For decades people have been trying to save things, save the whales, save the panda, save the rainforest. Time and time again we have seen this approach doesn't work. It is a pure communication snafu. How often in our lives do we save anything. We save Airmiles, a bit of money for a rainy day. We know the word save from two contexts, 1. Some hero saved someone, from drowning. Maybe a designated hero, like a beach guard. Or we are talking ''not expending', reaping economical benefits, like save some money at the pump. Save on your groceries.We are not hero's and even if we where saving as in protecting a life, this involves speed and urgency we don't like and don't have. No alarmist please! Save means you risk something in the effort. This is why "Save the [fill in the balnk]" campaigns usually attract the weak and empathic, and do seem to have some succes, but certainly never any results.
Now think of how the right wing oil companies keep down the left, with very little effort really. Are they calling out "Save our business model!". No, simply by smearing anyone that gets into their way they clean their path. We are so used to the word LEFT, as opposed to RIGHT, meaning those that are RIGHT (correct), we barely notice how the smears fly around. The left, the treehuggers (said in a derogative tone), the communists, radical, anarchistic (those advocating no government, like the republicans), violent (usually police infitrants), jobless etc etc. They are all smears. Only the way to say them is enough to turn the mostly unattentive uneducated audience away from your good cause. The smeared groups are almost a tool, like a supermodel can sell anything, a smeared individual or group that lost the grace of the public can put people off of anything. That is why its important to have them around. We can and should change that, and the way to do it is starting to be understood by more people.
The canadian goldmining company Eldorado is after all the gold in european soil. 'To pay off the debt' is the explanation, but as the debt was incurred through Wallstreet fraud (threw most countries in a recession) the mining of Gold in Greece and Romania is mostly a theft. It involves the same tactics as clearcutting in the Amazon, the locals don't matter. Use of the WTO, US chamber of commerce, Wallstreet banks have made Greek and Romanian politicians give way and you see the result in the pictures. Rosia Montana will be polluted with cyanide (used to amalgamate fine gold). It needs to be saved. Of course what needs to happen is that the mining companies involved need to be stopped, and if there are any politicians so corrupt as to allow them to go ahead, these should be sacked. "Save Rosia Montana" doesn't tell you that.
Eldorado Gold Corp doesn't act ashamed for it's eco destructive business. Above an example of their handiwork. Mind you massive amounts of fossil fuels are burned to get a fiw kilo's of useless yellow metal out of the ground. A large part of it is immediately pushed into the market to pay for the fuels, and ends up in bank vaults, those of the BIS, and most governments at the moment. Eldorado is active in China, Romania, Greece. Brazil and Turkey. They may make beautifull plans for a green cover over these scarred mountains, but it will still mean pollution and no place for wildlife, no capture of carbon and all for what? Yellow shiny stuff?
To protest against this process of gold mining, which is simply unnecessary to feed, clothe and keep the world warm, and which considering the climate problem looks like a huge avoidable CO2 emission proces (over a period of 25 years!), is logical. But the way these protests are done should change. As a first step we propose to really talk about what you don't want to happen. This way , even when people only hear you once, you told them what was going on. It gives people a handle for protests. Saving a mountain is a huge task, stopping some trucks and shovels is very doable.
The women above came to the protest also because the mining will affect children. But they do a good job drawing attention. They would be more effective if they talked about their issue, but of course not every student on facebook can be a spokesperson for their favorite cause. Women drawing attention should draw it to something that will change the behaviour of people in the way that protects Rosia Montana. That is what the whole thing is about. There is however a sad fact. Eldorado will have taken every step to be independent on anyone but the banks and oil companies and maybe some hardware companies. They are like a fossil fuel driven parasite that is plowing through the earth in search of gold, without ever stopping or considering the health of the whole. It seems no protests that just means holding up signs is going to work.
To be continued ...
Big oil spies on you
A court ruled that oil comapany Chevron can use email metadata, time, date, from, to, of all email traffic to protect its business. This comes on top of revelations that most international companies already do spy on activists, use blackwater (Xe Academi) to infiltrate and protect against anybody resisting them, and have for years used illegal spying to counter usually justified opposition.
"Last month, a federal court granted Chevron access to nine years of email metadata—which includes names, time stamps, and detailed location data and login info, but not content—belonging to activists, lawyers, and journalists who criticized the company for drilling in Ecuador and leaving behind a trail of toxic sludge and leaky pipelines."
It appears this blog and my communication will be subject to investigation, probably blocking due to new laws affecting internet neutrality, causing people to get a warped perception of societies priorities. The simple reason is that the system that depends on oil, and especially the oil companies, doe not employ people that care about the climate or the environment. They attract risk takers, vain or reckless idiots with to little knowledge to piece together what they are doing beyond the actual acts. These people are now protected by sophisticated systems because they can and will use their fuel (and its market value) to bribe everyone.
The emails could be handed to Chevron because they wheren't of US citizen. Only they where!
