COMMENTS: 79
How Many Earth Days Do We Have Left?
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Environment headlines via email.
Plan A -- the western fossil-fuel-based, auto-centered, throwaway economic model -- is not going to work for China, India, or the 3 billion other people in developing countries, and it will not continue to work for the industrial countries either.
It's time for Plan B -- an all-out response at wartime speed proportionate to the magnitude of threats facing civilization.
The four overriding goals of PLAN B 3.0 are to stabilize climate and population, eradicate poverty, and restore the earth's damaged ecosystems. Failure to reach any one of these goals will likely mean failure to reach the others as well.
"We are crossing natural thresholds that we cannot see and violating deadlines that we do not recognize," says Brown. "These deadlines are set by nature. Nature is the timekeeper, but we cannot see the clock."
Lester Brown has been described by the Washington Post as "one of the world's most influential thinkers." After working with the Department of Agriculture in international agricultural development, Brown helped establish the Overseas Development Council, then founded Worldwatch Institute, publishers of annual State of the World and Vital Signs reports. In 2001, he left Worldwatch, founded Earth Policy Institute, and published Eco-Economy: Building an Economy for the Earth.
TERRENCE McNALLY: When you were involved in agriculture in the Kennedy administration, few thought about the environment, unless it was about conservation or wilderness. A bit later, environmentalism was usually local -- a polluting factory or a threatened forest. Yet very early you had a global understanding of environmental issues. How did that happen?
LESTER BROWN: It was probably due to, first, living two and a half years in villages in India in 1956, where I could see the food/population problem beginning to unfold; and second, my training in the sciences, which gave me a feel for how natural systems work.
McNALLY: What has driven you to write Plan B, and then Plan B 2.0 and Plan B 3.0?
BROWN: One of the goals of the Earth Policy Institute is to provide a vision of a kind of world we want and a sense of how we get from here to there. Plan B was the first version of this.
With 3.0, we've changed the subtitle from Rescuing a Planet Under Stress and a Civilization in Trouble to simply Mobilizing to Save Civilization. We used to think about saving the planet, and that's still essential, but what's really at stake now is civilization itself.
We have a growing backlog of unresolved problems in the world: deforestation, collapsing fisheries, expanding deserts, falling water tables, eroding soils, you can go down the list. The fallout from these problems is becoming more and more difficult to manage, especially for governments in developing countries.
A number of countries have developed enough to bring down mortality but not enough to bring down fertility. With a rapid rate of population growth, they're caught in what demographers call "the demographic trap." If you can't break out of it, eventually you begin to break down.
17 of the top 20 failing states have rapid rates of population growth. These are the countries where most of the 70 million people added each year are being born. As this list of failing states grows each year, we have to ask how many failing states before we have a failing civilization? No one knows the answer. We haven't been there before.
On top of traditional environmental problems, we now have new stresses like soaring oil prices that put a lot of pressure on low and middle-income oil-importing countries. Then as the United States converts a growing share of our grain into fuel, we drive world grain prices to all-time highs, creating instability in low- and middle-income countries that import grain. We face the risk that the combination of rising oil and food prices will greatly increase the number of failing states. I think the number of failing states in the world is now the key indicator as to whether civilization is going to succeed or fail.
McNALLY: The enormous global inequity in income and wealth breeds inequity in health, in education, and in all phases of life, doesn't it?
BROWN: There is a vast opportunity gap, and those born into societies with few opportunities become recruits for international terrorist groups. In Africa, revolutionaries who want to overthrow governments simply recruit kids -- 10, 12, 14 years old -- give them guns, and let them go. As I look at the world today, terrorism is a problem and a threat, but even bigger threats are the persistence of poverty, continuing population growth, and climate change.
McNALLY: In one of the earlier versions of Plan B, you pointed out the danger of our attention to terrorism distracting us from these other issues. In 3.0, you've knit those problems together even more clearly. Now you're saying they're no longer "either/or," but they are inextricably linked.
BROWN: No question. The money we lay out to deal with things like population growth, environmental degradation, spreading water shortages, climate change, etc., is really the new security budget because these are the real threats.
The climate change threat is enormous. Last August an area of Arctic sea ice twice the size of Britain melted in one week. Scientists have never seen anything like this before.
Greenland has an ice sheet a mile thick or more, covering almost the entire island, which is three times the size of Texas. The rate at which it's melting now is extraordinary. There's a large glacier on the west coast, where the ice sheet flows into the sea, 3 miles wide and a mile deep, and it's flowing at 2 meters an hour. Glaciers normally flow at 80 to 100 meters per year. This is 2 meters per hour!
McNALLY: How much has global temperature risen so far?
BROWN: About one degree Fahrenheit over the last several decades. By the end of this century, temperature could rise anywhere from 3 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit.
McNALLY: But it's much greater than that at the poles, isn't it?
BROWN: Yes. We report temperature changes as a global average, but we have to keep in mind that temperature rises faster over land than over oceans, faster near the poles than near the equator, and faster in the interior of continents than in coastal regions. In parts of Alaska, Northern Canada, Siberia and areas around the Arctic Circle, including Greenland, temperatures have already gone up 3 to 7 degrees.
The west Antarctic ice sheet is not really on the continent itself, but is supported by a number of islands. When it starts to go, it could break up very quickly.
McNALLY: What might be the repercussions of that?
BROWN: If Greenland melts entirely, that adds 23 feet to the sea. The west Antarctic ice sheet adds 16 feet -- so together almost 40 feet. If that happens, many of the world's coastal cities would be under water. This is not going to happen in years or decades, but will be spread out over we hope at least a century or two. But still the rate becomes alarming. Even a one-meter rise in sea level threatens a lot of cities.
A large share of the world's population lives pretty close to the coast. If sea level were to rise 39 feet, there would be at least 600 million rising sea refugees. What happens to the price of land in the interior, if vast numbers are forced inland?
McNALLY: When people talk about melting glaciers, they usually refer to Greenland, the Arctic and Antarctica. You point out that throughout the world we depend on mountainous glaciers for a steady supply of water. Los Angeles, for instance, is vulnerable to this.
BROWN: Mountain glaciers are melting everywhere. The Alps and Andes could be almost entirely gone in half a century. But I'm even more concerned about the Tibetan plateau. All the major rivers in Asia originate in the Himalayas: the Indus, the Ganges, the Mekong, the Yangtze, and the Yellow River.
McNALLY: These rivers sustain huge numbers of people.
BROWN: During the dry season, the Ganges is fed by the ice melt from the Gangotri glacier, a vast glacier that could be gone entirely by mid-century. If we can't close enough coal-fired power plants fast enough to save it, then the Ganges will become a seasonal river that no longer flows during the dry season. Imagine the consequences of that. Think about the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers that irrigate the wheat and rice fields of Asia.
McNALLY: Along with the U.S., China and India are two of the three largest grain-producing countries.
