
Note: the original includes embedded tweets which do not reproduce well in SMS.

A 'Hothouse' Future for Humanity: Scientists Behind Terrifying Climate Analysis Hope They Are Wrong (

"This is, by far, the biggest political issue in the world. It is the one thing that will affect everyone on the planet for centuries to come. Why isn't everyone shouting it from the rooftops?"


A West Covina firefighter looks on while a horse barn burns as the River Fire moves through the area on July 31, 2018 in Lakeport, California. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Warning of a possible domino effect as multiple climate feedback loops are triggered within a dynamic cascade of rising temperatures and warming oceans, scientists behind a frightening new study say that for the sake of humanity's future they hope scenarios explored in their new models do not come to pass.

"This study effectively suggests the human race could become extinct this century and it's not even the top story on the fucking Guardian."

"I do hope we are wrong, but as scientists we have a responsibility to explore whether this is real," Johan Rockström, executive director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre, where the research was done, told the Guardian. "We need to know now. It's so urgent. This is one of the most existential questions in science."

Published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the new study, while not conclusive in its findings, warns that humanity may be just 1°C away from creatinga series of dynamic feedback loops that could push the world into a climate scenario not seen since the dawn of the Helocene Period, nearly 12,000 years ago.

The research, according to its abstract, explores "the risk that self-reinforcing feedbacks could push the Earth System toward a planetary threshold that, if crossed, could prevent stabilization of the climate at intermediate temperature rises and cause continued warming on a 'Hothouse Earth' pathway even as human emissions are reduced. Crossing the threshold would lead to a much higher global average temperature than any interglacial in the past 1.2 million years and to sea levels significantly higher than at any time in the Holocene."

As Rockström explains, the "tipping elements" examined in the research "can potentially act like a row of dominoes. Once one is pushed over, it pushes Earth towards another." And in an interview with the BBC, he added, "What we are saying is that when we reach 2 degrees of warming, we may be at a point where we hand over the control mechanism to Planet Earth herself. We are the ones in control right now, but once we go past 2 degrees, we see that the Earth system tips over from being a friend to a foe. We totally hand over our fate to an Earth system that starts rolling out of equilibrium."


Such feedback occurences, the authors of the study write, would pose "severe risks for health, economies, political stability, and ultimately, the habitability of the planet for humans."

With Arctic ice and glaciers melting away; increasingly powerful and frequent storms in the Atlantic and Pacific; coral reefs dying from warming oceans; record-setting wildfires in the U.S.; unprecedented heatwaves in Europe, the Middle East, and elsewhere—climate researchers have been at the forefront of sounding the alarms about the frightening path humanity is now following.

"In the context of the summer of 2018, this is definitely not a case of crying wolf, raising a false alarm: the wolves are now in sight," said Dr. Phil Williamson, a climate researcher at the University of East Anglia, about the latest study. "The authors argue that we need to be much more proactive in that regard, not just ending greenhouse gas emissions as rapidly as possible, but also building resilience in the context of complex Earth system processes that we might not fully understand until it is too late."

In order to avoid the worst-case scenarios, the researchers behind the study say that "collective human action is required" to steer planet's systems away from dangerous tipping points. "Such action," they write, "entails stewardship of the entire Earth System—biosphere, climate, and societies—and could include decarbonization of the global economy, enhancement of biosphere carbon sinks, behavioral changes, technological innovations, new governance arrangements, and transformed social values."

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

Title: Re: A 'Hothouse' Future for Humanity: Scientists Behind Terrifying Climate Analysis
Post by: Eddie on August 10, 2018, 09:58:33 AM
Note: the original includes embedded tweets which do not reproduce well in SMS.

A 'Hothouse' Future for Humanity: Scientists Behind Terrifying Climate Analysis Hope They Are Wrong (

"This is, by far, the biggest political issue in the world. It is the one thing that will affect everyone on the planet for centuries to come. Why isn't everyone shouting it from the rooftops?"


A West Covina firefighter looks on while a horse barn burns as the River Fire moves through the area on July 31, 2018 in Lakeport, California. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Warning of a possible domino effect as multiple climate feedback loops are triggered within a dynamic cascade of rising temperatures and warming oceans, scientists behind a frightening new study say that for the sake of humanity's future they hope scenarios explored in their new models do not come to pass.

"This study effectively suggests the human race could become extinct this century and it's not even the top story on the fucking Guardian."

"I do hope we are wrong, but as scientists we have a responsibility to explore whether this is real," Johan Rockström, executive director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre, where the research was done, told the Guardian. "We need to know now. It's so urgent. This is one of the most existential questions in science."

Published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the new study, while not conclusive in its findings, warns that humanity may be just 1°C away from creatinga series of dynamic feedback loops that could push the world into a climate scenario not seen since the dawn of the Helocene Period, nearly 12,000 years ago.

The research, according to its abstract, explores "the risk that self-reinforcing feedbacks could push the Earth System toward a planetary threshold that, if crossed, could prevent stabilization of the climate at intermediate temperature rises and cause continued warming on a 'Hothouse Earth' pathway even as human emissions are reduced. Crossing the threshold would lead to a much higher global average temperature than any interglacial in the past 1.2 million years and to sea levels significantly higher than at any time in the Holocene."

As Rockström explains, the "tipping elements" examined in the research "can potentially act like a row of dominoes. Once one is pushed over, it pushes Earth towards another." And in an interview with the BBC, he added, "What we are saying is that when we reach 2 degrees of warming, we may be at a point where we hand over the control mechanism to Planet Earth herself. We are the ones in control right now, but once we go past 2 degrees, we see that the Earth system tips over from being a friend to a foe. We totally hand over our fate to an Earth system that starts rolling out of equilibrium."


Such feedback occurences, the authors of the study write, would pose "severe risks for health, economies, political stability, and ultimately, the habitability of the planet for humans."

With Arctic ice and glaciers melting away; increasingly powerful and frequent storms in the Atlantic and Pacific; coral reefs dying from warming oceans; record-setting wildfires in the U.S.; unprecedented heatwaves in Europe, the Middle East, and elsewhere—climate researchers have been at the forefront of sounding the alarms about the frightening path humanity is now following.

"In the context of the summer of 2018, this is definitely not a case of crying wolf, raising a false alarm: the wolves are now in sight," said Dr. Phil Williamson, a climate researcher at the University of East Anglia, about the latest study. "The authors argue that we need to be much more proactive in that regard, not just ending greenhouse gas emissions as rapidly as possible, but also building resilience in the context of complex Earth system processes that we might not fully understand until it is too late."

In order to avoid the worst-case scenarios, the researchers behind the study say that "collective human action is required" to steer planet's systems away from dangerous tipping points. "Such action," they write, "entails stewardship of the entire Earth System—biosphere, climate, and societies—and could include decarbonization of the global economy, enhancement of biosphere carbon sinks, behavioral changes, technological innovations, new governance arrangements, and transformed social values."

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

I have certainly noticed this one reverberating through the media outlets over the past few days. Most of the commentary I've heard has been pretty good, although the experts that my NPR station brought on are more than willing to stop short of the rather ugly conclusions that all of us came to  four or five years ago.

That is , that even if we were actively trying to achieve the goals of the Paris Accord (which we have of course abandoned completely under Trump the Destroyer of Worlds) it would almost certainly not be nearly enough to save us from boiling the ocean into a dead zone.

At least I didn't hear any experts really attacking the conclusions as way off base, more like the "hope is better than no hope" kind of argument.
Title: 🍺 The bad news about your favorite Mexican beers
Post by: RE on September 03, 2018, 03:38:55 AM

climate desk
The bad news about your favorite Mexican beers
By Tom Philpott   on Sep 1, 2018


This story was originally published by Mother Jones and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Best enjoyed ice cold, the beers of Mexico are red-hot in the United States. Between 2013 and 2017, sales of brews from south of the border surged 44 percent, even as domestic beer sales dipped 3.5 percent. A single company benefits most from this cerveza boom: New York-based beverage giant Constella­tion Brands, which bought the U.S. rights to Mexican megabrands Corona, Modelo, Victoria, and Pacifico as part of a $4.8 billion deal back in 2013.

Constellation’s properties now account for about 1 in 11 brews sold in the United States. For investors, this fact has gone down like a frosty Corona on a broiling beach: Since June 2012, when Constellation first signaled it would take over U.S. distribution, the company’s stock has risen seven times over, driven largely by the explosive growth of its beer division.

But Constellation’s Mexican beer assets are complicated. The company can only sell the products in the United States (the Belgian-Brazilian behemoth AB InBev owns the Mexican rights), but the beer must be made in Mexico. To minimize hauling costs, the Constellation megabreweries are situated along the border. The company touts its flagship facility in Nava, Coahuila, less than 30 miles south of Eagle Pass, Texas, as “one of the world’s largest and most automated breweries,” churning out one case of beer for every drinking-age U.S. adult a year, as a promotional video puts it.

As U.S. demand for Constellation’s beer grows, the company plans to invest $1.8 billion in expansion over the next three years. A big chunk of that will go toward a massive new beer factory in Mexicali, a midsize city at the northeastern corner of Baja California. Mexicali sits in a blistering-hot desert that gets an average of three inches of rain per year and relies on the overtaxed Colorado River for its water needs. That’s not a great situation, given that the once-mighty waterway’s average annual flow between 2000 and 2014 was nearly 20 percent less than it was in the 20th century, a trend that will likely continue over the next decades as the climate changes. And some of Mexico’s portion of that water goes to Tijuana (pop. 1.8 million), as well as one of the country’s more productive farming regions. According to Mexico’s federal water agency, the Mexicali Valley water table is overstressed, with annual withdrawals far exceeding recharge.

Once it’s up and running in about two years, the Constellation brewery in Mexicali plans to make more than 132 million gallons of beer each year. A Constellation spokesman says the company’s breweries typically require about three gallons of water for every gallon of finished product. That’s at least 396 million gallons of water per year — the same amount it would take to supply more than 14,000 people with running water, at a time when about 200,000 Baja Californians already lack access to this basic necessity.

The company insists water shortages aren’t likely — the spokesperson said the new brewery will draw from Mexicali’s municipal waterworks and require at most 2 percent of the water supply annually. But in its yearly report, Constellation acknowledged that “there is no guarantee” there will be sufficient water for beer production. Indeed, back in 2016, the mayor of a town near Constellation’s Nava plant accused the brewery of taking so much water that his residents’ taps went dry. (Constellation says the water problems in the area were the result of poor infrastructure.)

Meanwhile, Constellation hails the economic impact of the new project, claiming it will create more than 500 permanent jobs. But the brewery will also use some U.S.-grown hops and barley, meaning limited benefit for the local farm economy. In short, our Mexican beer is brewed under a maquiladora model that has thrived along the border for decades: Factories import many of the components of manufacturing, slap them together with low-wage Mexican labor, and send them north, providing little long-term economic development — and in this case, potential ecological trouble.

In early 2017, a group called Mexicali Resiste began to oppose construction of the brewery, accusing local government officials of giving Constellation a sweetheart deal on water access. Several confrontations this year between protesters and police at the construction site have turned violent. No one can deny the appeal of a cold Corona on a long, hot summer day. But water-stressed Baja Californians are wondering what’s in it for them.
Title: 😤 Our Planet Is Angry
Post by: RE on September 18, 2018, 02:25:30 AM (

Sep 13, 2018
TD originals
Our Planet Is Angry 


Hurricane Florence, as seen from space on Thursday. (NASA via YouTube)

“Storm of a lifetime” is how the National Weather Service in Wilmington, N.C., described Hurricane Florence as it came lumbering across the Atlantic to hurl its ferocious winds and rain onto that coastal state. Pointing to the storm’s unusual path, one meteorologist said, “There’s virtually no precedent for a hurricane moving southwest for some time along the Carolina coast.” Florence is expected to slow down as it hits the coast, dumping a catastrophic amount of water over a small area instead of spreading rain far and wide. What that means for North Carolina’s numerous hog farms, coal ash pits and nuclear reactors is anyone’s guess, but there is a high likelihood of an environmental disaster unfolding.

We aren’t necessarily seeing more large storms. We’re seeing the usual storm activity jumping into overdrive, as The Washington Post’s Chris Mooney described how “n little more than a day, Hurricane Florence exploded in strength, jumping from a Category 1 to a Category 4 behemoth with 140 mph winds.”

On the other side of the planet an even stronger storm, with wind speeds greater than Florence, Super Typhoon Mangkhut, is heading right toward the Philippines and China. Geographically, between Florence and Mangkhut lie the islands of Hawaii that got battered by Hurricane Olivia just weeks after being hit by Hurricane Lane. And only weeks ago, large swaths of the planet were struck by debilitating and record-breaking heat waves, fueling out-of-control wildfires up and down California’s coast. We have barely recovered from Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico and Hurricane Harvey in Houston last year, and before we know it, worse climate-related disasters will be upon us.

The earth is trying to tell us something: We are a species in deep, deep trouble. No matter how much our politicians dismiss the reality of global warming, minimize its impact or offer false solutions, the rapidly intensifying storms and their unpredictable paths are screaming out that our climate is changing. Heat waves are cooking the ground we walk on. No longer is a melting glacier in a far-off location the worst sign of our changing climate—the signs are happening here and now.

A warmer planet cares little for an invasive species called “Homo sapiens” that has colonized its surface and poisoned it. We may as well think of global warming as a planetary fever intended to cast us off as one would a pesky and persistent virus. It’s just physics, after all—something that ought to be grasped by anyone who understands why the inside of their enclosed car gets scorching hot after even a few minutes of sitting in the sun.

At a time when we should be heeding the earth’s angry response to our greenhouse gas emissions, Donald Trump’s administration is steadily unraveling our modest protections from climate change. On Monday, news emerged that the Environmental Protection Agency would make it easier for energy companies to dump methane into the atmosphere. Methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. According to The New York Times, the proposal would be the “third major step this year to roll back federal efforts to fight climate change.” Just when we should be rapidly and dramatically scaling back all fossil fuel extraction and consumption, we are literally going backward.

Even in California, which has led the charge against Trump’s ill-fated decision to ignore climate change, and where Gov. Jerry Brown just signed an ambitious clean energy bill into law, we are not doing nearly enough. Gov. Brown and the California state Legislature have led the way on climate actions, but the federal bar is so low that California is able to preserve and even expand its oil and gas extraction industries and still claim to be leading the way on climate change.

The earth is doing its best to purge us, yet those in power are not listening. But the rest of us are. We’re listening and acting, as 30,000 people did in San Francisco last Saturday, joining hundreds of thousands of others all over the world as part of the Rise for Climate Jobs and Justice marches, and as activists are doing right now in confronting Gov. Brown at his Global Climate Summit. We are marching and rallying, screaming our throats hoarse, blocking traffic, getting arrested, chaining ourselves to equipment, and being attacked by dogs, pepper spray, tear gas and more.

Not only are we acting, we the people are the primary victims of a changing climate and the extreme weather events that are its hallmark. Trump, who boasted of the federal government’s response to Maria’s devastation of Puerto Rico by calling it an “unsung success,” has effectively told us that he considers 3,000 deaths a measure of success. On Thursday he went even further, denying that there were that many deaths in Puerto Rico and claiming it was all a Democrat-led conspiracy to smear him. He has decided that 20,000 pallets of bottled water that were found rotting in the sun for a year instead of being distributed to needy survivors is what constitutes an adequate response by the government. What, then, are we to expect from the response to Hurricane Florence, and to all the hurricanes, wildfires and heat waves that will follow, thick and fast?

Eventually governments will run out of money, resources and first responders to tackle the extreme weather events on our roasting planet. Ordinary people will be left on their own as elites go laughing all the way to the bank, enriched by the wealth of our fossil fuel economy.

The French Revolution of the 1780s and ’90s is one of many revolutions in history that demonstrated how people who are pushed too far can and will use violence to reorganize society. Obviously, in our current age we cannot consider killing off those politicians and corporate executives who are dooming us to climate-related suffering and death as they satiate their greed. But we can foment an alternative to bloody revolutions by stripping elites of their power by any nonviolent means necessary, such as elections, political actions and all other forms of people power. The fate of our species hangs in the balance. We are many and they are few. That is all that we can do now in the face of our climate apocalypse.
Title: 🏭 The deadly cost of DR Congo's pollution
Post by: RE on October 03, 2018, 03:01:39 AM
Title: 🌴 Collapsing Rainforest Ecosystems
Post by: RE on October 31, 2018, 03:03:32 AM (

Collapsing Rainforest Ecosystems
October 30, 2018 Patrice de Bergeracpas



We share this planet; we do not own it.

by Robert Hunziker


The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences recently issued a report on the status of arthropods in rainforests (Bradford C. Lister and Andres Garcia, Climate-Driven Declines in Arthropod Abundance Restructure a Rainforest Food Web, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2018 (

The report’s shocking analysis discovered a collapsing food web in tropical rainforests. Oh please! Can ecological news get any worse than this?

Biologists Brad Lister and Andres Garcia of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México returned to Puerto Rico’s Luquillo Rainforest after 40 years, and what they found blew them away. The abundance of insects, and arthropods in general, declined by as much as 60-fold and average temps had risen by 2°C over the past four decades. According to the scientists, global warming is impacting the rainforest with distinctive gusto.

According to Lister: “It was just a collapse in the insect community. A really dramatic change… The insect populations in the Luquillo forest are crashing.” (Source: Climate-Driven Crash in a Rainforest Food Web, Every Day Matters, Oct. 22, 2018).

It doesn’t get much worse than “crashing” of ecosystem support systems, i.e., insects and arthropods in general, which are in the phylum Euarthropoda, inclusive of insects, arachnids, myriapods, and crustaceans. This equates to a loss of basic structures of biosphere life forces.

The research team believes they are already seeing today what the recent IPCC report predicted for climate change in 2040. In their words: “It’s a harbinger of a global unraveling of natural systems.”

“The central question addressed by our research is why simultaneous, long-term declines in arthropods, lizards, frogs, and birds have occurred over the past four decades in the relatively undisturbed rainforests of northeastern Puerto Rico. Our analyses provide strong support for the hypothesis that climate warming has been a major factor driving reductions in arthropod abundance, and that these declines have in turn precipitated decreases in forest insectivores in a classic bottom-up cascade.” (Lister)

Lister and Garcia also compared insect abundance studies conducted in the Chamela-Cuixmala Biosphere Reserve in western Mexico in 1980 to the year 2014, finding temps increased 2.4°C and biomass of insects, and arthropods in general, declined 8-fold.

Their report prompts all kinds of questions about the health and stability of the world’s ecosystems. For one, tropical rainforests are the final frontier of pristine wilderness in the world. People do not live there and other than scientists, few people visit.

Therefore, if arthropods or invertebrate animals like insects and spiders are crashing in abundance, then something is horribly amiss. After all, the Luquillo is a protected rainforest, but alas, that doesn’t prevent the impact of global warming, which is on the rise in the tropics.

According to the scientists: “Our results suggest that the effects of climate warming in tropical forests may be even greater than anticipated.” (Source: Mountain Research Initiative)

Already, it was reported back in March of 2018 that insect losses of 40% up to 80% were happening around the world outside of and beyond tropical rainforests. (Ref: Insect Decimation Upstages Global Warming by Robert Hunziker, March 27, 2018)

Now, it appears that insect loss is truly global, not missing a corner of the planet. It’s everywhere. That’s worse than bad news; it’s dreadful. It’s indicative of a living planet in its early stages of dying throes but still hanging in there. Nobody knows for how much longer.

The big question is: What are the consequences of loss of large portions of insect life? Answer: All living things in the food chain above insects also decrease in abundance or in plain English, they die, e.g. frogs, lizards, and birds and ultimately Homo sapiens, assuming ecosystems eventually crumble.

Significantly, insects are the primary source for ecosystem creation and support. The world literally disintegrates without mischievous burrowing, forming new soil, aerating soil, pollinating food crops, etc. Nutrition for humans happens because insects pollinate.

After all, 97% of the Animal Kingdom consists of invertebrates such as insects, crabs, lobsters, clams, octopuses, jellyfish, and worms.  Meanwhile, insects of the world are getting the ole one-two punch as global warming hits the tropical rainforests whilst excessive use of chemicals hits broad-reaching continents, everywhere.

The underlying message is that the world’s ecosystems are under tremendous stress from aberrant forces such as (1) out of ordinary temperature rises, aka global warming, and (2) toxic chemicals, e.g.: “Industrial toxins are now routinely found in new-born babies, in mother’s milk, in the food chain, in domestic drinking water, in deep-water squid, at Mt. Everest’s basecamp, in fact, worldwide… Humans emit more than 250 billion tonnes of chemical substances a year, in a toxic avalanche that is harming people and life everywhere on the planet.” (Source: Scientist Categorize Earth as a Toxic Planet, Phys Org, February 7th 2017)

Here’s an excellent video about the insect dilemma on YouTube by Ben Guarino of the Washington Post: (

Postscript: NOAA has issued a warning as of 10-25-2018 that the entire Great Barrier Reef from November 2018 to February 2019 is at heightened risk of massive bleaching and coral death because of heat stress. If the models prove accurate, it would mean the entire Great Barrier Reef would be damaged by climate change and coral populations would trend towards very low levels, affecting the reef’s tourism and fishing industries and the employment they support. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s recent 1.5C report warned coral reefs were especially vulnerable to climate change. At even 1.5C of warming it estimated the planet would lose 80% of its coral reefs. At 2C they would all be wiped out.

About the Author
 Robert Hunziker lives in Los Angeles and can be reached at
Title: 🥀 Climate, Human Delusion and Our Destruction of the Biosphere: We Aren’t Even
Post by: RE on November 29, 2018, 01:19:48 AM (

Climate, Human Delusion and Our Destruction of the Biosphere: We Aren’t Even Trying!
By Robert J. Burrowes
Global Research, November 27, 2018
Theme: Environment
In-depth Report: Climate Change

Have you heard the expression ‘climate change’? That lovely expression that suggests a holiday in a place with a more pleasant climate.

Unfortunately, only the rarest individual has the capacity to see through the elite-promulgated delusion that generated this benign expression and its twin notions that 1.5 degrees celsius (above the preindustrial level) is an acceptable upper limit for an increase in global temperature and that the timeframe for extinction-threatening outcomes of this ‘climate change’ is the ‘end of the century’.

If you believe that this 1.5 degree increase is achievable or even viable for sustaining life on Earth and that the ‘end of the century’ is our timeframe then you are the victim of your own fear, which is suppressing your capacity to seek out, analyze and comprehend the evidence that is readily available and to then behave powerfully in response to it. For an explanation, see ‘Why Violence?’ and ‘Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice’.

Therefore, your fear, rather than the climate catastrophe and other critical assaults on Earth’s biosphere, is the real problem.

The most casual perusal of the evidence in relation to what is happening to Earth’s biosphere – as distinct from the propaganda that is endlessly promulgated in the global elite’s corporate media – clearly indicates that the cataclysmic assault on our biosphere in a wide range of synergistic ways is now driving the sixth mass extinction event in Earth’s history and that, as a direct result of our relentless and rampaging destruction of habitat, it will take down humanity with it. Well within 10 years. See ‘Human Extinction by 2026? A Last Ditch Strategy to Fight for Human Survival’.

Now if your fear hasn’t already been triggered so that you ceased reading this article, let me offer the barest outline of the nature and extent of the assault on Earth’s biosphere and why the climate catastrophe is only one part of it which nonetheless needs to be seriously, rather than tokenistically, addressed, as is usually suggested whether by most climate lobby groups or, of course, elite-controlled governments and the IPCC.

But before ranging beyond the climate to highlight other threats to the biosphere, did you know that governments and corporations around the world are currently planning or have under construction 1,380 new coal plants?That’s right. 1,380 new coal plants. In 59 countries. See ‘NGOs Release List of World’s Top Coal Plant Developers’ and ‘2018 Coal Plant Developers List’.

For just a taste of the detail on this rapid coal expansion, try the report ‘Tsunami Warning: Can China’s Central Authorities Stop a Massive Surge in New Coal Plants Caused by Provincial Overpermitting?’ and ‘The World Needs to Quit Coal. Why Is It So Hard?’

So if we are deluding ourselves about coal, what about oil? Can we expect a dramatic reduction in oil use to compensate for the substantial increase in coal use? Well, according to the just-released report of the International Energy Agency (IEA), while there is some projected improvement in fuel economy for cars and a projected increase in the number of electric vehicles, cars only account for about one-quarter of the world’s oil consumption and there is no projected reduction in the oil used to fuel freight trucks, ships and airplanes; for heating; and to make plastics and other petrochemicals. ‘As a result, the agency expects global oil demand to keep rising through 2040.’

To summarize: the IEA report notes that global carbon dioxide emissions rose 1.6% in 2017 and are on track to climb again in 2018 and, on the current trajectory, emissions will keep rising until 2040. See ‘World Energy Outlook 2018’ and ‘Clean Energy Is Surging, but Not Fast Enough to Solve Global Warming’.

So, given that we are led to believe that there is supposed to be some sort of international consensus to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5 (which is far too high in any case) above the preindustrial level, why is this happening? Well, in relation to coal: ‘Powerful companies, backed by powerful governments, often in the form of subsidies, are in a rush to grow their markets before it is too late. Banks still profit from it. Big national electricity grids were designed for it.’ See ‘The World Needs to Quit Coal. Why Is It So Hard?’

And just to illustrate what those of us who are genuinely concerned are up against, if you want to read the latest breathtakingly delusional account of the state of the world’s climate which prodigiously underestimates the nature of the climate catastrophe and utterly fails to consider the synergistic impact of other critical environmental destruction, you can do so in the US government’s just-released report ‘Fourth National Climate Assessment Volume II: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States’ which is summarized here: ‘Fourth National Climate Assessment Volume II: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States; Report-in-Brief’.

This report is presented in one of the global elite’s primary propaganda outlets as follows: ‘A major scientific report issued by 13 federal agencies on [23 November 2018] presents the starkest warnings to date of the consequences of climate change for the United States, predicting that if significant steps are not taken to rein in global warming, the damage will knock as much as 10 percent off the size of the American economy by century’s end.’ See ‘U.S. Climate Report Warns of Damaged Environment and Shrinking Economy’.

At this point I must confess that despite my substantial knowledge of human psychology and widespread human insanity (and the fear that drives it), certainly afflicting the global elite, sometimes even I am impressed with the level of delusion that elites can propagate and have so many believe. See ‘The Global Elite is Insane Revisited’.

Image below: Goebbels giving a speech in Lustgarten, Berlin, August 1934. This hand gesture was used while delivering a warning or threat. (Source: CC BY-SA 3.0 de)

Still, as Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Minister of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment under Adolf Hitler once noted:

    ‘If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.’

What Goebbels didn’t know is that someone must be terrified – as we terrorize our children – so that they can be so victimized by propaganda as adults.

Anyway, apart from our destruction of Earth’s climate by burning coal and oil, not to mention gas, elites use geoengineering to wage war on Earth’s climate, environment and ultimately us. For the latest update on the geoengineering assault on Earth’s biosphere, listen to Dane Wigington’s latest superb ‘Geoengineering Watch Global Alert News, #172’ and read, watch and listen to the vast documentary record available on the Geoengineering Watch website which remind us how climate engineering is annihilating plants, toxifying soils and water, and destroying the ozone layer among many other outcomes. For a video explaining the role of geoengineering in the latest wildfires in California, see ‘Climate Engineering Total Desperation, Engineering Catastrophic Wildfires To Temporarily Cool Earth’.

All of the above is happening despite the existing temperature increase (about one degree) triggering the now-endless succession of deadly wildfires, droughts, cold snaps, floods, heat waves and catastrophic hurricanes (often in parts of the world where the corporate media can ignore them), as well as the out-of-control methane releases into the atmosphere that are occurring. See ‘7,000 underground gas bubbles poised to “explode” in Arctic’ and ‘Release of Arctic Methane “May Be Apocalyptic,” Study Warns’.

Moreover, these methane releases coupled with other ongoing climate impacts such as sea ice melt and permafrost thawing in the Arctic – summarized in ‘Will humans be extinct by 2026?’– which has led to the ‘Arctic’s strongest sea ice break[ing] up for first time on record’ and the dramatic weakening of the Gulf Stream – see ‘Anomalously weak Labrador Sea convection and Atlantic overturning during the past 150 years’, ‘Observed fingerprint of a weakening Atlantic Ocean overturning circulation’ and ‘Gulf Stream current at its weakest in 1,600 years, studies show’– threaten imminent human extinction.
Destruction of the Biosphere, Timeframe of Global Climate Change: A Last Ditch Strategy to Fight for Human Survival

So do you think we are even trying? Or are we tinkering around the edges of this accelerating catastrophe and deluding ourselves that we are doing enough?

But this is far from the end of it. There are other critical threats to Earth’s biosphere that horribly complicate the nature and extent of this catastrophe. What are these threats?

Well, to leave aside a series of threats only marginally less drastic, here are some of the key ones, all of which seriously degrade (or destroy outright) vital components of the interrelated ecosystems (‘the web of life’) that make life on Earth possible.


We are currently destroying the world’s rainforests, mainly by logging them for timber and burning them down to make way for cattle ranches or palm oil plantations. In an extensive academic study, more than 150 joint authors of a report advised that ‘most of the world’s >40,000 tropical tree species now qualify as globally threatened’. See ‘Estimating the global conservation status of more than 15,000 Amazonian tree species’.

Why are more than 40,000 tropical tree species threatened with extinction? Because ‘Upwards of 80,000 acres of rainforest are destroyed across the world each day, taking with them over 130 species of plants, animals and insects.’ See ‘Half of Amazon Tree Species Face Extinction’ and ‘Measuring the Daily Destruction of the World’s Rainforests’. If you missed that, it was 80,000 acres of rainforest destroyed each day.


We are destroying the Earth’s oceans by dumping into them everything ranging from excess carbon dioxide and vast amounts of synthetic poisons to plastic and the radioactive contamination from Fukushima. The oceans absorb carbon dioxide as one manifestation of the climate catastrophe and, among other outcomes, this accelerates ocean acidification, adversely impacting coral reefs and the species that depend on these reefs.

In addition, a vast runoff of agricultural poisons, fossil fuels and other wastes is discharged into the ocean, adversely impacting life at all ocean depths – see ‘Staggering level of toxic chemicals found in creatures at the bottom of the sea, scientists say’– and generating ocean ‘dead zones’: regions that have too little oxygen to support marine organisms. See ‘Our Planet Is Exploding With Marine “Dead Zones”’.

Since the Fukushima nuclear reactor disaster in 2011, and despite the ongoing official coverup, vast quantities of radioactive materials are being ongoingly discharged into the Pacific Ocean, irradiating everything in its path. See ‘Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation’.

Finally, you may not be aware that there are up to 70 ‘still functional’ nuclear weapons as well as nine nuclear reactors lying on the ocean floor as a result of accidents involving nuclear warships and submarines. See ‘Naval Nuclear Accidents: The Secret Story’ and ‘A Nuclear Needle in a Haystack: The Cold War’s Missing Atom Bombs’.


But not all of our destruction is as visible as our vanishing rainforests and contaminated oceans. Have you considered the Earth’s soil recently? Apart from depleting it, for example, by washing it away (sometimes in dramatic mudslides but usually unobtrusively) because we have logged the rainforest that held it in place, we also dump vast quantities of both inorganic and organic pollutants into it as well. Some of the main toxic substances in waste are inorganic constituents such as heavy metals, including cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel and zinc. Mining and smelting activities and the spreading of metal-laden sewage sludge are the two main culprits responsible for the pollution of soils with heavy metals. See ‘Soil-net’.

Far more common, however, is our destruction of the soil with organic based pollutants associated with industrial chemicals. Thousands of synthetic chemicals reach the soil by direct or indirect means, often in the form of fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and other poisons that destroy the soil, by reducing the nutrients and killing the microbes, in which we grow our food (which many people actually eat, at great cost to their health). See, for example, ‘Glyphosate effects on soil rhizosphere-associated bacterial communities’.

Using genetically modified organisms, and the chemical poisons on which they rely, exacerbate this problem terribly. But two other outcomes of the use of such poisons are that the depleted soil can no longer sequester carbon and the poisons also kill many of the beneficial insects, such as bees, that play a part in plant pollination and growth.

And, of course, military contamination and destruction of soil is prodigious ranging from the radioactive contamination of vast areas to the extensive and multifaceted chemical contamination that occurs at military bases.

Partly related to military violence but also a product of using nuclear power, humans generate vast amounts of waste from exploitation of the nuclear fuel cycle. This ranges from the pollution generated by mining uranium to the radioactive waste generated by producing nuclear power or firing a nuclear weapon. But it also includes the nuclear waste generated by accidents such as that at Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Again, for just a taste of the monumental nature of this problem, see ‘Emergency Declared at Nuclear Waste Site in Washington State’, ‘Disposing of Nuclear Waste is a Challenge for Humanity’ and ‘Three Years Since the Kitty Litter Disaster at Waste Isolation Pilot Plant’.

Like destroying the rainforests and oceans, destroying the soil is an ongoing investment in future extinctions. And so is our overconsumption and contamination of the Earth’s finite fresh water supply.

Fresh Water

Whether wetland, river, creek, lake or acquifer, Earth’s fresh water is under siege. Given corporate negligence, this includes all of the chemical poisons and heavy metals used in corporate farming and mining operations, as well as, in many cases around the world where rubbish removal is poorly organized, the sewage and all other forms of ‘domestic’ waste discharged from households. Contamination of the world’s creeks, rivers, lakes and wetlands is now so advanced that many are no longer able to fully support marine life. For one summary of the problem, see ‘Pollution in Our Waterways is Harming People and Animals – How Can You Stop This!’

Beyond this, however, Earth’s groundwater supplies (located in many underground aquifers such as the Ogallala Aquifer in the United States) are also being progressively contaminated by gasoline, oil and chemicals from leaking storage tanks; bacteria, viruses and household chemicals from faulty septic systems; hazardous wastes from abandoned and uncontrolled hazardous waste sites (of which there are over 20,000 in the USA alone); leaks from landfill items such as car battery acid, paint and household cleaners; and the pesticides, herbicides and other poisons used on farms and home gardens. See ‘Groundwater contamination’.

Moreover, while notably absent from the list above, these contaminants also include radioactive waste from nuclear tests – see ‘Groundwater drunk by BILLIONS of people may be contaminated by radioactive material spread across the world by nuclear testing in the 1950s’– and the chemical contamination caused by hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in search of shale gas, for which about 750 chemicals and components, some extremely toxic and carcinogenic like lead and benzene, have been used. See ‘Fracking chemicals’.

By the way, if you didn’t know it, our purchase and use of all of those hitech products – cars, computers, mobile phones, televisions… – coupled with our consumption of intensively-farmed animal products, all of which are produced using huge quantities of fresh, clean water, is rapidly depleting and degrading the remaining fresh water on Earth, as well as savagely exploiting the people from whose countries we take the strategic minerals and water necessary for such production. See, for example, ‘500 Years is Long Enough! Human Depravity in the Congo’.


In addition to the above (and many other biosphere-destroying activities not mentioned), relying on our ignorance and fearful complicity, elites have a budget of hundreds of billions of dollars annually – see the US budget for war in ‘Costs of Post-9/11 U.S. Wars to 2019: $5.9 Trillion’– to kill huge numbers of our fellow human beings but also to destroy vast areas of Earth’s biosphere through war and other military violence. See, for example, the Toxic Remnants of War Project and the film ‘Scarred Lands & Wounded Lives’.

Unfortunately, too few activists have the awareness and courage to acknowledge the role that war plays in destroying the climate and environment, and include anti-war efforts in their campaigns. Campaigns that will fail dismally, and spectacularly, if the threatened nuclear war should eventuate. See ‘The War to End War 100 Years On: An Evaluation and Reorientation of our Resistance to War’.

Extinction beckons

In summary, our multifaceted, monumental and unrelenting assault on Earth’s biosphere is generating an extinction rate of 200 species (plants, birds, animals, fish, amphibians, insects and reptiles) each daywith another 26,000 species already identified as ‘under threat’ – see ‘Red list research finds 26,000 global species under extinction threat’– with some prominent scholars explaining how even these figures mask a vital component of the rapidly accelerating catastrophe of species extinctions: the demise of local populations of a species. See ‘Biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines’.

For further evidence from the vast literature on this subject touching only on impacts in relation to insects and its subsequent impact on birds, see ‘Death and Extinction of the Bees’, ‘Insectageddon: farming is more catastrophic than climate breakdown’ and ‘“Decimated”: Germany’s birds disappear as insect abundance plummets 76%’.

So severe is this assault on the biosphere that recent research warns that the ‘alarming loss of insects will likely take down humanity before global warming hits maximum velocity…. The worldwide loss of insects is simply staggering with some reports of 75% up to 90%, happening much faster than the paleoclimate record rate of the past five major extinction events’. Without insects ‘burrowing, forming new soil, aerating soil, pollinating food crops…’ and providing food for many bird species, the biosphere simply collapses. See ‘Insect Decimation Upstages Global Warming’.

So what can we do?

If you are genuinely powerful, you can stop lobbying governments to tinker with their policies, for example, in the direction of renewable energy (which, alone, cannot solve the multiplicity of ecological crises).

Governments are not the problem. And they simply do as elites direct them in any case. (If you believe that voters decide governments and their policies, and that lobbying them is effective, then your fear is deluding you again.)

The real problem is you and me.We have swallowed one of the ‘big lies’ that Joseph Goebbels talked about: we have believed and acted on the capitalist imperative to endlessly overconsume so that economic growth can rise perpetually in our finite world: a planet that has ecological limits.

But, as I noted above, the big lie only works because our fear makes us believe delusion. Why? Because we were terrorized as children into accepting material goods as substitutes for our capacity to be our unique and powerful Self. See ‘Love Denied: The Psychology of Materialism, Violence and War’.

The monstrous assault on Earth’s biosphere, that goes far beyond the climate catastrophe, is the outcome of each of us consuming more than we need and then fearfully deluding ourselves that it is necessary (or that the harm it caused was too little to matter or justified by some other consideration). Well, you can delude yourself as much as you like but it is still just that: a fearful delusion.

And the point is simply that you can choose differently and powerfully, if you have the courage. For a start, you can forego all air travel. You can travel without owning your own car. You can eat well without consuming meat or fish (and eating biodynamically/organically grown vegetarian/vegan food instead). In essence: If the demand for planet-destroying products is reduced, corporations will not produce them (and destroy the Earth in doing so).This is how the law of supply and demand works under capitalism.