Wind is unstoppable. It is such a reliable investment that countries around the world are building one mega wind farm after the other. The biggest off-shore farm right now is the London Array, powering 500.000 homes in and around London. Another park has just got the green light, the Triton Knoll farm with 1.2 Gigawatt powering 800.000 homes, almost twice the amount of the London Array.
Building such big projects, with high turbines to catch the stronger winds, means conflicts with air traffic safety. Apparently the project had to pay 16 million pound to upgrade the radar system :
"The impasse was finally broken by the five developers stumping up £16 million for a new Lockheed Martin radar system capable of filtering the movement of wind turbines from other air activity."
According to big banks like HSBC wind power is already cost competitive with coal. That has been the case for much longer, because the price of coal is artificial, all fossil fuel prices say more about the amount of wealth created the fossil fuel companies want to grasp than about the actual effort of getting the fuels or the scarcity of it. Oil prices remain the same over long periods of time as reserves where depleted. The amount of oil needed to get one barrel of oil out of the ground has risen considerably as easy oil was depleted. These kind of analysis results say more about the HSBC wanting to see a shift to wind than real costs. Why want wind? Because it is a source of wealth, a clean, safe and infinite source.
We are likely to see an explosion of wind projects soon, because the industry is becoming so powerfull it can lobby and make room for itself against the forces of fossil fuels. Even though the UK is also tapping into US shale gas we think the public likes the idea and will demand it more and more. Just like our Climatebabes!
We wondered wether people would accept this statement, out with the dark, in with the light, and so far nobody questioned the meaning. It is a strong position to take, to be clear about what you don't want but also what you do want. Not negative, but simply clear. The louder this call is heard the easier it will become to start handlling big oil, coal and gas the way they aught to, as servants to our desire to replace them.
Oil companies are beyond control because their product is completely intertwined with money. If suddenly all fossil fuels would be gone our money would soon buy nothing anymore, nothing would move or be produced, so more and more people would be competing over less and less stuff. Another reason big carbon is out of control is because oil drilling does not require money, it requires the materials and energy. But they produce energy, which they can trade for anything, so really you can't stop Shell or Exxon by cutting them off. It would send a signal, but as long as oil is for sale there is a buyer. To stop this process of fossil fuel consumption we need to take control of these companies by other means than legal (there's no ground and even if there is, big oil can lobby to make anything legal) of financial means. We must simply take control.
You can click on these contestants to vote for them and sponsor them.
Right now it seems control will only come when they have cut of so many people that a revolt breaks out. In Egypt we see that scenario happening right now. The country is starved of fuel because the US prints to many dollars, causing inflation outside the US (oil is only sold in dollars). THis demonstrates how banks, central banks like the Federal reserve in this case, can influence the consumption of fuel.
The Egyption revolution is primarily about the price of fossil fuel
The already hungry Egyptions are facing a major food crisis with predictions of weak havests. The revolution will continue until they find the solution : Renewable energy, solar. Because if the sun was Egypts primary energy source, nobody could influence the price of fuel. They should take this message to heart, ditch carbon, in with the sun. Maybe the army descides renewables are the way forward, but it seems right now it is primarily working to keep the oil flowing towards the US, at the cost of its citizens.
The Arctic and Anarctic are melting, we know that, temperature anomalies run into 12 or more degrees Celsius compared to historic record. The land mass itself is a habitat for polar bears, the ocean around it is important in generating oxygen for the deep ocean. The ocean currents that cycle between the arctic and the equator are very important for all marine life because of that. Iceclimb is a good action to draw more attention to the problem.
Listening to the live stream a lot of talk is about the environmental catastrophy, about what they tried and how devestated scientists have been. Greenpeace should learn to communicate, because whatever they say instructs their listeners. If you want to protect the Arctic and take action in this way, at least you could do is talk about the benefits of protecting the region. Repeating the ignorant ideas and statement of the people that see obvious profitability in exploiting the Arctic is not going to help.
Arctic exploration is like pulling the plug on humanity, and experts know
The problem with exploiting gas and oil in the Arctic is that it sets into motion a release of gas from the ocean floor. Clathrate ice is water combined with methane. It can only exist when it is cold enough. Massive amounts of gas are stored in Clathrate from decomposing biomass collected over millions of years. Methane is a powerfull greenhouse gas and would warm the planet much more, causing degassing of the oceans. This in turn will cause the chemistry of the oceans to change in favour of organisms that product poisonous H2S, Hygrogen Sulfide, a gas that kills instantly both plants and animals. Oil experts know this!
An oil industry expert about the risks of Arctic drilling
We have to be weary of Greenpeace. It has $100 million in the bank it is not using. It has undertaken some great actions, but with their money they could have achieved a lot more. You can't change the system from within, it's that simple. But they did get the Peta/Climatebabe message, which is that people pay attention to beauty and love, and that our natural leaders are babes and studs, not the liers, idealists and carbon administrators we call politicians and bankers.
