New evidence that dispersants are bad news for fish

Out of sight, out of our minds–in more ways than one. We will be the death of many species, likely us included.

Summit County Citizens Voice

Detailed study shows that fish exposed to oil-dispersant mix are less able to respond to subsequent environmental challenges

By Summit Voice

FRISCO — A new European study once again shows that using dispersants to treat oil spills can be bad news for many marine organisms, even as it prevents massive slicks from reaching the shoreline.

The results of the study will be presented formally at the July 6 meeting of the Society for Experimental Biology meeting in Valencia. The increased contamination under the water reduces the ability for fish and other organisms to cope with subsequent environmental challenges, the research team found.

Led by professor Guy Claireaux, of the University of Brest,  the biologists for the first time looked at the effects of chemically dispersed oil on the performance of European seabass to subsequent environmental challenges.

View original post 339 more words

Another Brick Falls from the Denial Wall

Insurance companies were, as far as I know, the first to recognize that the climate was changing and causing more claims for damage.  Now an iconic manufacturer is recognizing environmental problems:

“Big Company. Smaller Footprint.”

Big Company equals Big News, doesn’t it? Nope.  This story isn’t making big headlines. In fact, they released this document on October 4 and I just found it.  And I look daily.  As far as I can see, only a few have noticed this.

Why did Levi change its approach?  Reading this little article, it’s not hard to assume they, like the insurance companies, noticed significant changes.  Levi Strauss needs cotton and the water to grow cotton.  Climate change and population growth influence both.

So Levi Straus is turning several shades of Green.

It’s a lovely color.

Now the real question: Why isn’t this all over the news?  Is being environmentally correct now hopelessly politically incorrect?

Cassandra

FAIR and Ballast

In general, I like FAIR’s work.  This article brings out some of the general tenor of today’s MSM “reporting”:

“Brought to You by…Big Oil? Washington Post Hides Industry Sponsorship of Energy Debate”

The blurring of propaganda or news frightens me.  America sells everything, including information–and truth.  Of course, they sold out on truth a long time ago.  I fear this will sink us.

Cassandra

A Microcosm of the World?

This situation may well prove to be indicative of what the world’s (over)population will have to deal with in the upcoming decades:

“The Salton Sea:  Death and Politics in the Great American Water Wars.”

I fear we won’t handle the situations well at all, but I hope I’m wrong.

Cassandra

_Live Science_

Until today, I thought Live Science was one of those eco-freak sites, but today I logged on and found this right-thinking slideshow article by Andrea Thompson:

“Top 10 Craziest Environmental Ideas.”

Number 6 is “Keep Worms in the Kitchen.”

Finally, someone who recognizes that compost is CRAZY! It isn’t just those funny hats that make the Amish unusual. They COMPOST. Now that’s really wacky. Next time you visit Pennsylvania or thereabouts, don’t look for horse and buggies. Instead, go their farms and ask to see their worms! If you aren’t visiting Amish country, go to your nearest organic farm. Those folks are really zany. They compost too.

Composting is so weird, isn’t it? Everyone knows worms are icky and scraps smell. That’s why God made fossil fuels. That way we don’t have to use food scraps and manure to grow crops. Every real ‘Merkin knows that the proper place for food scraps is the garbage disposal. No stinky stuff belongs in our kitchens!

Number 7 is “Change Your Diet.”

How? By avoiding red meat. I know, I know. That’s downright un’Merkin! Red meat’s the only red that’s truly red-white-and-blue. Heart disease is as ‘Merkin as a Big Mac. It’s proof of our economic dominance in the world. But if you want to be environmentally wacky and thin and healthy, well, I guess it’s your right, but it’s gonna put you on a lot of watch lists.

Incidentally, as I was cruising through this site, I found a link to the “Craziest Environmental Ideas” show right above an article titled “Want to Save the Earth? Cut Out Meat.” Live Science also has articles such as “Red Meat a Ticket to Early Grave, Harvard Says” . Huh. Maybe some enviro-health nuts do work there. Put Live Science on a watch list.

Number 3 is “Live in Trash.”

Using recycled materials to build homes. Now that’s CRAZY. Real ‘Merkins want everything to be made of rare earths and old growth trees. We USE things; we don’t REuse things. Consumption. Mega-consumption. That’s the ‘Merkin way.