Beyond these simple but vital measures, you can consider many other powerful options, particularly including (accelerated) participation in the fifteen-year strategy outlined in ‘The Flame Tree Project to Save Life on Earth’ which provides a simple plan for people to systematically reduce their consumption, by at least 80%, involving both energy and resources of every kind – water, household energy, transport fuels, metals, meat, paper and plastic – while dramatically expanding their individual and community self-reliance in 16 areas, so that all environmental concerns are effectively addressed.

The Flame Tree Project was inspired by Mohandas K. Gandhi who identified the environmental crisis decades before it became an issue in the West, and who lived his own life in extraordinary simplicity and self-reliance, symbolized by his daily spinning of khadi. ‘Earth provides enough for every person’s need but not for every person’s greed.’ He also invited us to powerfully follow our conscience, reminding us that ‘Hesitating to act because others do not yet see the way only hinders progress.’

But, critically important though he believed personal action to be, Gandhi was also an extraordinary political strategist and he knew that we needed to do more than transform our own personal lives. We need to provide opportunities that compel others to consider doing the same.

So if your passion is campaigning for change, consider doing it strategically as outlined in Nonviolent Campaign Strategy. For example, see the Nonviolent Strategy Wheel and the list of strategic goals necessary to halt the climate catastrophe and end war. Choose one or a few goals appropriate to your circumstances and conduct a strategically-oriented nonviolent campaign, as explained on the same website, to achieve those goals.

Sound strategy is vital given the insanity driving elite behaviour (such as planning/building 1,380 new coal plants). As mentioned above, see ‘The Global Elite is Insane Revisited’.

If your fear makes it difficult to do things such as those suggested above, consider healing as explained in ‘Putting Feelings First’.

If you want your children to be able to respond powerfully in the face of the biosphere’s progressive collapse, consider making ‘My Promise to Children’.

And if you want to join the worldwide movement to end all violence against humans and the biosphere, you can do so by signing the online pledge of ‘The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World’.

The bottom line is this. You can systematically and rapidly reduce your personal consumption and, one way or another, mobilize others or nonviolently compel them to do the same. Or you can let your fear delude you that the ongoing destruction of Earth’s biosphere is somehow unrelated to your personal choices about consumption and the choices of those around you.

Extinction beckons. The choice is yours.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of ‘Why Violence?’ His email address is and his website is here. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Title: 🐻 Manifest Destiny and the Land Ethic: On Aldo Leopold, Escudilla and the Big
Post by: RE on December 06, 2018, 01:45:03 AM (

December 5, 2018
Manifest Destiny and the Land Ethic: On Aldo Leopold, Escudilla and the Big White Bear
by Louisa Willcox


Escudilla was once more than just a mountain. To Aldo Leopold, writing in Sand County Almanac, the massif in Arizona’s White Mountains was defined by the grizzly bear, “the outstanding achievement of… the pageant of evolution.” Leopold tells the tragic tale of how Old Bigfoot, one of the last grizzly bears in Arizona, was killed on Escudilla: “The government trapper who took the grizzly knew he had made Escudilla safe for cows. He did not know he had toppled the spire off an edifice a-building since the morning stars sang together… Escudilla still hangs on the horizon, but when you see it you no longer think of bears. It’s only a mountain now.”

I remember where I was, in a college library, when I first encountered Aldo Leopold and this essay. Unwittingly, I have since followed the trail that he helped blaze. It has been instructive, upon rereading his many writings, to better understand how his own route through the fields of ecology, wildlife management (which he helped invent), and conservation was something of a bushwhack—not unlike my journey.

Growing up at a time when predators were widely viewed as “varmints,” Leopold did not start out with reverence for bears, wolves, or mountain lions. In fact, as part of his first job as a ranger for the US Forest Service in the Southwest, he was charged with killing predators, especially wolves. In a 1920 essay, Leopold wrote of predators as “the common enemy of both the stockman and the conservationist.”

I have long been fascinated with Leopold’s conversion in his views about predators, which happened sometime during his late 20’s. The details of his process of transformation are still a bit of a mystery. Last summer, I asked his daughter, Estella, about her father’s metamorphosis. But she didn’t know precisely how or when it happened either. The mystery probably went to the grave with Aldo’s beloved wife, also named Estella, with whom he shared everything.

There are only Leopold’s words for what actually happened. In “Thinking Like a Mountain,” he writes about shooting into a pack of wolves, and then this: “We reached the old wolf in time to watch the fierce green fire dying in her eyes. I realized then and have known ever since, that there was something new to me in those eyes – something known only to her and the mountain. I was young then and full of trigger-itch: I thought that because fewer wolves meant more deer, that no wolves would mean hunter’s paradise. But after seeing the green fire die, I sensed that neither the wolf nor the mountain agreed with such a view.”

It hardly matters that according to biographers, Leopold probably did not change his views in a flash. His story is better the way he told it. In some respects, the fierce green fire became Leopold’s own in his life-long crusade for wilderness, predators, and biodiversity writ large. Leopold’s fight has in turn become ours, in the sense that many scientists, educators, conservationists, and increasingly the broader public, care passionately about protecting the wild nature we have left.

The Spell of Escudilla

Escudilla has cast a spell on me since college. I was then already smitten with the West and mountains with magical names like “Wind Rivers” and “Beartooths.” Around that time, near Yellowstone, I nearly collided at dusk with a grizzly who wheeled and disappeared in the forest, but not before locking eyes for a split second that seemed to last forever. I subsequently underwent something of my own conversion, bolting from my birthplace in rural Pennsylvania to seek the wilds of the West, my home for the past 40-plus years.

Last winter David and I made a pilgrimage to Escudilla. We were stopped by snow at about 9,000 feet. In a grassy meadow, elk tracks and pocket gopher diggings spoke to what Old Bigfoot may have eaten before he walked into the string of the trapper’s set-gun in a narrow defile and shot himself. Rising two thousand feet above us, Escudilla Peak was as commanding as when Leopold rode, weeks at a time, as a Forest Ranger, and for hundreds of years prior, when Puebloan and later Apachean peoples hunted and camped on its flanks.

Scattered spruce, Douglas-fir, and leafless aspen did little to block a stiff, cold wind that muffled David’s joyful shout: he had found a southwestern white pine. David had documented black bears eating white pine seeds that had been conveniently cached by squirrels on the flanks of the San Francisco Peaks – not unlike the grizzly bear’s habit here in Yellowstone of raiding squirrel middens for the fat-rich seeds of the tree’s cousin, whitebark pine. (I have wondered what bear food David has not written about and have yet to find one.) Almost certainly, Old Bigfoot would have carried a map of the middens in his head.

David photoshopped a grizzly in several photos he took of the meadow on Escudilla. They were apparently so convincing that several of his Facebook fans did not get the joke.

Of Manifest Destiny and The Land Ethic

Leopold witnessed the tail-end of a blood bath during which almost all the grizzlies, wolves, and other wildlife – not to mention native peoples – had been killed in the West. Driving the killing was the ethos of Manifest Destiny, defined by the need to dominate and subdue nature in order to “be fruitful and multiply.” Well-armed settlers and government trappers, such as Old Bigfoot’s killer, shot, trapped and poisoned every predator they could – even gassing wolf pups in dens and burning whole forests to eliminate their last refuges.

In a mere 60 years, European settlers succeeded in wiping out grizzlies in 97% of the lands where they once roamed. In 1918, Leopold’s contemporary, C. Hart Merriam, head of the US Bureau of Biological Survey, published a report showing where the last populations of grizzlies hung on, some comprised of just a few individuals — essentially the walking dead. Merriam and his colleague Vernon Bailey thought eight species of grizzly roamed the Southwest, but taxonomists later concluded these were slightly different morphs of what we now call Ursus arctos. Still, their maps and reports tell the story of how small island populations of mammals go extinct, and the seeming inevitability of the trajectory.

A century later, David plotted the last known locations of Southwest grizzly bears from reports and journals written by Merriam, Bailey, and sundry trappers and early Anglo visitors, finding Escudilla to be part of a much bigger complex he called “Gila/Mogollon,” where grizzlies lasted longer than elsewhere in the region – but not by much.

Fortunately for all of us, Leopold did not sit on the sidelines. He pled for saving bears and “all the pieces” of ecological systems, arguing for a different, more compassionate relationship with nature. Coining the term “The Land Ethic,” Leopold famously wrote: “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.” It is no exaggeration to say that Leopold’s land ethic would revolutionize our views about our responsibility to nature.

Leopold’s thinking, as well as that of Olaus and Mardy Murie, Bob Marshall, Thoreau, Emerson, and Muir became my North Star. And they gave me a framework to deal with my distress about the destruction being wrought by the rampant clearcutting and booming oil and gas drilling underway in Wyoming. There WAS something I could do–something that involved saving wilderness and the wild animals that depended on it. I became an advocate for Wilderness in Wyoming, playing a bit part in a campaign that became the first of my career.  It succeeded.

In the fall of 1983, when I arrived at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies for graduate work, one of the first things I did was to climb to the fourth floor of Sage Hall to find Leopold’s face among the graduating class photo of 1909.

Luna: Of Ferocity and Fear

Leopold tragically passed away while fighting a neighbor’s grass fire in 1948, long before I was born. But during the 1980s I had the privilege of meeting his son, Luna, who had edited (very lightly) A Sand County Almanac and Round River for publication. I was then Field Studies Director of the Teton Science School in Jackson, near where Luna summered.

Luna, a Professor of Hydrology at Berkeley, had huge hands, an aquiline nose, and fierce eyes.  I was terrified, a feeling reinforced after almost bombing his summer hydrology seminar.

It turned out that Luna was a complex man whose interests ranged far beyond rivers and water.  True, Luna was a world class hydrologist, and eloquent like his father, writing: “Water is the most critical resource issue of our lifetime and our children’s lifetime. The health of our waters is the principal measure of how we live on the land.”

But little about the natural world escaped his interest. He kept notebooks in which, among many things, he recorded the emergence of different species of butterflies after rainstorms. One night, around a campfire, I heard him tell a story that made a deep impression. Holding an ancient hand axe found not far from his cabin in the Wind Rivers, he summarized the sweep of the earth’s geologic and human history, in a little over an hour. His knowledge, daring, and storytelling skill were boggling.

Once, I saw Luna and his friend and colleague, geologist Dave Love, in action in a meeting with the Forest Service convened to purportedly hear input on a proposed clearcut in grizzly bear habitat—in an area prone to landslides. (With input from Luna and Dave, my Teton Science School students also researched the proposal, making their opposition abundantly clear to stone-faced Forest Service managers).

Both Luna and Dave despised stupidity, but dealt with it differently, Dave with a devilish twinkle, Luna with a ferocious gleam. Over maps, they described likely impacts of the clearcut and proposed miles of roads. After several tries, the Forest Service minion still wasn’t getting their arguments, which were, to be sure, inconvenient. When Luna brought his huge fist down on the table to make a point, the minion cringed. The clearcut never happened, but explanations differ: some say it was because of all the fuss made by my students, but Luna and Dave provided the intellectual muscle.

Only much later did I discover, to my astonishment, that Luna could be afraid, including of grizzly bears. He said this about a trip to Alaska’s Brooks Range with his father, Aldo: “As I looked across the gravel to the bordering thicket, I wondered how long it would take a grizzly bear to cross that narrow open space. I realized then, but did not want to acknowledge it, that I was afraid.”  After a beautiful expose, Luna concludes with this: “The experience of fear in a wild landscape, even of short duration, leads to a reorientation of mind. It can clear out the clutter of the modern scene and allow one to see life and land in a new context.”

I regret feeling somewhat intimidated by Luna. I wish I would have had the guts to ask him more about his childhood, his family, and personal evolution. At least I had that chance last summer with Estella, who is now the only member of Aldo Leopold’s immediate family still alive.

Estella: Paleontologist, Campaigner, Friend

Estella shares a lot with Luna: his nose, luminous eyes, ready laugh, and musical talent. But unlike Luna, she put me at ease instantly.

For a day and a half, Estella generously shared her life and perspectives, so rich that I plan on devoting several future podcasts and blogs to hopefully do them – and her – justice.

I had come with a book Estella had written a few years before, Stories from the Leopold Shack: Sand County Revisited.  Like Escudilla, for me “The Shack” may as well be the Sistine Chapel, but located on a degraded farm near Madison, Wisconsin, that Aldo Leopold had purchased during the Depression. Together, the family brought the farm back to life, replanting pine forests, restoring fire, and, previously unimaginable, even restoring the prairie itself. The Shack was center stage in the thinking and writing of Aldo Leopold (a number of essays in Sand County Almanac are set here), but it was also ground zero for the family. To the Leopolds, The Shack meant work, play, scientific inquiry, love and adventure, long before it became hallowed ground to conservationists and ecologists around the world.

It was almost inevitable that young Estella would become a scientist. The youngest of five siblings (who each became leading scientists in their own right), when twelve years old Estella was asked by her father what she wanted to be when she grew up. She responded: “a bug-ologist, the others are already taken.” Estella became instead a ground-breaking paleobotanist. But throughout his life, her father only called her “baby” because, she said, her mother was the only “Estella” to him.

She inherited her father’s fierce intellect, basic kindness, love of nature, and storytelling gene, writing that: “The romance of a lost biome dominated by ice-age mastodons, and a warmer climate when prairie Indian cultures were in their heyday, can be inferred from fossil evidence and can be read in the lines of the pollen story.”

During my conversation with Estella I expected to hear about her scientific endeavors, but was astonished to learn that she had mastered environmental campaigning, preferring often to work behind the scenes. She showed her chops in a successful fight she helped lead to save the Florissant Fossil Beds, which she describes in Saved in Time: The Fight to Establish Fossil Beds National Monument, Colorado, coauthored with Herbert Meyer. These fossils beds have been called an Eocene Pompeii, as they were created when a huge volcano erupted some 34 million years ago, freezing in time a boggling diversity of living things — insects, mammals, birds and plants.

The campaign had it all: science, of course, but also effective use of the media, grassroots organizing and outreach (just the second time bumper stickers were used), public protest (picture ladies in pearls and high heels with small children in front of bulldozers), litigation, and federal legislation that ultimately protected this “Rosetta Stone” of fossils as a national monument.

Within a visionary strategy, Estella and her fellow campaigners fit the pieces together as if the outcome was preordained, capitalizing on mistakes made by the overzealous, thuggish developers they were up against. I have trained lots of smart young environmentalists over the years and most never acquired this level of strategic ability, political instinct and just plain skill—all as if passed down through Estella’s family genes.

I did not read the inscriptions Estella wrote on the books I had given her to autograph until I was on the plane home. “To a kindred soul,” she wrote in one. Tears of gratitude still stain the page.

The Long, Grizzly Road to Recovery

The wave of environmental laws, almost all passed after Estella’s fight for Florissant, have thus far ensured that we still have grizzlies somewhere in the lower-48 states. A number of these laws were direct descendants of Aldo Leopold’s ideas: Endangered Species Act, Wilderness Act, and National Forest Management Act.   Indeed, these laws (often enforced through litigation brought by environmental groups), stronger government institutions, and public support explain why we have made progress towards grizzly bear recovery in the Northern Rockies. Even so, grizzlies have held onto and regained no more than 3% of their former range in the lower-48, the same as they occupied during Leopold’s time.  With the shooting in 1979 of what is thought to be the last grizzly in the San Juan Mountains of Colorado, no grizzlies remain in the southern Rockies or Southwest.

The fundamental problems for grizzlies are habitat destruction, excessive killing, and a very low reproductive rate. This year was a reminder that fear-based hostility towards predators is hardly a thing of the past, and that grizzlies are still extremely vulnerable. A record number of grizzlies died during 2018, almost all at the hand of humans – a minimum of 64 in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) and 51 in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE). If you include estimates of unreported deaths, the total is closer to 150 bears out of an aggregate population of perhaps 1500 animals divided among four ecological islands. Because population growth has stalled (partly the result of the warming climate), excessive killing could quickly reverse hard-fought progress and push the Great Bear back to the brink.

Aldo Leopold would be horrified (as Estella was). He certainly would speak up, maybe something like what he said years ago: “Only five states have any grizzlies at all. There seems to be a tacit assumption that if grizzlies can survive in Canada and Alaska, that is good enough. It is not good enough for me. Relegating grizzlies to Alaska is about like relegating happiness to heaven; one may never get there.”

Grizzlies in the Southwest?

Almost no one is talking today about grizzly recovery in the Southwest. But at least there is habitat if ever the time becomes ripe. In 2010 David and his colleague Troy Merrill completed the most detailed assessment yet of potential suitable habitat for grizzlies in this region. Not surprisingly, the biggest and best chunk lies along the border of Arizona and New Mexico in the “Gila/Mogollon complex” that includes Escudilla.

In addition to considering bear foods, vital rates, home range sizes, and numbers of people, David and Troy also took into account the remoteness of habitat from people with bad attitudes, noting that: “Potential hostility is related to a mix of high levels of employment in agriculture (Catron County), large numbers of elderly residents (Sierra County), and low levels of education (Gila and Sierra Counties). Relatively high rates of exposure to humans and conflict with private property rights are also potential problems in parts of this complex, especially in Catron County.”

Catron County has become the poster child for problems faced by all large carnivores in the Southwest. This backwater is famous for inflamed rhetoric and hostility towards Mexican wolves, as well as the government that reintroduced them in 1998. Prior to that, the last few hundred animals had been captured and relegated to zoos.  Fear, hatred, and excessive killing, the same factors lamented by Leopold nearly a century ago, have effectively blocked progress towards the recovery of what is now a population of not quite 100 wolves.

A few years ago, David and I got a taste of the Mexican wolf tragedy on a “show me” trip to Ted Turner’s Ladder Ranch in Sierra County in New Mexico, where a diminutive she-wolf had been captured and temporarily placed in a pen. A nearly hysterical local county commissioner came, sporting holstered guns, to observe the wolf darting, panicked, around a pen surrounded by a 5-foot electric fence. The experience reminded me of Leopold’s quip: “Saving grizzlies requires a long view of conservation and historical perspective.” From what David and I saw, we have a while to wait yet.
Title: 🌳 Crimes Against the Earth
Post by: RE on December 15, 2018, 01:53:43 AM (

Crimes Against the Earth
December 14, 2018 Patrice de Bergeracpas



by Andrew Glikson

The author surveys the capitalogenic crisis currently dooming our planet to vast die-offs.

    Dear Caesar
    Keep Burning, raping, killing
    But please, please
    Spare us your obscene poetry
    And ugly music

    – From Seneca’s last letter to Nero

The excavation of more than 600 billion tons of toxic carbon and hydrocarbon geological remains of previous biospheres and their transfer to the atmosphere as carbon gases constitutes nothing less than insanity leading to global suicide. With estimated profitable carbon reserves in excess of 20,000 GtC (Assessing “Dangerous Climate Change”, including oil shale, tar sand, coal seam gas, further emissions would take the atmosphere, oceans and biosphere back to early Eocene (~55-40 million years ago) and Mesozoic-like (pre-65 million years ago) greenhouse atmosphere and acid oceans conditions, during which large parts of the continents were inundated by the oceans. Most likely to survive the extreme transition over a few centuries would be grasses, some insects and perhaps some birds, descendants of the fated dinosaurs. A new evolutionary cycle would commence. Survivors of Homo sapiens may endure in the Arctic.
Figure 1. Global warming by January 2018 relative to 1951-1980

Since about 542 million years ago, acting as the lungs of the biosphere, the Earth’s atmosphere developed an oxygen-rich composition over hundreds of millions of years, allowing emergence of breathing animals.

A critical parameter in Drake’s Equation, which seeks to estimate the number of planets that host civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy, is L – the longevity of technological civilizations. Estimates of L range between a minimum of 70 years and 10,000 years, but even for the more optimistic scenarios, only a tiny fraction of such planets would exist in the galaxy at the present time. It is another question whether an intelligent species exists in this, or any other galaxy, which has brought about a mass extinction of species on the scale initiated by Homo sapiens since the mid-18th century and in particular since 1945.

The history of Earth includes six major mass extinctions defining the end of several periods, including the End-Ediacaran, Ordovician, Devonian, Permian, Jurassic and Cretaceous periods. Each of these events has been triggered either by extra-terrestrial impacts (End-Ediacaran and K-T) , massive volcanic eruptions, or methane release and related greenhouse events. Yet, with the exception of the proposed role of methanogenic bacteria for methane eruptions, the current Seventh mass extinction of species constitutes a novelty. For the first time in its history, the biosphere is in crisis through biological forcing by an advanced form of life, i.e. of a technological carbon-emitting species.

The distinct glacial-interglacial cycles of the Pleistocene (2.6 million years ago to 10,000 years ago), with rapid mean global temperature changes of up to 5 degrees Celsius rises over a few thousand years, and, in some instances shorter periods, forced an extreme adaptability of the Genus Homo. Of all the life forms on Earth, only this genus mastered fire, proceeding to manipulate the electromagnetic spectrum, split the atom and travel to other planets, a cultural change overtaking biological change.

Possessed by a conscious fear of death, craving a god-like immortality and omniscience, Homo developed the absurd faculty to simultaneously create and destroy, culminating with the demise of the atmospheric conditions that allowed its flourishing in the first place. The biological root factors which underlie the transformation of tribal warriors into button-pushing automatons capable of triggering global warming or a nuclear winter remain inexplicable.

Inherent in the enigma are little-understood top-to-base mechanisms, explored among others by George Ellis, who states: “although the laws of physics explain much of the world around us, we still do not have a realistic description of causality in truly complex hierarchical structures.” (“Physics, complexity and causality”, Nature, 435: 743, June 2005):

    For the first time in its history, the biosphere is in crisis through biological forcing by an advanced form of life, i.e. of a technological carbon-emitting species.

66 million years ago, huge asteroids hit the Earth, extinguishing the dinosaurs and vacating habitats, succeeded by the flourishing of mammals. At 56 million years ago, in the wake of a rise of atmospheric CO2 to levels near-800 parts per million, the monkeys made appearance. About 34 million years ago, weathering of the rising Himalayan and Alps sequestered CO2.  Earth was cooling, the Antarctic ice sheet formed and conditions on land became suitable for large, warm blooded mammals.

About 5.2 to 2.6 million years ago, in the Pliocene, with temperatures 2 – 3oC and sea levels 25+/-12 meters higher than during the 15th to 18th centuries, the accentuation of climate oscillations saw the appearance of the genus Paranthropus and the genus Homo. At least about one million years ago the mastering of fire by Homo Erectus, about a quarter of a millennium ago the appearance of Homo sapiens,and about 8,000 years ago the stabilization of the interglacial Holocene, saw the Neolithic and urban civilization.

Since the industrial age about 1750 and in particular from 1950, a period denoted as the Anthropocoene (cf. Steffen, Crutzen and McNeill, Ambio, 36, 614-621, 2007), deforestation and climate change led to the demise of an estimated 10,000 species per year due to destruction of habitats, ever increasing carbon pollution, acidification of the hydrosphere.

Planetcide stems back to deep recesses of the human mind, primeval fear of death leading to yearning for god-like immortality. Once excess food was produced, fear and its counterpart, violence, grew out of control, generating murderous orgies called “war“, designed to conquer death to appease the Gods.

From the Romans to the Third Reich, the barbarism of empires surpasses that of small marauding tribes. In the name of freedom they never cease to bomb peasant populations in their small fields. Only among the wretched of the Earth is true charity common, where empathy is learnt through suffering.

War is a synonym for ritual sacrifice of the young. From infanticide by rival warlord baboons, to the butchering of young children on Aztec altars, to the generational sacrifice such as in WWI, youths follow leaders blindly to the death. Hijacking the image of Christ, a messenger of justice and peace, fundamentalists promote a self-fulfilling Armageddon, while other see their future on space ships and barren planets. Nowadays a cabal of multibillionaires, executives and their political and media mouthpieces are leading the human race and much of nature to ultimate demise, with little resistance from the majority of people, either unaware or too afraid to resist the slide over the cliff.

Humans live in a realm of perceptions, dreams, myths and legends, in denial of critical existential factors (Janus: A Summing Up, Arthur Koestler, 1978) in a world as cruel as it is beautiful. Existentialist philosophy allows a perspective into, and a way of coping with, all that defies rational contemplation. Ethical and cultural assumptions of free will rarely govern the behavior of societies or nations, let alone an entire species.

And although the planet may not shed a tear for the demise of technological civilization, hope on the individual scale for the moment is possible. Going through the black night of the soul, members of the species may be rewarded by the emergence of a conscious dignity devoid of illusions, grateful for the glimpse at the universe for which humans are privileged for the fleeting moment:

“Having pushed a boulder up the mountain all day, turning toward the setting sun, we must consider Sisyphus happy.” (Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus, 1942)

In desperation, given the criminal inaction of most key international leaders, the scientific community has been coalescing about the notion of containing global heating damage via geoengineering.

About the Author
Dr. Andrew Glickson is Honorary Associate Professor, Geothermal Energy Centre of Excellence, University of Queensland.
Title: ♵ Our Germophobic, Plastic-addicted Society
Post by: RE on December 16, 2018, 12:50:30 AM (

Our Germophobic, Plastic-addicted Society
2018 December 7
tags: ocean plastic, plastic, plastic gyres
by Ian Welsh

Recently saw this picture, and had to laugh, because you’d never see this today in the West.


Every sandwich, today, would be individually wrapped, at the least in plastic wrap, but probably with a hard plastic container as well.

We are a bunch of germophobes, but it serves us ill. When I was a child in Malaysia, there was a rule among the ex-pats. The kids who were kept from all contact with “local” germs, were sick as heck. (One friend had his toys boiled regularly. He was sick all the time.) Those of us who were allowed to have normal contact, had no more illnesses than the locals (less, because we were properly inoculated and so on.)

Meanwhile we have vast stretches of ocean which are clogged by plastic. Plastic is showing up in both marine and terrestrial wildlife, and making its way into our own food-chain.

The rule for all consumer goods, and indeed, all manufacturing, should be that if it doesn’t degrade, or the manufacturer doesn’t guarantee recycling, with a bond posted to ensure performance and lack of strategic bankruptcy, it doesn’t get made. In those rare (and they should be very rare), cases where as a society, we want to make an exception, waivers should be required, and they should be paid for: the cost should be multiple of the monetary damage they do by not being recyclable. (At least two times, and multiple because monetary damage is not the only damage.)

Add to this laws and enforcement of laws banning “planned obsolescence” and we might be well on our way to un-fucking our environment. Or, I suppose, we could continue to prioritize short-term profit, neurotic fear of germs, and convenience. I mean, who gives a shit if our children and grandchildren have a planetary environment which can support life at the worst, or an environment which is incredibly unhealthy (which plastic’s estrogenic effects have already created)?

(Note: I’m in the hospital (serious, but unlikely to kill me), so things like comment moderation may not happen until I’m out, or may be delayed. Likewise, typos and other errors are unlikely to be fixed.)
Title: 🌳 Climate Change and the Limits of Reason
Post by: RE on December 17, 2018, 12:39:26 AM (

Climate Change and the Limits of Reason






    Modern urban-industrial man is given to the raping of anything and everything natural on which he can fasten his talons.  He rapes the sea; he rapes the soil; the natural resources of the earth.  He rapes the atmosphere.  He rapes the future of his own civilization.  Instead of living off of nature’s surplus, which he ought to do, he lives off its substance. He would not need to do this were he less numerous, and were he content to live a more simple life.  But he is prepared neither to reduce his numbers nor to lead a simpler and more healthful life.  So he goes on destroying his own environment, like a vast horde of locusts.  And he must be expected, persisting blindly as he does in this depraved process,to put an end to his own existence within the next century.  The years 2000 to 2050 should witness, in fact, the end of the great Western civilization.  The Chinese, more prudent and less spoiled, no less given to over-population but prepared to be more ruthless in the control of its effects, may inherent the ruins.

    – George Kennan, diary entry, March 21, 1977

    But as I grow older I realize how limited a part reason plays in the conduct of men.  They believe what they want to—and although liable to shipwreck they generally get off with a hole in the bottom of their boat and stick an old coat into that.

    – Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (to Harold Laski), December 26, 1917

    We all see what’s happening, we read it in the headlines every day, but seeing isn’t believing and believing isn’t accepting.

    – Roy Scranton, We’re Doomed. Now What?

Is it too late to avoid a global environmental catastrophe?  Does the increasingly worrisome feedback from the planet indicate that something like a chaotic tipping point is already upon us?  Facts and reason are slender reeds relative to entrenched opinions and the human capacity for self-delusion.  I suspect that neither this article nor others on the topic are likely to change many minds.

With atmospheric carbon dioxide at its highest levels in three to five million years with no end in its increase in sight, the warming, rising, and acidification of the world’s oceans, the destruction of habitat and the cascading collapse of species and entire ecosystems, some thoughtful people now believe we are near, at, or past a point of no return.  The question may not be whether or not we can turn things around, but rather how much time is left before a negative feedback loop from the environment as it was becomes a positive feedback loop for catastrophe.  It seems that the answer is probably a few years to a decade or two on the outside, if we are not already there.  The mild eleven-thousand year summer—the Holocene—that permitted and nurtured human civilization and allowed our numbers to grow will likely be done-in by our species in the not-too-distant future.
Alberta’s tar sands fields. An ecological outrage.

Humankind is a runaway project.  With a world population of more than 7.3 billion, we are a Malthusian plague species.  This is not a condemnation or indictment, nor some kind of ironic boast.  It is an observable fact.  The evidence is now overwhelming that we stand at a crossroads of history and of natural history, of nature and our own nature.  The fact that unfolding catastrophic change is literally in the air is undeniable.  But before we can devise solutions of mitigation, we have to admit that there is a problem.

In light of the overwhelming corroboration—objective, tested and retested readings of atmospheric CO2 levels, the acidification of the oceans, the global dying-off of the world’s reefs, and the faster-than-anticipated melting of the polar and Greenland icecaps and subsequent rises in mean ocean levels—those who still argue that human-caused global climate change is not real must be regarded frankly as either stupid, cynical, irrational, ideologically deluded, willfully ignorant or distracted, pathologically stubborn, terminally greedy, or otherwise unreasonably wedded to a bad position in the face of demonstrable facts.  There are no other possibilities to characterize these people and, in practical terms, the difference between these overlapping categories is either nonexistent or trivial.  If this claim seems rude and in violation of The Elements of Style, then so be it.1  The time for civility and distracting “controversies” and “debates” is over, and I apologize in no way for the tone of this statement.  It benefits nobody to indulge cynical and delusional deniers as the taffrail of the Titanic lifts above the horizon.

Some commentators have equated climate deniers with those who deny the Holocaust and chattel slavery. Although moral equations are always a tricky business, it is likely that the permanent damage humans are doing the planet will far exceed that of the Nazis and slavers.  The question is the degree to which those of us who do not deny climate change but who contribute to it are as culpable as these odious historical categories.  Perhaps we are just the enablers—collaborators—and equivalent of those who knew of the crimes and who stood by and averted their eyes or else knowingly immersed themselves in the immediate demands and priorities of private life.  No one except for the children, thrown unwittingly into this unfolding catastrophe, is innocent.

The debate about whether human activity has changed the global environment is over in any rational sense.  Human-caused climate change isreal. To deny this is to reveal oneself as being intellectually on the same plain as those who believe that the Earth is the flat center of the universe, or who deny that modern evolutionary theory contains greater and more accurate explanatory content than the archetypal myths of revealed religion and the teleological red herring of “Intelligent Design Theory.”  The remaining questions will be over the myriad of unknowable or partially or imperfectly knowable details of the unfolding chaos of the coming Eremocene (alternatively Anthropcene)2 and the extent of what the changes and consequences will be, their severity, and whether or not they might still be reversed or mitigated, and how.  The initial question is simply whether or not it is already too late to turn things around.

We have already changed the planet’s atmospheric chemistry to a degree that is possibly irreparable.  In 2012 atmospheric CO2 levels at the North Pole exceeded 400 parts per million (up from the pre-industrial of around 290ppm).  At this writing carbon dioxide levels are around 408ppm.  This is not an opinion, but a measurable fact.  Carbon dioxide levels can be easily tested, even by people who do not believe that human activity is altering the world’s environment.  Even if the production of all human-generated carbon was stopped today, the existing surfeit will last for a hundred thousand years or more if it is not actively mitigated.3  Much of the damage therefore is already done—the conditions for catastrophic change are locked in place—and we are now just waiting for the effects to manifest as carbon levels continue to rise unabated and with minor plateaus and fluctuations.

Increases in atmospheric carbon levels have resulted in an acidification of the oceans.  This too is an observable and quantifiable fact.  The fact that CO2 absorption by seawater results in its acidification and the fact that atmospheric carbon dioxide traps heat more effectively and to a greater extent than oxygen are now tenets of elementary school-level science and are in no way controversial assertions.  If you do not acknowledge both of these facts, then you do not really have an opinion on global climate change or its causes.  As it is, the “climate debate”—polemics over the reality of global climate change—is not a scientific debate at all, but one of politics and political entertainment pitting testable/measureable observations against the dumb and uninformed denials of the true believers who evoke them, or else the cynics who profit from carbon generation (the latter is reminiscent of the parable of the man who is paid a small fee to hang himself).4 Some general officers of the United States military are now on the record stating that climate change constitutes the greatest existing threat to our national security.5
The multibillionaire Koch brothers (with a fortune of about $53 bn each), and fierce libertarians, represent capitalist royalty and their climate denialism, along with that of other members of the energy sector (such as Exxon/Mobil) has done untold damage to the biosphere.

Some deniers reply to the facts of climate change with anecdotal observations about the weather—locally colder or snowier than usual winters in a given region are a favorite distraction—with no heed given to the bigger picture (never mind the fact that the cold or snowy winters that North America has experienced since 2010 were caused by a dip in the jet stream caused by much warmer than usual air masses in Eurasia that threw the polar vortex off of its axis and down into the lower 48 states while at times Greenland basked in 50 degree sunshine).

An effective retort to this kind of bold obtuseness is a simple and well-known analogy: the climate is like your personality and the weather is like your mood.  Just because you are sad for a day or two does not mean that you are a clinical depressive any more than a locally cold winter set in the midst of the two hottest decades ever recorded worldwide does not represent a global cooling trend.  Some places are likely to cool off as the planet’s overall mean temperature rises (the British Isles may get colder as the Gulf Stream is pushed further south by arctic melt water).  Of course human-generated carbon is only one prong of the global environmental crisis, and a symptom of existing imbalance.

Human beings are also killing off our fellow species at a rate that will soon surpass the Cretaceous die-off and is the sixth great mass extinction of the Earth’s natural history.6 This is a fact that is horrifying insofar as it can be quantified at all—the numbers here are softer and more conjectural than the precise measurements of chemistry and temperature and estimates may well be on the low side. The true number of lost species will never be known as unidentified species are driven into extinction before they can be described and catalogued by science.7  But as a general statement, the shocking loss of biodiversity and habitat is uncontroversial in the communities that study such things seriously.  Human history has shown itself to be a brief and destructive prong of natural history in which we have become the locusts or something much, much worse than such seasonal visitations and imbalances.

As a friend of mine observed, those who persist in their fool’s paradise or obstinate cynicism for short term gain and who still deny the reality global climate change must ultimately answer two questions: 1). What evidence would you accept that human are altering the global environment?  2). What if you are wrong in your denials?

From my own experience, I have found that neither fact-based reason nor the resulting cognitive dissonance it instills change many minds once they are firmly fixed; rationalization and denial are the twin pillars of human psychology and it is a common and unfortunate characteristic of our species to double-down on mistaken beliefs rather than admit error and address problems forthrightly.  This may be our epitaph.


1. William Strunk, Jr. and E.B. White, The Elements of Style, New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., 3rded., 1979, pp. 71-72, 80.

2. For Eremocene or “Age of Loneliness,” see Edward O. Wilson, Half-Earth, Our Planet’s Fight for Life, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2016, p. 20.  For Anthropcene, or “Epoch of Man,” see page 9.

3. David Archer, The Long Thaw, Princeton University Press, 2009, p. 1.

4. On political disputes disguised as scientific debates see Leonard Susskind, The Black Hole War, Boston: Little Brown and Company, 2008, 445-446.

5. Roy Scranton, Learning to Die in the Anthropocene, San Francisco: City Lights Books, 2015, p. 14.

6. Elizabeth Kolbert, The Sixth Extinction, New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2014, and Field Notes from a Catastrophe, New York: Bloomsbury, 2006 (2015).

7. See generally Edward O. Wilson, The Future of Life, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2002.

About the Author
 Dr. Michael F. Duggan has a Ph.D. in history from Georgetown University. He has taught both at Georgetown University and at New York University’s DC program. In 2011-2012, he was the Fellow at the Supreme Court of the United States.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on March 09, 2019, 06:26:32 PM
Link to page: (

The Web of Life Is Unraveling
 The range of organisms humans depend on is vast. (Denise Johnson / Unsplash)
The biggest agricultural authority in the world has warned that the web of life is coming apart as the loss of biodiversity increases.

The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations says the wholesale destruction and degradation of natural ecosystems puts human food security at risk, and adds a warning that the same loss could also seriously affect human health and livelihoods.

Although conservationists and biologists have been warning for decades of the increasing threat of mass extinction of species, the FAO study focuses on what its authors call “associated biodiversity for food and agriculture” – that is the networks or ecosystems of living things that underwrite all human food, livestock feed, fuel and fibre, as well as many human medicines.

These ecosystems include all plants, animals and microorganisms – insects, bats, birds, fungi, bacteria, earthworms, mangroves, corals, seagrasses and so on – that create soil fertility, pollinate plants, purify air and water, feed and protect fish, and fight crop and livestock pests and diseases.

Fish in jeopardy

And entirely independently, a team of French scientists has modelled marine biological systems on which humanity’s annual 80 million metric ton haul of fish depends, and warned that climate change could be about to trigger what they call “unprecedented biological shifts” in the world’s oceans.

In a new, 576-page report the FAO concerns itself not just with the remorseless loss everywhere of the natural wilderness and the biological variety fine-tuned by three billion years of evolution, but also with the wild ancestors of crop plants and the myriad breeds, strains and variants selected and bred by generations of farmers and pastoralists during the past 10,000 years of settled agriculture.

There are more than 250,000 flowering plants. Around 6,000 are cultivated for food, but most of the global diet is based on fewer than 200 species, and 66% of all crop production is delivered by just nine crop plants.