BROWN: The two countries most affected by the melting of the glaciers in the Himalayas and the Tibetan plateau will be India and China, which happen to be the two countries now building most of the world's coal-fired power plants.
McNALLY: In other words, they're putting up more and more greenhouse gases at a time when their very survival is dependent upon cutting them back. Those kinds of connections and interactions are some of our biggest blind spots, aren't they?
BROWN: We face four big challenges right now. We need to stabilize climate, stabilize population, eradicate poverty and restore the earth's damaged ecosystems.
We probably cannot stabilize population growth humanely unless we eradicate poverty. Stabilizing population means making sure that all youngsters get at least an elementary school education, girls as well as boys. It means providing basic health care, immunization against childhood diseases, the basic fundamentals of health care at the village level.
We have to provide reproductive health care and family planning services as well. There are at least 200 million women in the world who want to limit their number of children, but who lack access to family planning programs. The cost of family planning for these women over a year would be a tiny fraction of what we're spending in Iraq.
McNALLY: Iraq is now about 3 billion a week. Two years of Iraq funding could solve almost all the biggest problems we're facing. Talk about misspent resources!
BROWN: In terms of annual expenditures, the total bill for Plan B is less than $200 billion a year. I call it the New Defense Bill, because -- terrorism notwithstanding -- the real threats to our future now are climate change, continuing rapid population growth, continuing destruction of the economy's environmental support systems, the things that lead to failing states.
McNALLY: I've always said that the key to minimizing the threat of terrorism is to make terrorists pariahs in their own societies.
BROWN:
I can remember what we did in the post-World War II period. Normally after you win a war, you pillage. Instead we launched the Marshall Plan to rebuild the very countries with which we'd been engaged in one of the most deadly wars in history.
McNALLY: We did the opposite after World War I, and the result of that was World War II.
Let's imagine civilization is our patient. We've talked about some of the symptoms: climate change, peak oil, loss of water and soil. Briefly, what are the diagnosis and the recommended treatment?
BROWN: Looking at the world through an ecological lens, I see a mounting backlog of unresolved problems, many of them associated with population growth, including deforestation, expanding desert, deteriorating grasslands, eroding soils, falling water tables. Very few of these trends have been turned around; instead they're getting worse and becoming more difficult to manage. Now add to that climate change and peak oil.
McNALLY: Peak oil is the moment at which we've taken half of the oil out of the earth. One might say, "Only half ... we're in good shape." But, once we reach peak oil, we've used up the easiest half, and every subsequent barrel becomes more expensive.
BROWN: We have spent our lifetimes in a world where, except for an occasional blip here and there, oil production has always been increasing. In a world where oil production is no longer increasing, no country can get more oil unless another gets less, and that's a very different world. It creates a lot of tensions. It creates a politics of scarcity and rising oil prices.
As the United States shifts an ever larger share of its grain harvest into the production of fuel, the world is now facing quite possibly the worst food price inflation in history.
McNALLY: When we did an interview on Plan B four or five years ago, you predicted the current battle for grain. Does it go into the gas tank of a rich person or the mouth of a poor person?
BROWN: Nearly 20 percent of the 2007 grain harvest has been used to produce ethanol to satisfy, at most, 4 percent of our automotive fuel needs. From an agricultural point of view, the automotive fuel demand is insatiable. The grain required to fill a 25-gallon SUV tank with ethanol would feed one person for a year.
McNALLY: So the shift of grain to ethanol raises grain prices for us and the rest of the world, condemns millions to starvation -- all to supply a speck of our energy demand.
BROWN: We're in an ironic situation where as taxpayers we are subsidizing the conversion of grain into ethanol and therefore a rise in our own food prices. So we pay twice, on April 15 when we settle our taxes and then every time we go to the supermarket checkout counter.
McNALLY: Let's shift to solutions -- eradicating poverty, family planning, education and so on. You say that for $200 billion a year we could solve them.
BROWN: Yes -- one-fifth of global military expenditures which are now over a trillion, or 1,000 billion, per year. $100 billion weapon systems are almost useless now. You can't use them to deal with the problems we're facing.
McNALLY: What are the solutions?
BROWN: To slow climate change, we've devised a plan to cut carbon emissions 80 percent -- not by 2050, which is what politicians like to talk about -- but by 2020.
McNALLY: An 80 percent reduction in 12 years. How do we do it?
BROWN: There are three components to the plan: first, dramatically and systematically raise the efficiency of the world energy economy; second, massive investment in renewable sources of energy; and third, increase the earth's tree cover by planting billions of trees.
On efficiency, let me offer one simple example that most people are familiar with. If we replace incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescents, we can cut global electricity use 12 percent, allowing us to close 700 of the world's 2,360 coal-fired power plants.
40 percent of the world's electricity currently comes from coal, but by 2020 we see wind providing 40 percent.
McNALLY: In a dozen years ,you see wind replacing coal as the dominant energy source?
BROWN: There's 100,000 wind turbines in operation today, so that means building about a million and a half more, producing two megawatts each: 3 million megawatts in global wind-generating capacity. But a million and a half wind turbines over a dozen years is peanuts compared with producing 65 million cars a year, which we do now.
The Texas State Legislature and the Republican governor, Rick Perry, are putting together a package to harness that state's abundant wind energy. They're planning about 23,000 megawatts of wind energy, which will do away with 23 coal-fired power plants and supply half the state's residential electricity.
McNALLY: How quickly will that happen?
BROWN: By 2020. They're moving very fast.
We can install a million and a half wind turbines and combine that technology with plug-in hybrids. Add a second storage battery and a plug-in to a Toyota Prius, and you can recharge the batteries at night. The car's batteries become a storage facility for wind energy.
McNALLY: Toyota says they'll have plug-ins by 2010, and they're in competition with other companies who say they'll have it quicker.
BROWN: The big competition right now is between Toyota with the modified Prius and GM with the Chevrolet Volt. The gasoline equivalent cost of running cars on cheap wind-generated electricity is less than a dollar a gallon.
McNALLY: Wow! Will it take tax subsidies or incentives to get us to ramp up wind and renewables?
BROWN: The key is to get the market to tell the environmental truth, and right now the market does not do that. The market does a lot of things well, but it does not do a good job of incorporating what we call the "indirect cost" or what economists call "externalities." For example, the climate change and pollution costs of fossil fuels. The simple way to do that is to add carbon taxes and offset that increase by lowering income taxes.
McNALLY: Make it tax neutral, so that your pocket book bite is the same at the end of the year. But instead of taxing labor or work, which we want more of, we tax pollution and greenhouse gases, which we want less of.
BROWN: So we end up with more jobs and less climate destruction -- a win-win situation.
McNALLY: In terms of transforming our industries, you point to World War II, which you lived through.