And Number 1, the craziest of all, is “Ban Plastic Bags and [Incandescent] Light Bulbs.”

China and Australia are doing this. Aussies, now that’s understandable. They have a reputation for being crazy, but the Chinese? Who would have thought the Chinese even had electricity–except in the factories where they make all the stuff they ship to us?

In looking around, I now see that, once again, Live Science has all sorts of articles on recycling plastic bags and saving money with compact light bulbs. This site is definitely suspicious. Read with care if you’re a true ‘Merkin!

Oh, I forget. Real ‘Merkins don’t read.

Cassandra–feeling a bit more bitter than usual

The Magic Handbasket: Free Crap

Finally, others besides the usual doomers are starting to notice the world food problem: “20 Reasons to Be Prepared for a Global Food Crisis.”

This article by Michael T. Snyder is on today’s Seeking Alpha, one of my favorite financial sites. Snyder lists a number of issues I’ve posted about over the last year or so–water, topsoil, ethanol among them.

I read it nodding but wondered why the author didn’t address the underlying population problem. However, a good many of those who commented pointed out this link.

But then there was this comment:

You did not mention ,” my dog ate my homework” as another reason. The free market will take care of shortages as high prices cuts consumption and creates incentives to bring on new production. Unlimited demand will be curtailed by price, and limited supply will also be stimulated by price. Let the market price signal do it’s [sic–and sick as well] work. Sure there are physical constraints, and oil does raise the cost of production, though substitutes will replace them.

Cornucopians no longer amuse me. “Unlimited demand will be curtailed by price, and limited supply will also be stimulated by price”? Is “price” a new euphemism for “death”?

As I read this, I wondered if this person was just being especially sarcastic or if he actually believed in both the Free, Righteous, and Easy Economy (FREE) and the Complete Replacement Analogue for Petroleum (CRAP). So far, I see no substantial evidence that either of these exist or are likely to exist, and I have grave difficulty with anyone over the age of five who utters statements of blind, unsupported faith.

Childish utterances from adults stopped amusing me a few years ago when an extremely bright neighbor told me that we would quickly solve the crises caused by the depleteion of fossil fuels. I laughed and asked “How?” Without answering my question, but with a straight face, he just said, “Because we have to.”

Because we have to? I guess I missed the appearance of the Magic Fairy (MF) who told these folks that merely having wants and needs guarantees their gratification.

Cassandra

Climate Change Story–Most Likely the USA Didn’t Publish It

For quite a while now, I’ve ignored most MSM “news” sources in the United States. I’ve found filtering by topic using Google news much more useful. Instead of having to look at “news” about Lindsay Lohan, I now quickly find stories like this one from the Philippine Star:

“Food Security, Climate Change and the Tibetan Plateau”

Here’s the article in its entirety:

Food security, climate change and the Tibetan Plateau

By Rolando T. DY, Executive Director Center for Food and Agri-Business UA&P (The Philippine Star) Updated February 13, 2011 12:00 AM Comments (0) View comments

MANILA, Philippines – Is there a relationship between the distant Himalayas and Philippine food security?

If so, what are the implications on climate change? Let us find out.

First, we review what is being said about the Himalaya-Tibetan plateau as the Third Pole. Second, we will analyze the amount of rice production and surplus from the countries fed by the rivers originating from the Plateau. Third, we will derive implications on ASEAN and Philippine food security.

The Third Pole. The Himalayas, especially the Tibetan Plateau, has vast stores of fresh water in the glaciers. It is of global importance to food security. The Plateau is the source of the several world’s largest rivers and also plays a key role in the Asian weather system.

Changes on the Plateau are crucial for the water resources (irrigation, drinking and hydro-electric power) of most of the Asian continent. Half the world’s population, or three billion people, is dependent upon water from the Plateau.

Consider this: the rivers originating from the Plateau include the Yangtze and Yellow (China), the Mekong (Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam), Irrawaddy and Salween (Myanmar), Brahmaputra, Indus, and Sutlej (India), Indus and Sutlej (Pakistan), and Brahmaputra, Ganges and Meghna (Bangladesh). There are also the Karnali and Arun rivers in Nepal. Karnali feeds the Ganges river. These rivers feed 11 large deltas that have formed along Asia’s coastal zones. The water supply of these rivers would affect millions of Asians.