Let's recycle and reduce the use of plastic!
Plastic is choking our oceans, a fourth assault after overfishing,CO2 absorption (acidification) and warming. We have to cut the plastic waste, which is not easy because the plastic industry is enormous and the material is being used in almost every product. It's like there's a plastic tax on everythig, and this is exactly what it is, because for every item anyone buys a small amount of money goes to the producers of plastic. Not only the oil producers want to sell oil for plastic, and the plastic producers want to sell plastic for profit, but if cash flow is large enough banks want to keep it going for their bottom line! How to stop that?
Even if you promote the idea of using less plastic then how to do it most effectively. Showing beautifull women roling in trash may only help to associate that trash with the positive feeling of experiencing beauty, that's how most products are sold isn't it? So we should sell the solution, not the problem! Greenpeace as an organization is liable to midirect people, they are in the core not smart environementalists, too many accountants, although there is hope.
But even if we use plastic, we could use it in a way that is smarter. We could use recyclable containers for water, meat products (if you choose to eat those), bread, vegetables and dairy. Make em a bit thicker, cleaneable or recyclable, and design a collection and redistribution chain that allows anyone to us the same plastic container time and time again.
Supermarkets should be driving the push for plastic reduction.
The key to cheap recycling is to use renewable energy. If you can use solar or wind to do the recycling the cost will be steadily lower until you only pay for maintenance and labour. Automation can help as well. This goes for all types of recycling, even if it's about getting the plastic out of our oceans. That is why we need more renewables in any case, to have cheap energy to restore our eco system, decarbonize our lifestyle and move back towards the green of our planetary thermostat!
We regularly give away our t-shirts when we make pictures in the street, and these two ladies where willing to help us show them to you. They look great! They are not for sale, we are not a t-shirt action group, but they do a good job promoting the site. We are working on a new design, hopefully made of bamboo as we where shocked to learn about the effects of water guzzing child labour GM cotton.
The Aral sea dried up because it's tributaries water was diverted to irrigate cotton fields..
Bamboo cellulose, a type of sugar, is turned into rayon in a chemical process. This process is not green but can be. "Austrian company Lenzing, which makes a type of rayon fabric from wood pulp, uses a “closed loop” process that recycles essentially all the required chemicals." so if we switch from fossil fuel synthetic fabrics, and cotton based fabrics to bamboo fiber and cellulose fabrics we will be doing nature a favour, also because bamboo uses less fertilizer and grows on marginal lands. The plant is so versatile we believe it could seriously help fight climate change.
Wind is energy and can generate wealth, it can generate all wealth if you build enough of them. The combination with solar creates excellent results, as is seen in Germany. When de sun is out there is not much wind, and the other way around, so the variability of the total production is pretty small. With some storage it would even be possible to have only wind and solar, expecially when wind is generated offshore.
But there are other ways in which wind can generate wealth. The Dutch Rainmaker is a wind driven cooling system that condenses water out of air in places that are dry without rain. This means that you can grow crops and feed people where you first didn't have that option. The best use for water if it isn't necessary to allow people to drink and grow food is to grow trees, because it has been shown that enough trees will create rain cycles. Clouds form above the trees and take water away or make it rain as well. The Naga foundation knows all about this, and show it is even possible to create rain conveyor belts, taking water into the continent.
Lee Towers, de gouden stem van Rotterdam! Sinatra heeft zijn niveau nooit bereikt, Nat King Cole ging door het leven zonder te weten wat nog mogelijk was. Zonder een moment te twijfelen was hij bereid onze campagne te steunen, wij snappen niet waarom niet alles zo snel mogelijk duurzaam wordt gemaakt.
Rotterdam #010 De 'Zwaan'
In de geboortestad van Lee, Rotterdam, gaat het intussen de andere kant op. De haven is bijna een enclave, en lastig te managen door de stad. Er komen alleen maar centrales bij, de lucht kwaliteit verslechtert en bovendien is een pannekoek van de eerste orde voorzitter van het Rotterdam Climate Initiative. Wie? Shell medewerker (CEO) Jeroen van der Veer, die exact hetzelfde zegt als Voser, de huidige COE : "Niet zo snel met die verduurzaming"! Alleen Groen Links, die ook werk maakte van gevaarlijke chemische situaties bij Odfjell vraagt of Jeroen wil opstappen.
Pannekoek aan het hoofd van het Rotterdam Climate Initiative "Fossiele energie blijft nog lang nodig (als ik mijn zin krijg!)"
Dit ongezonde beleid, meer roet, ozon, CO2, NOx in de rotterdamse lucht, treft rotterdammers van Lee's generatie het hardst. Longziekten en dementie correleren met luchtvervuiling. Jaarlijks sterven duizenden Europeanen omdat we nog steeds veel kolen en gas stoken. Zo is de fossiele dominantie een last voor iedereen, nu en in de toekomst.
(Page 1 of 70, totaling 695 entries) » next page