BROWN:
In his State of the Union address one month after Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt announced that we were going to produce 25,000 tanks, 60,000 planes, 20,000 artillery planes. It was extraordinary. No one had ever seen arms production like this.
Then he called in the leaders of the auto industry and said, "Guys, guess what, we're going to ban the sale of private automobiles in the United States." The automobile industry had no choice but to switch to producing arms. And we didn't produce just the 60,000 planes, which was the goal, we produced 229,000. We exceeded every one of those arms production goals.
McNALLY: So it is your sense that we could make that same kind of a massive shift if leaders take this seriously?
BROWN: No question. It didn't take decades to restructure the U.S. industrial economy. It didn't take years. We did it in a matter of months. That's the exciting and encouraging thing about what we're challenged with now. It is entirely doable.
We have it in our power to restructure the world energy economy and avoid disastrous climate change. All we need is the leadership, the vision, and the will.
Stay up to date with the latest Environment headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Rune on Apr 22, 2008 1:02 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Last year, total energy consumption was a little over $300 billion while total tax revenue was about $450 billion. We could theoretically impose a 150% tax on energy and still be revenue neutral, but then what? That level of taxation would get us a small short term drop in quantity of energy used, with some more, modest reductions over time as energy efficient technologies became worthwhile and came online. However, the impact of the tax would be offset by the fact that businesses and individuals would no longer be paying income and other federal taxes, which has the same effect as an offsetting tax credit. Moreover, the Jevon's Paradox holds that as energy efficiency increases and temporary declines in energy demand cause prices to drop, the tendency is to find more ways to use energy (which seems momentarily cheaper and more widely available), which undoes much of the potential conservation benefit of energy efficiency in the first place.
Long story short, just for an example, if we taxed all energy at the equivalent of about $50 per barrel of oil we could expect to see a 2% or 3% drop in consumption. Do that two or three times and you will be hitting the revenue neutral limit. From there, either the carbon tax rates go flat or we start giving back as much money as we raise through carbon taxes. That is neither promising nor practical.
I find the notion of taking extreme and urgent measures mentioned in the earlier part of the article to be more realistic. That will be necessary to meet any realistic goal of zeroing out carbon emissions during or not long after our projected lifetimes. Stern regulation and even non-price rationing is already kicking in for water in some places, and we have used such methods in the great wars the article alludes to.
If we ever get serious about dealing with our energy and climate vulnerabilities, and the related economic consequences (as well as the indirectly related matter of great wealth inequality that makes any economic future bleak for the masses), we will need to come up with more than "market based solution," at least in the short to medium term of the transition. But somewhere along the way, we need to make a major shift in how we live and what we value if we hope to live within the Earth's limits without reaching a new point of equilibrium with the most brutal means of population reduction.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: A revenue neutral carbon tax does not add up to 80% emission cuts by 2020
Posted by: skewitall
» RE: A revenue neutral carbon tax does not add up to 80% emission cuts by 2020
Posted by: skewitall
» So don't be revenue neutral.
Posted by: KeepsonTickn
» Evidence showing that even large carbon taxes will only cut consumption a small amount
Posted by: Rune
» Jevon
Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: Jevon
Posted by: Rune
» Long story short!
Posted by: donl51
» You've sort of missed the point here.
Posted by: vmounts
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bitsfick on Apr 22, 2008 4:14 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Shortly after the village idiot was
Posted by: Sushi
» Gullible people
Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Shortly after the village idiot was
Posted by: PJAW
» RE: Shortly after the village idiot was
Posted by: donl51
» RE: Shortly after the village idiot was
Posted by: Cooltruth
Comments are closed-
Posted by: greentime on Apr 22, 2008 4:51 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who are we fooling by saying we have time?
We don't. We are already late.
Who are we fooling when we say "the government will take care of it"? Yep. Ourselves.
It is time to place the responsibility squarely where it belongs: on the ones who denied this reality, didn't and still don't listen, and pigged the power for their own fat lives. Yep, you know the ones.
Stop giving them your time. You've given them enough time.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: richholland on Apr 22, 2008 5:13 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good news for the world.
The Europe federation with its mixed economical and political system has taken sufficent measurements and is not seeing real problems for the next 100 years.
Maybe the american patriot still convinced the anglo/saxon capitalisme is the best system could read some books and THINK about life before he/she votes for another president.
Realise the communists made large kolchoses and got rid of the small farmers.
Now the big corporations take over from the small farmers and you call that FREEDOM.
But for the men in the street capitalistic or communistic hunger feels the same.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: williameon on Apr 22, 2008 5:31 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Party is over.
Two thousand and Twelve is the Magic Number.
How absurd?
Water boarded by Mother Nature.
The Planet Earth will shake, rattle and roll
Then turn on the Axis.
Sixty degrees.
In a twinkling of the eye,
Everything will change.
The Poles migrate and in the process
Wash away everything you know.
Cleansing the Planet!
A New World Order will rise from
The debts of this Destruction.
Affirming a new set of positive Goals and Ideals.
Civilizations have come and gone,
More times then we can remember.
Species have vanished without a trace.
What makes us any different?
Vanity?
Our GREED?
Mammoths and Saber Tooth Tigers once
Roamed the Earth.
We are in danger of becoming The Dinosaurs now!
Fossils frozen in Time,
Cemented in the Old Way.
One day we will be looked upon,
As a lower incarnation,
Who never evolved beyond our Differences?
Reptilian Fossils
Who crawled out of the Primordial Ooze
Looked into the reflection and became
Blinded by their own Vanity, Ambition and Greed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Plenty of Earth Days YES but, Human Days is another Question?
Posted by: donl51
» For that matter, how many biosphere days left?
Posted by: Daniel35
» Williameon, you've summed it up
Posted by: Cathyc
Comments are closed-
Posted by: john110 on Apr 22, 2008 5:58 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The rich can have it all? No they can't
Posted by: Cathyc
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Apr 22, 2008 6:37 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For everyone else, I'll tell you the best ways to be environmentalists and actually be proud of it:
1. Stop these wars for oil and end the war on drugs. It's time to overturn the 71 year ban on Cannabis and put its 25000 industrial uses to work. Talk about a biofuel that doesn't cause global warming and is good for a real economy. Since the current "market" is petroleum based all the way, it's RIGGED, not "free".
2. Quit supporting either the Republicans or Democrats. Both parties have been subsidizing Big Oil, Coal, and Nuclear for decades and they don't give a flying fuck about the health and well being of the people let alone the environment. Can you get either party to shift the subsidies away from Big Oil, Coal, and Nuclear and use it to build and maintain an energy infrastructure built on alternative renewables such as solar, wind, geothermal, hemp, etc ...? Not until you allow 3rd party progressive independents such as Ralph Nader, Cindy Sheehan, etc ... to replace these two corrupt parties in Washington. And again, the lopsided subsidization of fossil and nuclear energy over alternative renewables that have been proven to be both economically and ecologically beneficial also shows that the current market is RIGGED, not "free".
