Comments planetthoughts has made

Who should run the government?

Then let's not focus on "conservative" and "liberal".  How about this: if people with brains and integrity ran the country and the planet, the country and the planet could be saved.  That kind of government would be an experiment that has rarely been tried anywhere in the world, especially if one includes all the key bodies of government.

For the USA, it means changing the president and vice-president, most of the congress, and about 1/2 of the Supreme Court.  They fail either on brains, or integrity, or both.

David Alexander
PlanetThoughts.org
Love your Planet.

Good comments

The comments here are, of course, rather good and talk about different aspects.

What worries me more is the other 90% who still have only the vaguest idea what is going on in climate let alone oil supply and other "Peaks", who have little understanding of science or ability to get it, and whose votes count as much as those who know what they are talking about.

Normally I don't worry about it, and I accept that most people live a simple live, but when that 90% of our voting public thinks "we are low on oil, prices are going up, we had better drill more" and that is the whole analysis, as encouraged by narrow-thinking political figures, I really worry about whether we will grasp this opportunity or be busy finger-pointing in 10 years when oil supply collapses and we still have nothing in place.

David

David Alexander
PlanetThoughts.org
Love your Planet.

Sigh.

They all talk so well (that is why they are up there as finalists for president).  But I am afraid none of the remaining candidates (except Mike Gravel, who I believe is not on the ballot here in NYS - I will find out in one hour) are serious enough about the environment.  In fact, Hillary Clinton here seems to focus only on global warming.  Maybe that is in order to avoid blank stares from the audience, but the real problems involve warming, and resources (water, soil) depleting, and other forms of pollution.  And 2050?  That sounds much too late.On A look at Hillary Clinton's environmental platform and record posted 1 year, 9 months ago 7 Responses

Good idea

The part of the case history that seems ridiculous is that a farmer that gets some seeds blown into his/her property from a Monsanto-based neighbor can also no longer re-use their own seeds.

Something should be done about this situation.  I understand the farmers signed an agreement that they can not re-sue the seeds.  Perhaps we need a Federal law, or even a constitutional amendment, preventing such contractual clauses that license living things rather than selling them.  Monsanto should be required to improve their product in order to make more sales.  Or perhaps the license can be valid, but could be for a minimum of 5 years at a time, allowing farmers a less expensive path by re-using seeds for 5 years before needing to purchase again.On Monsanto's latest court triumph cloaks massive market power posted 1 year, 10 months ago 18 Responses

Stay with the Truth

Those who lie will pay the price; it is a universal law.  Those who speak the truth will find peace.

James Hansen is a hero, and his place in the history of humanity is assured, as is the place of every truth-teller and those who try to get the truth out but are not in a strong enough position to do so safely.

Their position is infinitely better than those sad-sacks who are clinging to misbegotten positions of guarding the status quo, which will not be here in 20 years, and maybe not even in 5 years.

David Alexander
PlanetThoughts.org
Love your Planet.

Whales

Yes, they could use the illegaly gathered whale blubber to power the illegal whaling ships.

David Alexander
PlanetThoughts.org
Love your Planet.

Good discussion

It is good to see some serious discussion of alternatives for action globally.  I do not have a recommendation, as I need to absorb these approaches more carefully.  I do wonder if the world is going to wait for the USA forever.  Being an American it is embarrassing how backward the government is, but eventually, as the world continues to move ahead, we will be so shamed as a nation that action will start.  Meanwhile, every individual should do what she/he can do, and vote with a mind to the future.

My comment about the Children: it is unfortunate that kids can lose their way sometimes.  Hopefully all the above (Bush, Cheney, Gore kids) will straighten themselves out.  I would rather not use the childrens' actions against ANY of their parents, as many factors go into child behaviors, and those folks all live under a media microscope.  This is not to condone any kind of drunk driving, underage drinking, and so on. Let's hope they will all find the right way.

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

Canaries in the ocean

The whales deserve a good meal - and we deserve to wake up to the meaning of these changes in eating patterns.

Change must be rather severe before entire migratory and eating patterns change.  I heard about skinny whales in the news two days ago, as well.  So, why is this story so important?  Two reasons that I can see.

1. Changes of this magnitude, and in the remote oceanic north to boot, are rare, and rapid in this case.  It is not like deciding to change your shirt and doing it all in two minutes - it should take long periods to see a shift in species locations and habits such as this.

2. All things are more connected than we may see at first, superficial glance.  For example, if this is due to a large temperature shift in the Bering see, what will this do to ocean currents?  What will it do to other animals in the region?  Ultimately we humans are part of nature's food chain, and require some basics in order to live, and even more in order to live "well".  To me, this whale news is equivalent to the sensitive canary used in coal mines; when they became ill or died, it was a warning to the miners about the air they were breathing.  Well, maybe we should try really hard to learn from these giant "canaries" - it may help save us from a worse disaster.

