The Earth Pope

O2 Breathe Freely

I don't know about you but I got to thinking about this continued inaction in the United States around the issue of global climate change and what it will take to wake up the Gaiavorous culture of Americans.  This seems to be of paramount importance seeing the reams and reams of reports and studies documenting the near total collapse of the primary ecosystems of the Earth.   

Unfortunately, Americans are so conditioned to living in fear that the ultimate scare doesn't even register in their advertisement addled minds.  They are content with the fact that someone else (not them of course) is offsetting their carbon emissions by planting trees somewhere else.  As long as Americans don't experience the effects of freak rainfall events, powerful storms or severe droughts they don't take any personal action to make change happen. 

Thinking about this I wondered, using my minimal climate training from college, if there was a proportionate gaseous process taking place where oxygen went down as carbon dioxide emissions increased.  I don't recall all of the elements of Boyles Law but it reasons that if the volume of CO2 increased in the atmosphere then the available oxygen might decrease, all other factors being equal.   

This would certainly put a new spin on the conversation about the importance of global climate change.  Once folks began to realize that available oxygen was decreasing while there was a simultanious increase in humans competing for the dwindling life sustaining gases, there would be a massive outcry to stop the depletion of oxygen and reduce the CO2 so that there would be more oxygen available.

As it turns out it does appear that oxygen is decreasing in both the atmosphere and in the oceans. In addition to tracking temperature increases as important indicators for global climate change we also need to be tracking decreases in available oxygen concentrations because oxygen is key to human life.  We can go without food and water for extended periods of time and still survive.  Go without oxygen for a few minutes and that is the end of this road show for you.

It turns out that another reason to pay attention to the decreasing oxygen levels is that we have historic evidence that a large decrease in oxygen has happened in the past and impacted all forms of life on Earth.  It is termed the Great Dying and happened about 250 million years ago during the biggest mass extinction in Earth's history.  What do they say about history repeating itself?

Unfortunately, this new awareness will undoubtedly lead to more regulation.  Marathon runners and professional athletics with have to purchase "oxygen consumption credits".  Elderly people will be stopped by airport security (wait, they already are!) to determine if they are smuggling additional oxygen canisters.  Oxygen bars would come under federal jurisdiction and tighter controls, eventually becoming "business non grada" because of the "black market oxygen" smuggling and itinerant inhalers lingering around neighborhoods. 

Maybe Mel Brooks was far more prescient in Space Balls then anyone imagined at the time.  Look for the first cases of PerriAire in a store near you this coming winter!    

When will they ever learn?

Well, it looks like the oil heads are at it once again.  They are turning global catastrophe into the shortest of short term gains by rushing to claim all of the oil and natural gas rights under the melting Arctic ice cap.  That's right, they are intent on getting the last drops of oil and natural gas available on the planet and pumping it into the atmosphere, customers be damned!

This race to the top is really about the bottom being pulled out from under every life form on the planet because as any person not under the hypnotic spell of the Paris Hilton media slight-of-eye will understand the answer to global climate change is not the burning of more fossil fuels.  Regardless of where they are found or how much of them are left to be exploited, we can not fill up our tanks and drive away from the problem.  What fuelish logic do these scientists apply to convince the governments of Russia and the United States to invest citizen dollars to prove that these resources belong to the corporations residing in one country or another?

But it may be the Goddess of natural lubricants who gets the last laugh on this one.  The leaders of the American oil junkies in the US Congress have been arguing since 1994 about how much power the Law of the Sea Treaty gives to the United Nations.  For 13 years they have been unable to ratify this treaty that over 150 other nations have agreed to and now they may have put American oil addicts at risk of losing their daily petroleum fix in the very near future .  Just the thought of going through fossil withdrawal has started to take its toll on even the most stalwart servants of the environmental movement.

I'm talking about Stuart Brand, James Lovelock and Hugh Montefiore and others who are advocating nuclear power as the safe alternative to reducing CO2 emissions. Soon they and their followers, scared out of their wits by the thought of a world without petroleum, will be advocating along with the oil slick representatives in Washington for liquefied coal plants and increased investments in clean coal technology.  If we get scared enough maybe we can even get the autotrophic auto heads in Detroit to come up with a versatile sports van for soccer moms that runs on medical waste!  That way when little Jacob or Emily breaks their ankle mom can fill up while the tots get their X-rays.