3. I don't see any so-called "liberals" or "progressives" addressing the issues of public transportation gone bad. Instead of taking bribes from Big Auto and Big Oil in the name of keeping oil artificially "cheap", why not make public transportation not only affordable but also better quality? Having travelled to big cities across the country and noticing the OBSCENELY high bus and rail fares despite the infrastructure not improving, don't you think it's time they quit bullshitting about newly painted trash bins and instead focused on repairing their creaking and rusty infrastructure? Raising the fares and yet allowing higher frequencies of mechanical/electrical failures and accidents sure tells me that something's way off. And what about those OBSCENELY high bus fare rates and their purposely limiting their routes thereby forcing more people to drive their autos to work? When you see public buses with fewer than 10 people on it or even a "NOT IN SERVICE" sign on it struggling through thick traffic, you'd be better off joining me in calling for these bus services to get their god damn motherfucking routes reformed so that more customers can come on board and actually be relieved.
4. Why not call for more suggestions to reward people who are frugal? I mean let's face it. Most companies don't give you any trade up program for say your old pc, tv, radio, etc ... so of course more petroleum is being burned to make more of garbage electronics that end up in the land fill the next year every time a slightly better version comes out. And let's talk about recycling and reusing. My wife and I reuse our plastic bottles that we'd save from our bottled juice drinks. I sure as hell don't mind making my own orange juice for example and filling it up in my old small plastic bottle time and again.
Look, for over 50 years, it's been the same doom and gloom talk which does nothing to convince people to save and push for better. All this leaves is the impression of "So what?" It's time to think differently and push for the better just like I've been doing all along so let's cut all this doom and gloom BULLSHIT talk out and cut to the chase, shall we?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's all doom and gloom BULLSHIT ! At this rate, no one will care to change their minds !
Posted by: donl51
» Translation: "vote for Nader" - 'cause a vote for Nader is a vote for McCain!
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» Nader sure beats Obama/Hillary anyday ! You can let the Dems ABUSE you for all I care !
Posted by: maxpayne
» It's NOT Doom and Gloom Bullshit !
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» since the discovery of agriculture?
Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: since the discovery of agriculture?
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» Oh yes it is !
Posted by: maxpayne
» Oh No It's Not !
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» RE: Oh YES it is ! People will still say "SO WHAT?"
Posted by: maxpayne
» My Party?
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» RE: My Party?
Posted by: maxpayne
» You're Half Cocked
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» And you're completely FUCKED BEYOND REPAIR!
Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: And you're completely FUCKED BEYOND REPAIR!
Posted by: Squarehead
» Maximum Pain is Smoking the hemp again.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner
» Sure beats POISONING oneself with RADIOACTIVE BULLSHIT.
Posted by: maxpayne
» You are already radioactive. How else do we date Egyptian mummies?
Posted by: AsteroidMiner
» You got it all wrong DUDE.
Posted by: maxpayne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: skewitall on Apr 22, 2008 7:30 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why doesn’t anyone talk about this? I’ll ask again….
Brown states, “We probably cannot stabilize population growth humanely unless we eradicate poverty.” “17 of the top 20 failing states have rapid rates of population growth.”
Well, we already knew that. So, what do we need to impose on them?
Or, should we just change our ways in the USA, and all will be fine?
Who wants a bathroom with a toilet? Who wants a kitchen sink?
Can we all have those two things today, or ever?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The developed world v. the developing
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Apr 22, 2008 9:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary Clinton wants to start throwing Nukes around the Middle East like it's the china in the White House..
Oh yeah Happy Earth Day..
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I think Americans are REALLY suicidal
Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: I think Americans are REALLY suicidal
Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
Comments are closed-
Posted by: donl51 on Apr 22, 2008 9:24 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: badkitty on Apr 22, 2008 10:21 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This is a very serious topic
Posted by: donl51
» RE: This is a very serious topic
Posted by: Knobby
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Geonomist on Apr 22, 2008 11:13 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 22, 2008 11:50 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's the only possible step that will start to end the current accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere - but it is not enough for us to take that step. The whole world must drastically cut back their use of fossil fuels.
What we need, then, is the world's biggest ever infrastructure manufacturing plan - and the only time people ever seem to get motivated to do that is during wartime, such as WWII, when people rushed to build ships and bombs as fast as they could, day and night, around the clock. Unfortunately, that's what seems to get people motivated.
What we have instead in the U.S. is massive propaganda pumped out by fossil fuel PR lobbyists 24-7 - the latest being the large "clean coal" marketing campaign that is blanketing the airwaves. Another large PR campaign is "don't make biofuels - make food!" - also run by the likes of BP and Exxon, behind the scenes of course.
I don't think you'll see Lester Brown on FOX News discussing the climate and pollution crisis, right?
There are people who are perfectly happy watching the planet burn in air-conditioned comfort, surrounded by armed guards. Burnt Planet? No problem, as long as the dividends from BP keep rolling in.
I appreciate Lester Brown's positivity and clear explanations, but let's also point to the forces of destruction that are set loose on the world by Wall Street financial interests - and also note that those very same forces now largely control our media, our schools, and our government.
Really - the U.S. is the worst country in the world on the issue of climate change. The worst of the worst - the bottom of the pile - the #1 force for global destruction in the world today - and that's because the corporations have taken this country over. Indeed, one cannot even point to any specific people, because the corporations have become like giant, self-sustaining machines where people are nothing but the working gears - easily molded, easily replaced. The machine itself is driven on by the goal of ever-increasing profits - and so it becomes a world-destroyer, which is what we are now seeing.
There are a number of solutions that have to be implemented to make progress. One is to ban holding companies and pass laws requiring direct ownership of shares by individual people. No more networks of shell companies to hide the real nature of transactions. The other is to repeal any notion of "the corporation as a person".
Then, you will see clearly how the world really works, and how a few billionaires have been raking in obscene profits for years while the planet is slowly degraded by their mindless corporate machines.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Be careful what you wish for
Posted by: suprmark
» RE: Step #1: Halt all fossil fuel imports to the United States.
Posted by: richholland
» And only real leadership from Nader, McKinney, Sheehan, etc ... will make this possible.
Posted by: maxpayne
» Energy independence is pure fantasy at this time.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner
» Then, obviously nuclear is NOT the answer you claim it to be.
Posted by: maxpayne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mmckinl on Apr 22, 2008 12:12 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We will need a whole new financial system. Our current debt based leveraged banking is entirely based on ever increasing growth to create our money. Without ever increasing growth the money supply stagnates then contracts. A contracting money supply means recession then depression while somewhere along the way a financial panic ensues throwing the whole economy into turmoil without a way out.
In order for a smooth transition from a growth economy to a sustainable economy money must be created without borrowing. This is very doable, it is already authorized in our Constitution.