All of them are dependent directly and indirectly on associated biodiversity. “Less biodiversity means that plants and animals are more vulnerable to pests and diseases. Compounded by our reliance on fewer and fewer species to feed ourselves, the increasing loss of biodiversity for food and agriculture puts food security and nutrition at risk,” said José Graziano da Silva, director-general of FAO.

Wild food problems

The FAO authors base their study on data from 91 of the 178 countries represented in the organisation. They find that 40 animal species comprise the world’s livestock, but the vast majority of meat, milk and eggs come from just a few species. The global count of breeds of livestock is put at 7,745. Of this huge variety, 26% are at risk of extinction.

Wild foods too – fruits, bulbs, tubers, grains, nuts, kernels, saps and gums, honey and insects and snails – matter hugely to many people in developing countries, but many of these report that 24% of the 4,000 species that provide wild food are in decline.

An estimated 87.5% of all flowering plants are pollinated by animals. Crops pollinated at least partially by animals – bees, but also other insects, birds and bats – account for 35% of all global food but for more than 90% of available vitamin C and more than 70% of available vitamin A.

But the researchers also focus on other services provided by natural ecosystems. Coral reefs, seagrass meadows and kelp forests provide nursery space and food sources for fish, but they also protect coastal communities against floods and storms.

“The increasing loss of biodiversity for food and agriculture puts food security and nutrition at risk”

Wetlands, forests and grassland regulate water flow. Grazing animals reduce the risk of grassland and woodland fire, but overgrazing is a major driver of soil erosion and soil compactions.

The report is a sharp reminder of human dependence on evolution’s generosity, but the warnings about biodiversity loss are hardly new. Researchers have repeatedly warned that the global warming driven by human exploitation of fossil fuels will accelerate the loss of wild things and that once-familiar species are vanishing from many habitats.

Others have already identified the danger of losing the wild ancestors of many crops that could in turn be harmed by climate change, and German scientists warned in 2017 of catastrophic falls in insect populations.

The impact of ever higher carbon dioxide ratios is predicted to harm the kelp forests that provide shelter for many commercial fish species., and warming itself can only impoverish ocean habitats.

Kind of war game

And support for this comes in the journal Nature Climate Change from a team of French researchers with colleagues from other European nations, the US and Japan.

Because monitoring of ocean biological systems is constrained in scale and fragmented in approach, the researchers turned to computer simulation: they designed a large number of pseudo-species of marine creatures, from zooplankton to fish, in 14 eco-regions, all with a range of responses to natural temperature variations, and then conducted a kind of war game of climate change in which local ocean temperature regimes change as the planet warms.

And they warn the world to expect what they call “abrupt community shifts” that could end in long-term change in the global catch, as well as in fish farms and even the ocean’s role in the carbon cycle.

They also point to a recent rise in the number of “climate surprises” that could be attributed to natural ocean warming events such as El Niño, as well as temperature shifts in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and the warming of the Arctic Ocean.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on March 21, 2019, 02:08:23 AM
2 of the more deadly snakes in Aus.
Behaviour somewhat unusual, i thought... May be due to food shortage from drought. I have heard of Goannas eating snakes where i come from in western NSW, but not so much other snakes...

Link with interesting video. (

More Tiger snakes where I am now in Victoria. Smaller but somewhat aggressive and easily startled compared to the bigger Eastern Browns and King Browns I encountered where I grew up. (I had a few waltzes with browns as a lad) All in the top dozen or so deadly in the world.... (

Title: 🏭 Global Carbon Emissions Hit Record High In 2018: IEA
Post by: RE on March 26, 2019, 12:59:34 AM (

 ENVIRONMENT 03/25/2019 08:55 pm ET
Global Carbon Emissions Hit Record High In 2018: IEA


China, the United States, and India together accounted for nearly 70 percent of the rise in energy demand.
Nina Chestney

LONDON, March 26 (Reuters) - Global energy-related carbon emissions rose to a record high last year as energy demand and coal use increased, mainly in Asia, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said on Tuesday.

Energy-related CO2 emissions rose by 1.7 percent to 33.1 billion tonnes from the previous year, the highest rate of growth since 2013, with the power sector accounting for almost two-thirds of this growth, according to IEA estimates.

The United States’ CO2 emissions grew by 3.1 percent in 2018, reversing a decline a year earlier, while China’s emissions rose by 2.5 percent and India’s by 4.5 percent.

Europe’s emissions fell by 1.3 percent and Japan’s fell for the fifth year running.

Carbon dioxide emissions are the primary cause of global average temperature rise which countries are seeking to curb to avoid the most devastating effects of climate change.

For the first time, the IEA assessed the impact of fossil fuel use on the increase in global temperature and found that CO2 emitted from coal consumption was responsible for over 0.3 degrees Celsius of the 1 degree rise in global average temperature since pre-industrial times.

Global energy demand grew by 2.3 percent in 2018, nearly twice the average rate of growth since 2010, driven by a strong global economy and higher heating and cooling demand in some parts of the world, the IEA said.

“We have seen an extraordinary increase in global energy demand in 2018, growing at its fastest pace this decade,” said Fatih Birol, the IEA’s executive director.

“Last year can also be considered another golden year for gas ... but despite major growth in renewables, global emissions are still rising, demonstrating once again that more urgent action is needed on all fronts,” he added.

By country, China, the United States, and India together accounted for nearly 70 percent of the rise in energy demand.

Global gas demand increased at its fastest rate since 2010, up 4.6 percent from a year earlier, driven by higher demand as switching from gas to coal increased.

Demand for energy from renewable sources rose by 4 percent but the use of renewables needs to expand much more quickly to meet long-term climate goals, the report said.

Oil demand grew by 1.3 percent in 2018, while coal consumption was up 0.7 percent as higher demand in Asia outpaced declines everywhere else.

“Coal-to-gas switching avoided almost 60 million tonnes of coal demand, with the transition to less carbon-intensive natural gas helping to avert 95 million tonnes of CO2 emissions,” the IEA said.

“Without this coal-to-gas switch, the increase in emissions would have been more than 15 percent greater,” it added.

(Reporting by Nina Chestney; editing by David Evans)
Title: Sikhs Aim to Plant 1,000,000 Trees by November as Gift to Planet
Post by: azozeo on April 12, 2019, 06:47:53 AM

Emma Fiala

    Apr 5, 2019

Sikhs the world over are leading the charge when it comes to reconnecting to nature. The Million Tree Project aims to plant one million new trees throughout the world, with tens of thousands already having been planted.

In what has been described as a “gift to the entire planet,” Sikhs have set out to celebrate the birth of the founder of Sikhism, Guru Nanak, born November 29, 1469—550 years ago. The project is being coordinated by a Washington DC-based environmental organization called EcoSikh.

Rajwant Singh, EcoSikh’s president, hopes to celebrate the birth of Guru Nanak in way that will motivate Sikhs to reconnect with nature and improve their relationship with the planet.
Post by: azozeo on April 13, 2019, 12:01:50 PM

Elias Marat

    Apr 3, 2019

For far too long, countries across Africa have borne the brunt of rampant desertification, drought and environmental degradation. However, a massive tree-planting project known as The Great Green Wall of Africa has combined the efforts of over 20 African nations in hopes to reverse the ongoing damage.

With the assistance of international partners and over a decade of work, the Great Green Wall is now bearing fruit.

The wall stretches across about 6,000 miles of the continent along the southern edge of the Sahara desert, or Sahel region. Since the 1970s, the lush vegetation and greenery that blanketed the region has faded away and rapidly degraded into a crusty, barren desert thanks to poor land use policies, bad development, and population growth.

Monique Barbut, who until recently was the executive secretary of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, noted:

    The Sahel region is one of the most arid and most vulnerable places on earth. Food, water and economic opportunity are often scarce. The local population is growing rapidly and to survive people already face difficult choices every day. If climate change and land degradation continue at the current rate, vulnerable communities could be forced to make some disastrous choices.”

With these problems in mind, African leaders started implementing plans for the Great Green Wall in 2007. Since then, the initiative has seen billions of dollars poured into the project in hopes of building a “natural wonder of the world across the entire width of Africa,” capable of improving local populations’ living conditions, salvaging endangered rural economies and agricultural plots, and increasing the income and food security of generations to come.
Title: ☠️The Race Towards Extinction: Climate Change versus the 5G Microwave Technology
Post by: RE on April 20, 2019, 02:04:33 AM
What about Global Thermonuclear War?  Where does that rank?

RE (

The Race Towards Extinction: Climate Change versus the 5G Microwave Technology Roll Out
By Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null
Global Research, April 17, 2019
Theme: Environment, Science and Medicine

By now, most of us should have come to realize that plant, animal and human life is not eternal on this planet. For several decades atmospheric scientists have been warning that the orgy of anthropogenic release of greenhouse gases, if it is permitted to continue at current rates, will bring life as we know to an end. Where scientists disagree, and where there remains growing debate, concerns the timeline before global warming’s acceleration cascades into runaway conditions leading towards our demise. Nevertheless, one thing seems certain, for anyone who bothers to follow the steady flow of climate change reports and updates, every year conditions are becoming more dire than the previous years. And as scientists consistently have had to reevaluate their earlier predictions, the situation is turning more drastic.

Not to be outdone by the fossil fuel industry’s addiction to burning fossil fuels, nor our blusterous neoliberal capitalist rush to establish full spectrum economic dominance, the telecommunications industry and Silicon Valley are eager to enter the horse race to imperil human existence. In the past we have regularly reported on the corruption that is endemic in our federal health agencies and the pharmaceutical industry, in the nuclear power industry and industrial agriculture. Now we address the culture of deception that permeates the telecommunications and wireless regime, and its irresponsible denialism about electromagnetic frequency radiation’s effects on plant and animal life.

The roll out of 5G (Fifth Generation) technology across the nation is being framed as a sprint contest against China, which is also determined to transition to 5G.

Europe, in defiance of American pressures, is now leaning towards the Chinese company Huawei to service the European continent. It is expected that by 2024, about 40 percent of the world’s population will be connected to the 5G network. That means tens of billions of devices, from cars to refrigerators, traffic lights, surveillance equipment, utility smart meters and phones will be interlinked to a global web of EMF technologies. Nothing with an electronic chip will be exempt. No plant or tree, insect, bird, fish, animal or human will be able to escape 24-hour a day exposure to enormous amounts of electromagnetic pollution. Already this new generation technology is being aggressively promoted and marketed to the public without any mention of its catastrophic risks. The organization Physicians for Safe Technology is now warning that its predictable adverse effect will create “biological, environmental as well as societal disruption” and will “be difficult or impossible to reverse.”

Whereas the current 4G technology succeeded in a complete digital migration enabling higher speeds for mobile phones, video and internet interfaces, in the words of President Obama’s FCC chair Tom Wheeler, 5G will be the “Internet of Everything.”

    “If something can be connected,” Wheeler told a National Press Club audience in 2016, “it will be connected in the 5G world. But with predictions of hundreds of billions of microchip-enabled products from pill bottles to plant waterers, you can be sure of only one thing: the biggest IOT [Internet of Things] has yet to be imagined.”

Wheeler believes he is in charge of this revolution:

    “the 5G revolution will touch all corners and that is damn important.”

The Obama administration’s FCC launched the Spectrum Frontiers rules to mandate 5G rollout as a “national priority.” In the rules, we find a disturbing initiative; that is, technology will drive policy rather than vice versa. Wheeler stated this in no uncertain terms. In other words, the private telecommunications industrial complex is being given precedence over elected legislators, including Congressional leaders who voice deep concerns about 5G’s threats. It also has precedence over the warnings voiced by the medical, health and environmental agencies.

However, the 5G race actually goes back to the Clinton White House. In 1996, Clinton foolishly handed over to the telecommunications industry carte blanche power over state and local governments to install 5G technologies. The Telecommunications Act (TCA) is a dismal piece of legislation. It is another incident where Clinton was a far more loyal enabler to private corporate interests instead of the public. Clinton’s TCA decrees that no health or environmental concern can interfere with telecom installations. It gives full power to the FCC to regulate telecom EMF’s health effects, yet the FCC is not a health agency nor are there any biomedical experts in the FCC. In addition, the Act takes away the authority of town, city, and county councils to rule against 5G stations and cell tower installments. And if towns vote to prevent a 5G tower being erected near a school or children’s park, or a crowded neighborhood, the companies have the right to sue.

For example, in the prosperous town of Moraga in the San Francisco Bay Area, town council efforts are underway to prevent the installation of a 5G cell tower. The initiative is being launched by a woman whose husband, a heavy cell phone user since the mid-1980s, developed a brain tumor near the ear where he held the phone for many years. Moraga is mobilized to bring a halt to the tower. But it is losing battle. And there are similar cases occurring throughout the country as the pubic becomes increasingly warned about 5G health risks.

No argument can be raised against the benefits that wireless technologies have brought to the world. They have contributed to remarkable advances in medical diagnostic tools, security equipment, better telecommunication networks for governments, businesses and organizations, entertainment, faster connections on the worldwide web, connected the internet with mobile phones, and much more. Consequently it has also been a boon for job growth. But their disadvantages and defects have largely been hidden from public view. And the telecommunication industry and government officials have been completely aware of these risks for over half a century. Other risks are being identified and described as independent research and analysis outside the purview of corporate telecom oversight continues.

Unfortunately the government is not investing in the necessary safety studies to determine whether rolling out 5G is a wise policy. Wheeler, the initial architect for the nation’s 5G strategy, has never acknowledged that there are known health risks associated with electromagnetic frequencies (EMF) . He is a product of the same private industrial mindset that has churned out climate change deniers in the big oil companies and pesticide- and GMO-risk deniers in the Big Agriculture.

Americans need to wake up to the fact that they are facing a formidable enemy in the telecommunication industry. The FCC and the cartel of telecom companies and Silicon Valley remain in complete denial about the multitude of health risks that 5G antennas, mobile phones, smart meters and other electronic appliances that will be connected with 5G, have been shown to contribute towards. Wheeler, who was appointed by Obama, took the reins of the FCC with an intention to push 5G technology regardless of any opposition. He also originally opposed net neutrality that would financially benefit internet providers’ coffers at the public’s expense. The subsequent backlash from Silicon companies such as Google, Microsoft, eBay, etc., forced the FCC to back pedal. There was never any question about Wheeler’s loyalty to his masters in the cable and wireless industry. Before entering politics, he was a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the telecommunications industry, a former president of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, a CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, and the only person to twice be inducted into the Wireless Hall of Fame. What Wheeler accomplished in office on behalf of the telecommunications industry is analogous to the successes of Wall Street bankers within during the Clinton presidency to dismantle consumer protections from casino investments. Since leaving the FCC, Wheeler has become a Fellow at the corporate-centrist Brookings Institute where he continues to advance telecommunication’s commercial interests

Unfortunately the situation has worsened under Trump. The current FCC Consumer Advisory Panel is controlled by the Koch Brothers’ American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) — staunch opponents of net neutrality, municipal broadband and consumer protections. The agency intends to grant the telecommunications industry with subsidized access to all local and state public properties. This will make the telecommunication industry’s dominance over state, city and state council rights complete.

Much of the technology that will be utilized by 5G is not completely new. The US and Soviet militaries have been experimenting with high electromagnetic frequency and microwave weaponry since the 1960s. A 1985 declassified CIA report on “Soviet Directed Energy Weapons” reveals that the Russians had been conducting extensive research in microwave particle beams and electromagnetic frequency directed laser weapons since the early 1960s. Their research was thorough and conceivable more advanced than the US military efforts.
The Wifi Alliance, Coming Soon to Your Neighborhood: 5G Wireless

Screenshot from the CIA

The only practical and conceivable benefit 5G has for the average consumer is speed. It is anticipated to be at least 10 to 100 times faster than the current 4G technology, which in turn was 10 times faster than 3G. Therefore, for those impatient with download times, it is largely only time-saving perk with greater interface capabilities with other wireless devices. However, it will be far greater boon to the Defense Department’s development of weapons and crowd control technologies. With 5G circumnavigating the globe, we cannot begin to imagine the horrid possibilities of future weapons, which could even include directed measures to trigger illnesses and disease in a foreign populations. With the 5G rollout we will be finally be on the path of entering an Orwellian nightmare.

A plethora of medical and environmental research has accumulated about the health and ecological risks of electromagnetic frequency radiation (EMF) and microwaves. To avoid confusion, 5G transmission is within the microwave band frequency. It is estimated that there are over 10,000 peer-reviewed clinical studies mentioning serious molecular biological injury and defects to organs, neurons, cells and cellular function, and DNA damage to plants, animals and humans alike. Between August 2016 and September 2018, over 400 new studies on electromagnetic radiation risks have been compiled by public health Professor Joel Moskowitz at the University of California at Berkeley. These studies cover earlier generation technologies, whereas 5G will be far more evasive and less safe. Compared to 4G technology in use today, every 5G base station will contain hundreds of thousands of antennas each aiming laser like microwave beams to all devices. In an urban area, base stations would be installed 100 meters (328 feet) apart.

For example, a study published in the August 2018 issue of Journal of Medical Imaging and Health Informatics concluded after an extensive review of the medical literature that “incidence of cancer cases was remarkably higher among people who resided in 400 meters from mobile antennas, in comparison to those who lived further away. Females reported statistically more health complaints than males. Inhabitants living close to cellular antennas are also at increased risk for developing neuropsychiatric complaints.” Under the 5G regime every American in a suburb or city will be living 100 meters or less from an antenna. Our lives will exist in a stew of what some now call “electrosmog.”

The Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, the Environment and Democracy in Germany has published one of the most thorough series of reports on the health, biological and environmental implications of long-term exposure to electromagnetic frequencies emitted from wireless communication technologies. The Initiative is a multi-disciplinary coalition of independent medical doctors, biologists, psychologists, environmental scientists, attorneys and representatives from other disciplines. Although the research primarily covers 3G and less, the science is daunting and should sound alarms of 5G’s far more destructive health risks. Even with 3G, the evidence is conclusive that the rise in brain tumors and cancer is attributable to the overuse of mobile phones. One summary report concludes that the genotoxic effects of phone radiation “can trigger irreversible damage in genomes and reversible ones in epigenomes.” Damage to cells’ mitochondria is particularly disturbing since mitochondrial DNA is directly passed down from mothers to their offspring. Back in 2011, the World Health Organization classified EMF radiation as a likely human carcinogen based upon wireless phones’ increased risk for developing malignant brain glioma tumors. The announcement was based upon scientists from 14 countries reviewing hundreds of scientific studies. Since then, the largest study of its kind through the National Toxicology Program, at a cost of $25 million, concluded without reservation that EMF exposure below the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection guidelines — which most countries follow — increases the incidence of brain and heart cancers in animals, including humans.

In 2016, the Europa EM-EMF guideline found “strong evidence that long-term exposure to certain EMFs is a risk factor for diseases such as certain cancers, Alzheimer’s disease, and male infertility…Common EHS (electromagnetic hypersensitivity) symptoms include headaches, concentration difficulties, sleep problems, depression, lack of energy, fatigue, and flu-like symptoms.”

All developed countries, which have the highest levels of EMF exposure and wireless device usage, are witnessing a rapid decline in male fertility. However, this trend is being observed globally. Since 1973 when close record keeping started to 2011, well into the wireless world, sperm concentrations have decreased 53 percent. The researchers at Hebrew University in Jerusalem who conducted the study predicts that large majority of men in the Europe could be completely infertile by 2060. According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), 85 percent of couples are unable to achieve pregnancy after 12 months of trying. Male sterility is the primary problem among 30-50 percent of couples. Curiously, the HHS makes no mention of EMF exposure among its lists of probable causes, although it notes medical radiation treatments.

Yet barely do we hear about the increasing amount EMF exposure and mobile phone usages association with these rising male infertility trends. Researchers at the National Academy of Medical Sciences in Ukraine, placed study participants’ sperm samples in incubation conditions either with our without Wifi mobile phone exposure. Sperm exposed to EMF showed substantial DNA fragmentation and loss of motility. More comprehensive in vitro and in vivo studies out of Hanyang University in Seoul concluded that EMF exposure dramatically altered reproductive endocrine hormones, gonadal function, embryonic development, pregnancy and fetal development. In addition, pineal gland measurements observed a decrease in melatonin, which would contribute to either sleeplessness or poor quality of sleep that is commonly noted by persons with EMF sensitivities. Sperm germ cell morphology declined and apoptosis of male germ cells were observed. In addition, EMF adversely affected women’s ovaries with decreases in the estrus cycle and follicle growth.

The telecommunications industry and FCC deny these types of findings because living in a sea of 5G microwave exposure these health risks will multiply exponentially in time.

In the Competence Initiative’s report Bees, Birds, and Humans: Electrosmog’s Destructive Effects on Nature, German biologist Dr. Ulrich Warnke states:

    “The information-processing and function systems of today’s humans, plants and animals are bombarded with artificial magnetic, electric and electromagnetic fields from numerous mobile and telecommunications sources in a concentration and intensity as never before. The consequences of these developments put forth by their critics cannot be overlooked any longer. Bees and other insects are disappearing. Birds avoid certain regions and are disoriented in others. Humans suffer functional problems and other sicknesses. And the evidence that suggests some of these problems may be inheritable means we’re passing them on to the next generation.”

As we noted above, Russia, before and during the years after the Soviet era, aggressively conducted experiments to determine microwave technologies activities on human health and the environment. Between 1960 and 1997, Russian scientists published 878 known studies measuring microwave effects on human and animal health and the environment. The studies are largely unknown in the US nor are they encouraging. In fact, they are outright frightening because these health threats have been known for a very long time and are being completely brushed aside. If 4G technology had been categorized and regulated as a pharmaceutical drug, it would have been black boxed and removed from the market long ago. And 5G will be far more toxic.

The Soviet studies on EMF exposure’s adverse effects on health and their symptoms’ prevalence of frequency, many which appear to have been replicated, monitored research subjects for 5 to 10 years. In other words, the researchers were interested in measuring the long-term effects from EMF exposure. They also involved thousands of subjects. Among the medical disorders identified were:

    Neuroasthenia and sensory somatic disorders — 91% frequency after 10 years
    CNS and autonomic nervous disorders — 59% frequency after 5 years
    Cardiovascular disease — 66% frequency after 5 years
    Circadian rhythm interruption and body temperature disruption – 85% frequency after 10 years
    Hypoglycemia – 59% frequency after 10 years
    Sensorimotor disorders and chronic fatigue – 59% frequency after 10 years
    Depression – 66% frequency after 5 years
    Resting tremors, tinnitus, hair loss – 59% frequency after 5 years
    Memory loss and chronic headaches – 50% frequency after 5 years

Other disorders identified included loss of muscle strength, thyroid hyperactivity, deterioration of eye sight, psycho-neurovegetative dystonia, asthenia, cardiac pain, etc. The Soviets also found that EMF’s adverse effects accumulated with longer exposure; younger children had much higher sensitivity to EMF fields than adults; and, the decline in a person’s health increasingly amplified EMF’s adverse effects. Most important, these studies were conducted back in the 1960s. When Professor C. Susskind from the University of California at Berkeley introduced the Soviet’s research during a 1968 US Senate hearing to evaluate microwaves’ biological effects, his suggestions that the US should make an effort to replicate the Soviet’s research and determine microwave safety, were ignored and dismissed.

We have only touched upon 5G’s potential threats to human life. However, it will also have devastating consequences on wildlife, plants and the environment. A large body of scientific literature already exists to corroborate 5G’s catastrophic environmental threats. For those concerned with climate change, the 5G rollout will also contribute to a warming Earth. The rollout does not portend to be green or clean. Nobody is speaking about the 20,000 plus satellites that will orbit around the planet and need to be launched by 20,000-plus rockets to advance the 5G vision. These rockets will be fueled by a new type of hydrocarbon engine. A paper released by the Aerospace Corporation predicts that this will “create a persistent layer of black carbon particles in the northern stratosphere.” (Greenhouse gases normally remain in the troposphere above the earth’s surface). This would likely deplete the ozone by 1 percent and the polar ozone layer by as much as 6%. The report concludes that “[A]fter one decade of continuous launches, globally averaged radiative forcing from the black carbon would exceed the forcing from the emitted CO2 by a factor of about 10 to the fifth power.” In other words, 5G will have a substantial carbon footprint at a time when we must drastically cut our greenhouse gas emissions to curtail the speed of reaching critical tipping points.

The federal government and telecommunication industry are making every effort to hide the predictable inimical consequences to life on earth once 5G is fully installed and operating. During Wheeler’s optimistic pep talk at the National Press Club, no mention was made about 5G detractors or ever increasing health warnings being articulated by the scientific community. Nor will the mainstream media lend its airwaves to address these deeply disturbing issues. The media is completely compromised by the telecom industry. Its conflicts of interests are rampant.

In our opinion, the 5G rollout is a naive experiment with potential holocaust-like dimensions in the long-term. The United States, unlike Europe, has never felt obliged to follow UNESCO’s Precautionary Principle to avoid “morally unacceptable harm” when the science is plausible but still uncertain. In the case of 5G, the harm to human life is certain, and in the view of Dr. Lennart Hardel, an oncology professor at University Hospital in Orebro, Sweden, it may be in violation of the Nuremberg Code.

The preponderance of quality peer-reviewed scientific data has established a direct link between EMF radiation emitted from mobile phones, computers and lap tops, and 3G to 5G antennas and towers with a multitude of illnesses. Unfortunately, based upon the lack of critical thinking and in-depth reporting evident in the mainstream media, we are reasonably confident that this expose and the excellent articles by many others will make very little impact. Mainstream media’s track record for denying scientific warnings about other human-made threats to health and life confirms our confidence. Almost nothing is being done in the US, and many other nations, to lessen global warming trends. The professional corporate class will do nothing, even if they understand climate change’s threats. There is simply too much profit to be made by not disrupting the status quo of conducting business-as-usual.  Now, there is the national priority to push the throttle to its limit to develop worldwide wireless connectivity.  Silicon Valley and its thousands of bright young minds will not wake up tomorrow and suddenly have a conscience committed to a universal set of morals and ethics. Like the generations before them, they are simply chasing the profits.  Federal legislators have always followed the money. Federal regulatory agencies such as the FCC, USDA, EPA, FDA and CDC are fully captured by Wall Street and multinational corporations. State legislators are following ALEC and its funders, who create and provide bills and policies favoring special corporate interests. These laws almost never benefit the citizens of the states.

We could have learned a lesson about why 5G will not be halted for proper review by looking at past history: our failed wars and the catastrophic consequences of our regime changes such as in Libya and Honduras. Even the arrest of Julian Assange. By now, we should have learned the lessons of how Washington has handled other scientifically proven dangers to the public:  genetically modified crops and chemicals like Roundup, mandatory vaccination, the dietary and environmental factors associated with our epidemics in obesity, diabetes, autism, heart diseases, etc, and the evisceration of consumer protection laws such as the Clean Water and Clean Air acts. Rarely do we ever read an honest, truthful expose in any major media source about the institutions and organizations that hold power over our lives, such as the Business Round Table, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Davos dilettantes. Nor is there ever concise reporting about the intelligence specter of the Deep State.

If we truly cared about 5G’s global peril to all of planetary life and humans, by extension we would have cared about all of these other threats foreshadowing our lives.  They are all interconnected.  So, are we hopeless? No, because there will always be a tiny segment of the American population who “get it” and in turn becomes an agitating voice against those in power. Unfortunately, those who “get it” are excluded from every critical forum where their voices most urgently need to be heard, especially within the mainstream media that protects the power elite and oligarchs. Hence, Americans find themselves in an economic, medical, political and pseudo-scientific echo chamber.  We hope this article provides a small source of light for those who wish to understand the future arrival of the 5G matrix.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Richard Gale is the Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the biotechnology and genomic industries.

Dr. Gary Null is the host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on alternative and nutritional health and a multi-award-winning documentary film director, including Poverty Inc and Deadly Deception.
The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null, Global Research, 2019
Title: ☠️We’re altering the climate so severely that we’ll soon face apocalyptic conseq
Post by: RE on April 22, 2019, 12:26:01 AM
What could possibly go wrong?

RE (

We’re altering the climate so severely that we’ll soon face apocalyptic consequences. Here are 11 last-ditch ways we could hack the planet to reverse that trend.

Aylin Woodward

Clouds above earth If warming continues, subtropical stratocumulus clouds could disappear altogether. Aleksandar Georgiev/Getty Images

    Geoengineering is a term that refers to technology that can alter Earth's natural cycles to cool down the planet. It's being increasingly discussed as a potential way to address climate change.
    Putting mirrors in space, capturing carbon dioxide, and seeding clouds with particles are all ways of manipulating weather or the atmosphere.
    But some scientists and politicians think geoengineering could damage the planet or lead to war.
    Here are 11 strategies researchers have put forth to hack the planet and combat climate change.

Oceans are hotter than they've ever been in recorded history. Ice Sheets are melting at unprecedented rates. Sea-level rise threatens countless species, coastal cities, and local economies.

As researchers' warnings about the consequences of climate change get more dire, some scientists and politicians are suggesting we do more than just curb our greenhouse-gas emissions — they want to hack our climate.

The technical term for this is geoengineering.

The concept evokes fantastical images of weather-controlling satellites, giant space mirrors, and carbon-sucking tubes. But some techniques for modifying Earth's atmosphere aren't in the realm of fantasy.

In fact, discussions about manipulating the atmosphere to cool the planet are growing increasingly mainstream. Climeworks, a company that captures carbon dioxide from the air, opened its first commercial plant in Switzerland in 2017. Y Combinator, Silicon Valley's largest incubator, has requested proposals from geoengineering-focused start-ups. And some political candidates, including presidential hopeful Andrew Yang, think the US needs to beat other countries to these technologies.

Read More:Longshot presidential candidate Andrew Yang thinks rogue geoengineering could cause a war

But other experts are less than convinced that these planet hacks are a good idea.

"The side effects may be almost as bad as the disease you're trying to cure," author and environmental activist Bill McKibben told Business Insider. What's more, McKibben said, geoengineering does little to address other problems that arise from greenhouse-gas emissions, such as ocean acidification.

Here are 11 potential geoengineering methods that have been proposed so far.
There are two main types of geoengineering. The first is carbon capture, which entails removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Smoke rises from the chimneys of a power plant in Shanghai, December 5, 2009. Aly Song/Reuters

Carbon capture and storage (CSS) is becoming widely accepted as a safe and potentially effective climate-change-fighting tool. Many people see it as a way to simply undo the changes that human activity is already causing.

Power plants in the US and Canada have already started utilizing CSS to lower their emissions. In the fall of 2014, the Boundary Dam Power Station near Estevan, Saskatchewan became one of the first power stations in the world to successfully use the technology.

According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, 21 commercial-scale carbon capture projects are operating around the world, and 22 more were in developmentas of 2017.

In some cases, CSS technology can also prevent carbon emissions from entering the atmosphere at all. Instead, carbon dioxide that's created when coal burns or electricity is generated can be captured in a plant, then transported and stored somewhere else.
Some companies are already developing promising carbon-capture technologies.
A view of the GassNova headquarters in Porsgrunn, Norway, August 9, 2017. Lefteris Karagiannopoulos/Reuters

Norway's state-owned carbon-capture technology coordinator, GassNova is facilitating financial support for the development, demonstration, and pilot studies of CCS technologies in the country.

A New York-based start-up, Global Thermostat, uses carbon sponges to absorb carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere, smokestacks, or both.

The company is building its first commercial-scale direct-air carbon-capture plant in Huntsville, Alabama. Global Thermostat cofounder Graciela Chichilnisky told Grist that once the plant is up and running, it will suck "up to a million tons of CO2 per year or more — all removed from air,"

Carbon Engineering, a British Columbia-based company owned in part by Bill Gates, is also striving to open commercial plants to pull carbon dioxide directly out of the the air.
One of the biggest issues with these carbon-capture technologies, however, is figuring out where to put the carbon dioxide after it's captured.
The Nesjavellir Geothermal Power Plant in Þingvellir, Iceland. Gretar Ívarsson/Wikimedia Commons

According to the Carbon Capture and Storage Association, storage sinks for captured carbon are typically deep underground in depleted oil and gas fields.

A Saskatchewan-based carbon storage effort, the Weyburn-Midale CO2 Monitoring and Storage project, has successfully moved and injected stored carbon into two depleted oil fields.

In 2008, a facility on an island in the Barents Sea stored nearly 4 tons of carbon in an offshore subsurface reservoir.
Captured carbon could also get stored in containers filled with carbon-dioxide-eating or converting algae and bacteria.
Tubular bioreactors are filled with green algae fixing CO2 in Costa de la Luz, Andalusia, Spain. Santiago Urquijo/Getty Images

These storage units are sometimes called bioreactors. A company in Quebec City, Canada called CO2 Solution has genetically engineered E. coli bacteria to produce enzymes that convert the carbon dioxide into an alternative form called bicarbonate.

According to a 2010 study, algae ponds are also effective at naturally capturing carbon through photosynthesis.
Some companies are trying to turn the carbon they capture into useful materials.
A Climeworks facility for capturing carbon dioxide from the air in Hinwil, Switzerland July 18, 2017. Arnd Wiegmann/Reuters

In May 2017, the Zurich-based company Climeworks opened its first commercial carbon-capture plant, which compresses captured carbon dioxide and turns it into fertilizer.
A company called Blue Planet converts carbon dioxide into bicarbonate then uses that to make building materials.
San Francisco International Airport. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Blue Planet takes carbon dioxide that has been captured from factories — like California's largest power plant in Moss Landing— and turns it into into a limestone coating that covers the company's proprietary concrete building material.

Blue Planet's products aren't yet available in big enough quantities for large-scale projects, according to Caltrans, but the company is currently developing a larger production facility in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Despite the fact that Blue Planet's products aren't on the commercial market yet, its bicarbonate rocks were included in the construction of part of San Francisco International Airport.
Another major planet-hacking strategy is solar geoengineering, which involves injecting particles or clouds into the sky that reflect sunlight back into space.
Ian Waldie/Getty Images

This is also called solar radiation management or albedo modification. (Albedo is the term for how much light or radiation is reflected back from Earth's surface.)

Ultimately, solar geoengineering aims increase the amount of solar radiation that gets reflected out into space from Earth in order to cool down the planet.

But none of these technologies have gotten off the ground yet, so to speak. In fact, most are so controversial that they haven't even been tested.
The idea for solar geoengineering is inspired by the effects of volcanic eruptions.
The Anak Krakatoa volcano erupts on December 23, 2018 in the Sunda Straits off the coast of southern Sumatra. Nurul Hidayat/AFP/Getty Images

When volcanoes fill the skies with sulfur and ash, that causes more sunlight to be reflected away from the planet, and the Earth cools.

Nearly 200 years ago, Mount Tambora in Indonesia underwent the most deadly volcanic eruption in recorded history, according to NASA. Some scientists believe the eruption was responsible for a severe summertime cold snap the following year that triggered killer frosts in New England and Europe.
This volcanic effect could be mimicked via a technique called stratospheric aerosol scattering. This involves injecting the upper atmosphere with tiny reflective particles like sulfuric acid or aerosols.

The idea is that these particles would reflect some sunlight away from Earth and back into space.

Harvard University's solar geoengineering research program is currently trying to model how clouds of such particles in the atmosphere would behave using small, steerable balloons.

The research program also suggests that we could brighten marine clouds so they reflect more sunlight. (The closer an object's color is to white — or the brighter it is — the more light it reflects.)
Mirrors, of course, also reflect sunlight. So some scientists have floated the idea of putting giant mirrors in space.
SVF2/Getty Images

In the 2000s, a scientist named Lowell Wood from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory suggested that a giant space mirror made of aluminum mesh could combat climate change. But he warned that the device would need to be 600,000 square miles in area — about the size of Greenland — to do any good. That would probable be prohibitively expensive.

"It would be like a window screen made of exceedingly fine metal wire," Wood explained to Popular Science in 2005.

More than a decade later, the idea of a space mirror is still hypothetical.
Eliminating or thinning some cirrus clouds —a type of cloud that sits high in the atmosphere and absorbs radiation — could be another way to send heat back into space.
Aleksey Sagitov/Shutterstock

This effort would involve reducing high-altitude cirrus clouds by seeding them with water-depleting aerosols.

These wispy clouds don't do much to reflect sunlight, but they do a lion's share of radiation trapping. So thinning them could theoretically help cool the Earth because that would provide more pathways for planet-warming solar radiation to escape into space.
One technology that manipulates the clouds is already in use today. It doesn't really address climate change, but it does allow us to make it rain when and where we want.
Dark clouds hang over Frankfurt, Germany on March 7, 2019. Michael Probst/Associated Press

Cloud seeding is a way to make it rain or snow by dropping silver ions into the atmosphere. Rainstorms happen when enough moisture collects around particles in the air, so these ions provide additional particles for moisture to glom onto.

The technology has already been tested by the governments of China, Russia, and the United Arab Emirates.

According to Pacific Standard Magazine, the technique has been in use for 75 years, and even helps with drought relief in the western US. In 2015, Texas experienced a 34% uptick in the length of rainfall thanks to cloud seeding.
Instead of focusing on clouds, some researchers are looking into ways to save melting Arctic ice. Ice sheets are responsible for reflecting lots of sunlight into space, so less ice means less heat leaving the planet.
Jeremy Potter/NOAA OAR/OER

A 2018 study showed that the 75% loss of Arctic ice volume that we've seen since 1979 — and the related loss of sunlight-reflecting surfaces — has significantly contributed to our warming planet.
A nonprofit called Ice911 wants to spread tiny glass beads around the Arctic that mimic ice's reflective abilities.
The Greenland Ice Sheet is melting four times faster than it was 16 years ago. Chasing Ice

Ice911's glass microsphere beads are tiny, hollow, and made from sand. They look like snow.

Leslie Field, the founder of Ice911, wants to spread the beads all over the Arctic in the hopes of making the polar ice more reflective and less prone to melting.

"Multi-year ice, the reflective ice in the Arctic, was historically the Earth's heat shield," Field recently told Fast Company. "It's not there to do that anymore."

The group is still testing its technology near Barrow, Alaska. In 2017, Ice911 covered more than three football fields of ice in glass beads, and in 2018, the organization deployed an additional 161,000 square feet of beads. Early results were promising: Treated areas showed higher reflectivity and less ice melt than untreated areas.
Alternatively, some researchers are pushing to shore up melting ice from the bottom up.
Patagonia's glaciers are melting rapidly. Mario Tama/ Getty Images

A recent article in the journal Nature suggested using geoengineering to preserve continental ice sheets by targeting the places where the ice meets warming ocean water.