With geoscientists plunging ahead convincing corporations and governments to pour money into extracting more oil and natural gas, and old guard environmentalists calling for massive increases in water use for nuclear energy while more mounds of virulent waste gets generated, we have our planetary work cut out for us all.  Our best minds and passionate scientists are throwing in the towel and taking the deadly way out.  That is why we can not and we will not stop advocating for investments in energy efficiency and renewable power.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to get us out of this mess but it sure appears that they and their kindred spirits are doing everything they can to keep us in the biggest one of all!

It's Just Greenwash

It's everywhere!  Eco-green is the new shade of marketing this season and almost every magazine, newspaper and TV talk show is jumping on the environmental bandwagon to demonstrate that they are serious about the issue of severe climate change and impending global upheaval that is predicted to result from the lack of any country doing much of anything serious about it.

Nowhere is this clarion call for action demonstrated to really be more of a gleeful cackle of corporate executives ringing up profits than in the latest Vanity Fair "2nd Annual Green Issue" sporting on its cover a striking pose of a Leonardo DiCaprio who is so hot the ice he is standing on is actually melting under his feet.  Next to him is the cute polar bear cub Knut, Berlin's rock star of endangered species, who is generating controversy on his own as Animal Rights activists call for his execution due to his being raised by humans instead of his mother.

What gives away the real agenda of the Vanity Fair senior honchos isn't the horde of sexually oriented advertisements selling the scents, clothes, jewelry and cars you will need to generate the animal magnetism necessary to attract men and women of the caliber of desirability shown in the layouts.  No, we all know that advertising revenue is the bread and butter of these magazines.  Without it we won't be able to have articles like Jungle Law, Global Citizens and Quiet Thunder in this edition. What really gives it away is the disgusting Diesel "Global Warming Ready" ads beginning on page 173.

In the first ad a sexy young woman drives a motorboat loaded with shopping bags away from a partially submerged London.  Her pouty lips and firm inner thighs convey a sense of consumer confidence that overcomes even the inconveniences of global warming.  In the next ad a man and woman share an intimate glass of water on a sun drenched roof with a submerged Manhattan skyline in the background.  In the final ad a man smears sunscreen on a woman embracing a palm tree on a beach while the eyes of Mount Rushmore presidents peer just above the waves.

How can Vanity Fair allow this kind of advertising in a "Green" issue?  Because the green is the shade of money and the editors at this magazine have no standards which prevent accepting advertising money from a company named Diesel of all things, that promotes "successful living" in the form of dressing in expensive denim, unbuttoned shirts and preparing to fornicate while the rest of the world slowly sinks below the raising water.

Remember, nothing says debauchery quite like Diesel!

Fungal Terrorists

The possibility of fungal terrorists occurred to me a few weeks ago as two totally separate but related events happened that suddenly revealed a context previously unseen.  Once I saw the implications I immediately realized the potential global impact but I didn't have any evidence to back-up my theory, until now, that is.

I had just returned from my doctor's office where I have to go every few months to get treatment for a particularly obstinate fungus that lives on my skin.  As the fungus multiples it aggravates my skin, causing rashes and a burning itch, so every so often I take a fungicide to control the population.  My doctor says that she has seen an increase in patients who have various forms of fungus and that the medical science isn't sure what is causing the fungal surge.

A week or two later I was in my garden engaged in hand-to-stem combat with the weeds when my neighbor came over for a quick confession of her recent eco-sin.  After hearing her confession and giving absolution she offered up a warning by showing me her bandaged hand.  It seems that she had contracted a very rare fungal infection either from her rose bushes or the compost she had just purchased.  Without any prompting from me she laid back the gauze covering to expose a coin-sized blister that was blood red.

"They had to do a biopsy"she indicated the single stitch next to the bleached skin where the sore had been drained.  "I'm going to have to take a 6-month regimen of fungicides to try and stop its growth and I'm worried about my liver", she went on to say. I just stared at her because I couldn't believe there were deadly fungi on the prowl in our neighborhood. 