The real battle will be to bring the banking industry into line. Currently they enjoy the biggest welfare program the United States ever granted, fractional reserve banking, whereby they can loan by leverage many multiples of their real worth. They will fight tooth and nail to keep this massive subsidy with the massive amounts of money they can create.
Without reforming our monetary system a sustainable economy is doomed to bankruptcy. The wrath of the populace that doesn't understand how their money is created will revolt and blame the concept of a sustainable economy for the problems that fractional banking causes.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: mmckinl
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: mmckinl
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: mmckinl
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Knobby on Apr 22, 2008 1:25 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another 50 years of beating and killing each other on a cleaner planet?
Another 50 years of sexual abuse to kids and women in a cleaner environment?
Another 50 years of who has the biggest bomb displayed in cleaner air?
Maybe you want another 50 years of being lead by leaders who will lie to and cheat all other humans for pieces of paper with green ink on them? Or maybe you want to see what else Monsanto can come up with in another 50 years of experimenting with humans and food?
But you Christians in particular, what are you trying to save? Isn't the ultimate goal of your belief to die and spend enternity up in the clouds with god and his son? So what does it matter what happens here, the sooner your gone the better you'll be,isn't that whats preach?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Missing you already
Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Missing you already
Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nigelbest on Apr 22, 2008 3:13 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
henry thoreau: there are 1000 hacking at he branches of the tree of problems for every one striking at the root
in other words, human nature goes the wrong way about solving problems - the inefficient way, the failure way
apparently no one wants to think about inequality - of wealth and power
you can't solve problems without power
DRAW the graph of power: 90% of ppl on between 10,000th and 100th of world-average pay/hr - 99% below average power - 1% up to ***100,000 TIMES*** average power - 1% taking 98% of world wealth - 1% of 1% taking 98% of 98%
how can your greatest efforts solve anything while you have giants of wealthpower 100,000 times average human size? - how much can you care about the fate of beings 100,000th the size?
unite your will to greatly increase equality or you cannot win - you can only work your butt off and fail if you dont face the root cause
if you solved all the branch problems, you wd still be left with the trunk problem - super-extreme inequality producing proportional violence producing prop. misery and problems
you're trying to cook a meal while the house is full to the roof with junk and fights - strike at the root and all the branch problems come down automatically
there is enough sanity and will in the world IF you obtain equality - if you dont, there isnt 1,000,000th enough
happinessfinneganswake.blogspot.com - you don't want to go to some nobody nowhere blogspot? - use yr sanity to judge sanity - worldly status is no gauge of quality in a world gone mad - sanity is on the periphery of an anarchic [ie, super-unequal] society
unite the people-will to move the wealth back to the earners of it and consumers - equality is democracy freedom order peace sanity intelligent governance survival
for one thing, you'll have 100 times as many brains able to contribute - 90% not too poor to contribute, 90% of educated brains not tied up in the catastrophic effects of super-inequality
you must change yr mindset to: root problem first - then help others to do the same - culture is ideas - human ideas are obviously wrong: look at the mess
WORLD-average pay is $40/hr - paying housewives and students too - yes, they are stealing that much
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: peoplepowergranny on Apr 22, 2008 7:20 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I guess we'll have to remain "environmental extremists!"
Posted by: monkeywrench
» What we need are REAL environmentalists ready to go on the OFFENSIVE WITH SOLUTIONS rather than
Posted by: maxpayne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leemiller38 on Apr 22, 2008 8:54 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Their are 6.5 billion environment destroyers-
Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: Their are 6.5 billion environment destroyers-
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: HeKnew on Apr 23, 2008 12:01 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Direct Democracy
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ljarvi on Apr 25, 2008 4:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Decentralized, complex economic systems must be created. Consumption must be decreased dramatically and life relocalized. Large-scale, centralized political and economic entities - and that includes national-level government, which is hopelessly corrupted - must be eliminated.
In light of this, for example, we don't need to encourage Toyota to build plug-in Prius' (at huge energy and resource expense) so people can continue to toodle down the paved-over earth from the exurbs to their mindless, remote-controlled, debt-enforced daily routines. A transformation of our social and economic orientation AWAY from the numbed, distracted, unconnected, spiritually-deadened consumptive ILLNESS that is our modern way of life is what is called for. This author's "solutions" amount to avoidance of this challenge, and should be repudiated by any person seriously interested in helping to facilitate humanity's journey through the unprecedented crisis we are facing.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Apr 28, 2008 3:49 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation
Background radiation is the ionizing radiation from several natural radiation
sources: sources in the Earth and from those sources that are incorporated in our
food and water, which are incorporated in our body, and in building materials and
other products that incorporate those radioactive sources; radiation sources from
space (in the form of cosmic rays); and sources in the atmosphere which primarily
come from both the radon gas that is released from the earth's surface and
subsequently decays to radioactive atoms that become attached to airborne dust
and particulates, and the production of radioactive atoms from the bombardment
of atoms in the upper atmosphere by high-energy cosmic rays. Since 1945 it also
comes from low levels of global radioactive contamination due to nuclear testing.
............shortened.............
Natural background radiation
Natural background radiation comes from three primary sources: cosmic radiation,
terrestrial sources, and radon. The worldwide average background dose for a
human being is about 2.4 mSv per year. This exposure is mostly from cosmic
radiation and natural isotopes in the Earth.
Cosmic radiation
The Earth, and all living things on it, are constantly bombarded by radiation from
outside our solar system of positively charged ions from protons to iron nuclei.
This radiation interacts in the atmosphere to create secondary radiation that rains
down, including X-rays, muons, protons, alpha particles, pions, electrons, and
neutrons. The dose from cosmic radiation is largely from muons, neutrons, and
electrons.
The dose rate from cosmic radiation varies in different parts of the world based
largely on the geomagnetic field and altitude.
Terrestrial sources
Radioactive material is found throughout nature. It occurs naturally in the soil,
rocks, water, air, and vegetation. The major radionuclides of concern for terrestrial
radiation are potassium, uranium and thorium. Each of these sources has been
decreasing in activity since the birth of the Earth so that our present dose from
potassium-40 is about 1⁄2 what it would have been at the dawn of life on Earth.
Some of the elements that make up the human body have radioactive isotopes,
such as potassium-40, so there is also a very small amount of internal radiation.
Radon
Radon gas seeps out of uranium-containing soils found across most of the world
and may concentrate in well-sealed homes. It is often the single largest contributor
to an individual's background radiation dose and is certainly the most variable in
the United States. Many areas of the world, including Cornwall and Aberdeenshire
in the United Kingdom have high enough natural radiation levels that nuclear
licensed sites cannot be built there—the sites would already exceed legal radiation
limits before they opened, and the natural topsoil and rock would all have to be
disposed of as low-level nuclear waste.
............shortened.............