Climate change is one factor contributing to the shrinking of wetlands at the source of the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers, reducing the amount of water that flows down the rivers. The Chinese Academy of Science’s Cold and Arid Regions Research Institute studied the Tibetan plateau’s wetlands over a 40-year period and found that they have shrunk by more than 10 percent. The wetlands feeding into the Yangtze River alone have been reduced by 29 percent. Despite increased rainfall in the region, the water level in the wetlands has dropped due to increased evaporation caused by global warming.

Impact on Southeast Asia

Key Southeast Asian rivers which provide water to the world’s rice providers (Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam) will be affected by the changes in the Plateau.

Mekong. The 5,000-kilometer river begins at the Plateau and meanders through China’s Yunnan province, Burma, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam. It is called the Lancang in China. Together with the Yangtze and Salween Rivers, it originates from the Plateau.

Salween. The 2,800-km river flows from the Plateau to Myanmar. It drains a narrow and mountainous watershed that extends into the countries of China, Myanmar and Thailand.

Irrawaddy. It starts at the confluence of the N’mai and Mali Rivers that are fed by the Himalayan glaciers. It is Myanmar’s largest river and most important commercial waterway. It flows relatively straight North-South before emptying through the Irrawaddy Delta.

Chao Phraya. Thailand’s major river begins at the confluence of the Ping and Nan rivers in Nakhon Sawan province. It flows south for 370 km from the central plains to Bangkok and the Gulf of Thailand. Ping river begins in northern Thailand. Nan river originates from Nan province. This river has no direct link to the Plateau but it could be indirectly affected by the weather system.

The Plateau and Global Rice Supply

The Asian rivers feed the rice lands of Asia. These countries account for about 72 percent of world output. They supply three fourths of world rice export. The rest are mainly supplied from the US, China, Brazil and Argentina, and Uruguay, in that order. Export is currently only seven percent of world production (not four percent as claim by some Philippine sources).

Thailand and Vietnam alone contribute half of the rice surplus of about 30 million tons. Cambodia and Myanmar another 1 million tons each. Cambodia and Myanmar have the potential, if and when developed, for easily 5 million tons.

Implications to Global Food Security

The melting of the Tibetan glaciers will have global repercussions. River flows could eventually decline and cut rice production. These could even spur conflicts among countries regarding water rights. The major rice exporters such as Vietnam, India, Pakistan, Cambodia and Myanmar will have less rice surpluses. China could become a major rice importer. Thailand could have lower surplus, too, as the upper reaches of Chao Phraya will be affected. World rice prices will skyrocket.

Is there a cause for concern due to long term rice shortage following the melting of the Tibetan glaciers? Yes. In this interconnected world (climate and trade-wise), this has already happened in 2008 and seems to be happening in 2010-2011. No, because the human genius has responded to challenges across the centuries.

Specifically for the Philippines, there is a compelling need for a national food security plan. The plan could cover the following:

• Push for an ASEAN food security plan that gives rice-deficit countries (Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, etc.) the right of first refusal for the rice exports of Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia and Myanmar.

• Launch productivity drive for all food staples, coupled with marketing information campaign that other food staples (white corn, potato, cassava, banana, and gabi) are as nutritious as rice. Remote communities must attain a high level of food sufficiency due to distance, transport cost and carbon footprint.

• Craft an agenda that combine food security and nutrition security. Energy source from food staples is inadequate and create a false sense of nutrition security.

• Craft watershed management-water supply framework in the context of supply chain of water from source to sea.

• Invest in research and development for rice and diversification of food supply. A key to this is support to the International Rice Research Institute and the Philippines’ Rice Research Institute for drought tolerant and flood-resistant varieties. Access technologies and best practices for crops from the international Center for Research into Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT) in India, the International Center for Potatoes (CIP) in Peru, and (Brazilian Agriculture Research Corp.

The proposed food security plan may also be applicable to other ASEAN countries. This is where ASEAN food security cooperation could take root.