"But you wear gloves in the garden all the time, don't you?" I whined, looking at my own bare hands and scanning for unidentified fungal pores.

"Yes, all the time so I have no idea how I got it" she said tucking in the wound with the bandage blanket.

This got me thinking about the connection between global warming and brazen fungi that could encouraged to attack humans as the planet warms.  Just as the fear was regressing I ran across this article on the connection between fungi and global warming that confirms my fears.  They are not only encouraged but they are thriving.  And some are now coming out twice a year.

So keep a close eye on your little itches and get those biking shorts into the washer, now!

Seasonal Confusion

So there I am on the streets of San Francisco last week, walking to visit a friend after taking the ferry across the bay from Larkspur, and the weather is in the mid-70s.  I'm thinking to myself that this is surely one of the warmest Marches I can remember when I get caught up in a lunch crowd heading back to work on Market Street. 

Most folks have their heads full of IPod music or cell phone conversations so they are totally unaware of anything that is going on around them.  As I stood there waiting for the light to change a finely dressed business woman turned to me and said, "Isn't this weather just fantastic!" When I neglected to respond in the appropriate amount of time she continued, "I mean spring is such a wonderful time of year but this weather has me thinking of summer clothing already!"

I just stared at her, hopefully without my mouth hanging open, because I couldn't believe that she really didn't connect this to global climate change.  When I was able to regain my composure I brought her back around to reality.  "You do realize that it is still officially winter, don't you?" I asked in all seriousness.  She was quick with her rebuttal.

"No it isn't!" she stated.  "It's...let's see it's March 14th so that means...well I guess it technically is winter but it might as well be spring."  She's right about that!  It might as well be spring because this winter has been hot enough and dry enough to be spring here in Northern California.  In fact it is now officially the warmest winter on record.  And we aren't just talking a few small increments here, but 1.3 degrees.

What's troubling is that this woman did not even seem worried about this fact.  She was obviously reveling in the opportunity to enjoy the warmth, catch a few rays at lunch and get to the mall to purchase her summer clothes.  From her perspective, what could possibly be wrong with warm March weather?

Maybe I will answer that for her next winter, that is if we still have one.  But then again, maybe I won't even need to wait that long for her to start asking questions.  I have a hunch that this summer is going to be so hot we will need to coin a new name for a season of extreme heat.

I wonder who is carrying an asbestos line of clothing for the scorching season?
 

Hole in the Head 2

After writing the last post about methyl bromide I got to thinking about the audacity of a Bush Abomination that had no intention of living up to an international agreement to help save life on earth even if such action could reduce the shareholder value of chemical companies.  I mean how much more cynical can these people be?  Turns out they can be so cynical as to become ludicrous.

While apologists like Jay Vroom (I am not making up this name) president of the pesticide association CropLife America  defames the American farmers with the tired old mantra that they are incapable of making the transition from cancer causing earth destroying tools (read chemicals) to less toxic tools, even after a 14-year transiton period because they need more time to find alternatives, our own US EPA is demonstrating what a crock of shit this argument is.

It turns out that while all of this pissing and moaning about how the US farm exports will go into the toilet without the aid of toxic chemicals the US EPA was giving out their Stratospheric Ozone Protection awards honoring companies, associations and teams that were able to accomplish just what Mr. Vroom said was impossible to do.

A quick read of the site makes known that the European companies were able to eliminate methyl bromide completely from their operations.  Even more revealing is the juxtapostion of the Australian Strawberry and Vegetable Growers who were able to phase out methyl bromide without ever needing critical use exemptions and the California Strawberry Commission, who in 2004 still used methyl bromide in 55% of planted acres.  Is this the best that the American farming community can show for reducing methyl bromide?

The critical use exemption is what the US government uses every year to help keep our farmers chemically dependent.  Instead of complying with the Montreal Protocol to have this deadly and earth destroying chemical completely eliminated our government works closely with the chemical companies to keep farmers addicted to dangerous chemicals. These collaborators in castastrophe are nothing but drug pushers using the scare tactics of economic collapse of the family farms to frighten American farmers into buying more poisons.

Now where have we heard of these kind of scare tactics before?

Hole in Our Head

What is that old saying about once your in a hole quit digging?