The exposure for an average person is about 360 millirems/year, 80 percent of
which comes from natural sources of radiation. The remaining 20 percent results
from exposure to artificial radiation sources, such as medical X-rays and a small
fraction from nuclear weapons tests.
............shortened.............
Reference:
http://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/publications/2000_1.html
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Rune on Apr 22, 2008 1:02 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Last year, total energy consumption was a little over $300 billion while total tax revenue was about $450 billion. We could theoretically impose a 150% tax on energy and still be revenue neutral, but then what? That level of taxation would get us a small short term drop in quantity of energy used, with some more, modest reductions over time as energy efficient technologies became worthwhile and came online. However, the impact of the tax would be offset by the fact that businesses and individuals would no longer be paying income and other federal taxes, which has the same effect as an offsetting tax credit. Moreover, the Jevon's Paradox holds that as energy efficiency increases and temporary declines in energy demand cause prices to drop, the tendency is to find more ways to use energy (which seems momentarily cheaper and more widely available), which undoes much of the potential conservation benefit of energy efficiency in the first place.
Long story short, just for an example, if we taxed all energy at the equivalent of about $50 per barrel of oil we could expect to see a 2% or 3% drop in consumption. Do that two or three times and you will be hitting the revenue neutral limit. From there, either the carbon tax rates go flat or we start giving back as much money as we raise through carbon taxes. That is neither promising nor practical.
I find the notion of taking extreme and urgent measures mentioned in the earlier part of the article to be more realistic. That will be necessary to meet any realistic goal of zeroing out carbon emissions during or not long after our projected lifetimes. Stern regulation and even non-price rationing is already kicking in for water in some places, and we have used such methods in the great wars the article alludes to.
If we ever get serious about dealing with our energy and climate vulnerabilities, and the related economic consequences (as well as the indirectly related matter of great wealth inequality that makes any economic future bleak for the masses), we will need to come up with more than "market based solution," at least in the short to medium term of the transition. But somewhere along the way, we need to make a major shift in how we live and what we value if we hope to live within the Earth's limits without reaching a new point of equilibrium with the most brutal means of population reduction.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: A revenue neutral carbon tax does not add up to 80% emission cuts by 2020
Posted by: skewitall
» RE: A revenue neutral carbon tax does not add up to 80% emission cuts by 2020
Posted by: skewitall
» So don't be revenue neutral.
Posted by: KeepsonTickn
» Evidence showing that even large carbon taxes will only cut consumption a small amount
Posted by: Rune
» Jevon
Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: Jevon
Posted by: Rune
» Long story short!
Posted by: donl51
» You've sort of missed the point here.
Posted by: vmounts
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bitsfick on Apr 22, 2008 4:14 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Shortly after the village idiot was
Posted by: Sushi
» Gullible people
Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Shortly after the village idiot was
Posted by: PJAW
» RE: Shortly after the village idiot was
Posted by: donl51
» RE: Shortly after the village idiot was
Posted by: Cooltruth
Comments are closed-
Posted by: greentime on Apr 22, 2008 4:51 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who are we fooling by saying we have time?
We don't. We are already late.
Who are we fooling when we say "the government will take care of it"? Yep. Ourselves.
It is time to place the responsibility squarely where it belongs: on the ones who denied this reality, didn't and still don't listen, and pigged the power for their own fat lives. Yep, you know the ones.
Stop giving them your time. You've given them enough time.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: richholland on Apr 22, 2008 5:13 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good news for the world.
The Europe federation with its mixed economical and political system has taken sufficent measurements and is not seeing real problems for the next 100 years.
Maybe the american patriot still convinced the anglo/saxon capitalisme is the best system could read some books and THINK about life before he/she votes for another president.
Realise the communists made large kolchoses and got rid of the small farmers.
Now the big corporations take over from the small farmers and you call that FREEDOM.
But for the men in the street capitalistic or communistic hunger feels the same.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: williameon on Apr 22, 2008 5:31 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Party is over.
Two thousand and Twelve is the Magic Number.
How absurd?
Water boarded by Mother Nature.
The Planet Earth will shake, rattle and roll
Then turn on the Axis.
Sixty degrees.
In a twinkling of the eye,
Everything will change.
The Poles migrate and in the process
Wash away everything you know.
Cleansing the Planet!
A New World Order will rise from
The debts of this Destruction.
Affirming a new set of positive Goals and Ideals.
Civilizations have come and gone,
More times then we can remember.
Species have vanished without a trace.
What makes us any different?
Vanity?
Our GREED?
Mammoths and Saber Tooth Tigers once
Roamed the Earth.
We are in danger of becoming The Dinosaurs now!
Fossils frozen in Time,
Cemented in the Old Way.
One day we will be looked upon,
As a lower incarnation,
Who never evolved beyond our Differences?
Reptilian Fossils
Who crawled out of the Primordial Ooze
Looked into the reflection and became
Blinded by their own Vanity, Ambition and Greed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Plenty of Earth Days YES but, Human Days is another Question?
Posted by: donl51
» For that matter, how many biosphere days left?
Posted by: Daniel35
» Williameon, you've summed it up
Posted by: Cathyc
Comments are closed-
Posted by: john110 on Apr 22, 2008 5:58 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The rich can have it all? No they can't
Posted by: Cathyc
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Apr 22, 2008 6:37 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For everyone else, I'll tell you the best ways to be environmentalists and actually be proud of it:
1. Stop these wars for oil and end the war on drugs. It's time to overturn the 71 year ban on Cannabis and put its 25000 industrial uses to work. Talk about a biofuel that doesn't cause global warming and is good for a real economy. Since the current "market" is petroleum based all the way, it's RIGGED, not "free".
2. Quit supporting either the Republicans or Democrats. Both parties have been subsidizing Big Oil, Coal, and Nuclear for decades and they don't give a flying fuck about the health and well being of the people let alone the environment. Can you get either party to shift the subsidies away from Big Oil, Coal, and Nuclear and use it to build and maintain an energy infrastructure built on alternative renewables such as solar, wind, geothermal, hemp, etc ...? Not until you allow 3rd party progressive independents such as Ralph Nader, Cindy Sheehan, etc ... to replace these two corrupt parties in Washington. And again, the lopsided subsidization of fossil and nuclear energy over alternative renewables that have been proven to be both economically and ecologically beneficial also shows that the current market is RIGGED, not "free".
3. I don't see any so-called "liberals" or "progressives" addressing the issues of public transportation gone bad. Instead of taking bribes from Big Auto and Big Oil in the name of keeping oil artificially "cheap", why not make public transportation not only affordable but also better quality? Having travelled to big cities across the country and noticing the OBSCENELY high bus and rail fares despite the infrastructure not improving, don't you think it's time they quit bullshitting about newly painted trash bins and instead focused on repairing their creaking and rusty infrastructure? Raising the fares and yet allowing higher frequencies of mechanical/electrical failures and accidents sure tells me that something's way off. And what about those OBSCENELY high bus fare rates and their purposely limiting their routes thereby forcing more people to drive their autos to work? When you see public buses with fewer than 10 people on it or even a "NOT IN SERVICE" sign on it struggling through thick traffic, you'd be better off joining me in calling for these bus services to get their god damn motherfucking routes reformed so that more customers can come on board and actually be relieved.
