BP - Keystone to America: Bend Over and Take It

TYT - The Upside Of Devastating Pollution!

TYT - Climate Change Is Nothing To Worry About (Until Later)

Sand-Swept Highway

Trey Smith

Highways come in all shapes and sizes. Some are long and some or short. Some climb through great heights via mountain ranges, while others barely register above sea level. Most of them in the western world are paved, though a few dirt and gravel roads still exist in some parts. The State of Washington has -- what I believe to be -- one of the most unique highways: the beach.

Yes, you can drive on most Washington beaches and those beaches are part of the state's highway system. Run afoul of numerous laws and don't be surprised if you're pulled over and handed a ticket!

From the standpoint of convenience, being able to drive on the beach is a cool thing. No need to find a parking area and then have to tromp down rutted paths to the ocean's edge. You can park so close that the waves lap at your tires! In fact, if you're not paying close attention, the sea can swallow you up relatively fast.

Since moving to Ocean Shores (and many times previously), I honestly admit that I have driven on the beach numerous times -- heck, almost daily. While I certainly enjoy the accessibility, I worry about the environmental costs. I can't imagine that all the oil and noxious gasses that vehicles regularly emit is conducive to a clean and healthy ecosystem. I worry that the human desire for convenience is befouling the very beauty we seek to take in.

Sometimes You Can't Go Home Again

Trey Smith

When Mount St. Helens blew her top in 1980, the nearby landscape looked like it had been leveled by an atomic bomb. Some people thought that any form of life would not return before several generations had passed. And yet, within 5 years or so, life did return. It seems that nature has a way of repairing herself.

Climactic events can be fierce and lead to overwhelming destruction. Most communities that find themselves in the path of a major hurricane, tornado or flood take years to rebuild, but they DO rebuild. There is one event -- a human-caused one -- in which this is not always the case: a nuclear accident. When a nuclear plant melts down, it can render the surrounding area uninhabitable for, maybe, forever.

This is what the citizens of the towns surrounding Fukushima have just learned. Up until now, the government has issued assurances that people would be allowed to return home at some point. But in the last few days government officials have admitted the obvious: the communities near the Fukushima plant have been rendered uninhabitable for the foreseeable future. Residents who had pinned their hopes on going home are now coming to the realization that "home" will have to be somewhere else!

You see, this is THE issue with nuclear energy. As long as things are humming along, nuclear energy seems like a good thing. But when a problem arises and things aren't humming along, it's not a good thing at all. This so-called wonderful energy source has the capacity to end human civilization all by itself. So, while many will argue that it has many upsides, this one downside cancels out all the supposed benefits.

It is bad enough that residents near Chernobyl or Fukushima have been permanently displaced, but what happens when a nuclear catastrophe renders the planet unlivable? If the entire population of earth is displaced, we have nowhere else to go!

If Only Man-Made Climate Change Was Real

Trey Smith

When typhoon Haiyan - known in the Philippines as Yolanda - pounded into the islands of Samar and Leyte at 4.40am after picking up speed on a 900-mile track across the Pacific, the US navy's warning center, JTWC, in Honolulu, calculated its winds to be gusting at up to 235mph (380kph).

This would make it the fourth most intense tropical cyclone ever recorded and possibly the strongest to have ever hit land. By comparison, St Jude, the storm that hit in southern England last month, had winds gusting to 99 mph.

As Filipino communities calculated the flood and wind damage done in the 25-mile-wide path of the storm, meteorologists questioned claims that Haiyan was the strongest ever to make landfall. "All we can say at this stage is maybe. The estimates of wind strength and central pressure are just that – estimates – albeit from well-attested satellite techniques developed over decades. Without ground observations right in the centre of the track we can never be totally sure," said Julian Heming, tropical prediction scientist at the Met Office.

Haiyan is the third Category 5 "super typhoon" to hit the Philippines since 2010.
~ from Typhoon Haiyan the Biggest Yet As World's Tropical Storms Gather Force by John Vidal ~

I've asked this before, but how many dots are needed before the vast majority feels confident enough to start connecting them?

Typhoon Haiyan, in and of itself, doesn't prove that man-made global warming is real -- I use the term "man-made" because males are primarily responsible -- but the number of records set for violent storms over the past decade or two should cause people to be concerned -- very concerned. We keep hearing and reading of record droughts, tornadoes, blizzards, floods and hurricanes. Why have many of these records been set in the past few years. There has to be SOME sort of explanation.

Scientists -- not pundits, politicos, religious nuts or the folks who benefit financially from denying climate change -- have zeroed in on the primary cause. That would be human society as it is operated in the industrialized world. They issue dire warnings after another and yet the issue somehow is still open to debate?