One proposed technique is to raise artificial ridges to protect the weakening margins of glaciers. But scientists warn that such a project could cost billions of dollars.
Beyond all of these options, researchers and investors are also thinking about geoengineering strategies that sound like something out of science fiction.
David Stanley/Flickr

Y Combinator, a prestigious incubator that boasts alums like Dropbox and Airbnb, issued a request last year for start-ups focusing on what they call "frontier technology ideas" for geoengineering.

"It's time to invest and avidly pursue a new wave of technological solutions to this problem — including those that are risky, unproven, even unlikely to work. It's time to take big swings at this," the company wrote in an announcement on their website.

Examples of these frontier solutions include developing genetically engineered phytoplankton that take in carbon dioxide via photosynthesis, and flooding deserts to create micro-oases that serve as carbon sinks.

Such concepts "straddle the border between very difficult to science fiction," the company wrote.
Wilder still is a proposal to create a cloud of asteroid dust in space that would shield the Earth from sunlight.
NASA’s OSIRIS-REx spacecraft took this image of the asteroid Bennu on November 16, 2018, from a distance of 85 miles (136 kilometers). NASA/GSFC/University of Arizona

A group of Scottish scientists suggested this idea in 2012.

Their plan called for pushing an asteroid to a specific point in space where it would feel equal gravitational pulls from the Earth and sun, so would remain anchored in place. Then a spacecraft would land on the asteroid and hurl asteroid dust into space.

The researchers said their plan would reduce the amount of sunlight hitting Earth by almost 2%, which would be enough to offset some 5 degrees Fahrenheit of warming.

Needless to say, the plan has many downsides, including the risk that the asteroid could accidentally get directed towards Earth.
In general, any geoengineering project or proposal that involves tweaking the delicate chemistry of Earth's atmosphere and its cycles faces enormous opposition.
Wikimedia Commons

Many scientists are particularly concerned about solar geoengineering experiments because most models predict that the effects will be felt differently around the globe, even in spots far from the initial location. For example, if solar geoengineering technology gets deployed in the southern hemisphere, that could impacts ocean temperature and wind speeds, leading to more hurricanes in the northern hemisphere.

Plus, a failed geoengineering technology could leave Earth's atmospheric chemistry irreversibly altered. We could end up damaging the ozone layer, for example, which protects us from harmful ultraviolet radiation.
However, a recent study asserted that it is possible to tweak the atmosphere in a way that would prevent other parts of the planet from experiencing weather backlash.
Planes or drones could scatter small doses of aerosols into the atmosphere. Shutterstock

The study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, modeled a scenario in which small amounts of geoengineering would decrease temperatures all over the world. Although such an initiative would perturb the climate in new ways, the authors wrote, those disturbances would be negligible compared to the havoc that climate change is already wreaking via droughts and rising sea-levels.

They suggested forming an international research program to investigate this option further.
Yet some scientists and politicians are already warning that geoengineering could lead to war.
Flickr/James Vaughan

"I've got a list of 27 reasons we shouldn't do it," Alan Robock, an environmental science professor at Rutgers and an expert on geoengineering, previously told Business Insider.

He worries a rogue country could pull the trigger on an atmospheric-transformation project that affects the entire world. The resulting conflicts with other nations could ultimately could escalate to nuclear war, Robock said.

Andrew Yang echoed similar concerns. If China start playing with atmospheric modifications on its own, rather than as part of a global initiative, Yang said, he expects the worst.
SEE ALSO: How a last-ditch ‘planet-hacking’ plan could keep Earth habitable for longer
More: Features Environment GeoEngineering Climate Change
Title: ☠️Climate Disruption: “The End of Ice” and Other Threats to the Planet
Post by: RE on April 23, 2019, 12:44:33 AM
Interestingly, we're getting more listens and views to our multimedia than Global Research!  :o  Even with Paul Beckwith as a Guest!

RE (

Climate Disruption: “The End of Ice” and Other Threats to the Planet
Talking Climate Change with Paul Beckwith & Dahr Jamail
By Michael Welch and Dahr Jamail
Global Research, April 20, 2019
Region: Canada, Pacific, USA, World
Theme: Environment, GLOBAL RESEARCH NEWS HOUR, Media Disinformation

Download the Audio (

Repeat broadcast originally airing January 11, 2019. – [MAW]

“We’re not going to stop this train wreck. We are not even trying to slow down the production of CO2, and there is already enough CO2 in the atmosphere. We are going to see the consequences, and they will be significant.” – Bruce Wright, senior scientist with the Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association. Quoted in The End of Ice [1]


 Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The battle to protect human civilization and life on this planet from the ravages of global warming has taken on a renewed urgency following the October 8th release of a stunning report from the world’s greatest authority on the state of the climate.

The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C was approved by the revered Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on October 6 in Incheon, Republic of Korea, just weeks in advance of last December’s Katowice Climate Change Conference. [2] Among other dire warnings, the report concluded that:

    The global mean surface temperature of Earth has increased 0.87°C during the period from 1850-1900 to 2006-2015.
    ocean acidification and changes to carbonate chemistry stemming from the absorption of 30% of anthropocentrically produced carbon dioxide are unprecedented for at least the last 65 million years.
    the probability of extreme drought, precipitation deficits, and risks associated with water availability in some regions increase dramatically with the internationally agreed upon limit of 2°C of global warming above pre-industrial levels versus the more ambitious target of 1.5 °C.
    Overshooting the 1.5 °C target would pose large risks for natural and human systems because some of those risks could be long-lasting and irreversible, such as the loss of some ecosystems.
    ecosystems such as kelp forests and coral reefs that are relatively less able to move are projected to experience high rates of mortality and loss. For example, multiple lines of evidence indicate that the majority (70–90%) of warm water (tropical) coral reefs that exist today will disappear even if global warming is constrained to 1.5°C.
    Ecosystem services from Earth’s oceans will be compromised due to 1.5°C warming and changes to ocean chemistry (e.g. acidification, hypoxia and dead zones) with more pronounced affects beyind 1.5°C of warming.
    Projections overwhelmingly indicate that restricting global temperature rise to 1.5 °C would require a 40-50% reduction below 2010 levels of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. [3]

While it has been pointed out that a thermonuclear war would likely have even more devastating impacts on life on Earth, at least humans have the power to decide not to use nuclear weapons. In the case of climate change, we are told that once critical thresholds have been crossed, no human actions, no matter how valiant and self-sacrificing, will be enough to prevent runaway warming.

On a week when youth around the planet are mobilizing strikes for ‘climate action,’ the Global Research News Hour highlights the major indicators of a natural world in crisis due to global warming.

In the first half hour, following a short report on a local (Winnipeg) youth activist event, University of Ottawa based climate systems scientist Paul Beckwith outlines some of the more worrying signs that even the October 2018 IPCC Special Report on Climate Change failed to adequately address, he looks at the threats to the polar ice caps and the role they play in regulating familiar weather patterns, and he assesses some of what needs to be done to avoid multiple ‘tipping points’, and a ‘Hothouse Earth’ scenario.
CKUW FunDrive 2019. Fund-raiser for Global Research News Hour

In our second half hour, mountaineer, independent journalist, former Iraq War correspondent, and Truthout staff writer Dahr Jamail navigates listeners through The End of Ice, his recently published book on climate change. His latest publication is a tour through various locations around the globe from Mount Denali in Alaska to Florida, to the Amazon Rainforest and marks the changes climate change have already made and projects to the changes yet to come.

Paul Beckwith is a physicist, engineer, and part-time professor at the University of Ottawa. His research focus is on Abrupt Climate System Change. He has an archive of Youtube videos in which he shares the most up to date information on the climate threat. His website is

Dahr Jamail, a Truthout staff reporter, is the author of The Will to Resist: Soldiers Who Refuse to Fight in Iraq and Afghanistan (Haymarket Books, 2009), and Beyond the Green Zone: Dispatches From an Unembedded Journalist in Occupied Iraq (Haymarket Books, 2007). He is also the co-author with William Rivers Pitt of The Mass Destruction of Iraq: Why It Is Happening, and Who Is Responsible (Truthout, 2014). Jamail is recipient of the Martha Gellhorn Award for Investigative Journalism, among other awards. Dahr Jamail is also the author of the recently published book, The End of Ice: Bearing Witness and Finding Meaning in the Path of Climate Disruption (The New Press, set for release January 15, 2019.) He lives and works in Washington State.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 244)
Title: Amsterdam White Swans make a Nest of Garbage in an Amsterdam Canal.
Post by: g on April 23, 2019, 05:56:53 AM
They wonder why we are Doomers. Seeing those beautiful white eggs engulfed in garbage is not easy to forget.   :'(

Amsterdam white swans made a nest of garbage in an Amsterdam canal.    :-[

A swan family built their nest of waste at one of Amsterdam's canals. The garbage has been thrown in the canals by humans. Now these swans "recycled" the waste and built their nest of it and might raise 6 new chicks very soon, since I counted 6 eggs. But it is also very sad to see what we human's are doing with our garbage and that these swans became a tourist attraction in Amsterdam. - Ton Dijkman

Title: 🐱 Australia is trying to kill millions of stray cats by airdropping poisoned
Post by: RE on April 27, 2019, 12:50:21 AM
I hope Assange's Cat didn't escape to Oz.

What could possibly go wrong here?

RE (

Australia is trying to kill millions of stray cats by airdropping poisoned sausages

By Sophie Lewis


April 26, 2019 / 7:46 PM / CBS News

The Australian government wants to kill two million feral cats by next year — and it wants to do it by airdropping poisonous sausages. There are currently an estimated 2 to 6 million free-roaming cats across the country, and officials say they are threatening native wildlife populations.

According to the Australian government, the goal is to "reduce the impact of feral predators and increase the resilience of our native species," because cats "damage the productivity of Australia's farming sector." The government wants to kill two million wild cats by 2020, which it says are a major contributor to the extinction of at least 27 mammals since their introduction to the country by Europeans, possibly in the 1700s. 

Part of the plan to cull the rising cat population is to bait the cats with lethal sausages made of kangaroo meat, chicken fat, herbs, spices and a poison called 1080, which is deadly to animals, according to the New York Times. The sausages are dropped from airplanes into areas with high stray cat populations. The cats allegedly die within 15 minutes of consuming the sausage.

"They've got to taste good," Dr. Dave Algar, who developed the recipe, told the NYT. "They are the cat's last meal." PETA Australia calls the poisonous sausages "horrifically cruel"

Along with baiting, the government is also trapping and shooting cats, in some cases. "The scientific evidence is unequivocal that feral cats are one of the greatest threats to Australia's land-based mammals," the government said in its "Threatened Species Strategy" plan.

Some parts of Australia are taking the issue a step further, offering rewards for slain cats. The state of Queensland is offering $10 AUS ($7 USD) per feral cat scalp. PETA and other organizations condemned the policies when they were announced, but Australian officials have supported them.

The plan initially received intense backlash when it was first announced in 2015. But now, even PETA Australia "in principle recognized that feral cats hunted wildlife to a point at which species can no longer survive," according to the NYT.

First published on April 26, 2019 / 7:46 PM
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: K-Dog on April 27, 2019, 11:45:19 AM
I hope Assange's Cat didn't escape to Oz.

What could possibly go wrong here?


"They've got to taste good," Shane Morse told the NYT. "They are the cat's last meal."


Dropping poisoned food from airplanes,  what could possibly go wrong?
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on April 28, 2019, 11:27:01 PM
Drop the damn cats from planes!
Little destructive bastards. Only good cat is a dead cat.
They destroy everything smaller than them.

Cat skin hats is what we need.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: RE on April 29, 2019, 02:12:09 AM
Drop the damn cats from planes!
Little destructive bastards. Only good cat is a dead cat.
They destroy everything smaller than them.

Cat skin hats is what we need.


How about passing out Slingshots to school kids and sending them out on Recess Cat Hunting?  Then they can cook up the meat for lunch in the school cafeteria!

Title: Ireland Declares Climate Emergency
Post by: azozeo on May 14, 2019, 03:08:01 PM (
Title: 🦖 CO2 Levels Reach Highest Levels in Human History
Post by: RE on May 15, 2019, 12:20:24 AM
And we still have 7.5B people living on the planet!  How high do they need to get to start killing off Homo Saps by the truckload?  ???   :icon_scratch:

Title: 🐨 Conservation group says koalas 'functionally extinct'
Post by: RE on May 18, 2019, 12:17:10 AM
There are still lots of Kangaroos though!


Conservation group says koalas 'functionally extinct'


One of Australia's foremost environmental organizations has declared koala bears “functionally extinct" and is calling on the Australian government to take action.


The Australian Koala Foundation (AKF) issued a report Thursday, warning that there only 80,000 koalas left on the continent, and that there aren’t enough breeding adults to support another generation of the pouched marsupial.

“I am calling on the new Prime Minister after the May election to enact the Koala Protection Act (KPA) which has been written and ready to go since 2016,” AKA chairman and CEO Deborah Tabart OAM said in a press release. “The plight of the Koala now falls on his shoulders.

The press release noted that even though the Australian government launched an inquiry into the declining population of koalas in 2011, almost no legislation has been passed to protect the species in the last six years.

“I know the Australian public are concerned for the safety of Koalas and are tired of seeing dead Koalas on our roads,” she said, adding that it’s time for officials “to respect the Koala and protect its habitat.”

According to the non-profit, only 41 of the 128 known habitats in Australia have any of the species left. Experts say this decline can be primarily attributed to heatwaves and drought caused by the effects of climate change.

Advocates say the proposed bill could help prevent further decline of the species. The law would be focused on protecting the habitats of koalas given that current Australian law only protects the species themselves.

The Koala Protection Act is based on a U.S. law, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, which helped the national emblem get off the threatened species list.

“The Bald Eagle Act was successful because there was political motive to ensure their icon did not go extinct,” Tabart wrote. “It is time for the Koala to be afforded the same respect.”
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on May 18, 2019, 12:55:09 AM
Eastern grey in my back yard a month ago. (still visits daily with a few friends).
Eating grass off my soakage trench as still pretty dry around here.
Pleanty of these around here, along with some smaller black faced wallabies in heavier wooded hills.
Further North and West you get the really big Western Reds out in the drier desert country.

Title: Re: 🐨 Conservation group says koalas 'functionally extinct'
Post by: Surly1 on May 18, 2019, 04:38:07 AM
There are still lots of Kangaroos though!


Conservation group says koalas 'functionally extinct'

And feral cats!
Title: Amazon Tribes - 1 / BIG OIL - 0 , party like it's 1999
Post by: azozeo on May 18, 2019, 10:55:19 AM

WHO-DO WORKS  :icon_sunny:

Amazon Tribe Wins Landmark Lawsuit To Protect Their Land From Oil Companies


David Cohen
Published on May 15, 2019

Last month, the Ecuadorian indigenous community of Waorani won a landmark lawsuit against three government bodies for putting their territory up for sale in an international oil auction.

The ruling indicates that the government took advantage of the Waorani people and used legal loopholes to sell land that belonged to the tribe. The unprecedented ruling immediately suspends any possibility of selling the community’s land for oil exploration. This case gives other communities in Ecuador’s southern Amazon rainforest hope that they can also prevent their land from being sold to oil companies.

Nemonte Nenquimo, one of the Waorani plaintiffs and representative of the Coordinating Council of the Waorani Nationality Ecuador Pastaza, said that the government has not respected human life as much as they have respected money and oil.

“The government tried to sell our lands to the oil companies without our permission. Our rainforest is our life. We decide what happens in our lands. We will never sell our rainforest to the oil companies. Today, the courts recognized that the Waorani people, and all indigenous peoples have rights over our territories that must be respected. The government’s interests in oil is not more valuable than our rights, our forests, our lives,” she said. (
Title: UN Puts The Hammer Down on Plastic
Post by: azozeo on May 22, 2019, 11:37:10 AM

Today, 187 countries took a major step forward in curbing the plastic waste crisis by adding plastic to the Basel Convention, a treaty that controls the movement of hazardous waste from one country to another. The amendmentsrequire exporters to obtain the consent of receiving countries before shipping most contaminated, mixed, or unrecyclable plastic waste, providing an important tool for countries in the Global South to stop the dumping of unwanted plastic waste into their country.

After China banned imports of most plastic waste in 2018, developing countries, particularly in Southeast Asia, have received a huge influx of contaminated and mixed plastic wastes that are difficult or even impossible to recycle. Norway’s proposed amendments to the Basel Convention provides countries the right to refuse unwanted or unmanageable plastic waste.

The decision reflects a growing recognition around the world of the toxic impacts of plastic and the plastic waste trade. The majority of countries expressed their support for the proposal and over one million people globally signed two public petitions from Avaaz and SumOfUs. Yet even amidst this overwhelming support, there were a few vocal outliers who opposed listing plastic under Annex II of the Basel Convention. These included the United States, the largest exporter of plastic waste in the world; the American Chemistry Council, a prominent petrochemical industry lobbying group; and the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, a business association largely comprised of waste brokers. As the United States is not a party to the Basel Convention, it will be banned from trading plastic waste with developing countries that are Basel Parties but not part of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (
Title: ‘Super corals’ give glimmer of hope for world’s dying reefs
Post by: azozeo on May 28, 2019, 09:17:02 AM

Hawaiian “super corals” that have recovered despite living in warm and acidic water offer a glimmer of hope that dying reefs across the world could be saved, a new study says.

The research suggests that the gloomiest climate change picture of a world without the kaleidoscope underwater habitats could still be avoided, according to lead author Christopher Jury.

“It’s unfortunately but inevitably true that things are going to get worse for reefs over the next 20-30 years, but that doesn’t mean it’s unstoppable,” said Jury, a postdoctoral researcher at the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology.

“We can still turn this thing around and end up getting back to better than what we have today within a reasonable timeframe,” he told AFP.

Coral reefs cover less than one percent of the ocean bed but support around 30 percent of all known marine life.

But they are suffering, with stressors including the warmer and more acidic oceans caused by climate change, as well as other human-made pressures including pollution and overfishing.

The UN’s intergovernmental panel on climate change warned last year that just 1.5 Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) of global warming could see 70-90 percent of Earth’s coral reefs vanish.

But Jury’s research shows that it is possible for coral to survive and even thrive in waters that are warmer and more acidic than where coral usually lives.

– Rapid recovery – (
Title: Moderate Democrats’ Delusions of ‘Prudence’ Will Kill Us All
Post by: Surly1 on May 29, 2019, 05:44:31 PM
Join me in another rousing chorus of, "Both sides are equally bad."

Moderate Democrats’ Delusions of ‘Prudence’ Will Kill Us All (

By Eric Levitz@EricLevitz


Earlier this month, the weather report for the Arctic Circle was partly cloudy with a high of 84 degrees.

Earlier this year, a United Nations report found that “potentially devastating temperature rises of 3 to 5 [degrees Celsius] in the Arctic are now inevitable even if the world succeeds in cutting greenhouse gas emissions in line with the Paris agreement.” At the moment, no nation on Earth is on track to meet its emissions targets under that accord. And any temperature rise above what’s already inevitable would pose a severe risk of melting the methane-infused Arctic permafrost, thus releasing 283 gigatonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere — a development that, when combined with the disappearance of heat-deflecting ice, would rapidly accelerate global warming and all but doom human civilization.

Meanwhile, the government of the world’s lone superpower remains dominated by a political party that regards climate change as something between an afterthought and a “Chinese hoax.” The GOP vigorously opposed the Paris agreement, and is in the process of repealing just about every measure the Obama administration took to uphold it. In fact, the Republican White House is so committed to a new rule that would keep economically inefficient — and ecologically ruinous — coal-fired power plants in operation, it is ignoring an EPA report that estimates such a policy would result in 1,400 additional premature deaths in the U.S. every year. For their part, Senate Republicans are so contemptuous of the notion that the climate crisis demands ambitious government action, they have turned the Green New Deal into a punching bag, and insisted that any new infrastructure package must consist largely of environmental deregulations.

America’s most powerful political party is also growing increasingly hostile to democratic values — and evermore insulated from popular rebuke by its own revisions to election law and the structural biases of America’s system of government. On the state level, Republicans have implemented a wide variety of voting rules designed to depress the political participation of Democratic-leaning constituencies. And when a Democrat nevertheless wins a gubernatorial election in a purple state, the GOP has taken to using their heavily gerrymandered state legislative majorities to preemptively strip the governor’s office of its traditional powers. These same anti-democratic tendencies are manifest at the federal level. The last two Republican administrations have launched investigations into the (nonexistent) crisis of mass voter fraud, in an ostensible bid to rationalize suppressive voting rules. And both Mitch McConnell and the Trump administration have refused to recognize the Democratic Party’s right to govern — the former by nullifying Barack Obama’s authority to appoint Supreme Court justices; the latter by refusing to comply with the (Democrat-controlled) House’s subpoenas.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority has abetted the GOP’s assaults on democratic rule by gutting the Voting Rights Act of 1965, approving unlimited corporate spending in American elections, vetoing an Arizona law that attempted to limit the influence of such spending by providing candidates with public funds, and hobbling public-sector unions, one of the only institutions with the capacity to serve as a countervailing weight to the power of (overwhelmingly Republican-aligned) corporate-interest groups.

This synergy between conservative domination of the anti-majoritarian judiciary and Republican efforts to entrench anti-majoritarian rule over the elected branches of government threatens to trigger a feedback loop nearly as dire for U.S. democracy as melting permafrost would be for the global climate: As the Supreme Court makes it easier for Republicans to disenfranchise hostile voters and dilute the influence of those who retain the ballot, Republicans become better able to replenish and expand their grip on the judiciary.

The threat that the GOP could soon entrench the rule of a reactionary, predominantly white minority isn’t an idle one. Thanks to Senate malapportionment, the decline of ticket-splitting in an era when all politics is national, and the political polarization of urban and rural areas (a nearly ubiquitous phenomenon across Western democracies that shows few signs of abating any time soon), Republicans currently enjoy a historically large structural advantage in the upper chamber, one that is poised to grow even more formidable in the years to come. By 2040, half the U.S. population is expected to reside in eight diverse, largely urban states, while another 20 percent of the populace will be concentrated in the next eight most populous states. This will leave the remaining, overwhelming white, and nonurban 30 percent of the American population with 68 votes in the U.S. Senate. In a political culture where Democratic presidents are no longer allowed to appoint Supreme Court justices unless their party also controls the upper chamber, GOP domination of the Senate will translate into GOP domination of the judiciary, even if the conservative movement boasts an ever-smaller fraction of public support (as research on the political views of millennials and Gen-Zers suggests that it will).

All of which is to say: There’s a reasonable argument that America’s capacity to address the existential threat posed by climate change — and arrest its descent into plutocracy — depends on the Democratic Party regaining full control of the federal government, and promptly enacting a series of (small-d) democratic reforms such as federal voting-rights protections and statehood for overwhelming nonwhite territories like Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Washington D.C., before secular trends allow a reactionary minority to lock up the Senate and judiciary for a generation.

There are many obstacles to such a beneficent development. A major one is the tendency of moderate Democrats to mistake their own myopic complacency for heroic prudence. Greg Weiner, a political scientist and onetime aide to former moderate Democratic senator Bob Kerrey, gives vivid expression to this unfortunate frame of mind, in a column published by the New York Times Wednesday.

In an op-ed titled “It’s Not Always the End of the World,” Weiner scolds Democrats and Republicans alike for grossly exaggerating the stakes of partisan conflict in the contemporary United States. Against the catastrophism embraced by the likes of Donald Trump and Barack Obama, Weiner champions the lost art of political “prudence,” which Abraham Lincoln once practiced so well:

Prudence is a capacity for judgment that enables leaders to adjust politics to circumstances. In extraordinary times, prudence demands boldness. In mundane moments, it requires modesty. Lincoln, the foremost exemplar of prudence in American political history, can instruct today’s voters in both ends of that continuum.

In 1838, an ordinary historical moment, a 28-year-old Lincoln warned the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Ill., that the greatest danger to American liberty would arise from leaders seeking greatness in times that did not require it … A quarter-century later, as Lincoln prepared a bold stroke that helped define his own legacy — the Emancipation Proclamation — his annual message to Congress spoke of historical circumstances more grandly: “We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth.”

Those poles of Lincoln’s politics — modesty in ordinary times and boldness when required — illustrate the essence of prudence. The gateway to prudence is accurately gauging the character of one’s moment in history.

These paragraphs do a rather poor job of establishing Weiner’s own capacity to distinguish history’s “ordinary times” from its “mundane moments.” Was the “greatest danger to American liberty” in 1838 really politicians who demanded bold reforms in an era that required none? Or was it, perhaps, the slaveocracy that condemned more than 1 million Americans to lifetimes of forced labor, family separations, rape, and physical abuse? And was Lincoln’s complacency about eliminating slavery, until the moment when abolition became militarily expedient for the Union Army, a mark of extraordinary prudence or an all-too-ordinary moral failure?

Weiner is no more discerning when he turns his gaze from antebellum America to Donald Trump’s. “There is no question that Mr. Trump’s political style is aberrant,” Weiner writes. “But what if, all things considered, the needs of the moment are ordinary?”

In his ensuing argument for the mundanity of our republic’s present challenges, Weiner never acknowledges the existence of climate change, voter suppression, Trump’s ongoing war on the rule of law, or any of the other maladies catalogued above. Here is the entirety of Weiner’s argument for why those who regard our present moment as one defined by crisis are deluding themselves:

Yet for all the polarization in our politics, Mr. Trump and many of his Democratic challengers agree on the core claim that we live in the throes of a historical crisis. They concur that economic dislocation has ravaged the middle class: many of them might have uttered Mr. Trump’s inaugural proclamation of “American carnage.” All speak of constitutional crises — Mr. Trump of the excesses of the administrative state, Democrats of his violations of longstanding norms.


But the erosion of the middle class is not an acute ailment: It is a gradual, nearly half-century phenomenon that is susceptible only to gradual solutions as well. As for the supposed collapse of American government promulgated by the bureaucracy, the truth is much less dramatic: The administrative state is the product of an eight-decade consensus dating to the New Deal, not an emergent calamity. It can be unwound, but 80 years of practice will not yield to sudden solutions.

Even if we stipulate that Weiner has accurately — and comprehensively — identified our republic’s crises as each party defines them, his argument would be uncompelling. It can be simultaneously true that the middle class has been in decline for a half century, and that we’ve now reached a moment of crisis in that long descent. Weiner could perhaps marshal empirical evidence for complacency about the middle class’s present state. But instead, he has rested his case on the claim that “a social problem that has been gradually deepening over a period of many years cannot possibly become a crisis in the present moment”; by this logic, it would have been “imprudent” for anyone to warn of an impending Civil War in 1860, as tensions between the North and South over the expansion of slavery into the Western territories was a “nearly half-century phenomenon” at that time.

But, of course, Weiner ignores the principal reasons for the left’s catastrophism, while badly misconstruing those behind the right’s. It is not the threat of malignant bureaucracy that led former Trump White House senior adviser Michael Anton to describe 2016 as the “Flight 93 Election,” but rather “the ceaseless importation of Third World foreigners with no tradition of, taste for, or experience in liberty,” which was rendering the electorate “more left, more Democratic, less Republican, less republican, and less traditionally American with every cycle.”

Weiner’s column isn’t without its merits. His observation that presidential candidates and the political press have to engage in reckless hyperbole to get noticed are fair (there is a reason why the headline to this column is a bit shouty). And “the rhetoric of catastrophe,” as he calls it, certainly has had a malign influence on America’s civic life in recent years. Nor is he wrong to accuse the Democratic Party of engaging in such threat inflation on many occasions.

But in its blithe elision of the primary threats facing our polity and planet, Weiner’s column epitomizes the self-congratulatory complacency of the moderate Senate Democrats, who are more scandalized by the thought of the filibuster’s abolition than the climate’s ruination. If Team Blue can somehow wrest Senate control from Mitch McConnell in 2021, we will not need “modesty” from lawmakers like Jon Tester and Joe Manchin; rather, we will need them to display uncharacteristic boldness, by voting to diminish their own small states’ overrepresentation in the Senate and for sweeping action to mitigate the climate crisis.

Such is the minimum required by prudence in our time.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on June 09, 2019, 03:12:03 AM
I have decide I want to plant a tree a week until I die.
Planted 5 blackwoods (native to this area), one magnolia and a mandarin in the last 3 weeks.
May not make much of a difference, but I dont care. We are at the point where we have to save what we can.


Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: RE on June 09, 2019, 04:18:07 AM
We are at the point where we have to save what we can.

The Motto of the Diner.

"Save As Many As You Can".

Title: Atlanta to Transform 7 Acres of Land Into Country’s Largest Free Food Forest
Post by: azozeo on June 09, 2019, 09:33:37 AM

Atlanta’s City Council just voted in favor of transforming over 7 acres of vacant property into the state of Georgia’s first food forest. The measure, which paves the way for the largest food forest in the country according to Councilwoman Carla Smith, was approved last Monday after a unanimous vote.

The Urban Food forest will be available free of charge and will include edible trees, shrubs, and vines in addition to traditional community garden beds as well as walking trails, public gathering spaces and other features.

“It’s just like going into a park and picking muscadines from a bush,” Smith said.

The land, currently own by environmental agency The Conservation Fund, will be sold to the city of Atlanta for $157,384.00. The agency was in possession of the land after it was abandoned due to a failed business venture.

According to the The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, “The Urban Food Forest at Browns Mill has been in the works since November 2016 when the city accepted an $86,150 grant from the U.S. Forest Service Community Forest and Open Space Program.”

Atlanta’s Department of Parks and Recreation will oversee the property and Trees Atlanta, will maintain the Urban Food Forest. Trees Atlanta has secured $121,500.00 in funding and plans to employ two part-time workers including including a Forest Ranger and a Community Workforce Educator.

Plans for the Urban Food forest conform to the city’s goal to “strengthen local food economy to ensure 85 percent of the city residents are within one-half mile of fresh food access by 2021.” According to the measure, “parks, greenspace and recreation are an integral part of the fabric of the City of Atlanta.”

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 36 percent of Atlanta was classified a food desert in 2017 and a quarter of the city’s residents must travel more than a half-mile to purchase fresh produce.

Hopefully Atlanta will be the first of many cities pushing for legislation that focuses on the well-being of their residents and transitions vacant lands into productive spaces that benefit the people. With many Americans living in areas classified as food deserts, it only makes sense to further legislation like Atlanta’s Ordinance 19-O-1251 to make use of the vacant lands that dot America’s urban landscapes.

By Emma Fiala / Republished with permission / The Mind Unleashed / Report a typo

This article was chosen for republication based on the interest of our readers. Anti-Media republishes stories from a number of other independent news sources. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not reflect Anti-Media editorial policy.
Stored Safely on Blockchain

This post is published to LBRY blockchain at lbry://@AntiMedia/atlanta-7-acres-free-food-forest.

Try LBRY to experience content freedom, earn crypto, and support The Anti-Media!

    Since you’re here……We have a small favor to ask. Fewer and fewer people are seeing Anti-Media articles as social media sites crack down on us, and advertising revenues across the board are quickly declining. However, unlike many news organizations, we haven’t put up a paywall because we value open and accessible journalism over profit — but at this point, we’re barely even breaking even. Hopefully, you can see why we need to ask for your help. Anti-Media’s independent journalism and analysis takes substantial time, resources, and effort to produce, but we do it because we believe in our message and hope you do, too.

    If everyone who reads our reporting and finds value in it helps fund it, our future can be much more secure. For as little as $1 and a minute of your time, you can support Anti-Media. Thank you. Click here to support us
Title: This couple spent 20 years replanting a destroyed 4 million tree rainforest
Post by: azozeo on June 09, 2019, 09:37:49 AM


It makes a difference. Trust the process  :icon_sunny:

 Strange Sounds
Sebastião Salgado returned home to Brazil in 1994 after spending years abroad, expecting to find comfort in the tree-covered rainforest paradise he’d left behind.
However, when he got back to Minas Gerais, he found that the forest that had belonged to his parents had completely dried out and died due to deforestation and uncontrolled exploitation of its natural resources, especially iron ore. He and his wife acquired the land and decided to do something about it, spending the next 20 years replanting the entire forest.
couple replants millions of trees in Brazil, couple replants millions of trees in Brazil video, couple replants millions of trees in Brazil picture
Couple Spend 20 Years Replanting A Destroyed 4 Million Tree Rainforest

“The land was as sick as I was – everything was destroyed,” Salgado told the Guardian. “Only about 0.5% of the land was covered in trees. Then my wife had a fabulous idea to replant this forest. And when we began to do that, then all the insects and birds and fish returned and, thanks to this increase of the trees I, too, was reborn – this was the most important moment.”

The couple set up Instituto Terra with the noble goal of restoring the 17,000-acre property to its natural state. The organization they set up and ran recruited partners and volunteers, and together they set about planting 4 million saplings. (

Title: Re: This couple spent 20 years replanting a destroyed 4 million tree rainforest
Post by: K-Dog on June 09, 2019, 02:12:45 PM


It makes a difference. Trust the process  :icon_sunny:

 Strange Sounds
Sebastião Salgado returned home to Brazil in 1994 after spending years abroad, expecting to find comfort in the tree-covered rainforest paradise he’d left behind.
However, when he got back to Minas Gerais, he found that the forest that had belonged to his parents had completely dried out and died due to deforestation and uncontrolled exploitation of its natural resources, especially iron ore. He and his wife acquired the land and decided to do something about it, spending the next 20 years replanting the entire forest.
couple replants millions of trees in Brazil, couple replants millions of trees in Brazil video, couple replants millions of trees in Brazil picture
Couple Spend 20 Years Replanting A Destroyed 4 Million Tree Rainforest

“The land was as sick as I was – everything was destroyed,” Salgado told the Guardian. “Only about 0.5% of the land was covered in trees. Then my wife had a fabulous idea to replant this forest. And when we began to do that, then all the insects and birds and fish returned and, thanks to this increase of the trees I, too, was reborn – this was the most important moment.”

The couple set up Instituto Terra with the noble goal of restoring the 17,000-acre property to its natural state. The organization they set up and ran recruited partners and volunteers, and together they set about planting 4 million saplings. (

I found their place on Google Earth and took a screenshot.  Here it is.


Their website is below.  I cropped the screenshot to show that their 'rain forest' is next to the town of Aimores Brazil.  You can see their estate buildings at one end of their property.  It is all within walking distance of city streets.  Prime real estate with your back yard a valley a few kilometers long with rainforest all the way to the ridgeline.  138 kilometers from the sea.  Sweet. 

I'd love to be a stray dog in that town and learn how to speak Portuguese.  Drink chimarrão all day long.  When I got good enough to blog in Portugese I'd come back north.  It could take a while.  You know; old dog!
Latitude -19.50372187  Longitude -41.07089399

Rua Luiz Martins Soares 294
Aimorés, Minas Gerais, Brasil
35200-000 (

Address via reverse lookup.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on June 09, 2019, 02:18:52 PM
All we need do is corral up all the psychopathe politicians & we can put this planet back neat as a pin  :icon_sunny:

20 years is a drop in the bucket, nice progress. The same thing is true with the Mt. St. Helens explosion. Place is paradise now, 35 years later.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: K-Dog on June 09, 2019, 10:52:25 PM
But how did that land get that way in the first place and what is going on in Brazil today.  I've been looking into things down there.  It is open season on the rain forest and ranchers can shoot all the indians they want now that Jair rules the roost.

“Os índios não falam nossa língua, não têm dinheiro, não têm cultura. São povos nativos. Como eles conseguem ter 13% do território nacional”

“The Indians do not speak our language, they do not have money, they do not have culture. They are native peoples. How did they manage to get 13% of the national territory”

Campo Grande News, April 22, 2015

He wasn't joking.

“Pena que a cavalaria brasileira não tenha sido tão eficiente quanto a americana, que exterminou os índios”

“It’s a shame that the Brazilian cavalry hasn’t been as efficient as the Americans, who exterminated the Indians.” Correio Braziliense newspaper, April 12, 1998

The land was logged and denuded by cattle after it was stolen from the indians.  Seriously fire up Google Earth and take a look at what is going on in the area.  They have the best 'rain forest' for miles around but they are not the only rich bitches a hundred miles from the sea who have one.  The area obviously restores greenery quickly but google earth shows the cover is actually still quite sparse seen from the top down and it will be a years before it is a real forest.
While you are investigating you could see what Jair Bolsonaro is doing.  Hard to believe but Jair makes Trump look sweet.  Bad mojo. Very bad.  I have to google Racist Brazilian Ranchers and see what comes up.
Title: 🌪️ Drone video: Tornado damage in Dayton, Ohio
Post by: RE on June 10, 2019, 04:12:21 AM
OK, the McMansions aren't in great shape, but check out that huge supply of firewood!  Got Chainsaw?


Title: Tree Huggers go TOE 2 TOE w/paramilitary, loggers
Post by: azozeo on June 10, 2019, 04:33:37 PM

Lost Coast, CA – Humboldt Redwood Company (HRC) brought logging crews and paramilitary security into in the last remaining unprotected, intact Douglas-fir/hardwood forest in coastal California late on Wednesday, June 5.

On Thursday morning, Mattole Forest Defenders headed to the forest. HRC has again hired paramilitary-styled security company Lear Asset Management of Ukiah, which employs tasers, dogs, drones, and night-vision goggles.  This equipment is familiar to Lear personnel who are veterans of U.S. wars in the Middle East. Last year, there were safety breeches by Lear employees using aggressive tactics. Thursday morning they showed up in camo gear on 4-wheelers.

Rainbow Ridge, located about 25 miles south of Eureka in the Mattole River Watershed, has been the scene of resistance to old-growth logging since 1990.  Lawsuits, blockades, and tree-sits have kept much of the forest standing.

The remote area is the home to numerous threatened and endangered species, including Golden Eagle, Northern Goshawk, and Northern Spotted Owl and is the headwaters for the wild Mattole River stocks of coho and Chinook salmon.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on June 16, 2019, 03:37:36 AM
This weeks tree tally:
1 x grapefruit.
2 x Magnolias. I already have a 3 other Magnolias on site. Seem to do well here.
1 x clump of bamboo. No idea of variety. Clump came in a load of waste at work. Has a 2 inch diameter stem on one piece.

Has anyone grown tea?
Made from white Camelia I believe. Camelia Sensis. Have a few different Camelia's on the property. Seem to like the climate here in SE Oz along with Magnolias..
Hot dry summers, cool wet winters here. Micro climate a little cooler due to altitude of property.