4. Why not call for more suggestions to reward people who are frugal? I mean let's face it. Most companies don't give you any trade up program for say your old pc, tv, radio, etc ... so of course more petroleum is being burned to make more of garbage electronics that end up in the land fill the next year every time a slightly better version comes out. And let's talk about recycling and reusing. My wife and I reuse our plastic bottles that we'd save from our bottled juice drinks. I sure as hell don't mind making my own orange juice for example and filling it up in my old small plastic bottle time and again.
Look, for over 50 years, it's been the same doom and gloom talk which does nothing to convince people to save and push for better. All this leaves is the impression of "So what?" It's time to think differently and push for the better just like I've been doing all along so let's cut all this doom and gloom BULLSHIT talk out and cut to the chase, shall we?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's all doom and gloom BULLSHIT ! At this rate, no one will care to change their minds !
Posted by: donl51
» Translation: "vote for Nader" - 'cause a vote for Nader is a vote for McCain!
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» Nader sure beats Obama/Hillary anyday ! You can let the Dems ABUSE you for all I care !
Posted by: maxpayne
» It's NOT Doom and Gloom Bullshit !
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» since the discovery of agriculture?
Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: since the discovery of agriculture?
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» Oh yes it is !
Posted by: maxpayne
» Oh No It's Not !
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» RE: Oh YES it is ! People will still say "SO WHAT?"
Posted by: maxpayne
» My Party?
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» RE: My Party?
Posted by: maxpayne
» You're Half Cocked
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» And you're completely FUCKED BEYOND REPAIR!
Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: And you're completely FUCKED BEYOND REPAIR!
Posted by: Squarehead
» Maximum Pain is Smoking the hemp again.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner
» Sure beats POISONING oneself with RADIOACTIVE BULLSHIT.
Posted by: maxpayne
» You are already radioactive. How else do we date Egyptian mummies?
Posted by: AsteroidMiner
» You got it all wrong DUDE.
Posted by: maxpayne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: skewitall on Apr 22, 2008 7:30 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why doesn’t anyone talk about this? I’ll ask again….
Brown states, “We probably cannot stabilize population growth humanely unless we eradicate poverty.” “17 of the top 20 failing states have rapid rates of population growth.”
Well, we already knew that. So, what do we need to impose on them?
Or, should we just change our ways in the USA, and all will be fine?
Who wants a bathroom with a toilet? Who wants a kitchen sink?
Can we all have those two things today, or ever?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The developed world v. the developing
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Apr 22, 2008 9:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary Clinton wants to start throwing Nukes around the Middle East like it's the china in the White House..
Oh yeah Happy Earth Day..
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I think Americans are REALLY suicidal
Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: I think Americans are REALLY suicidal
Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
Comments are closed-
Posted by: donl51 on Apr 22, 2008 9:24 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: badkitty on Apr 22, 2008 10:21 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This is a very serious topic
Posted by: donl51
» RE: This is a very serious topic
Posted by: Knobby
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Geonomist on Apr 22, 2008 11:13 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 22, 2008 11:50 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's the only possible step that will start to end the current accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere - but it is not enough for us to take that step. The whole world must drastically cut back their use of fossil fuels.
What we need, then, is the world's biggest ever infrastructure manufacturing plan - and the only time people ever seem to get motivated to do that is during wartime, such as WWII, when people rushed to build ships and bombs as fast as they could, day and night, around the clock. Unfortunately, that's what seems to get people motivated.
What we have instead in the U.S. is massive propaganda pumped out by fossil fuel PR lobbyists 24-7 - the latest being the large "clean coal" marketing campaign that is blanketing the airwaves. Another large PR campaign is "don't make biofuels - make food!" - also run by the likes of BP and Exxon, behind the scenes of course.
I don't think you'll see Lester Brown on FOX News discussing the climate and pollution crisis, right?
There are people who are perfectly happy watching the planet burn in air-conditioned comfort, surrounded by armed guards. Burnt Planet? No problem, as long as the dividends from BP keep rolling in.
I appreciate Lester Brown's positivity and clear explanations, but let's also point to the forces of destruction that are set loose on the world by Wall Street financial interests - and also note that those very same forces now largely control our media, our schools, and our government.
Really - the U.S. is the worst country in the world on the issue of climate change. The worst of the worst - the bottom of the pile - the #1 force for global destruction in the world today - and that's because the corporations have taken this country over. Indeed, one cannot even point to any specific people, because the corporations have become like giant, self-sustaining machines where people are nothing but the working gears - easily molded, easily replaced. The machine itself is driven on by the goal of ever-increasing profits - and so it becomes a world-destroyer, which is what we are now seeing.
There are a number of solutions that have to be implemented to make progress. One is to ban holding companies and pass laws requiring direct ownership of shares by individual people. No more networks of shell companies to hide the real nature of transactions. The other is to repeal any notion of "the corporation as a person".
Then, you will see clearly how the world really works, and how a few billionaires have been raking in obscene profits for years while the planet is slowly degraded by their mindless corporate machines.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Be careful what you wish for
Posted by: suprmark
» RE: Step #1: Halt all fossil fuel imports to the United States.
Posted by: richholland
» And only real leadership from Nader, McKinney, Sheehan, etc ... will make this possible.
Posted by: maxpayne
» Energy independence is pure fantasy at this time.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner
» Then, obviously nuclear is NOT the answer you claim it to be.
Posted by: maxpayne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mmckinl on Apr 22, 2008 12:12 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We will need a whole new financial system. Our current debt based leveraged banking is entirely based on ever increasing growth to create our money. Without ever increasing growth the money supply stagnates then contracts. A contracting money supply means recession then depression while somewhere along the way a financial panic ensues throwing the whole economy into turmoil without a way out.
In order for a smooth transition from a growth economy to a sustainable economy money must be created without borrowing. This is very doable, it is already authorized in our Constitution.
The real battle will be to bring the banking industry into line. Currently they enjoy the biggest welfare program the United States ever granted, fractional reserve banking, whereby they can loan by leverage many multiples of their real worth. They will fight tooth and nail to keep this massive subsidy with the massive amounts of money they can create.
Without reforming our monetary system a sustainable economy is doomed to bankruptcy. The wrath of the populace that doesn't understand how their money is created will revolt and blame the concept of a sustainable economy for the problems that fractional banking causes.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: mmckinl
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: mmckinl
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: The 1907 banking panic shows you are wrong here. Not So !