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

The "R" word

Yes, government is often wonderful, and does great things in many cases.  If I may say, it is Republicans of the currently dominant type, who have repeated over and over that government is bad, that private enterprise should solve everything.  It is their long-term, brainwashing strategy to change percpeptions en masse as part of a (well-known) permanent Republican majority.

So, are we afraid to say to the sleeping masses, "No, government CAN be the best answer to certain problems, those that are very large, that require endurance, that affect the weak or outnumbered, and simply that benefit the public without necessarily being profitable.  The government's job is to protect both the greater good, and the neglected individual".

Are we afraid to say this?  If so, let's change that and see how we go from there.

I will also use the "B" word: let's get Backbones and stand straight and

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

Sugar in my tank?

In that case, Sugar Frosted Flakes could become our next fuel!  First of all, it is not really a food so we are not causing the food shortage that is often a concern.  Second, the marketing is already there: put a tiger in your tank, and so on.  And of course the sugar content would be more than enough for cars, since it surpasses the sugar in apples or oranges.

But I seem to recall that in the old days, enemies would attack by pouring sugar into a gas tank to ruin the fuel lines.  Perhaps we have really progressed to where cars can run on sugar (even though people can not)?  Seriously, I am a little suspicious that this will really work, but am willing to look closer if more details are provided.On Orange You Glad We Didn't Say Switchgrass? posted 2 years, 5 months ago 2 Responses

Environmentally sound?

There must be SOMETHING better than this - see the objections mentioned in the previous comment.

Other ideas that should require less physical space while not depending on toxic chemicals: what about compressing air?  what about spinning flywheels to high speeds to store energy.  These must be much more compact.  Flywheels, by the way, can be made very efficient and durable.

I believe there have also been some low-toxicity rechargeble battery chemistries that have been developed, as mention in the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car" - I would like to look closer at those.

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

80% reduction by 2050... is it enough?

I hope the 80% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 is enough.  It seems that is the new gold standard for those who are really getting alarmed by global warming.  For example, the United Kingdom recently announced a very similar goal.

However, there is in parallel a good deal of news that seems to indicate that we need something more like an 80% reduction within 10 years.  Now, that is my own estimate, and I don't think there are well-agreed exact numbers, but look at the recent NASA report declaring that we have 10 years to make dramatic changes.  Honestly, I just don't know for sure what the timeline is... and it seems no one else is sure, but when you analyze by risk factors, it seems we need to move even faster in the right direction than Minnesota is doing.

Can we do it?  I don't know, it seems so unlikely.  But if there are some additional major climate events such as a large glacier disintegrating, perhaps we will put our foot to the gas pedal, excuse the expression.

I am in the somewhat doubtful but not hopeless camp.  The world will take some actions, and there will be some climate change despite that, as the change has already started and will certainly increase before there is improvement.  I will do what I can, and will work at it.  The rest is up to destiny.

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

Canaries in the coal mine?

Does anyone have an idea whether this kind of change is unique over history?  What will the net impact be on previous predictions?  Reading the provided sources (thank you for those) still does not seem to define what the net result will be in climate projections.  Perhaps no one is yet sure about it.On The Beak In Review posted 2 years, 6 months ago 1 Response

Shell game

All the presidential promises leave me wondering: which if any of the presidential hats has a diamond of a mind under it?  Everyone, even the presidential candidates, knows that the public "likes" the environment - thus predictable climate policy announcements and pronouncements.

Before the election comes around, I will need to look closely at the candidates and their voting histories, and listen to them speak, and will need to decide on their relative integrity and intelligence.  After that, it is time to look at their stated policies - but not in the reverse order.  Only by understanding the competence and honesty factors can a person then evaluate the value of proposals made by candidates.On Why Does Bill Richardson Hate America? posted 2 years, 6 months ago 1 Response

Park

OK, "Global Warming National Park".

Let's call it as we see it.  The poster child for climate change should have the fact of its recognizability and symbolism, incorporated into the name.  It would be truly a sign of changing times if the United States government chose a name like "Global Warming National Park", with the intention of recognizing the sadness that many plants, animals, and yes, people, are drastically affected in a negative way by climate change.

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

Let a hundred flowers bloom...

It is a hopeful sign that effort is being put into many technologies.  As anyone with an engineering background (such as myself) knows, the initial calculations are very important, but only in implementation can one finally be sure of benefits and negatives of an approach in a new field.  It seems that companies investing in tidal power must know something... and the technologies being developed in rivers will later apply to oceans.