Well, we are in a very big hole, a hole in the ozone that is, and the United States of Addicts just can't seem to stop digging.  Maybe they are digging the graves for each and every species on the planet while they are all amped up on their chemical dependencies.

Let's connect some of the dots here so the picture is unmistakeable for all to see.  A recent news item states that the ozone hole is the biggest on record.  The hole is caused by the continued release of  "human-produced compounds that release chlorine and bromine gases into the stratosphere."  The reason this is important is that the ozone layer protects life on earth by blocking out harmful ultraviolet radiation from the sun.

Scientists and international policy makers have known this for quite awhile.  The Montreal Protocol treaty was signed in 1987--almost 20 years ago.  The purpose behind the treaty was to get the world off of its dependency to chemicals that were destroying the ozone and thus placing the entire planet in jeopardy.  Not really an outcome anyone could live with.  One of the primary chemicals contributing to this untenable situation is methyl bromide, a hard core drug of choice for farmers in the United States.

Since the United States was a signatory to the treaty we promised to end the use of methyl bromide by 2005 but the government failed to meet the deadline and it has been seeking extensions for methyl bromide use ever since.  Now it comes to light that, as with any drug addict, while US of A representatives were negotiating the extensions the chemical companies were stockpiling methyl bromide and other banned pesticides. 

As if this wasn't enough to make you want to jump in a hole and hide, it was recently reported that greenhouse gas emissions have hit a record high.  This means that there is now more CO2 in the atmosphere and that the melting ice caps, increased droughts and rising sea levels have a greater probability of happening in a shorter period of time.  And the emissions limits set by the Kyoto Protocol
aren't going to help even if the biggest polluters (read US of Addicts) signed on, which they didn't.

Now, if you put these items on a piece of paper like the connect-the-dots games you did in elementary school and begin to connect them you will see a picture of the main impediment to reverse this global catastrophe--George W. Bush.  The Bush Abomination has the worst environmental record in the history of the nation. 

And that's one scary picture indeed!

   

Now Hear this

Wait until you hear this one!

In a major case of misplaced priorities, it now appears that the oil and gas companies are worried that the noise from their explorations might have a negative impact on the hearing of polar bears in the Arctic.  The oil companies are joined in this shameless diversion from true disaster by a host of science prostitutes pretending that this is important information to collect because, you know, we don't want nursing polar bear moms to go deaf while the oil companies explore for oil in the last wildernesses on earth.  And oh yeah, did anyone mention that the BP is putting up $60,000 for this bogus research?

The middleman in this shameless pandering to the "cute and cuddly" crowd is Polar Bears International.  PBI has a detailed news item on their site explaining why BP is funding this effort.  To quote from the article, "In awarding the grant, BP noted that obtaining a clear understanding of polar bear hearing will allow scientists and industry to better understand the frequencies and levels of received sound that could affect bear behavior."  The company seems to believe that defining how polar bears hear is extremely important because of Artic warming trends.  Huh?

Polar bears are facing extinction due to global warming and a loss of sea ice.  They aren't in danger of going deaf due to oil exploration but maybe the cracking of the breaking ice caps might cause their ears some damage.  Instead of conducting research to understand how other animals hear we need scientists to conduct studies on oil executives to understand why they can't hear all of the voices calling for major action to greatly reduce and eliminate the release of greenhouse gases.

Here's what I suggest.  Since Scientist Megan Owen of the San Diego Zoo is developing a mobile lab to take to different locations let's have her and her team go visit the executives of the oil and gas companies in the comfort of their offices.  She could shoot them with a tranquilizer gun, stuff them into small metal cages and stimulate them with various sounds (like polar bear roars) until they stuck their tongues into buckets to get their treats.

Maybe then they would be able to hear the sounds of a dying planet a little bit clearer.

Oil Shale Revisited

Ah, the folly of operating in artificially defined boundaries drawn by engineers with a linear mindset on a Holy Grail quest for increased oil profits!  The world they manufacture is so perfect that they are actually able to convince skeptics and environmentalists that they can pull oil out of oil shale in a manner that actually creates more energy than is expended.