Might try a few more natives next so I dont have to water as much come summer.

Title: Scientists amazed as Canadian permafrost thaws 70 years early
Post by: Surly1 on June 19, 2019, 05:12:47 AM
Scientists amazed as Canadian permafrost thaws 70 years early (

General view of a landscape of partially thawed Arctic permafrost near Mould Bay, Canada, in this handout photo released June 18, 2019. The image was captured in 2016 by researchers from the University of Alaska Fairbanks who were amazed to find the permafrost thawing 70 years faster than models predicted. Louise Farquharson/Handout via REUTERS

LONDON (Reuters) - Permafrost at outposts in the Canadian Arctic is thawing 70 years earlier than predicted, an expedition has discovered, in the latest sign that the global climate crisis is accelerating even faster than scientists had feared.

General view of a landscape of partially thawed Arctic permafrost near Mould Bay, Canada, in this handout photo released June 18, 2019. The image was captured in 2016 by researchers from the University of Alaska Fairbanks who were amazed to find the permafrost thawing 70 years faster than models predicted. Louise Farquharson/Handout via REUTERS

A team from the University of Alaska Fairbanks said they were astounded by how quickly a succession of unusually hot summers had destabilized the upper layers of giant subterranean ice blocks that had been frozen solid for millennia.

“What we saw was amazing,” Vladimir E. Romanovsky, a professor of geophysics at the university, told Reuters by telephone. “It’s an indication that the climate is now warmer than at any time in the last 5,000 or more years.”

With governments meeting in Bonn this week to try to ratchet up ambitions in United Nations climate negotiations, the team’s findings, published on June 10 in Geophysical Research Letters, offered a further sign of a growing climate emergency.

The paper was based on data Romanovsky and his colleagues had been analyzing since their last expedition to the area in 2016. The team used a modified propeller plane to visit exceptionally remote sites, including an abandoned Cold War-era radar base more than 300 km from the nearest human settlement.

Diving through a lucky break in the clouds, Romanovsky and his colleagues said they were confronted with a landscape that was unrecognizable from the pristine Arctic terrain they had encountered during initial visits a decade or so earlier.

The vista had dissolved into an undulating sea of hummocks - waist-high depressions and ponds known as thermokarst. Vegetation, once sparse, had begun to flourish in the shelter provided from the constant wind.

Torn between professional excitement and foreboding, Romanovsky said the scene had reminded him of the aftermath of a bombardment.

“It’s a canary in the coalmine,” said Louise Farquharson, a post-doctoral researcher and co-author of the study. “It’s very likely that this phenomenon is affecting a much more extensive region and that’s what we’re going to look at next.”

Scientists are concerned about the stability of permafrost because of the risk that rapid thawing could release vast quantities of heat-trapping gases, unleashing a feedback loop that would in turn fuel even faster temperature rises.

Even if current commitments to cut emissions under the 2015 Paris Agreement are implemented, the world is still far from averting the risk that these kinds of feedback loops will trigger runaway warming, according to models used by the U.N.-backed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

With scientists warning that sharply higher temperatures would devastate the global south and threaten the viability of industrial civilization in the northern hemisphere, campaigners said the new paper reinforced the imperative to cut emissions.

“Thawing permafrost is one of the tipping points for climate breakdown and it’s happening before our very eyes,” said Jennifer Morgan, Executive Director of Greenpeace International. “This premature thawing is another clear signal that we must decarbonize our economies, and immediately.”

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on June 24, 2019, 02:33:18 AM
This weeks tree:
Eucalyptus Pauciflora "Little Snowman"
Hopefully will not need much water once established, and will be good for birds and insects. (

Next week might be a native Bottle Brush or another citrus.
I am with you Re: "Save As Many As You Can".

Title: We Have Less Than a Millisecond Left
Post by: Surly1 on June 28, 2019, 10:08:13 AM
We Have Less Than a Millisecond Left- (
 None of us should be thinking or talking about anything other than climate change.

We Have Less Than a Millisecond Left

We Have Less Than a Millisecond Left

We have less than a millisecond left.

You see, the planet we call home has existed for roughly 4.55 billion years. But numbers that large mean almost nothing to me, nor to most people, so I choose to break it down. If we lay the age of the Earth out over a calendar year, that would amount to 518,264 years per hour or 144 years per second. So if we have 10 or 11 years until the point of no return, as climate scientists have repeatedly told us, that means we have a millisecond left before midnight in which to change our society completely to avoid turning the Earth into a piping hot fajita. (If you want to be more generous and instead look at how long modern homosapiens have been walking around, it’s 315,000 years. So if you lay that over a calendar year, we have roughly 15 minutes before the stroke of midnight to combat climate change. Not sure that makes me feel much better.)

None of us should be thinking about anything other than climate change. We all kind of know it even if we think we don’t know it. Even people who deny climate change exists probably secretly know it. They’re just confusing what they want to be true with what they subconsciously know to be true. I did the same thing when I was a child and tennis legend Jimmy Connors lost in the semifinals of the 1991 U.S. Open after his monumental run at the ancient age of 39. (For an 11-year-old, 39 sounds pretty close to mummified.) I was certain Jimmy would be playing in the finals. I knew deep within my bones that Jimbo would dazzle us with diving volleys and mid-court passing shots in the championship match because how could the powers that be allow the only character America genuinely cared about to bow out before the finals? In my mind it was akin to killing off Iron Man halfway through the movie “Iron Man.”

Jimmy Connors did not show up to the finals. Climate change is the only thing we should be thinking about.

I don’t just mean there should be a report every couple hours about climate change by our bloviating bullhorns of mainstream news. I don’t mean once a day you should mention to a friend that Al Gore seems vaguely douchey but probably has a point. I mean climate change should be ALL we’re thinking about. It should be a major factor in every conversation, every job, every TV show, every humor column, every tweet, every clever T-shirt slogan and every fortune cookie message. Climate change should be everything.

Plastic action figures for kids should have one arm melted off to symbolize the effects of climate change. Your server at a nice restaurant should sprinkle sand in your soup du jour to remind you of the disappearance of fresh water. Ice cream should be exclusively served melted to symbolize rising temperatures. Hamburgers should cost $200 to compensate for the global emissions of factory farming. And every time you go ice skating someone should punch you in the face and yell, “Enjoy it while it lasts!”

We have less than a millisecond left.

Simply put, humans have no business going about our day-to-day actions as if we aren’t on the event horizon. It’s equivalent to working on your model train set while your kitchen is burning down, your spouse is in the bathroom battling an alligator that took up residence in the bathtub, and your 12-year-old daughter is in the living room having just been offered heroin for the first time. … Right now, humanity is still focused on the model train.

The International Governmental Panel on Climate Change says the point of no return is the year 2030. This obviously doesn’t mean everything spontaneously combusts at the stroke of midnight 2030 (although that would be fascinating to watch). It means that after that point—if we aren’t living vastly different lives—no effort will change the fact that the planet inevitably will become uninhabitable and we humans inevitably will go extinct and there inevitably will be no more skiing (both due to a lack of snow and due to a lack of fleshy beings to ride on skis). The year 2030 is the point of no return. It is the date of our impending, prolonged suicide.

Let’s assume the world’s greatest climate scientists are way off. Let’s assume these people who do nothing other than study climatic models using computer programs so sophisticated I wouldn’t be qualified to turn them on—let’s assume they have their swollen heads up their highly-educated asses. Let’s assume that they were so wrong that it’s not 10 years but instead 20 years until the point of no return, so the amount of time we have left is double what they thought. That still means we should be thinking about nothing other than climate change. It still means our very survival as a species, or lack thereof, will be decided in the next couple decades. It still means we have only a millisecond.

Maybe we’re right to die off. Maybe our hubris and egos the size and shape of SUVs have doomed us, and we should just give up and enjoy our final few years. But if that’s the case, I would like an announcement. I would honestly prefer a national address by some of our so-called leaders stating clearly, “Look folks, in order to continue civilized society of the human species, we would need to change everything. Every single one of us would have to labor toward a massive shift to a sustainable culture that works in harmony with nature, rather than abusing nature like it’s a servant who gave us an ugly look. We would have to focus on achieving this new society rather than spending a third of all our free time watching superhero movies. But we have no intention of doing that because it sounds kinda hard, not to mention corporate profits would suffer in the short term. So instead, we’re declaring here and now that we’ll all just keep functioning as is until such time as the oceans turn to acid, the ever-growing storms consume us, and California feels like the inside of a kiln. According to our best minds, that will be 10 to 20 years from now, so don’t worry about starting that retirement fund. Don’t buy the extended warranty on that vacuum. And whatever you do, at no point, and under no circumstances, quit smoking and drinking. …”Thank you, and good night.”

If that’s the choice we’ve decided to make, then I want an announcement along these lines. On the other hand, if we decide to do the opposite and save ourselves, someone should probably let everyone know it’s an all-hands-on-deck scenario.

Let’s make the call. We have less than a millisecond left.

Lee Camp is an American stand-up comedian, writer, actor and activist. Camp is the host of the weekly comedy news TV show “Redacted Tonight With Lee Camp” on RT America. He is a former comedy writer for the Onion and the Huffington Post and has been a touring stand-up comic for 20 years.

Title: Re: We Have Less Than a Millisecond Left
Post by: RE on June 28, 2019, 10:21:08 AM
If that were true, we would have all been dead by the time I replied to your post.

Hyperbole in titling is not real helpful on this issue.  It amounts to another prediction not come true.

I do realize of course you did not write this headline.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 01, 2019, 02:19:27 AM
This week's tree: Callistemon Citrinus.
"White Anzac" bottle brush. Australian native. Bird and insect attracting. Grows well in this area.
Have 2 red bottle brushes already on property which are always teeming with bees and yellow honey eaters when in flower. looking forward to see the white variety.

Next week will be another fruit tree I think. Maybe a blood orange or perhaps an apple... Have plenty of nuts and stone fruits already.

Plant a tree a week until I die. Save all you can.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 01, 2019, 02:20:56 AM
Here is a picture of a Callistemon citrinus..
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: AJ on July 01, 2019, 03:06:35 AM
I wish I could plant a tree a week :o.
1. I would have to put in T posts and wire fencing around every tree to keep the deer/elk from eating them to twigs.
2. The forest fire that is sure to come through here in time will burn Oregon to the ground and the area will become desert like Southern California (climate change is a bitch!).
Not sure a tree a week would help - at least here.
Good luck with the planting.
Title: Re: We Have Less Than a Millisecond Left
Post by: K-Dog on July 01, 2019, 08:09:06 AM
If that were true, we would have all been dead by the time I replied to your post.

Hyperbole in titling is not real helpful on this issue.  It amounts to another prediction not come true.

I do realize of course you did not write this headline.


It is just the beginning.  Titles like that will be invented by pro-status quo players to emphasize foolish doom.  Forever doomers were ignored as being crazy.  Some of us are crazy but not all as we know.

Guy McPhee preaches a scary fact exaggerated story to audiences with nothing better to do than pay attention to him.  Similar messages will pushed by OPPONENTS of DOOM to make rational concern over our ecological/resource predicament seem foolish.


You get that pushed at you three times a day and mission accomplished, you will hold doom in contempt and Trumptopia goes on.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on July 01, 2019, 11:54:40 AM
Here is a picture of a Callistemon citrinus..

Growing up in So. Cal. back in the day, folks had these & the red ones in their yards. Nice touch to your surroundings.  :icon_sunny:
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 01, 2019, 12:37:37 PM
I wish I could plant a tree a week :o.
1. I would have to put in T posts and wire fencing around every tree to keep the deer/elk from eating them to twigs.
2. The forest fire that is sure to come through here in time will burn Oregon to the ground and the area will become desert like Southern California (climate change is a bitch!).
Not sure a tree a week would help - at least here.
Good luck with the planting.

I will plant a tree for you mate. Give me a suggestion.
I have trouble with rabbits and kangaroos, so I put a tree guard on every tree until established.
Very bad fire area here. (Just North of Melbourne Australia in what we call mountains...). Have strategies and equipment to try and defend the property. 

Here is a picture of a Callistemon citrinus..

Growing up in So. Cal. back in the day, folks had these & the red ones in their yards. Nice touch to your surroundings.  :icon_sunny:

Yes they are very nice trees. I have 2 red already and like I said birds and insects love them. Added bonus is they dont need watering once established as they are natives here and can handle the hot dry summers.

When all my trees are established and flowering I will post a few pictures. I think I have one of my flowering gums out front from last spring. I will see if I can find it.

Below is a picture from summer of the 6 WA flowering gums I planted out front when we moved here nearly 20 years ago. Doing well.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Eddie on July 01, 2019, 02:02:03 PM
I wish I could plant a tree a week :o.
1. I would have to put in T posts and wire fencing around every tree to keep the deer/elk from eating them to twigs.
2. The forest fire that is sure to come through here in time will burn Oregon to the ground and the area will become desert like Southern California (climate change is a bitch!).
Not sure a tree a week would help - at least here.
Good luck with the planting.

I will plant a tree for you mate. Give me a suggestion.
I have trouble with rabbits and kangaroos, so I put a tree guard on every tree until established.
Very bad fire area here. (Just North of Melbourne Australia in what we call mountains...). Have strategies and equipment to try and defend the property. 

Here is a picture of a Callistemon citrinus..

Growing up in So. Cal. back in the day, folks had these & the red ones in their yards. Nice touch to your surroundings.  :icon_sunny:

Yes they are very nice trees. I have 2 red already and like I said birds and insects love them. Added bonus is they dont need watering once established as they are natives here and can handle the hot dry summers.

When all my trees are established and flowering I will post a few pictures. I think I have one of my flowering gums out front from last spring. I will see if I can find it.

Below is a picture from summer of the 6 WA flowering gums I planted out front when we moved here nearly 20 years ago. Doing well.
Very nice avocation you've selected JOW. I am reading the thread with interest.

I think I'm going to put out the fig tree I propagated  a few years back ( the one from cuttings planted by the dead pioneers who settled my place) out at the lake house.It'll  be touch and go, but I already have two fig trees at the other house, and I want one out there. Plenty of water with the lake, but I'll still have to water it for years probably, to get it past the tough part.

My mango tree I started before Palloy drank the hemlock, is doing well, too, My grown daughter who is currently living with us re-potted it for me. I'm afraid to put it in the ground. Too likely to freeze, until things warm up a bit more. Maybe in the fullness of time.

This year climate change here means it's been the wettest year on record pretty much, which is more like a blessing than a curse. Not sure it keeps on doing that. We had an eight year miserable drought that only ended a few years back.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: AJ on July 01, 2019, 04:26:54 PM

I will plant a tree for you mate. Give me a suggestion.
I have trouble with rabbits and kangaroos, so I put a tree guard on every tree until established.
Very bad fire area here. (Just North of Melbourne Australia in what we call mountains...). Have strategies and equipment to try and defend the property. 

Here is a picture of a Callistemon citrinus..

Yes they are very nice trees. I have 2 red already and like I said birds and insects love them. Added bonus is they dont need watering once established as they are natives here and can handle the hot dry summers.

When all my trees are established and flowering I will post a few pictures. I think I have one of my flowering gums out front from last spring. I will see if I can find it.

Below is a picture from summer of the 6 WA flowering gums I planted out front when we moved here nearly 20 years ago. Doing well.
Any kind of fruit tree is nice.
I just bought a trash pump (can pump pond water) and then found out that the fire hose and fittings cost more than the pump. They are being shipped right now. Once I have it all here I can fight a small fire in the brush. However, if the BIG "burn the forest down fire" - PARADISE CA kinda fire - comes through I will be running at top speed to the pasture across the road.
You can see from my picture, we are in the forest.
Love your gum trees flowers :emthup:
Title: Corporations and Bolsonaro Teaming Up to Destroy the Amazon
Post by: azozeo on July 02, 2019, 12:36:46 PM

July 01st, 2019

By Joe Catron @jncatron

As deforestation in Brazil’s Amazon rainforest reaches the highest level in a decade, the rainforest’s indigenous peoples and their supporters have called for action against the political and business interests they blame for a spike in illegal logging and other resource extraction.

A report released by Amazon Watch as part of its ongoing “Complicity in Destruction” campaign aims not only to spotlight the role of North American and Western European financiers, importers, and traders in the ongoing destruction of the Amazon, but also to mobilize support for a boycott launched by the National Indigenous Mobilization (MNI) against the Brazilian agribusiness and mining interests encroaching on the threatened region. The report says:

    The MNI requests solidarity from the international community to support these efforts, which aim to leverage global markets in order to moderate the behavior of the agroindustrial sector, as a means to halt [Brazil President Jair] Bolsonaro’s assault, ultimately protecting and restoring environmental safeguards and human rights.”

Christian Poirier, Amazon Watch’s Program Director, told MintPress News that the inauguration of right-wing strongman Jair Bolsonaro as Brazil’s president on January 1 lent fresh urgency to the campaign. (
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 02, 2019, 04:54:48 PM
I wish I could plant a tree a week :o.
1. I would have to put in T posts and wire fencing around every tree to keep the deer/elk from eating them to twigs.
2. The forest fire that is sure to come through here in time will burn Oregon to the ground and the area will become desert like Southern California (climate change is a bitch!).
Not sure a tree a week would help - at least here.
Good luck with the planting.

I will plant a tree for you mate. Give me a suggestion.
I have trouble with rabbits and kangaroos, so I put a tree guard on every tree until established.
Very bad fire area here. (Just North of Melbourne Australia in what we call mountains...). Have strategies and equipment to try and defend the property. 

Here is a picture of a Callistemon citrinus..

Growing up in So. Cal. back in the day, folks had these & the red ones in their yards. Nice touch to your surroundings.  :icon_sunny:

Yes they are very nice trees. I have 2 red already and like I said birds and insects love them. Added bonus is they dont need watering once established as they are natives here and can handle the hot dry summers.

When all my trees are established and flowering I will post a few pictures. I think I have one of my flowering gums out front from last spring. I will see if I can find it.

Below is a picture from summer of the 6 WA flowering gums I planted out front when we moved here nearly 20 years ago. Doing well.
Very nice avocation you've selected JOW. I am reading the thread with interest.

I think I'm going to put out the fig tree I propagated  a few years back ( the one from cuttings planted by the dead pioneers who settled my place) out at the lake house.It'll  be touch and go, but I already have two fig trees at the other house, and I want one out there. Plenty of water with the lake, but I'll still have to water it for years probably, to get it past the tough part.

My mango tree I started before Palloy drank the hemlock, is doing well, too, My grown daughter who is currently living with us re-potted it for me. I'm afraid to put it in the ground. Too likely to freeze, until things warm up a bit more. Maybe in the fullness of time.

This year climate change here means it's been the wettest year on record pretty much, which is more like a blessing than a curse. Not sure it keeps on doing that. We had an eight year miserable drought that only ended a few years back.

Cool mate.
Figs are indestructable! I have 2 on the property, one in the chicken pen which is thriving, and I cut back pretty savagely every year, and one I have neglected for 4 years as I planted it in the wrong spot out in my paddock. Every Summer it dies off and drops all its leaves. Every Spring it comes back.... I get a few figs every year, but birds get most. I will net them when I need more.
Too cold for mangoes in my area too. Big trees when they grow. I have 3 Avocado's which I have plastic around in winter, which are doing well, but frost knocks them really badly. No fruit yet.
I only have 2 acres, but I am surprised what you can fit on it! All up I have over 200 trees already. Nuts, fruit, ornamental and natives. 
Truth is I am cynical and angry. World is going to hell in a hand basket. Politicians are useless and Joe public is majority brainwashed denialist morons. I have decided all I can do is try and improve my little bit in of our world. Better to channel my anger into direct action of planting trees. Still not allowed to eat the stupid people in Australia.... I would start with the clergy and the politicians first. ;D


Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: RE on July 02, 2019, 08:01:12 PM
Still not allowed to eat the stupid people in Australia.... I would start with the clergy and the politicians first. ;D

Banksters are my first choice of post-SHTF Day meats.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 02, 2019, 10:29:20 PM
Still not allowed to eat the stupid people in Australia.... I would start with the clergy and the politicians first. ;D

Banksters are my first choice of post-SHTF Day meats.


Where are the recipes then?

I think vegans would be a fairly healthy option... Just like grass fed beef. Juicy and chemical free.
Need to start a "What you would eat when SHTF thread..."

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: RE on July 02, 2019, 10:54:06 PM
Still not allowed to eat the stupid people in Australia.... I would start with the clergy and the politicians first. ;D

Banksters are my first choice of post-SHTF Day meats.


Where are the recipes then?

I think vegans would be a fairly healthy option... Just like grass fed beef. Juicy and chemical free.
Need to start a "What you would eat when SHTF thread..."


You can find great Recipes for meats on r/cookingzone ( and r/meatosaurus (  Both are Diner Social Media Reddit Subs.  Just substitute "Bankster" for Beef, Moose, Bear, Lamb Ostrich, Rabbit, Squirrel etc, etc etc.  Also great instructional videos available on how to butcher a Bear Bankster in the Field.  Here's a sample:

Title: 🏔️ Hooray, the Arctic is melting! Say WHAT?
Post by: RE on July 03, 2019, 12:33:52 AM
The Imbeciles are IN CHARGE!

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Surly1 on July 03, 2019, 04:11:03 AM

Banksters are my first choice of post-SHTF Day meats.


Just substitute "Bankster" for Beef, Moose, Bear, Lamb Ostrich, Rabbit, Squirrel etc, etc etc.  Also great instructional videos available on how to butcher a Bear Bankster in the Field.  Here's a sample:


As apex predators, humans like banisters absorb most of the environmental, toxins. And beware the brains: prions can give you kuru, or mad cow disease.

In the same way we don't eat vermin that we kill, I'd avoid the bankster.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: RE on July 03, 2019, 05:28:42 AM

Banksters are my first choice of post-SHTF Day meats.


Just substitute "Bankster" for Beef, Moose, Bear, Lamb Ostrich, Rabbit, Squirrel etc, etc etc.  Also great instructional videos available on how to butcher a Bear Bankster in the Field.  Here's a sample:


As apex predators, humans like banisters absorb most of the environmental, toxins. And beware the brains: prions can give you kuru, or mad cow disease.

In the same way we don't eat vermin that we kill, I'd avoid the bankster.

No worries.  The Instapot cooks the shit out of any meat.  Comes out tender, moist and delicious.  Also Sterilizes and Sautees.  :icon_sunny:

I suggest my Corned Beef recipe, and double the normal amount of Kosher Salt and Pink Curing Salt (Sodium Nitrate, NaNO2)  This should double insure any nasties get sent to the Great Beyond before consumption.  For triple insurance, add Cayenne Pepper, fresh Habanero Peppers and Chili Powder.  Just make sure you have plenty of Alaskan Pure Glacial Water to wash it down with and ready access to a Composting Toilet..


Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on July 03, 2019, 02:23:29 PM
Still not allowed to eat the stupid people in Australia.... I would start with the clergy and the politicians first. ;D

Banksters are my first choice of post-SHTF Day meats.


I'll bet coyotes & buzzards would back away from that tainted grizzle in a new york minute......
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: K-Dog on July 03, 2019, 03:07:06 PM
Still not allowed to eat the stupid people in Australia.... I would start with the clergy and the politicians first. ;D

Banksters are my first choice of post-SHTF Day meats.


I'll bet coyotes & buzzards would back away from that tainted grizzle in a new york minute......

Dandelions and grass would be better.
Title: trees glorious trees
Post by: John of Wallan on July 05, 2019, 05:22:46 AM
I want hardy fruit or nut trees which are drought and frost tolerant....  We get long hot dry summers and cool wet winters with some frosts.
Any suggestions?

I already have: Apricot, peach x 2, cherry, nectarine, hazel nut x 2, walnut x 2, macadamia x 2, almond, chestnut x 2, grapefruit, mandarin, lemon x 2, lime, fig x 2, avocado x 3 and  a bay tree (leaves used for cooking). Oh, and also an olive.
I have a navel orange and some kind of apple are on my wish list, but not sure which variety.
Also growing bamboo, but so far not attracting any pandas.
Have no luck with passion fruit for some reason, and poor results with berries so far. Pretty sure problem is summer heat; it is hard to keep up enough water for plants with shallow roots, hence I prefer trees or deep rooted perennials.   

Last 2 weeks have planted bird and insect attracting natives, so a fruit or nut would be good this week. Bare rooted trees are appearing in nurseries now.

Plant a tree a week until I die. Save as many as you can.

No tree porn this week, but here is a picture of a black cockatoo in one of my radiata pines from a few years back, and an echidna in my paddock hiding under a tree from me. Very shy, short sighted and truely strange little creatures!

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 05, 2019, 05:40:35 AM
Pretty sure the cockatoo is a are yellow tailed black cockatoo. Every year we get visited by a small flock 5 or 6.
They are damn noisy! Used to tell the lads when they were small they were Pterodactyls due to loud screeching noise they make as they fought over pine nuts.... Site has a sound bite: (

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 06, 2019, 11:24:32 PM
This weeks tree:
Citrus Sinensis "Cara Cara"
Blood navel orange.
In full sun and I have a plastic tree guard around it for winter, as this micro climate is close to the limit for citrus cold wise.

Will look at bare rooted trees over next few weeks. Apple or maybe a plum. Had a wattle tree which blew over a few years back. I might find a few local species and see if I can propagate a few from seed also..
Open to suggestions folks.

Save all you can. Plants a tree a week until I die.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 13, 2019, 01:30:13 AM
This weeks tree:
Grevilliea Sp.
Looks like the one in the picture attached. Spider like red flowers and needle like leaves.
Very wide variety of different shaped flowers and leaves, as well as general size. Nat actually sure exactly how big this one will grow....
Native and bird attractant so should withstand dry hot summers once established..

Will plant it in a sunny area where the bloody kangaroos wont kill it!
If I didn't live in a fairly urban area I would have roo steak with a 7mm hole it it by now.

Save all you can. Plant a tree a week until I die is the plan.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Surly1 on July 13, 2019, 01:57:56 AM
This weeks tree:
Grevilliea Sp.
Looks like the one in the picture attached. Spider like red flowers and needle like leaves.
Very wide variety of different shaped flowers and leaves, as well as general size. Nat actually sure exactly how big this one will grow....
Native and bird attractant so should withstand dry hot summers once established..

Will plant it in a sunny area where the bloody kangaroos wont kill it!
If I didn't live in a fairly urban area I would have roo steak with a 7mm hole it it by now.

Save all you can. Plant a tree a week until I die is the plan.


A great plan, actually. But there's no pic attached!
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on July 13, 2019, 11:06:51 AM
This weeks tree:
Grevilliea Sp.
Looks like the one in the picture attached. Spider like red flowers and needle like leaves.
Very wide variety of different shaped flowers and leaves, as well as general size. Nat actually sure exactly how big this one will grow....
Native and bird attractant so should withstand dry hot summers once established..

Will plant it in a sunny area where the bloody kangaroos wont kill it!
If I didn't live in a fairly urban area I would have roo steak with a 7mm hole it it by now.

Save all you can. Plant a tree a week until I die is the plan.


What does "Roo" taste like ? Please don't say chicken  :icon_mrgreen:
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: azozeo on July 13, 2019, 11:10:15 AM

Farmers Are Using Flowers To Beat Back Pests Instead Of Chemicals


(Aimee Lutkin) A farm is its own ecosystem, but many conventional practices strip away the life cycle of all the creatures living in it by using pesticides. This makes sense, since crops can be decimated by the wrong kind of insect or other invader.

Source – Green Matters

by Aimee Lutkin, June 2nd, 2019

But pesticides have created a number of problems; not only do pests become gradually resistant to the poison, the use of the chemicals can be unhealthy for workers and potentially for the people who come in contact with the produce in their food cycle.

Fast Company reports that many organic farmers are going back to older practices by cultivating an environment where natural pest predators can live. They’re growing flowers amongst their other crops, creating a home for creatures like parasitic wasps, who eat aphids in their larval state. It’s been a common practice to grow flowers around the perimeter of farmland acres, because it encourages biodiversity. But agriculturalists are experimenting with strips of flowers within their crops, creating a highway for bugs to travel farther and cover more ground for pest control.

Nature’s anti-aging miracle: Omega 3 fatty acids have been proven to improve mood, gut health, immune function, and overall well being that has an anti-aging effect. Organic Vegan fatty acids are better due to toxins present in the sea, where most animal sources are found. Help prevent Alzheimer’s, dementia, and various ailments with these life-saving nutrients. Order now and feel safe and secure in the knowledge of good health. VEGAN OMEGA 3 – Better than Fish Oil | 60 Capsules of Algal DHA and EPA | Plant Based Brain Supplement, Maintain Cardiovascular Health and Quality Prenatal Omega-3
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 13, 2019, 02:12:59 PM
This weeks tree:
Grevilliea Sp.
Looks like the one in the picture attached. Spider like red flowers and needle like leaves.
Very wide variety of different shaped flowers and leaves, as well as general size. Nat actually sure exactly how big this one will grow....
Native and bird attractant so should withstand dry hot summers once established..

Will plant it in a sunny area where the bloody kangaroos wont kill it!
If I didn't live in a fairly urban area I would have roo steak with a 7mm hole it it by now.

Save all you can. Plant a tree a week until I die is the plan.


What does "Roo" taste like ? Please don't say chicken  :icon_mrgreen:

Actually taste a lot like beef. Its a very lean and healthy meat, and we really should be eating this in Australia instead of beef or lamb, as it is suitable to our climate and ecosystems.

Most roo meat is used as pet food in Australia, and we export a fair bit too apparently. You may see it in a shop in the States that sells game meats. You see it here in restaurants sometimes along with other game meats such as Emu, Venison, Buffalo and Crocodile. Kangaroos are not easily domesticated like sheep or cattle. Same reason you don't farm Hippos or North American Bison I assume. I have eaten all the above, (except Hippo and Bison!), plus a few species I have shot myself: rabbit, quail (my favourite), pigeon and duck. I will only shoot pest species now. Rabbits, cats, deer, wild dogs and foxes, and no, I have not eaten dog, cat or fox. :P

I like the flower idea. We have tried something similar in the garden with a couple of different plants which confuse butterflies, companion planting with stuff bugs don.t like as well as sacrificial plants bugs prefer to draw them away, and we don't use pesticides to allow natural predators. I have a fair diversity of plants on the property now, and growing every week, and I am sure this helps predator insects and birds control pests. Best snail control I have seen are my chickens. They are vicious predators which hunt in packs when let out onto the wild snail herds!  ;D
A lot of people think I am a crazy because I am planting trees and spending my spare time and really very little money putting in water tanks, garden beds, pumps, backup power, stocking a pantry and other little self sufficiency, and usually money saving steps instead of living the uber-consumerist lifestyle culture demands. Seems to be the same people who panic when there is a blackout, or if a telephone outage stops credit card machines working for a day like they did last week.

All these small steps are good, and they make a big difference locally, but I think we are all still pretty screwed!
I will post another picture of a Grevillea like the latest one I have planted. Surly says he cant see the last one even though it comes up when I log on....

Title: 'Florida really tops the charts' of states climate change will heat up
Post by: Surly1 on July 19, 2019, 04:58:21 AM
'Florida really tops the charts' of states climate change will heat up, report says


Miamians are already used to stifling heat waves that leave them sprinting from air-conditioned cars to air-conditioned buildings or flocking to the beach to cool off. Or so they think.

But if a new report on climate-change induced global warming is right, residents could feel the heat a lot more by the middle of the century. Scientists from the climate advocacy group Union of Concerned Scientists are predicting that the city could go from a couple weeks a year that feel like 100 degrees to nearly four months of scorching hot days, with the rest of Florida not far behind.

High temperatures are linked to all kinds of health problems, from heart and lung conditions to exacerbating mental health issues. In South Florida, almost a dozen elderly people elderly people died when the air conditioning went out after Hurricane Irma. Soaring thermometer readings have already forced some outdoor workers to shift their labor earlier or later in the day.

"Florida really tops the charts on so many different metrics," said Erika Spanger-Siegfried, lead climate analyst for the group. "The southeast region leads the nation, and Florida is the state within that region that will be most affected."

Spanger-Sigfried and her team analyzed historical heat records from 1970 to 2000 to come up with historical averages for cities, counties, states and regions in the lower 48 states, and used 18 different climate models to project temperatures into the future. What they found: with no action to cut carbon emissions, temperatures could soar to harmful, even deadly, levels by mid-century.

High temperatures are historically most common in the southwest, where it got so hot in 2017 that airplanes couldn't take off.

But it's not temperature alone that matters for physical well-being. As most Floridians already know, it's not the heat—it's the humidity.

"Our bodies can cope with high temperatures if we can sweat," said Spanger-Siegfried. "But as the humidity rises, it gets harder for our body to cool."

The heat index is a combination of temperature and humidity that results in a "feels like" temperature.

Right now, there are about 25 days a year that feel like they're above 100 degrees in Florida, like the heatwave last month. Without action to change emissions, scientists estimate there will be 105 of those 100 degree plus days a year in Florida in a few decades, around 2036 to 2065. By late century, that number could climb to 141 days.

Predictions for Miami-Dade County are worse. Instead of the statewide average of 25 days where it feels like 100 degrees, Miami-Dade already has 41 and by the middle of the century, that could be 134. That's more than any other county in the state.

The researchers created an interactive tool to show how hot it might get in specific cities and counties depending on how much climate change is slowed, or if it's not slowed at all.

More hot days spells trouble for outdoor workers, who don't always have strict guidelines for breaks. More than half of agricultural workers in Homestead surveyed by the organization WeCount! last year reported they weren't allowed to rest in the shade, and 69% said they had experienced symptoms of heat-related illness.

It doesn't help that the natural instinct when the temperatures rise is to crank up the AC, which Spanger-Siegfried pointed out consumes even more electricity and burns even more fuel.

"If we use dirty sources of fuel to keep our indoor areas cool, we're making our outdoor areas warmer," she said.

Not that everyone even has AC. Federal rules for public housing don't require air conditioning, leaving low-income residents to buy their own or suffer without one.

On a hotter planet, people who use public transit will also bear the brunt of the higher temperatures. While Miami often reaches intense temperatures, the county installed its first—and what appears to be its only—air-conditioned bus stop in 2016.

A cheaper way to cool down urban areas, which are usually hotter than rural areas thanks to all the metal, glass and pavement, is nature's original solution: trees. Miami-Dade did a tree canopy survey in 2016 with the University of Florida and Florida International University and found that the county has about 20% of its land covered by trees, out of a possible 44 percent. Researchers found the trees were clustered in wealthier, whiter neighborhoods like Coral Gables and were lacking in lower income neighborhoods primarily occupied by people of color.

The county began the Million Trees Miami program to solve the problem and bring the total average canopy in the county up to 30% by 2020. They've since scrapped the deadline, said Gabriela Lopez, community image manager for Neat Streets Miami, and instead just focus on adding trees wherever they can.

"We have been able to record the planting of approximately 300,000 trees. However, we know that more trees have probably been planted since the initiative began," she said.

But while trees can help cool down a neighborhood, soak up flood waters and even raise property values, the ultimate solution to stop rising temperatures at their source is to emit less into the atmosphere, said Spanger-Siegfried.

"We need to start and end with thinking about making emissions cuts," she said.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on July 22, 2019, 08:35:58 PM
Tree of the week:
Eucalyptus leucoxylon ‘Euky Dwarf’

Already have one similar I planted nearly 20 years ago on the property I will post a few pictures of shortly.
Do well in this area. Should be fairly drought tolerant.

Not looking forward to heat waves in the summer if what you guys in the Northern Hemisphere are going through are indications of what we can expect. We already get regularly into the low 40's for a week or so. (Over 100 in the old scale). If we start getting 5 or 6 degrees hotter than usual it will be unlivable. Even Eucalyptus trees start to shut down and stress can kill once it gets much over 40,particularly if dry. A lot of native birds suffer pretty badly too if much over 40.

We have plenty of water here at the moment just North of Melbourne, but further North and inland is in severe drought. South West Queensland, Western NSW and North Western Victoria and into South Australia is pretty bad. Will look at  adding more tanks in next year or so to collect more winter rains.

Plant a tree a week. Save what you can.

Title: 🏭 No Climate Event in 2,000 Years Compares to What’s Happening Now
Post by: RE on July 25, 2019, 06:34:53 AM (

No Climate Event in 2,000 Years Compares to What’s Happening Now

While parts of the world have warmed or cooled in the past, modern climate change is happening just about everywhere at the same time.

Robinson Meyer
Jul 24, 2019

A firefighting plane dumps flame retardant on a wildfire in Chaveira, Portugal, on July 22, 2019.
Climate-change heat has helped fuel searing temperatures and wildfires across Portugal this year, such as this one in Chaveira.Rafael Marchante / Reuters

From the planet’s perspective, one of the most significant events of the past 2,000 years occurred on April 5, 1815, when the Indonesian volcano Mount Tambora began to erupt. “The noise was, in the first instance, almost universally attributed to a distant cannon,” wrote a British statesman stationed hundreds of miles away on Java. Soon “the sun became obscured” with ash, and by the next week, fog-like smoke reduced visibility to 900 feet, while earthquakes shook the island.

Tambora was the largest volcanic eruption since the end of the last Ice Age, one of a series of eruptions that pumped huge amounts of sunlight-reflecting gas into the atmosphere. This gas darkened and chilled summers in Europe. It weakened the monsoons in India and West Africa. It allowed glaciers to advance in the Alps.

In other words, these eruptions brought about a kind of natural climate change. But it was felt differently in different places. And new research confirms that it pales in comparison to the climate change we now face.

Read: The unprecedented surge in fear about climate change

Absolutely nothing resembling modern-day global warming has happened on Earth for at least the past 2,000 years, a new study published today in Nature confirms. Since the birth of Jesus Christ, the climate has sometimes naturally changed—some parts of the world have briefly cooled, and some have briefly warmed—but it has never changed as it’s changing now. Never once until the Industrial Revolution did temperatures surge in the same direction everywhere at the same time. They’re doing so now, the study finds.

Drawing on a huge database of climate-recording objects from all over the world—including tree rings, cave formations, and ancient pollen trapped in lake mud—the study concludes that 98 percent of Earth’s surface experienced its hottest period of the past 2,000 years within living memory. That uniform heat spike “is unprecedented over the Common Era,” it says.

This latest finding may not surprise most climate scientists, who suspect that the planet is as hot now as it’s ever been in at least the past 125,000 years. But it may shock some politicians, who have downplayed modern-day climate change by talking about those past shifts. “The climate has always been changing. There has never been a time when the climate has not changed,” said Senator Marco Rubio at a Republican presidential debate in 2016.