Mostly, we see a lot of creative energy going into alternative sources of power.  "Let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend" - in this case, no one will be arrested and detained as they were in Maoist China.  Hopefully the government will become an intelligent supporter of a variety of solutions, until a few clear winners become obvious, and any solution that fills a niche and that provides a net positive in energy, will likely continue to thrive even if it is not a primary source of worldwide power.

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

We have met the enemy, and he [or she] is us

Well said, GO.  It is always harder to see the evil when we are doing it ourselves.  Yet that is the most important one to see!On Bipartisan bill calls for intelligence assessment of climate impacts posted 2 years, 7 months ago 10 Responses

Phew

OMG, I was wondering... is it THAT easy to blow up a hydrogen car (and its neighborhood)?  Thank you for the clarification, amaingdrx.

Still, when you read about the fact that hydrogen is far more explosive than gasoline, and inherently has no smell and is invisible, I wonder what we may be getting ourselves into.  Really, I don't want to read, after the first explosion kills loads of innocent people, "Golly, how did we miss predicting that would happen".

Do any experts on hydrogen handling and vehicles (which I am not) have further insight or facts?

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

Facts matter

From an efficiency viewpoint, I very much agree, we would need to look at the careful analyses of transportation costs.  This kind of modeling has been done, and pure intuition about it is a 50% bet on being wrong, as complex systems can be almost impossible to analyze through intuition alone.

That still leaves the issue of Wal-marts treatment of workers, of the standards it sets for manufacturers, and many other issues.  For those reasons I oppose Wal-mart's growth.  Fortunately they have not been allowed in New York City.  Yes, I am a liberal with convictions and the actions to support them, and proud of it.  No, I do not wear designer clothes or drink latte.  Never have, hopefully never will.

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

Arrogance

It is arrogance - those who feel they know they answer absolutely, and that it is God's way, are running the government.  And by funny coincidence, they happen to make money in the process.

Is the elephant in the room so big that half of the country can not see it?

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

It is here

T. Boone P. knows, I for one believe him.  It seems to me we are at that curved, comfortable top of the roller coaster of oil.  The ride down will get faster and faster, less and less comfortabel, relieved only temporarily by various conservation measures, and economic slowdown.  But before long even those will not help.  Then maybe we will begin to pay attention to that which has been predicted and analyzed for so many years: a world where cheap plastics, travel, fertilizer, and heating can no longer be taken as a given, and in fact are disappearing.  Hopefully there will be a robust set of alternative energy sources by then, and hopefully not nuclear energy.  Wise alternative energy sources can probably not replace oil, a unique gift from the past millions of years, but it may cushion the blow as we hit the bottom of our roller coaster ride.

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

Government - consider the alternative

I feel that your denigrating direct government intervention in "free markets" is because you have absorbed, without realizing it, or perhaps you have been part of the creation of, the Republic/neo-conservative effort of the last 40 years to take over the language and perception of government.  With mostly fictitious Cadillac-driving welfare queens, "government on our backs" language, and numerous distortions (the most recent of the well-known ones having led to a disastrous, and mismanaged, war), the wealthy have done their best to change public perception of government as being too big, and always inefficient.  Yet, Medicare is one of the most effective and efficient systems in place -- far more efficient (dollars spent compared to health care delivered) than private insurance.

Of course government CAN screw up, but is that the rule?  Government ownership of water supplies for communities and cities is threatened and lost, regulations for clean air and environment disappear, and money is concentrated further and further in the hands of the wealthy, when government is seen as incompetent or worse, as evil.  Why has a clique of influential wealthy individuals pursued this attitude toward government?  Because they can increase their wealth and power when government is weak, when monopolies are allowed to thrive, when worker protections and minimum wage languish.

The saddest thing is when middle-class and poor individuals accept this language and perception.  Hopefully the mistakes and misdeeds of the last six years by our "conservative" government, have wakened enough people to reverse that trend.

Government is there to protect the common good.  Private industry throughout history, overall, has only sought its own self-interest at the expense of the interests of society.  In fact, corporate law pretty much forces that kind of behavior.

Let government regulate and intervene in "free" markets.  I use quotes because the so-called "free" markets allowed General Motors to buy up and destroy trolley competition over decades, allowed genetically modified crops to overrun non-GM crops in neighboring farms thereby forcing the neighbors to pay the GM-food manufacturer to re-plant their own seeds (a Supreme Court decision), and on and on.

Free markets are also good, but healthy government regulation, intervention, and innovation are essential to a healthy, robust democracy.  And that is what we all want, isn't it?

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.

Climate change

I hope that also indicates that kids in Britain and gradually around the world will have a new set of priorities as adults, because our current adult set of governments are, with one or two countries excepted, doing almost nothing to avoid climate change as well as depletion of all kinds of natural resources.

There will need to be educational opportunities for children and teenagers so that they can become informed activists.

David Alexander PlanetThoughts.org Love your Planet.