A least that is what Shell oil would have us all believe.  They just can't leave the world's biggest deposit of oil alone, even if it is locked up in rocks underlying Utah, Wyoming and Colorado.  Even though the oil companies tried to do this back in the 1970S and failed miserably. But this time Shell has new technology (that marvelous silver bullet to save us all) that is going to extract this liquid gold in an environmentally safe process providing that favorite drug of overly consumptive Americans--cheap oil.

Here's how Shell plans to do it.  They are going to drill giant holes in the ground, lower in huge electric heaters and heat the rocks until they ooze oil in a viscosity that can be pumped out. Then, to protect the ground water Shell will drill another set of holes surrounding the heater holes where they will insert electric refrigeration systems to freeze the water, forming an ice wall so the flowing oil can't get out and pollute anything.

Just like the days of the Synfuels project during the Carter Administration these same oil companies are trying to get us all to believe that they can extract more energy out of the ground then they have to use getting it out.  In this case "3.5 units of energy for every 1 unit used in production." But the question really is what constitutes "production?"

These folks are much more sophisticated about terminology now then they were back in the 70S.  They throw around words such as "life-cycle analysis" to give the impression that they have looked at the whole system and have taking everything into consideration.  But let's just pull at the edges of their study boundary a bit more to see where this oily Ponzi Scheme begins to erode.

First, the energy needed to heat the rocks and then freeze the water will require enormous amounts of electricity.  A report estimates that for "each 100,000 barrels produced daily it would require about 1.2 gigawatts of electric-generating capacity." That is more than the largest power plant in Colorado today!

Second, the fuel used to generate this energy would most likely be coal.  How much energy is expended mining, processing, transporting and fueling these coal fired power plants?  Has this been factored into the equation for determining recoverable energy from oil shale? 

Third, if this process for extracting oil from oil shale requires the construction of new power plants, what is the energy expended in building these plants?  How much energy is used to make the materials, transport the materials and then erect the plants?  This has not been factored into the energy availability equation at all.

And finally, with all of the evidence of global warming and climate change linked to the burning of fossil fuels it is simply an oil addict's insanity to burn coal to generate electricity to heat rocks to 700 degrees to extract oil to burn for energy all the while generating megatons of life destroying CO2.

If Shell's plans succeed and their minions in Congress push through legislation supporting and subsidizing this petroleum psychosis we won't be able to breath easier because of lessening our dependence on Mid-East oil.

We probably won't be breathing at all.

Flagging Conviction

I support the amendment to ban flag burning that is being sponsored by Senator Orrin Hatch and that was recently backed by such stern Democrats as Senator Dianne Feinstein and Senate Minority Leader Henry Reid.  The fact that a recent Senate action failed by only one vote shows the importance of this constitutional amendment.   But it is not just the right of free speech that is at issue here. It is the right to expose innocent people to potential toxic substances when a flag is burned.

Just think about for a moment.  A crowd gathers in a public square in Hometown, USA where a demonstration is taking place against some mild atrocity that the US Government is imposing on yet another foreign country.  As the crowd pushes in closer to see the police and protesters challenging each other a small group of rabid dissidents unfurls the American flag and lights it on fire.  It has been generously soaked in an accelerant to increase the dramatic effect of the burning but it also unleashing toxic substances into the lungs of everyone within 100 yards.

While the flag burning amendment is a small step in the right direction for the wrong reasons it is still a step on the way to the bigger, broader ban that I want the senators to support.  I want the senators to propose an amendment to outlaw burning of any item deemed "waste".  Fire is one of the most effective elements in fooling humans into believing that something unwanted has been made to go "away".  By eliminating burning of all waste as an option we are forced to engage our innovation and creativity to find ways to reduce the waste we generate and reuse or recycle our resources.

So next time you are feeling the urge to burn the flag I want you to stop, put the matches down and instead pick up a pair of scissors.  Take the flag and cut out letters, symbols or images that you can use to make your statement.  Then, with the leftover flag material you can line the inside of a suit jacket.  That's right!  A new fashion statement for the senators and representatives who still wear those silly metal American flags on their lapels.   Image those men spreading their jackets open like a pair of true American wings.  What a statement that will make to their constiuents.

And maybe, just maybe they will all fly away to the same imaginary land where they believe the toxic waste goes to.