To which the study replies: Sure. It just hasn’t changed like this.

In fairness, that wasn’t always clear. Decades ago, researchers talked about the past periods of climate change as global events. They cited the Little Ice Age, which began in roughly 1550 and ended around 1850, as an era when global temperatures fell everywhere. But this study—and work from other scholars—suggests that the Little Ice Age wasn’t global at all, and mostly lowered temperatures in western Europe and parts of North America.

“Traditionally, the understanding of climate over [the past 2,000 years] is that there were globally coherent periods of climate variability—that there was a cold period called the Little Ice Age, [or] that there was a warm period called the Medieval Climate Anomaly,” said Nathan Steiger, an author of the paper and a research scientist at Columbia, at a press conference this week. “What we show is that these periods weren’t globally coherent, as previously thought.”

Read: Are we living through climate change’s worst-case scenario?

What makes those older eras different from modern warming is coherence—that climate change is happening today just about everywhere at the same time. “That coherence cannot be explained by the natural variability of the climate system,” Steiger said. And it does not characterize any previous era.

“This study is another nail in the coffin of the idea of that there was a globally warm or cold period that fit tidily into a specific couple of centuries,” said Yarrow Axford, a climate scientist at Northwestern University, in an email. She was not involved in writing the new paper. The idea that the Little Ice Age or eras like it were uniform global events was “already dying within the scientific community,” she said, yet that idea remains “perennially popular with nonexperts who want to sow doubt about the significance of the dramatic and truly global warming that has occurred in the past century.”

Among the nonexperts who have tacitly embraced that idea: Donald Trump. The president has repeatedly brought up the fluctuating nature of the climate in order to downplay current change. “Something’s changing, and it’ll change back again,” he said on 60 Minutes last year.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to
Robinson Meyer is a staff writer at The Atlantic, where he covers climate change and technology.
Title: Only through the insurrection of civil societies will we avoid the worst
Post by: Surly1 on July 25, 2019, 07:06:04 AM

Climate and collapse: Only through the insurrection of civil societies will we avoid the worst

Translation of an interview of Christophe Bonneuil, French historian and research director at the CNRS, by Ivan Du Roy for BastaMag, published on October 16th, 2018. [PDF version]

"Another end of the world is possible"

Are we under the threat of an imminent "collapse" as a result of global warming and the over-exploitation of resources? For the historian Christophe Bonneuil, there is no question: major social, economic and geopolitical upheavals have already been triggered and will only accelerate. Instead, the issue needs to be repositioned, in turn inciting "political thinking" of the current situation: who will be the winners and the losers? How can we exert an influence on the nature of these changes? Mass migrations, risk of conflicts over resources: despite his brutal observation of this emerging world, the historian appeals to avoid the trap of a "romanticism" of collapse. "Another end of the world is possible," he says. It is up to civil societies to write the final scenario. Interview.

Basta Mag: How has the climate situation evolved since the signing of the Paris Agreement - in the context of the COP 21 -, at the end of 2015?

Christophe Bonneuil [1]
: Greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise everywhere, France included. In view of the trajectory of global emissions, if we continue down that path, we take the direction of an overall increase in temperatures of at least +3°C well before the end of the century. We see here the limits of the non-compulsary nature of the agreement signed three years ago, at the Paris Climate Conference, the COP 21. The Paris Agreement is dangerously close to the 1938 Munich Agreement, which, believing it avoided a world war, actually precipitated it. This summer, the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere exceeded 411 ppm (part per million), a level unmatched for 800,000 years to 4 million years. We must be even more gullible than a "munichois" to believe that it will not have consequences of geological magnitude, or cause human disasters and major geopolitical upheavals.

What are the indicators showing that a fateful threshold, which would pave the way to a "Hothouse Earth", may likely be crossed in the coming decades?

Since the Quaternary era, the Earth oscillates approximately every 100,000 years between a glacial state and an interglacial state, between two periods of glaciation. What threatens us is an exit from the limits of this oscillation. The probability of a scenario in which Earth would switch to a hothouse state was accredited by an article published in July in the journal of the American Academy of Sciences [2]. In India, projected temperatures in ten or fifteen years show that some regions will experience peaks above 50°C [3], which could also happen in France at the end of the century [4]. Bodies will not be able to bear it, regions will become unlivable, and the poorest will be most affected.

Part of our greenhouse gas emissions is absorbed by the oceans, which have themselves not been as acidic for 300 million years. This destroys coral reefs and threatens aquatic wildlife. On land, the speed of plant migration is also not fast enough to adapt to climate change [5]. Added to this is the extent of deforestation, habitat fragmentation and the impacts of chemicals used by intensive agriculture: in German nature reserves, scientists have observed a fall of more than 75% in insect populations in less than three decades [6].

Some talk of a coming "collapse". Is this an adequate way of presenting the risks?

It is no longer about positioning oneself as optimistic or pessimistic, as an informed catastrophist – by appealing to the possibility of a catastrophe in order to arouse the mobilisation that will prevent it - or, on the contrary, as someone who refuses to use fear because it would be politically problematic. Whether we like it or not, a report was presented at the last World Geological Congress in 2016, declaring that the Earth has left the Holocene to enter a new geological era, the Anthropocene. Whether we like it or not, hundreds of scientific works show that thresholds have been crossed or are being crossed for a range of parameters of the Earth system, beyond which the evolutions are brutal: runaway climate change as a source of extreme events, rising sea levels requiring to move hundreds of large cities and billions of people across the century, biodiversity collapse, the cycle of nitrogen, phosphorus and water... multiple collapses are either already underway or coming.

What is looming over us is not a climate crisis to manage with "solutions" or economic globalisation to regulate, but the possibility of a collapse of the world we currently live in, a globalised industrial civilisation resulting from five centuries of capitalism. Some people prefer to define collapse as the extinction of the human species. Even with the worst climate and ecological scenario, this perspective remains less likely today than it was during the Cold War and the threat of nuclear winter.

Imagine the worst: climatic, ecological and geopolitical upheavals, devastating wars between powers for resources, civil wars fueled by xenophobic or religious fanaticism, clan wars in a devastated world... But why wouldn’t the few humans surviving and resisting barbarism, find no resource and habitable place on Earth? To adopt the end of the human race as the framework of thought for collapse is to risk inhibiting all thought and politics. I think that this scenario should not monopolise our attention: it only distracts from any geopolitical, social or geographical analysis.

What would be the most likely collapse scenario?

A more interesting definition, otherwise more probable in the 21st century than human extinction, is one given by Yves Cochet and the Momentum Institute: the collapse as a "process through which the basic needs (water, food, housing, clothing, energy...) are no longer provided - at a reasonable cost - to a majority of the population by services regulated by law". Just as the violence of the Greek crisis has shown us, this type of collapse can affect entire countries, even in Europe. Given the interconnected nature of the world economy, we can extend the hypothesis to that of the collapse of a system: the civilisation of industrial capitalism and its consumerist culture, nowadays a globalised civilisation, regardless of the vast disparities in social and territorial domains.

Following the erasure of so many political systems across the last 50 centuries, and while reports from all over describe the coming upheavals, isn’t it reckless to regard industrial and consumerist capitalism as immortal? Given it is the cause of global disarray [7], it seems rather interesting to think about its collapse, or even to prepare it!


By multiplying, for example, the acts of non-cooperation with the consumerist model, by resisting the fascist drifts or oppressions enabled by the ecological crisis, by opposing useless projects and the pursuit of fossil fuel extraction and ore processing, by reinforcing emerging alternatives. With the image of the post-apocalyptic and Hollywood's individualistic “last man” in mind, I rather prefer the image of the collectives participating in the collapse of an old productivist world: those blocking the mines and bringing down the share price of multinationals, those reinventing the commons - from the transition movement of the Zone to Defend. Another end of the world is possible! [8]

Have such upheavals ever occurred in the past? What were the social, economic and geopolitical consequences?

It is interesting to look at the past, or else we will remain very politically naive, especially in the face of this fear of a future collapse. This kind of sublime of a collapse that will happen later is a representation of rich Western, white people. Populations and societies are either seeing their lives turned upside down, or have already seen it in the past. With the arrival of Europeans in America, Amerindian populations literally collapsed from 55 million people to 5 million between 1492 and 1650. Is that not a collapse? This genocide has left traces in the ice cores of climatologists. There is a drop of more than 5 ppm in the carbon concentration in the atmosphere between 1492 and 1610 [9]. This decline is due to the fact that, with 50 million Indians disappearing, more than 50 million cultivated hectares have returned to the fallow land and forest, capturing carbon in turn.

This European expansion was also a consequence of another upheaval, the Black Death of the 14th century. Nearly half of the European population was decimated. There was less manpower in the countryside, which in turn weakened the seigniorial power. Less numerous, the peasants then obtained certain rights. The aristocracy then went in search of new spaces to dominate and expand within, financing oceanic expeditions to Africa and the Americas. The establishment of the first sugar company in Madeira, off the coast of Morocco, served as a base for departure to the Americas. From the 16th to the 18th century, an important supply of European money came from mines exploited in the New World.

So there are winners and losers to the collapse?

After the Black Death, European peasantry was able to establish for itself a better position in society, ultimately recovering. The aristocracy and the nascent financial bourgeoisie continued to contribute to the emergence of capitalism and European expansion. The vanquished were Amerindians and Africans, captured as slaves until the 19th century. For this reason, we cannot say that everyone is in the same boat in the event of collapse.

Another example: in the years 1870-1900, El Niño events - the large-scale warming of ocean surface waters - caused droughts and famines in the Amazon, Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, killing nearly 40 million people [10]. The consequences of these natural climatic phenomena were then aggravated by European expansion, in turn bringing with them geopolitical implications. In China, the Qing dynasty was weakened by European Imperialism following the Opium War. The imperial dynasty no longer had the means to meet the needs of its population in the event of a natural disaster, and lost its legitimacy. Hence the Boxer war in 1899-1901, which led to the fall of the dynasty in 1912. The disrupted monsoons also caused millions of deaths to famine in India because the British colonial power, far from supporting the rural population, continued to puncture their commodities, which at the time were exported to Britain. Colonial empires also benefited from the climate disruptions that profoundly destabilised Africa. The droughts and famines of the 1890s in East Africa facilitated colonial penetration, which in turn aided rinderpest and sleeping sickness that decimated livestock, wildlife and African societies in the early 20th century.

These examples illustrate how the impacts of ecological and climatic disasters, both their causes and their consequences, are never separated from forms of domination and exploitation. As a result, we cannot think of the collapse purely politically by simply comparing a graphed curve of the world's population against a curve of resource availability or planetary limits. These curves say nothing about what is happening geopolitically, how social and political relations evolve, lest of all who the winners and losers are in these upheavals. The poorest can lose even more than what they have already, while the richest 1% emerge unscathed.

What could be the consequences of the current climate and environmental upheavals?

A disastrous scenario could be that of an unrecognisable Earth, less habitable overall, with hundreds of millions of refugees ruined and forced to leave their homes, whole sub-continents left to the chaos of civil wars and the extraction of resources, and ultra-militarised world powers. These authoritarian regimes would fight each other for the control of Earth's resources, and would internally reign a dictatorship in the name of the ecological emergency and the exclusion of destitute foreigners hurrying to their doors.

In the name of climate emergency and in the face of a rapid degradation of Earth's habitability, these regimes will abolish the moral and social boundaries: we will be offered servitude and submission in exchange for survival. The control of our personal data will guide our behaviours. This totalitarian order will present itself as an ecologist and will ration the use of resources, but will maintain enormous inequalities between a general population with diminished life and an elite that will continue to over-consume.

This is the scenario of a capitalism partially de-globalised, and re-structured in dictatorial blocks, in which the militarised state and the economic power would become one. Fully privatised ecological service markets, climate geoengineering, military and extractivist space conquest or trans-humanism would be the "solutions" proposed by these regimes to the problems of the planet. This scenario sends chills up the spine. Yet we are already experiencing these premises, in China, the United States, Russia, Europe or Brazil.

Only a massive mobilisation of civil societies and victims of climate change already facing the damage of existing "globalisation", only an ethical and political insurrection against all attacks against the living and human dignity itself, only an archipelago of revolutionary changes towards well-being and self-reliant societies can thwart this scenario of ecofascist capitalism.

Yet many are those saying to themselves "So far, so good, so far, so good"...

If we look in the short term at how global imbalance changes the game, it seems that for a number of years to come, the top 5% to 10% of the world, living mainly in OECD countries [which includes the 36 most developed countries in the world, ed] as well as China and Russia, do not yet fully realize the seriousness of the situation: they are less fragile, live in relatively stable states erecting barriers against migrants, have access to a standard of living that requires an unequal ecological exchange with the rest of the planet, where most of the production workshops and sites of extraction are located. For them, "everything is fine" as long as they continue to benefit from a political and economic system externalising violence towards other territories, populations and species of the world.

On the other hand, the most underprivileged half of humanity, could be in vital danger. This half has received nothing from the wealth generated in 2017 worldwide while 82% of it benefited the richest 1% of the world [11]. While some buy lifeboats, others toil in the workshops of the world under conditions of extreme pollution, or on land becoming less and less fertile. Between 200 million and one billion people could become refugees by 2050. We must realise the violence of climate change that is adding to, and combining with, the social violence suffered by these "Wretched of the Earth".

We must therefore expect considerable political and geopolitical upheavals...

Europe is in the grip of a xenophobic push. On our doorstep, the drowning rate of migrants trying to cross the Mediterranean has increased from one in 42 in 2017 to one in 18 in 2018, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. It's appalling! India erected a 4000 km long separation wall with Bangladesh. With the melting ice in the Himalayas and the disruption of monsoons, water regimes are changing, with effects on dams and irrigation systems. This is already creating tensions between China, India and Pakistan. The Himalayas become a kind of geopolitical bedlam, subject to a "hyper-siege" as Jean-Michel Valantin has shown [12]. Their populations are stuck between rising water on one side, and the relative drying of the Himalayan water tower on the other. This conjunction of climatic phenomena and geopolitical tensions is worrying in an area with nuclearised countries.

The disturbances of the planet also redistribute the power relations between nation-states as we have known them since the end of the Cold War. Among the potential winners, there is Russia, which has room - Siberia - which will be able to accommodate populations in the future. North America and China also have clear lands, which Europe doesn't have. These lands will allow the cultivation of millions of hectares of wheat.

Paradoxically, global warming also opens up new potential for fossil energy exploitation, doesn’t it?

The thaw of the Arctic sea ice is accelerating Russian fossil fuel extraction projects with massive Chinese funding, which, incidentally, may further worsen global warming. A new maritime route is opening, the passage of the North-East [which connects the Pacific to the Atlantic through northern Russia and Scandinavia, note]. The first big methane tanker - Christophe de Margerie [named after the former CEO of Total who died in 2014, ed] - sailed for the first time in the summer of 2017 without the necessity of an ice-breaking ship. The Northeast Passage is the equivalent of the Suez Canal or Panama in the 19th century: it brings China closer to Europe by three weeks. Floating nuclear power plants will likely be established by Russia in the Arctic, to provide power to the first cities that are set up in this 'frozen far-west', as well as the exploitation of gas and oil fields.

When we see the gap between the richest and the billions of people most affected by climate damage, or the differences in the costs and benefits of the warming depending on regions or states, it is clear that the rhetoric of "We are all concerned, we must act together", doesn’t hold water. There will be winners and losers to global warming. Some countries - like Russia and the oil monarchies of the Gulf - and some social groups have no interest in this changing. No, we are not all in the same boat, or not in the same class or with the same access to the restaurant and canoes [reference to Titanic]. A "positive ecology" made of concrete alternatives is useful, but it will not be enough without a fight. This is also the lesson to be learned from Nicolas Hulot's failure in the government [Nicolas Hulot was the French Minister of the Environment under Macron, resigning in August 2018].

Won’t the extraction of fossil fuels stop by itself, because of the limits of these resources, for example oil?

Since the 1970s, the environmental movement has highlighted these limits. But in terms of fossil resource reserves, we have, according to a study published in 2015, largely enough to increase the global temperature of the planet by more than 8°C, and the level of the oceans by 30 meters during the 3rd millennium [13]. We can no longer count on these limits and on a shortage of resources - the famous oil "spike" - to stop us on time. Only political voluntarism, spurred by an insurrection of civil societies, can help avoid the worst.

We know the existence of fossil reserves under our feet, which we must absolutely learn not to extract. We must leave a model of development dating back 500 years, when the conquistadores killed Amerindians for mere kilos of gold or silver. This model that must be overcome is capitalism: it is not only a question of returning to a Keynesian capitalism with a little more ecology in it. Our conception of the individual, "who is by himself a perfect and solitary whole" according to Rousseau, our conception of beings other than human beings, of the good life and of property, must be rethought.

We must work on the issue of the commons. And, beyond a collapsing industrial modernity, we must invent terrestrial futures[14]. In politics, it's time for the focus to shift. Political leaders, institutions or companies can no longer be taken seriously if they don’t have clear proposals to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the ecological footprint within the next five years. While they currently place competitiveness, growth and business above all, they will have to give way to policies more adequate to preserve our lives, our values of solidarity, and a habitable world.

Translated by Crystelle Vu - Edited by Julian Oliver - 2018 / Written with VIM / Last edit 30.10.2018

[1] Historian, research director at the CNRS, co-author of "L’événement Anthropocène. La Terre, l’histoire et nous" (Seuil, « Points Histoire », 2016) and director of the « Anthropocene » collection at Ed. du Seuil.
[2] Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene.
[3] Deadly heat waves could hit South Asia this century.
[4] France could experience heat peaks of 50°C at the end of the century, 'Le Monde' article in French
[5] Richard T. Corlett & David A.Westcott. « Will plant movements keep up with climate change ? ».
[6] More than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas
[7] Christophe Bonneuil & Jean-Baptiste Fressoz, L’événement Anthropocène. La Terre, l’histoire et nous (Seuil, « Points Histoire », 2016).
[8] It is the slogan of a graffiti illustrating the political radicalisations of recent years, and the title of the latest book by Pablo Servigne, Raphael Stevens and Gauthier Chapelle, Une autre fin du monde est possible (Another end of the world is possible) (Seuil, 2018)
[9] Simon L. Lewis et Mark A. Maslin, « Defining the Anthropocene », Nature, 519, 2015, p. 171-180.
[10] Read the book by Mike Davis, Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World.
[11] Report by Oxfam NGO, january 2018.
[12] Jean-Michel Valantin, Géopolitique d’une planète déréglée (Seuil, 2017).
[13] R. Winkelmann, A. Levermann, A. Ridgwell, K. Caldeira, « Combustion of available fossil-fuel resources sufficient to eliminate the Antarctic Ice Sheet », Science Advances, 1 (2015).
[14] « Devenirs terrestres » (fr) :

Title: Europe is burning
Post by: Surly1 on July 25, 2019, 07:55:08 AM
Europe is burning just as new research offers a chilling truth about the volatility of climate change (
Cooler years mask the underlying behaviour of the system. As natural variations move in the other direction, they can unleash a period of supercharged heating

It’s not the fall that will kill you, but the suddenness of the stopping. Just as it is with a plane crash, so it is with global heating. Changes in the climate don’t in themselves represent a significant risk – the Earth’s climate has been changing for billions of years after all – but it is the abrupt changes that could spell disaster for us. 

New research suggests that climate models which predict greater global warming in the future also have more volatile warming trends. If that is the case, and the climate is as sensitive to our carbon dioxide emissions as many of the latest models suggest, this will seriously threaten our ability to adapt. And it is that which will put a significant fraction of humanity in jeopardy.  

Many scientists focus on how much warmer the Earth’s climate will become because of the extra carbon dioxide humans have put into the atmosphere. The technical term for this is Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity(ECS). Equilibrium because it takes years, decades or centuries for the climate system to respond to extra heating.

Think how much energy it takes to heat a bathtub full of water and how long it can stay warm for. The amount of energy required to heat the trillions of litres of the Earth’s oceans is enormous. 

Consider that bath of water again. Imagine the tap is dripping because it’s not entirely closed, so the water level in the bath is increasing, but only very slowly. Trying to track changes in water level just by eye would be as difficult as seeing the march of time in the hour hand of a watch. Now picture someone is in the bath. Unless the person stays absolutely still, they will have an impact on the water level as their movements will make waves. Depending on how much they move, these waves can be plain to see and would easily mask the very slow water level increase. 

ECS tells us where the climate system will end up – what the final water level will be. But it may not tell us a great deal about how we will get there. Will we have a smooth increase or a much bumpier ride? How much will the climate fluctuate as it responds to being heated up? How big will the “waves” in temperatures be? These are the answers that this recent research has addressed and why on reading it my first response was “Oh no. This isn’t good”.

Because what the team lead by University of Exeter PhD researcherFemke Nijsse found, is that more sensitive climates have higher fluctuations. Using extensive climate simulations, they discovered that if a climate system reacts strongly to increased greenhouse gases, then it is also more likely to have decades when temperatures are much higher or sometimes much lower than the longer-term average. In fact, more sensitive climates may have a run of years that are cooler than less sensitive climates.

But these cooler years are masking the underlying behaviour of the system. As natural variations move in the other direction, they can conspire with the sensitive climate to unleash a period of supercharged heating. OK, but why should we be worried about that?

Because the warming trend of the Earth’s real climate between 2002-2012 was a bit less than what it should have been given how much we have been increasing greenhouse gases. Some people leapt at that as being evidence that the climate is less sensitive than was initially feared. They argued we shouldn’t decarbonise too rapidly, or even at all, because there is no urgency to do so.

But this period of depressed warming is consistent with the Earth’s climate having higher fluctuations. What this means is that at some point in the future we may see temperatures swing across to much faster warming trends. This period of hyper-warming could swamp whatever adaptation measures we are currently putting in place. 

When in the future? Perhaps now, as witnessed by the near continual breaking of temperature records around the world and much faster rates of glacier retreat than expected. Rather than a brief anomaly, this may be the beginning of an acceleration of global heating; an acceleration of a trend that is already greater than any warming trend for the past 2000 years.

Exploring the relationship between sensitivity and fluctuations is very complex, and no single study can be considered to provide the last word on the matter. But this new research has kicked away another support against the collapse into despair about how we are affecting the climate. 

Because, remember, it’s not the fall, but the sudden stop. And the mess our civilisation will make if climate change sends us plummeting hard and fast to the floor will not be pretty.

James Dyke is a senior lecturer in global systems at Exeter University

Title: The Guardian view on James Lovelock: Earth, but not as we knew it
Post by: Surly1 on July 26, 2019, 06:15:35 AM
The Guardian view on James Lovelock: Earth, but not as we knew it (

The Guardian view on James Lovelock: Earth, but not as we knew it

As he celebrates his centennial birthday, the scientist continues to rewrite our future
James Lovelock pictured near his home on the Dorset coast in September 2016. ‘“I’m a romantic,” he said once. “I’m much more of a poet by nature than anything else.”’
James Lovelock pictured near his home on the Dorset coast in September 2016. ‘“I’m a romantic,” he said once. “I’m much more of a poet by nature than anything else.”’ Photograph: Adrian Sherratt/The Guardian

James Lovelock, the scientist and writer, is 100 years old on Friday and remains a combination of environmental Cassandra and Old Testament prophet. Unlike them, though, he changes his mind about what the future holds. Foolish consistency, Emerson wrote, is the hobgoblin of little minds, and Mr Lovelock’s mind is not little. More than 10 years before the record high July temperatures, Mr Lovelock flatly told the Guardian that 80% of human life on Earth would perish by 2100 because of the climate emergency. He imagined a dystopian end of humanity where “the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable” by the end of the 21st century.

As a scientist (his first letter to Nature was published in 1945, on the subject of writing on petri dishes), Mr Lovelock’s life has been studded with insight. He invented an electron capture detector that could pick up minute traces of pollutants – such as the pesticides that spurred Rachel Carson to write the 1962 book Silent Spring. At home he built instruments that ended up on Mars, helping Nasa to establish that the red planet was lifeless.

Mr Lovelock’s imagination has not narrowed, but his vision has become bleaker with time. His new book Novacene: The Coming Age of Hyperintelligence proposes that the 300,000-year Anthropocene era of Earth’s human domination is ending. Novacene is a new age where our species is doomed to a worse fate than clinging on for dear life at the north pole as previously imagined. Instead we will become lackeys of cyborgs able to think 10,000 times faster than humans. We will be kept on to ensure there are habitable temperatures for these superior intelligences.

Novacene’s thesis is a straight-line extrapolation of Mr Lovelock’s breakthrough idea which he began to develop while a consultant at Nasa in the 1970s; the thought that the planet was a superorganism. In 1974, he and biologist Lynn Margulis proposed the Gaia hypothesis, which holds that Earth is in some way alive. The paper suggested our planet metabolises and responds to changes in its environment to survive. In bestselling books such as The Revenge of Gaia, Mr Lovelock argued that humans have exploited Earth and the “old lady” would eliminate us unless we treated her with greater reverence. That is why the Novacene will start, he now reasons: because a superintelligence will recognise that all living tissue will be consumed by climate crisis and will act with Gaia to keep the life going.

When it came out, the Gaia theory immediately chimed with the incipient green movement. Tough-minded scientists, though, initially reacted as if – as one critic put it – Mr Lovelock had let off a bad smell at the vicar’s tea party. Its appeal, they wrongly sneered, was to devotees of faith-healing and mysticism.

But Mr Lovelock has stuck to his guns and refused to be co-opted by environmentalism. He backs nuclear power and has zigzagged on global heating, saying that some alarmist books – including his own – had made unwarranted predictions. He even told the Guardian: “We’ve got to really make it clear to those very silly people who think we can save the planet to cease and desist.” And what of the Gaia hypothesis? Evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould described it as “a metaphor not a mechanism”. Its truth is poetic not literal. That echoes how Mr Lovelock sees himself. “I’m a romantic,” he said once. “I’m much more of a poet by nature than anything else.”

He might be best seen then as a 21st-century William Blake – one whose words are no more testable than verse, but no less valuable for that.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on August 02, 2019, 02:26:01 AM
Tree of the week:
Planted a Rhododendron in a shaded spot and a passion fruit vine on the front fence last week end. Not really a tree, but hey, a plant is a plant.
Planning on getting an apple this week end. Will plant it in the chicken pen to try and keep insects away without sprays.
Not sure what variety. Want something good for eating and cooking.
Attached is  picture of "Euky Dwarf" I planted around 18 years ago. Doing well in this climate.
Save what you can. Plant a tree a week.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: AJ on August 02, 2019, 03:23:21 AM
I love your tree a week program. My problem is deer. They would kill any tree I planted if I didn't put up T-posts and 6' high fence around them. It seems that every deer resistant tree gets eaten, including fig (which they are never supposed to eat). The deer eat the young shoots (maybe they don't have the toxins that are supposed to "deter" them. I could plant more douglas fir but I am already surrounded by them.
Thanks for the pictures.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on August 02, 2019, 02:49:10 PM
I have similar problems with Kangaroos and rabbits. I put tree guards on everything now until established. The plants they dont eat they crush when hopping away if they are small.

Next plan is to get another small dog or 2. My last yappers died a year ago from old age. I will post a pic of my deceased pooches if I can find some.

25km away on the property where I chop fire wood is lousy with Sambar deer. (Another introduced pest species like rabbits!) Plastic tree guards seem to deter them somewhat also. I will post a pic of my very simple tree guards. I have a roll of clear builders plastic I cut into sheets and seal into a ring with my clothes iron and a bit of newspaper to stop it sticking.

Get a bit angry and depressed with current environmental death spiral. Sick of trying to enlighten stupid people. Plating is best remedy I can find. Still some people dont like me doing it for god knows what reason... Makes me feel better and makes the local environment much nicer for all creatures great and small, including old fat bearded bastards such as myself.  ;D
A tree a week until I die will be my legacy. Dont care who else knows, as long as I know I have done something.
Save what you can.

PS Tree guard pic is not fantastic. I will take some better pics next time I make one. In the background you can see a flock of local Rosella's (birds) eating grass. Pretty well live on my property now with all the trees.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on August 03, 2019, 09:34:54 PM
Tree of the week:
Gone a bit crazy this week.... Have planted another 5 Callistemon's, (Bottle brush), in a bit of a hedge alternating white and red varieties to give a bit of a wind break for the vegetable garden. Should also attract bees for pollination, and birds for insect control. All have tree guards until established to stop roos trampling them.
Also now have a bare rooted apple to plant out. Royal Gala. Will make up raised bed in chicken pen and plant out this week.
Next door has some local self sown wattle trees. I will jump the fence and see if I can find some seed pods to propagate. Will make good display tree for winter.
Will post some pics shortly.
Plant a tree a week until I die. Save what you can.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: Surly1 on August 04, 2019, 01:45:36 AM
Tree of the week:
Gone a bit crazy this week.... Have planted another 5 Callistemon's, (Bottle brush), in a bit of a hedge alternating white and red varieties to give a bit of a wind break for the vegetable garden. Should also attract bees for pollination, and birds for insect control. All have tree guards until established to stop roos trampling them.
Also now have a bare rooted apple to plant out. Royal Gala. Will make up raised bed in chicken pen and plant out this week.
Next door has some local self sown wattle trees. I will jump the fence and see if I can find some seed pods to propagate. Will make good display tree for winter.
Will post some pics shortly.
Plant a tree a week until I die. Save what you can.

You're providing a great example.

 :emthup: :emthup:
Title: Global Ocean Circulation Appears To Be Collapsing Due To A Warming Planet
Post by: Surly1 on August 06, 2019, 02:26:15 PM
Global Ocean Circulation Appears To Be Collapsing Due To A Warming Planet (
Arctic ice loss is potentially negatively impacting the planet's largest ocean circulation system. While scientists do have some analogs as to how this may impact the world, we will be largely in uncharted territory.

Global ocean circulation appears to be slowing NASA

Scientists have long known about the anomalous "warming hole" in the North Atlantic Ocean, an area immune to warming of Earth's oceans. This cool zone in the North Atlantic Ocean appears to be associated with a slowdown in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), one of the key drivers in global ocean circulation.

A recent study published in Nature outlines research by a team of Yale University and University of Southhampton scientists. The team found evidence that Arctic ice loss is potentially negatively impacting the planet's largest ocean circulation system. While scientists do have some analogs as to how this may impact the world, we will be largely in uncharted territory.

AMOC is one of the largest current systems in the Atlantic Ocean and the world. Generally speaking, it transports warm and salty water northward from the tropics to South and East of Greenland. This warm water cools to ambient water temperature then sinks as it is saltier and thus denser than the relatively more fresh surrounding water. The dense mass of water sinks to the base of the North Atlantic Ocean and is pushed south along the abyss of the Atlantic Ocean.

Schematic of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

Schematic of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation


This process whereby water is transported into the Northern Atlantic Ocean acts to distribute ocean water globally. What's more important, and the basis for concern of many scientists is this mechanism is one of the most efficient ways Earth transports heat from the tropics to the northern latitudes. The warm water transported from the tropics to the North Atlantic releases heat to the atmosphere, playing a key role in warming of western Europe. You likely have heard of one of the more popular components of the AMOC, the Gulf Stream which brings warm tropical water to the western coasts of Europe.

Evidence is growing that the comparatively cold zone within the Northern Atlantic could be due to a slowdown of this global ocean water circulation. Hence, a slowdown in the planet's ability to transfer heat from the tropics to the northern latitudes. The cold zone could be due to melting of ice in the Arctic and Greenland. This would cause a cold fresh water cap over the North Atlantic, inhibiting sinking of salty tropical waters. This would in effect slow down the global circulation and hinder the transport of warm tropical waters north.

Measured trend in temperature variations from 1900 to 2012.

Measured trend in temperature variations from 1900 to 2012.


Melting of the Arctic sea ice has rapidly increased in the recent decades. Satellite image records indicate that September Arctic sea ice is 30% less today than it was in 1979. This trend of increased sea ice melting during summer months does not appear to be slowing. Hence, indications are that we will see a continued weakening of the global ocean circulation system.

This scenario of a collapse in AMOC and global ocean circulation is the premise for the movie "The Day After Tomorrow." As a disclaimer, the plot line in which much of New England and Western Europe gets plunged into an ice age is significantly over exaggerated and unrealistic on human time scales.

While geologists have studied events in the past similar to what appears to be happening today, scientists are largely unsure of what lies ahead.

Follow me on Twitter or LinkedIn. Check out my website.

Trevor Nace
Senior Contributor

I am a geologist passionate about sharing Earth's intricacies with you. I received my PhD from Duke University where I studied the geology and climate of the Amazon. 

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on August 07, 2019, 05:34:37 PM

I think I would rather eat the stupid than cane toads.... Ugly critters.
I have had stinging nettle. Bland.

Title: The Environment Board, 4 JoW.....
Post by: azozeo on August 08, 2019, 10:24:49 AM

Bizarre Forest ‘Superorganism’ is Keeping Dead Trees Alive, Study Finds

The new information “dramatically changes our view of forest ecosystems as ‘superorganisms’.”


(TMU) — While hiking in the New Zealand wilderness, Sebastian Leuzinger of the Auckland University of Technology and a colleague made an astonishing discovery: a tree stump that should have died was being kept alive by neighboring trees. After conducting an experiment, the researchers concluded that nearby trees were funneling water and nutrients to the stump through an interconnected root system. The revelation supports the understanding that trees and other organisms work together for the benefit of a forest.

For the study, Leuzinger and his teammate decided to put continuous water monitors in the kauri (Agathis australis) stump and in two nearby adult trees of the same species. Then, they waited. After several weeks, they discovered a relationship between the water flow in the trees and the stump.

When nearby trees evaporated water through their leaves during the day, the water movement in the stump remained low. But, when the trees were dormant during the evening, the water would begin circulating through the stump. Furthermore, when it was overcast or rainy and the water flow dropped in the trees, the stump picked it up.

As NewScientist reports, water flow is largely driven by evaporation in healthy trees. But, without leaves, the stump’s water flow was dependent on the movement of its neighbors.

The finding, which was published in iScience, undermines the notion of trees as individual or separate entities. We’ve long known the symbiotic relationship between fungi and tree roots, but the new information “dramatically changes our view of forest ecosystems as ‘superorganisms’,” said Leuzinger.

He added that the networking of water makes the trees more resistant to water scarcity. However, it also increases the risk of disease spreading. This could be problematic for Kauri trees which are affected by a deadly disease called kauri dieback.

Living stumps have been reported as far back as the 1800s. But, this is one of the first studies ever on how they survive. There are several theories as to why trees help each other out. The most probable of which suggests that a leafless stump simply becomes part of the host tree’s broader root system.

According to Greg Moore at the University of Melbourne, Australia, trees are “ruthlessly efficient” in maximizing their resources. “So the fact that this stump is being supported by nearby trees tells you they are getting a benefit,” he said.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on August 08, 2019, 06:45:20 PM
Yes thanks mate! Amazing.
This is typical of the current situation: We know very little about the wonders of the natural environment, yet we are steaming along full speed ahead destroying it.
There are a few other interesting "Super organisms" I have read about. Apparently some entire forests of oaks are one organism connected at the roots and genetically clones of each other. Gives new meaning to the web of life....

If only humanity could collectively figure out that we are part of the natural environment not the ruler over it, we may have a future. We cant live without the natural environment. It gives us food, water, shelter and oxygen.
Colonizing another planet sure as shit wont save us when we destroy what we have here on this lonely blue dot in the Galaxy.
Plant a tree a week until I die is my answer.
Save what you can.

Title: Here’s how the hottest month in recorded history unfolded around the world
Post by: azozeo on August 11, 2019, 05:58:28 PM

During the hottest month that humans have recorded, a local television station in the Netherlands aired nonstop images of wintry landscapes to help viewers momentarily forget the heat wave outside.

Officials in Switzerland and elsewhere painted stretches of rail tracks white, hoping to keep them from buckling in the extreme heat. (
Title: NASA Study Concludes When Civilization Will End, And It's Not Looking Good
Post by: Surly1 on August 16, 2019, 06:21:54 AM

NASA Study Concludes When Civilization Will End, And It's Not Looking Good for Us

By Tom McKay
Update: NASA is now clarifying its role in this study. NASA officials released this statement on the study on March 20, which seeks to distance the agency from the paper: "A soon-to-be published research paper, 'Human and Nature Dynamics (HANDY): Modeling Inequality and Use of Resources in the Collapse or Sustainability of Societies' by University of Maryland researchers Safa Motesharrei and Eugenia Kalnay, and University of Minnesota's Jorge Rivas, was not solicited, directed or reviewed by NASA. It is an independent study by the university researchers utilizing research tools developed for a separate NASA activity. As is the case with all independent research, the views and conclusions in the paper are those of the authors alone. NASA does not endorse the paper or its conclusions." Read the original story below.

Civilization was pretty great while it lasted, wasn't it? Too bad it's not going to for much longer. According to a new study sponsored by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, we only have a few decades left before everything we know and hold dear collapses.

The report, written by applied mathematician Safa Motesharrei of the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center along with a team of natural and social scientists, explains that modern civilization is doomed. And there's not just one particular group to blame, but the entire fundamental structure and nature of our society.

Analyzing five risk factors for societal collapse (population, climate, water, agriculture and energy), the report says that the sudden downfall of complicated societal structures can follow when these factors converge to form two important criteria. Motesharrei's report says that all societal collapses over the past 5,000 years have involved both "the stretching of resources due to the strain placed on the ecological carrying capacity" and "the economic stratification of society into Elites [rich] and Masses (or "Commoners") [poor]." This "Elite" population restricts the flow of resources accessible to the "Masses", accumulating a surplus for themselves that is high enough to strain natural resources. Eventually this situation will inevitably result in the destruction of society.

Elite power, the report suggests, will buffer "detrimental effects of the environmental collapse until much later than the Commoners," allowing the privileged to "continue 'business as usual' despite the impending catastrophe."

Science will surely save us, the nay-sayers may yell. But technology, argues Motesharrei, has only damned us further:

In other words, the benefits of technology are outweighed by how much the gains reinforce the existing, over-burdened system — making collapse even more likely.