Posted by: mmckinl
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Knobby on Apr 22, 2008 1:25 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another 50 years of beating and killing each other on a cleaner planet?
Another 50 years of sexual abuse to kids and women in a cleaner environment?
Another 50 years of who has the biggest bomb displayed in cleaner air?
Maybe you want another 50 years of being lead by leaders who will lie to and cheat all other humans for pieces of paper with green ink on them? Or maybe you want to see what else Monsanto can come up with in another 50 years of experimenting with humans and food?
But you Christians in particular, what are you trying to save? Isn't the ultimate goal of your belief to die and spend enternity up in the clouds with god and his son? So what does it matter what happens here, the sooner your gone the better you'll be,isn't that whats preach?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Missing you already
Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Missing you already
Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nigelbest on Apr 22, 2008 3:13 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
henry thoreau: there are 1000 hacking at he branches of the tree of problems for every one striking at the root
in other words, human nature goes the wrong way about solving problems - the inefficient way, the failure way
apparently no one wants to think about inequality - of wealth and power
you can't solve problems without power
DRAW the graph of power: 90% of ppl on between 10,000th and 100th of world-average pay/hr - 99% below average power - 1% up to ***100,000 TIMES*** average power - 1% taking 98% of world wealth - 1% of 1% taking 98% of 98%
how can your greatest efforts solve anything while you have giants of wealthpower 100,000 times average human size? - how much can you care about the fate of beings 100,000th the size?
unite your will to greatly increase equality or you cannot win - you can only work your butt off and fail if you dont face the root cause
if you solved all the branch problems, you wd still be left with the trunk problem - super-extreme inequality producing proportional violence producing prop. misery and problems
you're trying to cook a meal while the house is full to the roof with junk and fights - strike at the root and all the branch problems come down automatically
there is enough sanity and will in the world IF you obtain equality - if you dont, there isnt 1,000,000th enough
happinessfinneganswake.blogspot.com - you don't want to go to some nobody nowhere blogspot? - use yr sanity to judge sanity - worldly status is no gauge of quality in a world gone mad - sanity is on the periphery of an anarchic [ie, super-unequal] society
unite the people-will to move the wealth back to the earners of it and consumers - equality is democracy freedom order peace sanity intelligent governance survival
for one thing, you'll have 100 times as many brains able to contribute - 90% not too poor to contribute, 90% of educated brains not tied up in the catastrophic effects of super-inequality
you must change yr mindset to: root problem first - then help others to do the same - culture is ideas - human ideas are obviously wrong: look at the mess
WORLD-average pay is $40/hr - paying housewives and students too - yes, they are stealing that much
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: peoplepowergranny on Apr 22, 2008 7:20 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I guess we'll have to remain "environmental extremists!"
Posted by: monkeywrench
» What we need are REAL environmentalists ready to go on the OFFENSIVE WITH SOLUTIONS rather than
Posted by: maxpayne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leemiller38 on Apr 22, 2008 8:54 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Their are 6.5 billion environment destroyers-
Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: Their are 6.5 billion environment destroyers-
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: HeKnew on Apr 23, 2008 12:01 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Direct Democracy
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ljarvi on Apr 25, 2008 4:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Decentralized, complex economic systems must be created. Consumption must be decreased dramatically and life relocalized. Large-scale, centralized political and economic entities - and that includes national-level government, which is hopelessly corrupted - must be eliminated.
In light of this, for example, we don't need to encourage Toyota to build plug-in Prius' (at huge energy and resource expense) so people can continue to toodle down the paved-over earth from the exurbs to their mindless, remote-controlled, debt-enforced daily routines. A transformation of our social and economic orientation AWAY from the numbed, distracted, unconnected, spiritually-deadened consumptive ILLNESS that is our modern way of life is what is called for. This author's "solutions" amount to avoidance of this challenge, and should be repudiated by any person seriously interested in helping to facilitate humanity's journey through the unprecedented crisis we are facing.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Apr 28, 2008 3:49 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation
Background radiation is the ionizing radiation from several natural radiation
sources: sources in the Earth and from those sources that are incorporated in our
food and water, which are incorporated in our body, and in building materials and
other products that incorporate those radioactive sources; radiation sources from
space (in the form of cosmic rays); and sources in the atmosphere which primarily
come from both the radon gas that is released from the earth's surface and
subsequently decays to radioactive atoms that become attached to airborne dust
and particulates, and the production of radioactive atoms from the bombardment
of atoms in the upper atmosphere by high-energy cosmic rays. Since 1945 it also
comes from low levels of global radioactive contamination due to nuclear testing.
............shortened.............
Natural background radiation
Natural background radiation comes from three primary sources: cosmic radiation,
terrestrial sources, and radon. The worldwide average background dose for a
human being is about 2.4 mSv per year. This exposure is mostly from cosmic
radiation and natural isotopes in the Earth.
Cosmic radiation
The Earth, and all living things on it, are constantly bombarded by radiation from
outside our solar system of positively charged ions from protons to iron nuclei.
This radiation interacts in the atmosphere to create secondary radiation that rains
down, including X-rays, muons, protons, alpha particles, pions, electrons, and
neutrons. The dose from cosmic radiation is largely from muons, neutrons, and
electrons.
The dose rate from cosmic radiation varies in different parts of the world based
largely on the geomagnetic field and altitude.
Terrestrial sources
Radioactive material is found throughout nature. It occurs naturally in the soil,
rocks, water, air, and vegetation. The major radionuclides of concern for terrestrial
radiation are potassium, uranium and thorium. Each of these sources has been
decreasing in activity since the birth of the Earth so that our present dose from
potassium-40 is about 1⁄2 what it would have been at the dawn of life on Earth.
Some of the elements that make up the human body have radioactive isotopes,
such as potassium-40, so there is also a very small amount of internal radiation.
Radon
Radon gas seeps out of uranium-containing soils found across most of the world
and may concentrate in well-sealed homes. It is often the single largest contributor
to an individual's background radiation dose and is certainly the most variable in
the United States. Many areas of the world, including Cornwall and Aberdeenshire
in the United Kingdom have high enough natural radiation levels that nuclear
licensed sites cannot be built there—the sites would already exceed legal radiation
limits before they opened, and the natural topsoil and rock would all have to be
disposed of as low-level nuclear waste.
............shortened.............
The exposure for an average person is about 360 millirems/year, 80 percent of
which comes from natural sources of radiation. The remaining 20 percent results
from exposure to artificial radiation sources, such as medical X-rays and a small
fraction from nuclear weapons tests.
............shortened.............
Reference:
http://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/publications/2000_1.html
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Trial Begins for Activist Who Fought to Protect Federal Lands from Drilling -- Join the Protest
California Carbon Trading Allows Timber Companies to Sell CO2 Credits for Their Worst Logging Practices
How to Answer the Dumb Things Climate Deniers Say