I found credentials for Dy here and put them below:

Rolando T. Dy has been Dean of the School of Management at University of Asia and the Pacific since 2004 and Executive Director of Center for Food and Agri Business since 1995. Dr. Dy was a Visiting Lecturer at PAD Business School in Lima, Peru since 2008. From 2006 to 2008, he was at Monash University � Australia APEC Study Centre for courses on Policy Reforms and Structural Adjustments. He served as Consultant for various organizations: ADB, AusAid, FAO, GTZ, Growth … with Equity in Mindanao Program/USAID, Japan Bank for International Cooperation, the World Bank, Congressional Oversight Committee for Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization, industry associations, private corporations, and government agencies. He was Senior Consultant for the Strategic Framework of ASEAN Cooperation in Agriculture and Fisheries since 2004 for the ASEAN Secretariat. He serves as Independent Director of A Brown Co. Inc. He was Resource Person to the National Competitiveness Council. Dr. Dy is active in the Brunei-Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines (BIMP) East ASEAN Growth Area (EAGA). In March 2007, he was a paper presentor on Private Investment in the EAGA Conference in Makassar, Indonesia. In November 2007, he was resource speaker at the EAGA Investment Conference in Davao City; and in January 2008, on agro-industry at the EAGA Strategic Planning conference in Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia. He served as ADB consultant to the review of the BIMP-EAGA Strategic Planning Conference in KotaKinabalu in late 2008. He is an alumnus of the IESE Business School�s International Faculty Program in Barcelona, Spain. He completed BS in Metallurgical Engineering at the University of the Philippines, MS in Industrial Economics from CRC, and PhD in Development Management from UA&P.

When I was young, I was so proud of the wide-ranging and informative journalism in the United States. That was a long time ago.

Cassandra

Here’s the Beef

Lierre Keith’s Mother Earth News article “The Truth about Vegetarianism” brings up several points worth considering, most importantly this one:

The truth is that agriculture is the most destructive thing humans have done to the planet, and more of the same won’t save us.

Keith doesn’t mention William Ruddiman’s theory that our current global climate change started when man discovered slash and burn agriculture, but what she says certainly fits right in with Ruddiman’s conclusions. People have intensified their food production and with that their numbers. Like all living things, the nutrients we need limit our lives. By nature, we are omnivores. That’s a fact. Whether or not we eat meat however is quite a complicated issue, morally, ecologically, and economically.

I grew up hearing about how much grain was wasted by feeding it to livestock, but I agree with Keith that the answer isn’t going vegan. As she suggests, the answer is even simpler: Stop feeding grain to food animals. Cows eat grass. Chickens chase down grasshoppers. As he, a former vegan says, the answer isn’t getting rid of all the food animals and going vegan. For some parts of the country, the local populations could, in fact, add to ecological destruction by going vegan.

Eating cattle raised on land naturally suited for grass may well be ecologically sounder than eating organic vegetables and fruits raised on grassland made suitable for vegetables and trees through the use of intensive irrigation provided by humans rerouting or pumping water.

Much of western America is basically unsuited for growing vegetables. The west was–and a great deal still is–rangeland, sparsely populated by deer, antelope, and such, along with a few people and their cattle. (I’ll refrain from comment about grazing permits for now.) But over much of America, grain crops now rule where cattle and buffalo once roamed.

Wells, then pivot sprinkler systems, allowed the mass production of grain crops, and then with surplus grain came modern industrial farming, one of the worst abominations invented by mankind. Not only do factory animals suffer unspeakably, but it’s also becoming more and more clear that, overall, this capstone of supposed efficiency embodies all disruptions and dangers inherent in human agriculture.

Ironically, even when we operate from the best intentions, human efforts to improve our lot, corrupt, and even destroy efficient and highly functional ecosystems.

Cassandra

If Not Oil, Then Lithium?

I found this New York Times article disturbing: “U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan.”

Reading this, I feel like I need lithium, so, like the NYT, I’ll reserve editorial comment.

Cassandra

Pollan on Lawns

Today’s AWAD vocabulary email brought with it this line:

A lawn is nature under totalitarian rule. -Michael Pollan, author, journalism professor (b. 1955)

I like this. The typical, manicured American lawn reflects not a love of nature but of conformity. When I ask the typical lawn tender why a weed-free plane of clipped grass is so important, I usually get blank stares. Most do not reflect on the waste of water, fertilizer, and time.

Consequently, I was glad to add Michel Pollan to my non-infidel list.

I still say it! Death to Infidel Lawns!