The worst-case scenarios predicted by Motesharrei are pretty dire, involving sudden collapse due to famine or a drawn-out breakdown of society due to the over-consumption of natural resources. The best-case scenario involves recognition of the looming catastrophe by Elites and a more equitable restructuring of society, but who really believes that is going to happen? Here's what the study recommends in a nutshell:

These are great suggestions that will, unfortunately, almost certainly never be put into action, considering just how far down the wrong path our civilization has gone. As of last year, humans are using more resources than the Earth can replenish and the planet's distribution of resources among its terrestrial inhabitants is massively unequal. This is what happened to Rome and the Mayans, according to the report.

... historical collapses were allowed to occur by elites who appear to be oblivious to the catastrophic trajectory (most clearly apparent in the Roman and Mayan cases).

And that's not even counting the spectre of global climate change, which could be a looming "instant planetary emergency." According to Canadian Wildlife Service biologist Neil Dawe:

Economic growth is the biggest destroyer of the ecology. Those people who think you can have a growing economy and a healthy environment are wrong. If we don't reduce our numbers, nature will do it for us ... Everything is worse and we’re still doing the same things. Because ecosystems are so resilient, they don’t exact immediate punishment on the stupid.

In maybe the nicest way to say the end is nigh possible, Motesharrei's report concludes that "closely reflecting the reality of the world today ... we find that collapse is difficult to avoid."

Writes Nafeez Ahmed at The Guardian:

"Although the study is largely theoretical, a number of other more empirically-focused studies — by KPMG and the UK Government Office of Science for instance — have warned that the convergence of food, water and energy crises could create a 'perfect storm' within about fifteen years. But these 'business as usual' forecasts could be very conservative."

Well, at least zombies aren't real.

Update: NASA has issued a clarification about its role in the study, saying that while the study relies on NASA research tools developed for another project, it did not directly solicit, direct, or review Motesharrei's paper. "As is the case with all independent research, the views and conclusions in the paper are those of the authors alone. NASA does not endorse the paper or its conclusions." (
Title: Re: NASA Study Concludes When Civilization Will End, And It's Not Looking Good
Post by: azozeo on August 16, 2019, 06:53:16 AM
<div><img alt="" sizes="(min-width:768px) 1020px, 414px" src="" srcset=" 414w, ( 828w, ( 1020w, ( 2040w" /></div>
<h1>NASA Study Concludes When Civilization Will End, And It's Not Looking Good for Us</h1>
<div data-google-query-id="CKbZmse0h-QCFUUA-QAdVgwD2Q"></div>
<div><span>By </span>Tom McKay (</div>
<time>Mar 18 2014</time></div>
<a href="" title="Share" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><button></button>[/url]</div>
<div>Update: NASA is now clarifying its role in this study. NASA officials released this statement on the study on March 20, which seeks to distance the agency from the paper: "A soon-to-be published research paper, 'Human and Nature Dynamics (HANDY): Modeling Inequality and Use of Resources in the Collapse or Sustainability of Societies' by University of Maryland researchers Safa Motesharrei and Eugenia Kalnay, and University of Minnesota's Jorge Rivas, was not solicited, directed or reviewed by NASA. It is an independent study by the university researchers utilizing research tools developed for a separate NASA activity. As is the case with all independent research, the views and conclusions in the paper are those of the authors alone. NASA does not endorse the paper or its conclusions." Read the original story below.</div>
<p>Civilization was pretty great while it lasted, wasn't it? Too bad it's not going to for much longer. According to a new study sponsored by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, we only have a few decades left before everything we know and hold dear collapses.</p>
<p>The report, written by applied mathematician Safa Motesharrei of the <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center[/url] along with a team of natural and social scientists, explains that <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">modern civilization is doomed[/url]. And there's not just one particular group to blame, but the entire fundamental structure and nature of our society.</p>
<p>Analyzing five risk factors for societal collapse (population, climate, water, agriculture and energy), the report says that the sudden downfall of complicated societal structures can follow when these factors converge to form two important criteria. Motesharrei's report says that all societal collapses over the past 5,000 years have involved both "the stretching of resources due to the strain placed on the ecological carrying capacity" and "the economic stratification of society into Elites [rich] and Masses (or "Commoners") [poor]." This "Elite" population restricts the flow of resources accessible to the "Masses", accumulating a surplus for themselves that is high enough to strain natural resources. Eventually this situation will inevitably result in the destruction of society.</p>
<p>Elite power, the report suggests, will buffer "detrimental effects of the environmental collapse until much later than the Commoners," allowing the privileged to "continue 'business as usual' despite the impending catastrophe."</p>
<p>Science will surely save us, the nay-sayers may yell. But technology, argues Motesharrei, has only damned us further:</p>
<p>In other words, the benefits of technology are outweighed by how much the gains reinforce the existing, over-burdened system — making collapse even more likely.</p>
<p>The worst-case scenarios predicted by Motesharrei are pretty dire, involving sudden collapse due to famine or a drawn-out breakdown of society due to the over-consumption of natural resources. The best-case scenario involves recognition of the looming catastrophe by Elites and a more equitable restructuring of society, but who really believes that is going to happen? Here's what the study <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">recommends[/url] in a nutshell:</p>
<p>These are great suggestions that will, unfortunately, almost certainly never be put into action, considering just how far down the wrong path our civilization has gone. As of last year, humans are using <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">more resources[/url] than the Earth can replenish and the planet's distribution of resources among its terrestrial inhabitants is <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">massively unequal[/url]. This is what happened to Rome and the Mayans, according to the report.</p>
... historical collapses were allowed to occur by elites who appear to be oblivious to the catastrophic trajectory (most clearly apparent in the Roman and Mayan cases).

<p>And that's not even counting the spectre of global climate change, which could be a looming <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">"instant planetary emergency."[/url] According to Canadian Wildlife Service biologist Neil Dawe:</p>
<div data-google-query-id="CMyhiY-9h-QCFUUM5wodNzIMXg"></div>
Economic growth is the biggest destroyer of the ecology. Those people who think you can have a growing economy and a healthy environment are wrong. If we don't reduce our numbers, nature will do it for us ... Everything is worse and we’re still doing the same things. Because ecosystems are so resilient, they don’t exact immediate punishment on the stupid.

<p>In maybe the nicest way to say the end is nigh possible, Motesharrei's report concludes that "closely reflecting the reality of the world today ... we find that collapse is difficult to avoid."</p>
<p><a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Writes[/url] Nafeez Ahmed at The Guardian:</p>
<p>"Although the study is largely theoretical, a number of other more empirically-focused studies — by <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">KPMG[/url] and the <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">UK Government Office of Science[/url] for instance — have warned that the convergence of food, water and energy crises could create a 'perfect storm' within about fifteen years. But these 'business as usual' forecasts could be <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">very conservative[/url]."</p>
<p>Well, at least zombies aren't real.</p>
<p>Update: NASA has issued a <a href="" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">clarification[/url] about its role in the study, saying that while the study relies on NASA research tools developed for another project, it did not directly solicit, direct, or review Motesharrei's paper. "As is the case with all independent research, the views and conclusions in the paper are those of the authors alone. NASA does not endorse the paper or its conclusions."</p>
</div> (

Great post. It will be sooner than later. Will the next decade be called the roaring twenty's ?
Title: 🏞️ Lies, Damned Lies, and Sustainable Development
Post by: RE on August 17, 2019, 12:23:04 AM

Lies, Damned Lies, and Sustainable Development

by Bill Willers / August 16th, 2019

    [W]hy do so many assume that a ‘Green New Deal’ won’t just empower those same forces that have run havoc upon the world for the past half century and just cause more death and starvation than has already been suffered under Globalization?
    — Matthew Ehret, 2019

Sustainable development, the concept, was advanced in 1987 by the United Nations in “Our Common Future,” aka The Bruntland Report, in which it was defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” In truth, the Report, intended for “those who shape policy and make decisions that affect the course of development and the condition of the environment”, has served as justification for sustained growth: “A five to tenfold increase in manufacturing output will be needed”; “Painful choices have to be made.” In an alarming display of ecological ignorance, there was admission of guaranteed biological destruction: “Efforts to save particular species will be possible for only relatively few of the more spectacular and important ones.”

Not long thereafter, the concept of sustainable development was boosted by organizations with clout. The World Conservation Union (IUCN) produced in 1991 “Caring For The Earth: A Strategy For Sustainable Living,” a declaration of principles by a coalition of conservation organizations, supported by “sponsors” and “collaborators” that included national develop agencies, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. The IUCN therein defined sustainable development as “improving the quality of human life while living within the carrying capacity of supporting ecosystems.” In the same year, the Trilateral Commission published a book, Beyond Interdependence, in which, in a chapter titled “The Growth Imperative and Sustainable Development”, the authors declared that “The maxim of sustainable development is not ‘limits to growth’; it is ’the growth of limits’,” a direct attack on the Club of Rome’s 1972 “The Limits To Growth.”

Sustainable development was quickly introduced into the educational system. In 1992, educators all over the U.S. were receiving a slick promotional brochure for a book, “World Resources 1992-93: A Guide to the Global Environment.” A few weeks later, the book was sent gratis to key educators. A publication of the World Resources Institute (WRI), it was promoted as “the overpowering challenger in the contest for primacy among environmental almanacs”. WRI described its goal as an organization “to help….. grapple with one of our time’s most pressing questions: How can societies meet human needs and nurture economic growth without destroying the natural resources and environmental integrity that make prosperity possible (emphasis added). WRI was supported financially by Corporate Property Investors, Mitchell Energy and Development Corporation, and foundations for Weyerhaeuser, Amoco and Shell Oil. A category “Corporate Associates” included Waste Management, Inc., Monsanto, Chevron and E. I. duPont de Nemours, with “cooperating organizations” including the World Bank, the Overseas Development Association, and other organizations devoted to growth and resource exploitation (current WRI support here).

The Federal Government championed sustainable development from the beginning. In 1992 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sent a report (230-R-93-005) to Congress with “EPA is … assisting regional, state, and local efforts to promote sustainable development … The Nation can only achieve and maintain sustainable development when its citizens understand the concept and embrace it as a national priority.” President Clinton’s 25-person Council on Sustainable Development was co-chaired by Dow Chemical vice president David Buzzelli. Eight representatives had corporate ties (e.g., Chemical Manufacturer’s Association, the Committee for Economic Development, the American Petroleum Institute, and the Business Council for Economic Development), whereas the five environmentalists were administrators for “Big 10″ environmental organizations, themselves recipients of corporate largesse. And why be surprised? The Council just mirrored Clinton and his Vice President, as they expressed the view that “We will renew America’s commitment to leave our children a better nation … whose leadership for sustainable global growth is unsurpassed” (emphasis added).

In 1972, the Club of Rome published “The Limits To Growth” grounded on a study of five factors: resource depletion, industrial output, pollution, agriculture, and population growth, and the dynamics of their interactions. Conclusions of the study were a harsh warning regarding limitations that our beautiful home planet places on human activities, because system collapse was predicted for the middle of the current Century if a “business-as-usual” model were to be maintained, which, despite much political posturing, has been the case. There have been periodic updates of the study. Such “doomsday” talk has not been what industrial and financial interests have wanted to hear, and since publication there has been much criticism of “The Limits To Growth” from economists and the business community. However, a recent “40 year update”, a 2014 study released by the University of Melbourne, reveals that the business-as-usual scenario of The Limits To Growth “… aligns well with historical data that has been updated for this paper.” Data came from the UN and federal sources. That the gravity of this global situation is not front-and-center news is itself a reflection of media ownership.

Sustainable development, in sum, was captured early on by global financial forces the life blood of which is unending growth. As history confirms, it has proven to be a highly manipulable concept for a corporate/political/media network to normalize in the public mind. The suggestion of sustainability indicates things are going to be just fine, so it has been employed as a kind of mass tranquilizer. As the sustainability idea has advanced over the decades, discussions surrounding it have shifted easily, as required, between ‘development’ and ‘growth.’ Among the UN’s many laudable Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), such as peace and the eradication of poverty, one also finds the advancement of “inclusive and sustained economic growth” in which “business and the private sector” are to play a key role, this expressed in its Agenda 2030. The admittedly “supremely ambitious” Agenda 2030 looks like 15,000 words of wishful thinking considering the profit-driven interests that have been — and that are intent on remaining — at the helm. The banking world certainly has lost no time in the creation of “green financial instruments” for the Green New Deal.

The prospect of the Green New Deal becoming morphed into Sustainable Development by another name is real, given the powerful forces so adept at co-opting and repackaging things to serve their own ends. The development/growth debate has long been dominated by business interests, economists, advertisers and corporate journalists, with biologists neglectfully absent. And yet, it all boils down to biology, for when species “overshoot” the capacities of their environments to support them, collapse is the result. Our species is certainly unique in the ability to modify ecosystems (typically at the expense of other life forms) as a means of staving off the impacts of our having exceeded — as we know we have — earth’s ability to support our resource-hungry billions. But we are not immune to natural laws, and this party cannot last forever. It’s not clear, exactly, how it will play out in the long run, but one thing is certain: Ultimately, we shall find out.

Bill Willers is an emeritus professor of biology, University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh. He is founder of the Superior Wilderness Action Network and editor of Learning to Listen to the Land, and Unmanaged Landscapes, both from Island Press. He can be contacted at Read other articles by Bill.

This article was posted on Friday, August 16th, 2019 at 7:42am and is filed under Environment, Sustainability, United Nations.

All content © 2007-2019 Dissident Voice and respective authors | Subscribe to the DV RSS feed | Top
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on August 17, 2019, 02:42:20 AM

Lies, Damned Lies, and Sustainable Development

by Bill Willers / August 16th, 2019

Blah blah blah........

 It’s not clear, exactly, how it will play out in the long run, but one thing is certain: Ultimately, we shall find out.

It wont play out in the long run.
It will play out in the very short term.... Perhaps in my lifetime. Depends on how long I live when shit gets really silly....
Too many rats in too small a cage.

Attached is the following pictures:
The 5 bottle brush trees and the 5 blackwoods I have planted over the last few months. Blackwoods are native to area and were propagated from seed off the tree in background in photo.
My 3 avocados in their winter guards. Centre one is grown from seed we sprouted inside on the window sill in a glass of water, and is double in size compared to the same age grafted trees from a nursery. all need front protection here in winter. Still a little too cold here for avocados in winter when young. 
Also a picture of the golden wattles next door just getting to the end their full bloom. Great for bees in winter! Plan to jump the fence and grab a few seed pods when I know they are not home....
Have had a planting lull for last 2 weeks getting cuttings ready for a spring offensive!
As you can see from photos nice and green right now. Plenty of water around. Gets pretty hot and dry in summer.

Plant a tree a week until I die is my plan.
Save What you can.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on August 24, 2019, 10:55:37 PM
Tree of the week: More shrubbery than trees this week...
Leucadendrin laureolum x salignum 'Inca Gold" South African origin I believe but does well here. (
Good bird attracting and drought tolerant once established.
Also planted a Rhododendron "Cowbell" to please the most important bird indoors. (
Everything else in the paddock looking well. Deciduous fruit trees buds starting to swell and a few blossoms already out on the almond.
Still frost danger for another 3 or 4 weeks. Plenty of moisture around at he moment, and plenty of underground mutton around. (rabbits)

Plant a tree a week until you die. Save what you can.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on August 24, 2019, 11:43:58 PM
Fools & Dreamers: Regenerating a Native Forest (Full Documentary) (

This guy has the right idea.

Title: Fire Resistant Coconut Husks Can Replace Wood and Save Millions of Trees
Post by: azozeo on August 31, 2019, 02:48:04 PM
by John Vibes, Guest writer

According to a study published in Nature, 15.3 billion trees are chopped down every year, and roughly 46% of the world’s trees have been cleared over the past 12,000 years.

For most manufacturing, wood is not even necessary anymore, but unfortunately, humans have been slow to develop alternatives. A Dutch start-up called CocoPallet is one of the companies that are working to change this.

CocoPallet makes transportation pallets from coconut husks, which means that the material is 100% organic and it also being recycled from a waste product.

The process used by CocoPallet is actually cheaper than using wood, and the design is more practical and durable as well. It is estimated that the company saves roughly 200 million trees from being cut down every year since shipping pallets are used everywhere.

The technology was initially developed by researchers at Wageningen University but was later commercialized by Michiel Vos, founder of CocoPallet.

Crafting objects out of coconuts never occurred to Jan Van Dam, a plant scientist at Wageningen University, but over 20 years ago, an Indonesian man entered his office at the college to show him something. At the time, Van Dam specialized in developing materials out of plant fiber, but this was something he had never seen before.

“It looked like a normal piece of hardboard. But according to this man, it was not made out of logged trees, but completely made out of coconut bark, the outer shell of the fruit. Rock hard, wood-like board material from coconut husk? That was new to me,” Van Dam told Dutch news source ‘de Volkskrant’.

Van Dam also explained that a recyclable product like this is needed, especially in places like Asia where coconut waste is abundant. (
Title: Ireland Pledges to Plant 440 Million Trees Over the Next 20 Years
Post by: azozeo on September 08, 2019, 10:35:53 AM
Tree of the week: More shrubbery than trees this week...
Leucadendrin laureolum x salignum 'Inca Gold" South African origin I believe but does well here. (
Good bird attracting and drought tolerant once established.
Also planted a Rhododendron "Cowbell" to please the most important bird indoors. (
Everything else in the paddock looking well. Deciduous fruit trees buds starting to swell and a few blossoms already out on the almond.
Still frost danger for another 3 or 4 weeks. Plenty of moisture around at he moment, and plenty of underground mutton around. (rabbits)

Plant a tree a week until you die. Save what you can.


( (

Title: South African Miracle Plant Can Remove More CO2 Per Ac Than Subtropical Forests
Post by: azozeo on September 08, 2019, 10:40:47 AM

By Mayukh Saha / Truth Theory

Its humble claim to fame is as a beautiful plant used for indoor decoration and food and medicinal purposes. It is known to adapt to multiple conditions from the rainy tropics to the arid lands typical to South Africa. But this modest plant has acquired international fame as a plant capable of sponging out carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at a higher rate per hectare than even the Amazon rainforests! Say hello to the Elephant Food, just one of its many names.

A surprising ally in the fight against global warming, the humble Portulacaria Afra (Elephant Food, Porkbush and Spekboom in Afrikaans) is a common, luscious, fleshy, and juicy plant used as a decorating plant. But it has a surprisingly important quality as it is effective in binding carbon dioxide in semi-arid landscapes and thicket vegetation.

Also read: How A Brazilian Photographer Restored An Entire Forest With 2.7 million Trees In 20 Years

A hectare of Porkbush consequently can absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than any other plant or tree, even more than the Amazon forests, know to take in almost half of the world’s greenhouse gases. This makes the Porkbush one of the most promising weapons in the fight against global warming. The plant is a succulent, hardy and soft-wooded bush with brownish stems. The leaves are plump, juicy, and bright green.
Some Alarming CO2 Facts

Check this out: the amount of carbon dioxide has spiked alarmingly in the past decades. It peaked at an alarming 405 parts per million in 2017, a 3 million years high when temperatures were 2-3 degrees higher than during the pre-industrial years and the sea level was 15-25 meters higher.

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, the excess presence of which is contributing to the global rise in earth’s temperature and climate change.
Title: Pre-Historic Plants Reproduce for the 1st Time !
Post by: azozeo on September 13, 2019, 07:52:47 AM

Prehistoric Plants Reproduce In The UK For The First Time In Human History Due To Climate Change


By Mayukh Saha / Truth Theory

Botanists are of the opinion that the Isle of Wight contains a palm tree of prehistoric origin which has recently produced cones of both genders. It is believed that climate change is the major reason behind the flowering and flourishing of this tree, which used to be extremely prevalent on Earth nearly 250 million years ago. The tree is situated in the Ventnor Botanic Gardens.

One of the reasons climate change affects this palm is because the Gardens has a temperature difference of nearly 5 degrees with the rest of England. Incidentally, this is the second warmest place in all of the United Kingdom, behind the Isles of Scilly. Liz Walker of the abovementioned garden is quite excited to find out about the different seeds that might come up after the pollen is transferred.

She also believes that this could be considered as conclusive proof that climate change exists. For, this plant had no chance of growing in the temperate regions of the UK, and it is the heatwave of the last few months which has led to its growth.

This plant’s other known name is the Japanese Sago Palm, scientifically referred to as Cycas revoluta. It was prevalent in the Jurassic times and found in the steep cliffs of limestone, which gave rise to the UK. The Jurassic period had a large amount of CO2 in its atmosphere which led to the plant flourishing. Could it be possible that the carbon emissions have gone up so high so as to facilitate the growth of such plants yet again?

The curator of the Gardens, Chris Kidd told CNN that the cycads were grown to experiment on, something that was unheard of a decade and a half ago. While this cone was extremely widespread before the evolution which made plants flowered, now it is simply used as an ornament in British homes.

Kidd mentions that 15 years ago, the cycad not only survived the harsh English winter but also grew leaves. Half a decade back, a cycad of masculine nature produced something akin to a cone, which was not expected. And recently, in an even more surprising turn of events, both genders producing cones.

There has been the presence of prehistoric cycads fossilized near the reproducing cycads. Yet, due to a considerable distance between them, biologists and scientists have to manually transfer their pollen from one place to the other.
Title: Water water everywhere and not a drop to drink
Post by: John of Wallan on September 15, 2019, 03:13:22 PM
Our country is the worlds biggest island and driest continent.
Some are waking up to the fact that no one, not even 1st world countries are immune from drought. No rain eventually means no water.
A lot of city people think this is only a 3rd world African or Middle East problem.
These major, modern towns will literally have no water coming through the taps.
Australia's biggest city, Sydney, is not far away from the same situation.
Big wake up calls are coming.

We all need to spend our scarce resources on water and food security, not guns, bombs, tanks, electric self driving cars, mcmansions and gadgets with screens..


The towns that are at risk of running out of water
The drought crisis crippling parts of the eastern seaboard will come to a head within just a few weeks. Photo: AAP

The drought crisis crippling parts of the eastern seaboard may come to a head within weeks as several regional centres are set to completely run out of water within two months.
Parts of regional NSW could run out of water as early as November, with data showing the worst-case scenario for the state if there’s no rain or government intervention.
The projections from NSW’s river operator and bulk water supplier, WaterNSW, show without significant rain, the first towns to lose water supply will be Dubbo, Cobar, Nyngan and Narromine in central NSW, with the Macquarie River forecast to run dry by November.
Normally, the Macquarie River experiences an average inflow of 1448 gigalitres a year, but in the past two years has seen just 97 gigalitres enter the river system, the data, seen by AAP shows.
Meanwhile, the Queensland state government has announced drastic measures to combat the falling water levels and keep some of its regional towns alive.
The NSW situation has been described as “critical” by state Water Minister Melinda Pavey, with the government insisting it’s doing everything it can to make sure the State gets through the devastating drought.
Australia’s longest river – the Murray – has been severely affected with 901 gigalitres of water entering the system in the past 12 months, compared with its annual average of 5000 gigalitres.
The data shows that Menindee Lakes, which is a source of flows for the lower Darling and is a vital fish nursery, received just six gigalitres of water in the past year.
Its annual inflow average is 1387 gigalitres.
The lakes sit within the town of Menindee, which experienced mass fish deaths along the Darling River last summer.
Residents have questioned the drainage of the lakes twice in 2017 with some suggesting the fish carnage wouldn’t have happened if the lakes were full.
The Water NSW data shows the lakes received 2100 gigalitres of water in 2016-17 followed by just 52 gigalitres of water in 2017-18.
Under the worst-case scenario, the Lachlan River, which runs through the state’s central west, is projected to run dry by March 2020 leaving the towns of Forbes, Cowra and Parkes without water supply.
The river is the fourth-longest in Australia and annually receives an average of 1212 gigalitres of water, but in the last year recorded inflows of just 107 gigalitres.
summer promises more dry weather and fires
Cattle at a property in Quilpie, in south-west Queensland in late August. Photo: AAP
The state’s north-west, including the small towns of Manilla and Boggabri, could also run out of water by the same date if the upper Namoi River doesn’t receive any rainfall.
A group of rivers that straddle the NSW and Queensland border and supply water to the towns of Boggabilla, Ashford and Goondiwindi, received just 17 gigalitres of inflows in the past year compared to an annual average of 1000 gigalitres.
WaterNSW also predicted the Border rivers will run dry by September 2020 without government intervention and rain.
Water is projected to stop flowing from taps in the northern NSW town of Inverell in March 2021 where the Gwydir River, which usually receives 1141 gigalitres of rain a year, will dry up after just 19 gigalitres entered the system last year.
The data predicts that most of Sydney’s water supply will remain flowing until at least October 2021 when, under the worst-case scenario, the upper Nepean River will run dry.
Australia’s largest urban water-supply dam – Warragamba Dam – is projected to stop flowing by January 2022, according to the data.
Warragamba Dam received 105 gigalitres of water in the last year, compared with its annual average of 1069 gigalitres.
Outlooks for spring and December again point to above-average temperatures.
With the exception of only parts of Western Australia and the west coast of Tasmania, the outlook for rainfall across the country is below average.

Relief for southern Queensland
With less rainfall and high temperatures, it means some governments are resorting to drastic measures to keep towns hydrated.
Over the weekend Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk announced that the Queensland government would provide $800,000 a month to truck in water to drought-stricken Stanthorpe, about 220 kilometres south-west of Brisbane.
Between 30 and 40 trucks will cart the water into the town every day.
A further $2.4 million will be spent on two one-megalitre tanks in Stanthorpe to hold supplies that will be trucked in when the dwindling local dams run out.
The drastic measure will ensure residents of the town will have a secure drinking water supply until 2020.
“With bushfires following the prolonged drought, Stanthorpe will not be left to battle through this alone,” Ms Palaszczuk said.

-with AAP

Title: 'Dead tree after dead tree.' The case of Washington's dying foliage
Post by: Surly1 on September 19, 2019, 03:52:57 AM
'Dead tree after dead tree.' The case of Washington's dying foliage (

Trees are shown through fog on Friday, April 5, 2019, in the Hoh Rainforest on the Olympic Peninsula.
When Jim and Judy Davis moved to their property in Granite Falls two and a half years ago, the trees in their 25-acre forest were healthy.

Then the hemlocks started to turn brown.

Now, “if we were to walk this path completely -- it’s about a quarter of a mile -- this is what you would see,” Jim Davis said, “just dead tree after dead tree.

“It’s just a feeling of sadness and helplessness."

News outlets around the country are providing special coverage this week of climate change. KUOW will have stories and interviews on the crisis and what to do about it. #ClimateCoverageNow

So the Davises called in Kevin Zobrist.

“I feel like I'm always coming out to a crime scene, you know: another dead tree, another one lost, coming out to investigate,” Zobrist said.

Zobrist is a forestry professor at Washington State University. He said this isn’t just a problem on the Davis’ property.

“When I drive up and down the highways around western Washington, I just see dead and dying hemlocks all up and down the roads,” Zobrist said. “We first noticed it right around 2016, and now I just see it everywhere.”

And it’s not just hemlocks. Western red cedars and big-leaf maples are struggling as well. All three species are native to western Washington.

Zobrist isn’t the only one seeing this: KUOW’s listeners have been writing in to ask about why they’re seeing so many dead trees.

Zobrist thinks the answer lies in climate change.

“At this point in time, my top suspect is drought — drought stress from climate change,” he said. “We've seen records being set for heat and drought in a number of years in a row now, starting with 2012.”

“This summer was a little bit better,” he said. “But that cumulative drought stress is really taking its toll.”

Thirst can weaken trees’ immune systems, and then something else, like an insect or fungus, can kill them.

It's not just happening in places we can see it, like gardens, parks and roadways. It’s happening deep in the forest as well.

Glenn Kohler, a forest entomologist for the Washington Department of Natural Resources, visits a forest near Bellingham where he spotted dead trees during an annual forest health survey.
Enlarge Icon
Glenn Kohler, a forest entomologist for the Washington Department of Natural Resources, visits a forest near Bellingham where he spotted dead trees during an annual forest health survey.

Glenn Kohler, a forest entomologist for Washington’s Department of Natural Resources, and his colleagues fly over every forested acre of the state every year and measure how many trees have died.

“So the individual trees or a patch of dead trees are going to have the same kind of red color that's easy to see from an airplane,” Kohler said. “That's what we're mapping.”

“The amount of that is increasing right now,” he said.

In 2018, Kohler and his colleagues found that nearly 500,000 acres of Washington’s forests had some level of damage. That’s an area bigger than all of Kitsap County.

In short, western Washington’s forests are changing, Zobrist said. Some trees may be lost in places where they used to be able to survive.

“This is, I think, the first really visible impact of climate change in our area,” Zobrist said. “And it's kind of a warning of things to come.”

Jim and Judy Davis say, now that the initial shock of the dying hemlocks has worn off, they’ve come up with a plan. They’re going to take out some of the dead trees and limbs to reduce fire risk around their house, and they’ve started to plant new trees, choosing drought-tolerant native species.

Zobrist said other homeowners can do the same thing.

Also, he said, take a look around the tree, at what else might be competing for water.

“Grass is the worst,” he said. “I see lots of situations where there's a lawn or tall grass all the way up to the edge of the tree and that grass layer robs all the water, so get the grass out of there. Replace that with a good three to four inches of mulch.”

The Davises hope measures like these will help their forest survive for decades to come, for their kids and seven grandkids.

This story is part of Covering Climate Now, a global collaboration of more than 220 news outlets to strengthen coverage of the climate story.

Title: Millions hit the streets for global climate change strike - live updates
Post by: RE on September 20, 2019, 12:45:19 PM
Joan of Arc was 16 also.


She was Burned at the Stake at Age 19.

RE (

Millions hit the streets for global climate change strike - live updates


By Haley Ott

Updated on: September 20, 2019 / 3:27 PM / CBS News

    Millions of people are skipping school and work around the world to protest climate change.
    They are demanding "an end to the age of fossil fuels."
    Climate activist Greta Thunberg is one of thousands participating in the New York City march.
    Thousands joined in marches in New York City, Chicago, Denver and more cities across the country.

Millions of people around the world are walking out of their schools and workplaces Friday to demand urgent action on climate change. The global climate strikes, which are taking place in more than 150 countries, were scheduled ahead of the opening of the United Nations General Assembly and the Climate Action Summit on September 23.

The protests have been organized by young people around the world who are part of the "Fridays for Future" campaign, which has seen students walk out of their schools on Fridays to demand their political leaders take urgent action to address climate change.

"We need to act right now to stop burning fossil fuels and ensure a rapid energy revolution with equity, reparations and climate justice at its heart," organizers say.
Climate Change More

    Amazon promises to use only renewable energy in 10 years
    Which businesses are closing for Friday's climate strike?
    Wall Street sees profits in a heating planet
    Greenland's disappearing ice sheet: "One degree is everything"

Climate activist Greta Thunberg is participating in the protests in New York City, where 1.1 million students have been given permission to skip school to join in. She tweeted from the march that "New York City is looking huge! Lower Manhattan is absolutely packed with people."

Follow live updates below.
Thunberg says millions attended early marches

Greta Thunberg tweeted the New York City strike is "looking huge" and posted a photo of packed streets in Lower Manhattan. She is expected to speak at the rally later Friday.

    The preliminary numbers say there are at least 3 million people in today's #ClimateStrike And that is before counting North and South America!! To be updated... #FridaysForFuture
    — Greta Thunberg (@GretaThunberg) September 20, 2019

Thunberg said the city was "looking huge" and tweeted photos of packed streets in Lower Manhattan.

Demonstrators held signs that read "climate change is real"; "there is no Planet B": and "if you did your job, we would be in school."

Manhattan borough president Gale Brewster tweeted video showing protesters filling the streets from Foley Square to Centre Street and Chambers Street and across Broadway.

    NYCs massive #ClimateStrike march has begun, from Foley Sq down Centre St to Chambers St across to Broadway... and down to the Battery! Thank you @ClimateCrisis and everyone else marching!
    — Gale A. Brewer (@galeabrewer) September 20, 2019

Brewster is one of a number of local New York City elected officials who were attending the strike, which took place outside City Hall. New York City Council speaker Corey Johnson tweeted he had "never seen so many people before. So inspired by these young people! There are people as far as you can see!"

    I'm at the #climatestrikenyc and I've never seen so many people before. So inspired by these young people! There are people as far as you can!
    — Corey Johnson (@CoreyinNYC) September 20, 2019

Thousands join in near Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco office
Climate Strike
Google employees hold signs outside of their offices before marching to join others in a climate strike rally at City Hall Friday, September 20, 2019, in San Francisco. Eric Risberg / AP

In San Francisco, thousands rallied near House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office at the Federal Building at Seventh and Market streets. Protesters took off marching down Market Street at about 10:30 a.m. chanting, "climate change has got to go" and "climate justice now," CBS San Francisco reports.

They marched to U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein's office at 1 Post Street and they plan to return to the Federal Building for a rally. Traffic and Muni service was blocked along a large segment of Market Street.

Organizers for the San Francisco action said that they are calling on Pelosi and Feinstein to back the Green New Deal, an ambitious climate action plan introduced by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocascio-Cortez of New York.

They are also calling on corporations like Bank of America, Amazon and PG&E to divest from the fossil fuel industry and improve their own reliance on renewable energy sources.

Many students from Oakland schools were attending the rally on field trips, district spokesperson John Sasaki said.

Students are also expected to walk out of the University of California at Berkeley. As of about 11 a.m. PT, they were gathering at Sproul Plaza.

Students participating said that dire forecasts of rising global temperatures made them fearful of the consequences if there is not immediate action.

"I'm scared for our future, if we even have one," said Otto, a 13-year-old student from San Francisco.
Thousands join Chicago strike

Thousands of people joined the strike in downtown Chicago, CBS Chicago reported. Protesters began gathering Friday morning at Grant Park and the plan is to march to Federal Plaza.

The Illinois Chapter of the Youth Climate Strike organized the protest. Speakers started at 12 p.m. CT, with the group calling on Governor J.B. Pritzker to pass the Clean Energy Jobs Act. The bill aims to put the state on a path to 100% clean energy by 2050.

    The voices of global climate strike marchers, led by young people, reverberate through the streets of Chicago. @cbschicago
    — Wendy Widom (@wendywidom) September 20, 2019

New York City students won't be punished for leaving school
CBS New York

The New York City Department of Education said that students who had parents' approval would not get in trouble for attending. Younger students can only leave school with a parent and teachers are barred from atending.

"We applaud our students when they raise their voices in a safe and respectful manner on issues that matter to them. Young people around the world are joining the #ClimateStrike this week--showing that student action will lead us forward," the New York City Department of Education tweeted on September 12.

There are 1.1. million students in New York City's public school system, the largest in the country.

Tens of thousands are expected at the downtown rally, and 16-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg is expected to address the crowd.
Germany agrees $60 billion climate policy package
APTOPIX Germany Climate Protests
Three people stand on ice blocks under gallows to protest against climate change in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, Germany, on Friday, September 20, 2019. AP

The German government announced a $60 billion package of measures to address climate change on Friday as protesters marched across the country to demand urgent action.

"We believe that we can achieve the goals and that we've truly laid the foundations for this," German Chancellor Angela Merkel said.

The country aims to cut emissions by 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels.

Despite the environment being one of the most important issues to German voters, Germany's environmental protection has lagged behind other countries in Europe in recent years, and it's on course to miss its emissions targets for 2020 by a wide margin, the Associated Press reports.
Kabul climate protesters march despite violence

Approximately 100 climate change protesters marched through the Afghan capital city of Kabul on Friday, following an armed personnel carrier and surrounded by soldiers with guns to protect them, the Associated Press reports.

Afghanistan has been declared the most dangerous country in the world by the Institute for Economics and Peace.

"We know war can kill a group of people," one of the organizers, Fardeen Barakzai, said. "The problem in Afghanistan is our leaders are fighting for power, but the real power is in nature."
Thousands of protesters turn out in London

Thousands of protesters have turned out in London, CBS News' Imtiaz Tyab reports, as climate strikes take place across the United Kingdom.

Demonstrators are gathered outside the Houses of Parliament.

Weather experts say climate change is making Britain more rainy: For the past nine years, winters have been 5% wetter on average than they were between 1981 and 2010, according to BBC News.
Germany inches toward new climate policy

Following all-night talks in Berlin, the German government came closer to agreeing new measures for tackling climate change on Friday, local media reported, as protesters took to the streets to demand action.

How Europe's biggest economy decides to tackle greenhouse gas emissions is being closely watched by other nations.

    Like the sea we rise!
    Liebes Klimakabinett, ihr habt euch mit den falschen angelegt...#AlleFuersKlima #FridaysForFuture
    — Fridays for Future Freiburg (@F4F_Freiburg) September 20, 2019

    #allefürsklima ist im vollen Gange💚‼️ Wir streiken bis ihr handelt!#FridaysForFuture #week4climate #roteklimakarte
    — Fridays For Future Bonn (@BonnFuture) September 20, 2019

The environment is a major issue for German voters, and students have been holding large weekly protests, inspired by Swedish activist Greta Thunberg.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel planned to present details of the plan later on Friday.
Low turnout in Nigeria's largest city

The turnout for climate strike protests in Lagos, Nigeria's largest city, is low, BBC News reports. Approximately 30 people were in the streets.

Because it's on the coast, Lagos will be affected by rising sea levels. More people were protesting in Abuja, however, where hundreds gathered.

    Happening Now in Abuja Nigeria #FridaysForFuture #ClimateStrike #ClimateAction
    — David Mike Terungwa (@miketerungwa) September 20, 2019

    Today is my 45 weeks of #FridaysForFuture in Abuja, Nigeria and the #globalclimatestrike. Climate change crises cannot wait, it is time for us to demand for climate justice. Join us anywhere you here, for the people and the planet.#ClimateStrike
    — Oladosu Adenike (@the_ecofeminist) September 20, 2019

“I want to breathe clean”
Indian commuters drive amidst heavy smog in New Delhi on December 6, 2018. Getty Images

New Delhi in India is one of the world's most polluted cities, and dozens of climate protesters gathered outside the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs on Friday as part of the worldwide climate strikes.

"I want to breathe clean," demonstrators shouted, according The Associated Press. Some carried signs with slogans like: "There is no Earth B."

An estimated 100,000 children under 5 are killed by air pollution in India every year.
Australia’s Great Barrier Reef is dying
Around the Games - Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games Day 8
An athlete swims near Australia's Great Barrier Reef on April 12, 2018. Getty

The Great Barrier Reef in Australia is one of the most diverse ecosystems in the world, but half of its coral has died.

Scientists say warming waters are what pose the greatest threat to the system, last year causing a "mass bleaching event" that "cooked" it, BBC News reports. And coral is struggling to regrow.

The United Nations is considering adding the reef to its list of endangered sites.
"We are not sinking, we are fighting"
Australians Gather As Part Of Global Climate Strike
Thousands of protesters march as part of a climate strike rally on September 20, 2019 in Sydney, Australia. Getty Images

Thousands of protesters in Asia and the Pacific kicked off Friday's global climate strike, which is expected to be the largest climate change protest in history.

In Australia, an estimated 300,000 people took to the streets. Events also took place on the low-lying islands of Vanuatu and Kiribati, which are facing disaster as sea levels rise.

"We are not sinking, we are fighting," children in Kiribati chanted.

"There are a lot of people here who can feel the effects of climate change already, for example with typhoons," one 23-year-old protester in the Philippines told French news agency AFP. Experts say increasingly violent storms and rising sea levels are already having an impact on the island nation.
Businesses supporting the climate strikes

Some businesses are letting workers take the day off to participate in the strikes, while others are closing outright, CBS News MoneyWatch reporter Irina Ivanova reports. More than 7,000 companies have pledged to draw attention to the protests by either donating ad space or putting banners on their sites.

CBS News put together a list of the businesses that are closing here.

First published on September 20, 2019 / 4:45 AM
Title: 👸 Joan of Arc Speaks: "We Will Make Them Hear Us"
Post by: RE on September 21, 2019, 08:57:34 AM
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: K-Dog on September 21, 2019, 01:00:34 PM

The Manufacturing of Greta Thunberg – for Consent: The Political Economy of the Non-Profit Industrial Complex


ood investigative journalism doesn’t only reveal hidden mechanisms of our time; it also exposes those who refuse to confront the mechanisms. Remember when the late Bruce Dixon courageously and cogently called Bernie Sanders “a sheep dog candidate”? Remember when Eva Bartlett, Vanessa Beeley and others truly stood with Syrian people in opposing the western intervention? I do. Those who could not face the reality came up with all sorts of profanities and ill conceived theories to demonize the messengers.

Cory Morningstar has been a dedicated environmental activist with a sound track record, who has closely worked with various NGOs. She is a mother. She is an avid gardener. She is an honest person with empathy, passion, love for people, love for our fellow creatures and love for nature. Her human character and sense of justice has culminated in her keen insights, observations and analyses. Her writings have inspired many of us to see the depth and scope of capitalist institutions as part of the social dynamics affecting our consciousness. Her meticulous pursuit of facts in illustrating mechanisms of our world evokes a sense of awe. She is a respected colleague in our struggle toward a better tomorrow.

While her latest series, The Manufacturing of Greta Thunberg—for Consent: The Political Economy of the Non-Profit Industrial Complex Volume I and Volume II, has been wildly praised as a ground-breaking milestone in depicting the vast mechanism of exploitation and subjugation involving the Non-Profit Industrial Complex, it has been also maliciously misrepresented.

One of the very common, yet blatantly erroneous criticisms, centers around the series’ focus on the young activist Greta Thunberg. Why do they attack the author as a child abuser? The series does not attack the 16-yearold activist at all. It points out those organizations and individuals which closely surround her in forming a momentum for their agenda. It delineates how the mobilization fits within the larger framework of corporate “environmentalism”, colonialism, global capitalism and imperialism. The trickery of the accusation that the work attacks a child and smears the youth-led activism follows the same pattern of lies and deceptions unfolding against serious journalism for some time. It reflects how the establishment successfully dominates our minds as it dominates the hierarchy of money and violence. The ruling class actually abuses children by making them pawns for lucrative business projects—such as carbon capture and storage, “renewable energy” schemes, carbon trading and so on (the series discusses why they do not work extensively). They trick the innocent youth into digging their own graves while making profits out of it. Remember people called you racist, when you pointed out President Obama’s drone killings? Remember people called you misogynist when you criticized Secretary Clinton’s colonial policies? Those who did didn’t mind brown people blown into pieces, and didn’t mind the colonial oppression of women in colonized lands. The capitalist hierarchy structurally forces us to embrace the values, norms and beliefs of the ruling class, as it trains people to climb the social ladder as expected. The momentum to accuse Morningstar’s work as a child abuse stems from the same psychological projection of accusers’ own complicity in consecrating a teenager as an invincible saint of their movement.

Then there is the most typical argument to condone obvious institutional tendencies of inhumanity: “things aren’t always black and white”. Of course there are good environmentalists doing good work as well. We have gone through this in so many incarnations. When we point out police brutality, we hear “not all police officers are bad”. When we point out obvious racism among us: “not all white people are racist”. Those are certainly true. But could we also say “not all slave masters were evil”, “not all Kings and queens were evil”, “not all colonizers were evil”, and so on? Well, sure. But does that mean we can bring back slavery, feudalism or colonialism? No. Refusal to talk about the systematic inhumanity inflicted by the system tolerates the status quo as acceptable.

And please do stop with the “but the movement gives us hope” nonsense. What happened when we were sold “hope”, “change” and “forward”, and received colonial wars, big bank bailouts, global surveillance and loss of legal protections during the Obama presidency? We got Donald Trump. When the system squeezes already oppressed people while shuttering their hope and making them embrace fear, people try their best to hold onto whatever they have. They embrace an illusion of salvation in authoritarian lies and hatred against “others”. It is extremely important that we strive to discuss such a mechanism among us instead of jumping into the same momentum. We must discuss the true hope of building a momentum moving beyond the lies and deceptions coming out of the destructive hierarchy.

Morningstar states in The Manufacturing of Greta Thunberg—for Consent: The Political Economy of Non Profit Industrial Complex Volume II Act IV:

    “Consider that collectively, the populace appears to believe that not only is it possible to colonize another planet, but that we will do so in the not-so-distant future. This is incredible considering the massive odds of and colossal barriers to such an endeavour succeeding. Thus, it is alarming, that this same populace appears not to believe it is not possible to create new societies where necessity is detached from want (superfluous consumer goods). This begs the question – have we been fully conditioned to believe only those that represent hegemonic interests? It is a sound question considering the billionaires of the world are currently petrified of the capitalist system collapsing – while those oppressed by the capitalist system believe it cannot be dismantled. Yet we can dismantle institutions. We can dismantle the capitalist economic system devouring what remains of the natural world – but not if we identify with our oppressors and the very system that enslaves us. It is our natural world and her living natural communities that sustain us. Not industrial civilization – not technology.”

Hopelessness and cynicism do creep up to justify the status quo. But we also must recognize that such a position does away with putting our efforts toward standing with the truly oppressed ones.

Morningstar’s series meticulously documents how powerful global organizations seek ways to cultivate a consensus for their trajectory. And it carefully states, with facts, why the trajectory does not lead to achieving their promises—preventing climate change and other environmental calamities. The illustrated mechanism has been revealed over and over through their past crimes—the co-ordinated actions of industries, bankers, politicians, NGOs, UN, global financial institutions and media have culminated into colonial wars, cover-ups of nuclear disasters, regime change, and other corporate, colonial and imperial policies. There is nothing speculative, coincidental or conspiratorial about the series. It is based on careful research, honesty, courage to face the real issue and true love for humanity. It is again curiously indicative that those who engage in a conspiracy to mobilize the people according to their agendas accuse those who see through the attempt as “conspiracy theorist”. The use of the derogatory term invented by the US intelligence agency to label dissidents as tin-hat wearing nuts jobs hardly proves their legitimacy.

Moreover, I must say that it is extremely odd and disingenuous that the series has been portrayed as a refusal to take any action, instead insisting on ideological purity. Such an attack has been coming from those who have been pointing out the same moneyed network in forwarding corporatism, colonialism and militarism by manipulating popular opinions. What is the difference between opposing destructive colonial wars and opposing colonization of nature/co-optation of activism? More specifically, what prompts some of them to say “what is your solution?”, “we can’t wait for capitalism to be overthrown to solve climate change” and so on. The obvious falsehood of such an angle is the stark absence of solutions within their own “green momentum”. Morningstar’s research does not talk about the necessity of establishing a communist statehood or overthrowing capitalism in order to solve the impending crisis. It simply states facts in a cohesive manner. Consequently, it certainly indicates the systematic structural issues presented by the hierarchy of money and violence. The research clearly names individuals and organizations that are involved in mobilizing the population in installing government policies that are lucrative to the associated corporations and beneficial to the imperial framework. Capitalist hegemony does present itself as a source of predicaments of our time. But is that new to us?

Needless to say, for those of us who believe in the Marxist perspective, the solution amounts to a structural transformation of our society into one that doesn’t monopolize the means of production for the ruling class.  Economic activities must be subservient to harmonious existence of the people, environment and other species. And our social interactions must be under a control of such aims, instead of financial and social power of the ruling class. But make no mistake that that is simply an ultimate direction. Just as we voice our objections against any form of inhumanity regardless of our systematic problem, when we see certain environmental policies being subservient to the corporate agenda, likely to result in worsened conditions for the people, we discuss them. There shouldn’t be anything different about pointing out the US military aggression and the fallacy of US environmental policies, especially when they are forwarded by the same western establishment. When we find the carbon capture schemes to be disingenuous, for example, we simply point it out. We demand an answer to why corporate “solutions” are upheld as people’s “solutions”. And people who buy into false narratives should be noted as not credible leaders in people’s movement. So the question “what is your solution?” really should be directed at those who subscribe to those erroneous “solutions.” They need to be asked how those solutions would be a worthy cause at the first place, and why cogent criticisms against implementations of destructive schemes cannot be embraced because “we can’t wait for a socialist revolution”.

What people desperately need today is good investigative reports like those presented by Cory Morningstar, along with our educational efforts to reveal the mechanisms of our time. We must learn how the unprecedented wealth accumulation among the very few ends up protected by layers and layers of moneyed social institutions co-ordinating to perpetuate the system, while progressively oppressive financial pressure and state violence against already oppressed people keep herding people into the capitalist framework. When we face the sad reality of people embracing policies that allow the powerful minorities to exploit and subjugate them over and over, what we need is not a popular mobilization guided by vague slogans easily subsumed by the imperial framework. Such a method would lead to draconian enforcement of corporate “solutions” according to their definition of “problems”. It is a recipe for bringing about a fascist order. What we need is openness and willingness to learn how we are domesticated by the authoritarian framework so that the actions are guided by the interests of the people in forming a society that allows true liberation of the people in a mutually respectful and harmonious manner.

Please do read The Manufacturing of Greta Thunberg—for Consent: The Political Economy of Non Profit Industrial Complex Volume I and II. It gives us an excellent starting point in learning how to build a better tomorrow for all of us.


[Hiroyuki Hamada is an artist. Exhibiting widely in gallery and non-commercial settings alike, Hamada has been the recipient of a Pollock-Krasner Foundation grant, twice received New York Foundation for the Arts Fellowships in sculpture, and was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship. Alongside his career as an artist, his writing can be found at various outlets online.] (

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: K-Dog on September 21, 2019, 01:07:16 PM
Resource depletion is not part of the Climate Discussion as we would like.  Capitalism continues to sow for crops of ignorance and the green-washing has just begun.  More to come.  It has hardly started.

The battle for hearts and minds is on.

If Greta starts to speak for the Global South she can break free of the exploitation.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: RE on September 21, 2019, 01:27:03 PM
Quote from: K-Dog link=topic=616.msg178626#msg178626 date=15690960
The Manufacturing of Greta Thunberg – for Consent: The Political Economy of the Non-Profit Industrial Complex[/size]

You can't beat cute girls for propaganda value.

Title: 🔥 Climate Protesters and World Leaders: Same Planet, Different Worlds
Post by: RE on September 21, 2019, 01:43:22 PM (

Climate Protesters and World Leaders: Same Planet, Different Worlds
ImageFires in the Amazon in Brazil this week.
Fires in the Amazon in Brazil this week.CreditCreditBruno Kelly/Reuters


By Somini Sengupta

    Sept. 21, 2019
    Updated 3:14 p.m. ET

UNITED NATIONS — This is the world we live in: Punishing heat waves, catastrophic floods, huge fires and climate conditions so uncertain that children took to the streets en masse in global protests to demand action.

But this is also the world we live in: A pantheon of world leaders who have deep ties to the industries that are the biggest sources of planet-warming emissions, are hostile to protests, or use climate science denial to score political points.
What on Earth Is Going On?

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get our latest stories and insights about climate change — along with answers to your questions and tips on how to help.

Somini Sengupta covers international climate issues and is the author of "The End of Karma: Hope and Fury Among India's Young." @SominiSengupta • Facebook
Title: 🔥 Friday's global strike was likely the largest climate rally ever
Post by: RE on September 22, 2019, 06:10:50 AM (

Friday's global strike was likely the largest climate rally ever
Grace Hauck, USA TODAY Published 4:36 p.m. ET Sept. 21, 2019


Students from an estimated 156 countries marched in the Global Climate Strike. USA TODAY

Millions of people around the world took part in Friday's climate strike, and estimates of total crowd sizes are still rolling in — some as high as 4 million.

From New Delhi to Antarctica, protesters marched to draw attention to the climate crisis ahead of the United Nations Climate Action Summit, which kicks off Monday.

In New York City, where schools excused the city's 1.1 million students from class to participate, Mayor Bill de Blasio put preliminary crowd estimates at 60,000. Organizers, however, have pegged that number at closer to 250,000, making it the largest protest that day.

Local officials and protest organizers offered varying crowd size estimates. According to organizers, some of the other largest demonstrations took place in Berlin (270,000), London (100,000) and across Australia (about 100,000 protesting in Melbourne, organizers say).

In the U.S., big groups also turned out in San Francisco (40,000), Denver (7,500) Boston (7,000), Chicago (3,000), Portland (2,000) and Washington, D.C., among other cities.

You may like: 6 things to know about teenage climate change activist Greta Thunberg

Greta Thunberg, the noted 16-year-old Swedish environmental activist who sparked the global movement, joined the strike in New York City. She and other organizers have estimated the worldwide crowd size at 4 million.

"Around the world today about 4 million people have been striking," Thunberg said. "This is the biggest climate strike ever in history and we all should be so proud of ourselves because we have done this together."

She's likely right — preliminary estimates suggest that Friday's strike was the largest climate protest in history.

More than 1.4 million people worldwide took part in the first global climate strike this past March, organizers estimated. Some 100,000 young people participated in the U.S. The second global strike in May likely witnessed even greater participation, organizers said.

Putting a number on turnout can be tricky, but researchers with the Crowd Funding Consortium are giving it a shot. Harvard Professor Erica Chenoweth and University of Connecticut Professor Jeremy Pressman are leading a collaborative effort to document crowd size estimates in the U.S. and worldwide.

Back in 2017, after the first Women's March, Chenoweth and Pressman launched the consortium to make crowd estimates available to academics and the public. You can see the breakdown of their estimates laid out in spreadsheets here.

"We collect data on as many U.S. protests going on as possible. We consult social media, traditional media, and, for large protests, the maps and listings publicly provided by organizers," Pressman told USA TODAY.

No future, no children: Teens refusing to have kids until there's action on climate change

The group pegged its "best guess" at total crowd size for the Women's March at more than 4 million in the U.S. alone, placing it among the largest protests in world history.

Others include the nearly 4 million people across France who marched in solidarity against terrorism following the 2015 Charlie Hebdo attack, and the 2003 worldwide protests against the war in Iraq, when somewhere between 10 and 15 million people protested, according to various estimates.

Pressman said the number of locations participating in Friday's climate strike made it difficult to put a number on crowd size, but that data was still being compiled.

A second worldwide walkout called Earth Strike is planned Sept. 27, on the anniversary of "Silent Spring," the book that kick-started the environmentalist movement.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on September 23, 2019, 03:08:00 AM
Tree of the week:
Some sort of golden wattle.... Found an unmarked seedling in the local nursery for a few dollars. May have even been self sown in a pot....
Will post a picture of leaf and flower to see if  can identify. Should be ok. Lots of different wattles grow locally.
Have made cuttings of various bottle brushes and planted some blackwood seeds I collected from next door neighbours tree. I will wait until after summer heat to plant any more out to ensure they survive.
Plenty of moisture in the ground here despite lower than average rainfall. I am making preparations in case we have a hot dry summer.

Plant a tree a week until I die is the plan.
Save what you can.

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: RE on September 23, 2019, 08:31:53 AM

Plenty of moisture in the ground here despite lower than average rainfall. I am making preparations in case we have a hot dry summer.


Post some pics of your Doomstead!

Title: 🔥 'This Is All Wrong,' Greta Thunberg Tells World Leaders At U.N. Climate Sessi
Post by: RE on September 23, 2019, 09:17:23 AM
Greta of Stockholm is on the March!


From Wiki on Greta:

"Thunberg says she first heard about climate change in 2011, when she was 8 years old, and could not understand why so little was being done about it.[11] Three years later she became depressed and lethargic, stopped talking and eating, and was eventually diagnosed with Asperger syndrome,[12] obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD),[12] and selective mutism.[12][13] While acknowledging that her diagnosis "has limited me before", she does not view her autism as an illness and has instead called it her "superpower".[13]"

Autism AND OCD!  What a combination!  She's a WINNER!

RE (

'This Is All Wrong,' Greta Thunberg Tells World Leaders At U.N. Climate Session

September 23, 201911:24 AM ET

Bill Chappell

Greta Thunberg has a message for world leaders at the United Nations this week: "We'll be watching you." Speaking at the Climate Action Summit in New York, Thunberg added, "This is all wrong. I shouldn't be up here. I should be back in school, on the other side of the ocean."

But instead, Thunberg is trying to convince politicians to take climate change seriously, and to do something to stop a global warming trend that will affect the world's children more than it affects anyone who's currently in power.

In an impassioned speech, Thunberg told those who hold office, "you all come to us young people for hope. How dare you? You have stolen my dreams, and my childhood with your empty words, and yet I'm one of the lucky ones. People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing."
Young People Lead Millions To Protest Global Inaction On Climate Change
Young People Lead Millions To Protest Global Inaction On Climate Change
Greta Thunberg To U.S.: 'You Have A Moral Responsibility' On Climate Change
Greta Thunberg To U.S.: 'You Have A Moral Responsibility' On Climate Change

Saying that the world is now in the early stages of a mass extinction, Thunberg criticized those who still speak of the crisis in terms of money and economic growth.

"How dare you?" she asked again, growing increasingly emotional as the audience cheered.

Citing more than 30 years' worth of scientific studies and warnings that greenhouse gases and other factors were establishing a dangerous new environmental trend, Thunberg criticized politicians for not developing solutions and strategies to confront that threat.

"We'll be watching you," climate activist Greta Thunberg told world leaders Monday, speaking at the U.N. Climate Action Summit in New York City.
Johannes Eisele/AFP/Getty Images

"You say you hear us and that you understand the urgency. But no matter how sad and angry I am, I do not want to believe that. Because if you really understood the situation and still kept on failing to act, then you would be evil. And that I refuse to believe."

Thunberg then drilled into one aspect of a current international plan, which includes the goal of cutting current emissions levels in half over the next 10 years.

But that plan, she said, only provides a 50% chance of keeping the warming trend below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

"Fifty percent may be acceptable to you," Thunberg said, before listing the many assumptions that underlie the estimate, and the challenges that could thwart success.
Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: John of Wallan on September 23, 2019, 02:40:25 PM

Plenty of moisture in the ground here despite lower than average rainfall. I am making preparations in case we have a hot dry summer.


Post some pics of your Doomstead!


Here is a picture of my mystery wattle just planted.
Happy to post pics of items around the place but concerned if I post too much that identifies my location all the local Ali Babba's will be visiting to help themselves...
With this in mind see picture of my front yard as seen from the road... ;D

Title: Re: The Environment Board
Post by: RE on September 23, 2019, 03:22:43 PM

Plenty of moisture in the ground here despite lower than average rainfall. I am making preparations in case we have a hot dry summer.


Post some pics of your Doomstead!


Here is a picture of my mystery wattle just planted.
Happy to post pics of items around the place but concerned if I post too much that identifies my location all the local Ali Babba's will be visiting to help themselves...
With this in mind see picture of my front yard as seen from the road... ;D


I don't think any Zombies will be able to peg your location from those pics.  :icon_sunny:

Title: 💰 Saving the Planet Means Overthrowing the Ruling Elites
Post by: RE on September 24, 2019, 06:17:58 AM (

Sep 23, 2019
TD originals
Saving the Planet Means Overthrowing the Ruling Elites

Mr. Fish / Truthdig

Friday’s climate strike by students across the globe will have no more impact than the mass mobilizations by women following the election of Donald Trump or the hundreds of thousands of protesters who took to the streets to denounce the Iraq War. This does not mean these protests should not have taken place. They should have. But such demonstrations need to be grounded in the bitter reality that in the corridors of power we do not count. If we lived in a democracy, which we do not, our aspirations, rights and demands, especially the demand that we confront the climate emergency, would have an impact. We would be able to vote representatives into power in government to carry out change. We would be able to demand environmental justice from the courts. We would be able to divert resources to the elimination of carbon emissions.

Voting, lobbying, petitioning and protesting to induce the ruling elites to respond rationally to the climate catastrophe have proved no more effective than scrofula victims’ appeals to Henry VIII to cure them with a royal touch. The familiar tactics employed over the past few decades by environmentalists have been spectacular failures. In 1900 the burning of fossil fuel—mostly coal—produced about 2 billion tons of carbon dioxide a year. That number had risen threefold by 1950. Today the level is 20 times higher than the 1900 figure. During the last decade the increase in CO2 was 100 to 200 times faster than what the earth experienced during the transition from the last ice age. On May 11 the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii recorded 415.26 parts per million of CO2 in the air. It’s believed to be the highest concentration since humans evolved. We will embrace a new paradigm for resistance or die.

The ruling elites and the corporations they serve are the principal obstacles to change. They cannot be reformed. And this means revolution, which is what Extinction Rebellion seeks in calling for an “international rebellion” on Oct. 7, when it will attempt to shut down city centers around the globe in acts of sustained, mass civil disobedience. Power has to be transferred into our hands. And since the elites won’t give up power willingly, we will have to take it through nonviolent action.

Protests can be the beginning of political consciousness. But they can also be empty political theater. They can be used to celebrate our moral probity—advertisements, especially in the age of social media, for ourselves. They can be a boutique activism in which protesters allow themselves to be funneled through police barricades and arrests are politely choreographed, resulting in a few hours in jail and the credentialing of the demonstrators as radicals. They can be used to distance ourselves from a repugnant political figure such as Donald Trump, while leaving us silent and complicit when the same policies are carried out by a supposed progressive such as Barack Obama. This is a game the state has learned to play to its advantage. As long as we do not disrupt the machine, as long as we protest according to their rules, the elites will let us march through the streets of Washington in pussy hats or walk out of school for a day.

When power is threatened, as it was in the sustained protests during the Occupy encampments and at Standing Rock, the ruling elites react very differently. They employ the full weight of the surveillance state to demonize the protesters, arrest and detain the leadership and infiltrate agents provocateurs to carry out violent assaults to justify the use of the police and security forces to shut the protests down.

Preemptive efforts by the security forces to harass and thwart Extinction Rebellion’s planned October occupation of city centers, an action designed to negatively affect commerce and bring parts of major cities to a standstill, have already begun. Roger Hallam, the co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, was arrested Sept. 14 and charged with attempting to cause a disruption at Heathrow Airport by using a drone. Hallam has called Heathrow—which climate activists say emits 18 million tons of carbon dioxide a year, more than the total emissions of 118 countries—“a crime against humanity.” He and other activists have vowed to halt the airport’s plans to build a third runway. Hallam’s case will be heard at the Isleworth Crown Court on Oct. 14, meaning he will not be released until after the Oct. 7 protests. In addition, other Extinction Rebellion organizers, including Andrew Medhurst, have been arrested in England, and police have seized their phones and computers.

It does not matter who is the public face of the corporate state. This is not about political personalities. It was Obama, after all, who oversaw a coordinated national effort to eradicate the Occupy encampments and place the water protectors at Standing Rock under siege. Obama’s environmental policies, despite his lip service to curbing global warming and his support of the nonbinding Paris climate accord—which the climate scientist James Hansen called a fraud—were appalling. U.S. oil production rose every year he was in office, an increase of 88%. It was the largest domestic increase in oil production in American history. Obama opened offshore drilling to American oil companies as if he were Sarah Palin. “American energy production, you wouldn’t always know it, but it went up every year I was president,” Obama told an audience at Rice University last year. “And you know that … suddenly America’s like the biggest oil producer … that was me, people.”

Democrats, like Republicans, serve corporate power. They will not end government subsidies for the fossil fuel industry and the extraction industries. They will not impose carbon taxes to keep fossil fuels in the ground. They will not limit overconsumption. The technologies they invest in—fracking, hybrid cars, genetically modified food—are designed to maintain or expand consumption levels, not reduce them. They will not redirect the trillions of dollars and scientific and technical expertise from the military and corporations toward saving us from environmental catastrophe. The rhetoric and gimmicks they use to placate the public, from carbon credits to wind turbines and solar panels, are, as the scientist James Lovelock says, the equivalent of 18th-century doctors attempting to cure serious diseases with leeches and mercury.

The creation of ever more complex bureaucratic and technocratic systems in an age of diminishing resources is a characteristic of dying civilizations. Civilizations in their final phase frantically search for new methods of exploitation rather than adapt to a changing environment. They repress and exploit the lower classes with greater and greater ruthlessness to maintain the insatiable appetites among the elites for power, luxury and hedonism. The worse things get, the more the elites retreat into their private enclaves. The more out of touch the elites become, the more catastrophe is assured. This self-defeating process degrades the ecosystem until catastrophic systems collapse.

The ruling elites, trained in business schools and managerial programs, are not equipped to confront the existential problems caused by climate catastrophe. They are trained to maintain, no matter the cost, the systems of global capitalism. They are systems managers. They lack the intellectual capacity and imagination to search for solutions outside the narrow parameters of global capitalism.

Those living in the global south are already suffering and dying from the effects of global warming, for which the wealthy industrialized nations of the global north bear most of the responsibility. The richest 0.54%, or 42 million people across the world, are responsible for more emissions than the poorest half of the global population, or 3.8 billion people. These elites are sacrificing the poorest on the planet first as they work up the social and economic hierarchy to extinguish us all.

We have to let go of our relentless positivism, our absurd mania for hope, our naive belief that with grit and determination we can solve all problems. We have to face the bleakness before us. We live in a world already heavily damaged by global warming, which will inevitably get worse. Refusal to participate in the further destruction of the planet means a rupture with traditional politics. It means noncooperation with authority. It means defying in every nonviolent way possible consumer capitalism, militarism and imperialism. It means adjusting our lifestyle, including becoming vegans, to thwart the forces bent upon our annihilation. And it means waves of sustained civil disobedience until the machine is broken.

The biosphere, including the Amazon rainforest, the oceans and the polar ice caps, is visibly deteriorating. Heat waves are crippling Europe, Australia and the American Southwest. Floods devastate the Midwest. Last week, southeast Texas suffered heavy flooding and deaths when it was hit by the seventh-wettest tropical cyclone in U.S. history, with some areas receiving more than 40 inches of rainfall within three days. Monster hurricanes ravage the Caribbean and the shores of the United States. Wildfires consume the forests of the West Coast. But despite the tangible signs of a climate emergency, the elites continue to assure us we can live as we have always lived.

The mathematical models for the future of the planet have three devastating trajectories: a massive die-off of perhaps 70 percent of the human population and then an uneasy stabilization; extinction of humans and most other species; an immediate and radical reconfiguration of human society to protect the biosphere and make it more diverse and productive. This third scenario, which most scientists admit is unlikely, is dependent on a halt to the production and consumption of fossil fuels, converting to a plant-based diet to destroy the animal agriculture industry—almost as large a contributor to greenhouse gases as the fossil fuel industry—and greening the deserts and restoring rainforests. We know what we have to do if our children are to have a future. The only question left is how do we empower leaders who will save us.

Climate scientists warn that we will soon reach a tipping point when the biosphere becomes so degraded no effort to save the ecosystem will halt runaway climate change. We may already be there. The tipping point, many believe, is a further increase in global temperatures of 2 degrees Celsius. At that point “feedback loops” will see environmental catastrophes exacerbate each other.

We must embrace a new radicalism. We must carry out sustained civil disobedience to disrupt the machinery of exploitation, even as we prepare for the inevitable dislocations and catastrophes ahead. We must alter our lifestyles and consumption to cut our personal carbon footprints. And we must organize to replace existing structures of power with ones capable of coping with the crisis before us.

Chris Hedges
Title: 🔥 Greta Thunberg Out-Trolls Donald Trump After US Leader's Sarcastic Tweet
Post by: RE on September 25, 2019, 12:39:31 AM (

Greta Thunberg Out-Trolls Donald Trump After US Leader's Sarcastic Tweet
Donald Trump, 73, commented: "She seems like a very happy young girl looking forward to a bright and wonderful future. So nice to see!"
World | Reuters | Updated: September 25, 2019 04:46 IST


Greta Thunberg Out-Trolls Donald Trump After US Leader's Sarcastic Tweet

Greta Thunberg shot back at at US President Donald Trump's attempt to mock her

United Nations:

Swedish teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg shot back on Tuesday at U.S. President Donald Trump's attempt to mock her on Twitter by changing her profile on the social media site to reflect Trump's taunting remark.

Late on Monday Trump retweeted a clip of the 16-year-old's speech to a United Nations climate summit in which she angrily denounced world leaders for failing to tackle climate change by demanding: "How dare you?"

Trump, 73, commented: "She seems like a very happy young girl looking forward to a bright and wonderful future. So nice to see!"

By Tuesday Thunberg shot back, changing her Twitter biography to: "A very happy young girl looking forward to a bright and wonderful future."

A Reuters video of Thunberg glaring at Trump as he entered the United Nations in New York on Monday went viral on social media. Trump has questioned climate science and has challenged every major U.S. regulation aimed at combating climate change.

Thunberg started missing school on Fridays a year ago to protest for climate action outside the Swedish parliament, inspiring millions of children and sparking a global climate strike movement known as Fridays for Future.

On Tuesday, the hashtags #GretaThunbergOutdidTrump and #BeBest were trending in the United States. Be Best is Melania Trump's campaign against cyber bullying.

Thunberg is in the running for the Nobel Peace Prize, one of the few people whose nomination has become known before the awards ceremony. She is the bookmakers' favorite to win the prize next month.

Trump has made the case that he deserves to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and commented again on Monday when asked about the topic.

"I think I'm going to get a Nobel Prize for a lot of things, if they gave it out fairly, which they don't," Trump said.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
Title: 🔥 Another global climate strike is coming Friday. These kids aren’t giving up.
Post by: RE on September 27, 2019, 12:41:13 AM
I gotta write an article on the Greta Propaganda.  ::)

Ughh. Too much to do!  I gotta protect & defend the Doomstead Diner in the War of Clans!  My Peace Shield ran out and there are Invaders Lurking outside my town!  I have to get more Warriors trained and get my Defenses Upgraded before I go out and CRUSH these Motherfuckers who are Disturbing my Peaceful Wa in my Community!  I will be ready for them and I will SQUASH THEM LIKE BUGS!

Another global climate strike is coming Friday. These kids aren’t giving up.

Greta Thunberg is targeting the airline industry this time.
By Umair Irfan Sep 26, 2019, 3:20pm EDT

Youth climate activists like Greta Thunberg (center) say they will continue going on strike to protest government inaction on climate change. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Another youth-led climate strike is planned for Friday, September 27, a week after organizers rallied more than 4 million people across more than 150 countries into the streets in a strike to demand action on climate change.

Last week’s strike was intended to pressure world leaders headed to the United Nations Climate Action Summit on Monday, a meeting convened to encourage more ambitious climate commitments. Youth activist Greta Thunberg, who began striking alone outside Swedish Parliament in August 2018, opened the summit admonishing world leaders for failing to do enough to limit climate change.

“My message is that we’ll be watching you,” she said. “We are in the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth.”

While 67 countries this week indicated their intention to enhance their commitments to climate action under the Paris climate accord by the end of 2020, the summit failed to deliver big commitments to limit greenhouse gas emissions from the world’s largest emitters: China, the United States, and India.

Ultimately, youth activists didn’t get all of the results they wanted, but the summit showed they changed the conversation around climate change on the international stage. World leaders noted that such an event would not have happened without the pressure from young people.

“Each week for months and months now we’ve had young people speak,” said French President Emmanuel Macron. “I think they’ve identified an absolute urgency that we have to respond to here.”

And so youth and other campaigners are planning to keep up the pressure, continuing the weekly strikes that preceded the massive demonstration last week with another one this Friday. Dozens of events are planned around the world.

Unlike last Friday, public schools in New York City won’t excuse students to attend the strike. But Italy’s education minister Lorenzo Fioramonti wrote on Facebook that he invites students and families to participate in the strike in his country. In Washington, DC, activists may try to snarl traffic in the morning by blocking key intersections, as they did on Monday.
Title: Goldman Sachs released a 34-page analysis of the impact of climate change.
Post by: Surly1 on September 29, 2019, 07:56:39 AM
When the Vampire Squid says it's bad, perhaps even the elites will listen. They won't listen to Greta, but when the Squid speaks...

Goldman Sachs released a 34-page analysis of the impact of climate change. And the results are terrifying. (


Yusuf Khan
Sep. 25, 2019, 09:12 AM

REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

  • A Goldman Sachs report on the impact of climate change on cities across the world makes for grim reading. 
  • Rising temperatures would lead to changing disease patterns, more intense and longer-lasting heatwaves, more destructive weather events, and pressure on the availability and quality of water for drinking and agriculture.
  • Major cities were also highlighted at risk of flooding with parts of New York, Tokyo, and Lagos all at risk of being partially submerged. 
  • View Markets Insider for more stories.

Goldman Sachs released a report on the effect of climate change on cities around the world and the results made for grim reading. 

The bank's Global Markets Institute, led by Amanda Hindlian, warned of "significant" potential risks to the world's largest cities, which are especially vulnerable to more frequent storms, higher temperatures, rising sea levels, and storm surges.  

Cities generate about 80% of global GDP and are home to more than half of the world's population, a share that Goldman says, citing the United Nations, is projected to reach two-thirds by 2050. About 40% of the global population lives within 100 kilometers of a coast, it says, and 1 in 10 live in areas less than 10 meters above sea level.

Goldman highlighted three cities which would be subject to those storm surges and in the future could face harmful flooding — New York, Tokyo, and Lagos. Miami, Alexandria, Dhaka, and Shanghai face major flood risks due to being less than 11 meters above sea level. 

New yorkGoldman Sachs

Goldman's researchers said that when starting the study they took a broad consensus that human activity, namely emission of greenhouse gasses "is causing the earth to warm in ways that are affecting the climate."

Natural ecosystems would be damaged, and risks to human health would rise, as well as pressures on food and drinking water. 

Agriculture would also be massively affected: "Warmer temperatures and shifting precipitation patterns could reduce yields and nutritional quality as well change growing seasons and agricultural zones around the world."

Goldman gave some fairly stark warnings about potential outcomes:

  • More frequent, more intense, and longer-lasting heatwaves.The consequences will affect human health, productivity, economic activity, and agriculture. "Higher surface temperatures could exacerbate the warming process by causing permafrost to melt, releasing further methane and CO2 into the atmosphere."
  • Destructive weather events, including storms, winds, flooding and fires. It's not just New York, Tokyo and Lagos. "Other major low-lying coastal or already flood-prone cities include Shanghai, Dhaka, Mumbai and Karachi – each of which has a population of 15 million people or more."
  • Changing disease patterns. "Warmer temperatures could cause disease vectors to migrate from the tropics to regions where people have less immunity; this is true not only for viruses like malaria and dengue fever but also for water-borne and food-borne diseases."
  • Shifting agricultural patterns and food shortages. "Livestock could be affected by higher temperatures and reduced water supplies. Ocean acidification is likely to put stress on aquatic populations and affect current fishing patterns. Some of these changes are already underway. Some climate scientists, for example, estimate that coral reefs will be all but extinct over the course of the century due to ocean acidification."
  • Water. "Half of the world's population will live in water-stressed areas as soon as 2025," Goldman notes, citing the World Health Orgnization. "Even in non-stressed areas, the quality of surface water could deteriorate as more rain and storms drive erosion and the release of toxins. These dynamics could affect everything from the availability of drinking water for people to a shortage of water for livestock and crops (with negative effects for the food supply) to decreases in hydroelectric power generation."

Lagos and TokyoGoldman Sachs

The bank said that all those factors would "affect economic activity, damage infrastructure – from buildings to transportation to water and waste-management systems – and disproportionately harm vulnerable residents."

"Despite the uncertainty around the timing and scale of the impact, it may be prudent for some cities to start investing in adaptation now," Goldman says. "Urban adaptation could drive one of the largest infrastructure build-outs in history. Given the scale of the task, urban adaptation will likely need to draw on innovative sources of financing."

Global populationsGoldman Sachs

Title: ☃️ Montana Governor declares emergency as rare September storm pounds Rockies
Post by: RE on September 30, 2019, 01:24:18 AM (

Montana Governor declares emergency as rare September storm pounds Rockies
Gov. Steve Bullock said as much as three feet of snow had fallen in some parts of the state.
September snow in several states, severe weather across the country

Sept. 29, 2019, 2:00 PM AKDT / Updated Sept. 29, 2019, 4:54 PM AKDT
By Tim Stelloh


Montana Gov. Steve Bullock declared an emergency Sunday as a rare September snowstorm walloped the Northern Rockies with powerful winds and as much as three feet of snow.

Calling the storm “unprecedented,” Bullock said that strong winds downed power lines that shut down roads, triggered outages and hampered cell phone service.

"In terms of how widespread and strong this storm has been, we still have a lot of data crunching to do, but it appears that this storm could end up being one of, if not the strongest on record" for early fall, said Matthew Jackson, a National Weather Service senior meteorologist.

Jackson said a three-day period in September 1934 was the last time so much snow fell in such a short amount of time.

But that record — 13.2 inches in the city of Great Falls — had already been eclipsed by this weekend's snowy weather, when nearly 19 inches fell in just two days.

"As we are still snowing, that number will likely increase tonight," he said.
People walk along a snow covered street in Helena on Sunday.Matt Volz / AP

Bullock's emergency declaration targeted eight counties in western Montana as well as the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, allowing state officials to more easily help hard-hit areas.

There were no immediate reports of injuries or deaths. No major interstates were affected, though the state Department of Transportation said that snow and ice had closed several smaller roads.

The storm mostly spared the state's largest