What will it take to put this picture into a clearer focus? Really! What will it take?

BP - Humankind's Most Dangerous Moment?

MR - How the Koch Brothers Will Profit from the Climate-Destroying Keystone Pipeline

BP - Fukushima Is Collapsing - The Worst Is Coming...

BP - The Last Hours of Humanity: Warming the World to Extinction

BP - Climate Change: We Now Know The Point of No Return

TRNN - The Cost of Saving the Planet

DN - Holding BP Accountable: Environmental Justice Struggle Continues in Gulf Region After 2010 Spill

Global Warming? Nah!

Trey Smith

Two months before my community and so many others were overwhelmed this week by epic rains, our state’s chief oil and gas regulator, Matt Lepore, appeared onstage in nearby Loveland with representatives of the fossil fuel industry. During that event, Lepore — an industry-lawyer-turned-public-official — proceeded to berate citizens concerned about the ecological impact of fracking and unbridled drilling. More specifically, he insisted that those asking fossil fuel development to be governed by the precautionary principle are mostly affluent and therefore unconcerned with the economic impact of their environmentalism.

Ignoring public polling data that documented the broad support for tougher environmental regulation, Lepore was making the classic populist argument against the precautionary principle. In this instance, an industry puppet: 1) pretended environmental stewardship is merely a luxury for those fortunate enough to be able to afford it; and 2) insinuated that a lack of such stewardship primarily harms the sensibilities of rich folk, but not much else.

Today, parts of the same city where Lepore delivered his diatribe remain inundated. Same thing for “thousands of oil and gas wells and associated condensate tanks and ponds,” according to the Boulder Daily Camera.

Already, there is at least one confirmed oil pipeline leak. At the same time, the Denver Post reports that “oil drums, tanks and other industrial debris mixed into the swollen (South Platte) river.” Some of this has been caught on camera, as harrowing photos of partially submerged oil and gas sites now hit the Internet. It all suggests that there’s a very real possibility of a slow-motion environmental disaster, one whose potential damage to water supplies, spread of carcinogenic chemicals and contamination of agricultural land should concern both rich and poor.

In retrospect, then, the flood powerfully illustrates the problem with officials like Lepore (who later apologized) pretending that environmental stewardship and the precautionary principle are just aristocratic priorities. They are, in fact, quite the opposite: They are priorities for everyone and if those priorities have any class implications at all, those implications disproportionately involve the middle and lower classes.
~ from Industry Puppets Spew Obscene Lies While People Drown by David Sirota ~

Another odd thing about the situation in Colorado is the overall lack of analysis in the mainstream media of possible causes. I heard many a host and correspondent say words like epic and historic, but I don't think I heard any of them say the most obvious ones: global warming/climate change. When an area that has been dry for hundreds of years experiences torrential rains, one would think that it would be okay to explore the possibility that one of the reasons for this event had to do with climate change.

Too often, unfortunately, the mainstream media treats atypical storms just like they treat mass killings perpetrated by white men -- they utilize the "lone wolf" rationale. In terms of storms, we are told it is a freak occurrence completely unrelated to any number of other so-called freak storms. Though all these huge dots seem to be staring the establishment in the face, they are loathe to connect the dots! It's not that they don't see the obvious connections; it's more that they don't want us to recognize them.

Why? Because, if the majority of people start connecting the dots, we will demand significant changes to business as usual and that might mean a dip in the corporate world's short-term profits. We can't have that now!

BP - Climate Change is Worse than You Have Ever Imagined

MR - Fukushima: Biggest Emergency Since Meltdown

[Hidden] in Plain View

Trey Smith

The latest move to prevent us from knowing what is going on relates to so-called transparency policies whose fine print instead does the opposite — by effectively blunting the stated intent of the regulations.

The new policy is presented as an entirely forward-looking one. Government agencies are ordered to make life easier for those seeking federal data, by releasing it in a form that makes it easier to analyze it. And that, of course, sounds great.

But buried in the middle of a section on “definitions” is something that most might miss — and that might turn out to be the real purpose of the new policy. It reminds us of how vigilant you need to be in reading notices from all manner of institutions — whether your bank or your power company — on changed terms and conditions.

The suspect phrase refers to something called “the mosaic effect.” Government officials are told that they must consider this “effect” when deciding what to release and what to withhold.

The mosaic effect occurs when the information in an individual dataset, in isolation, may not pose a risk of identifying an individual (or threatening some other important interest such as security), but when combined with other available information, could pose such risk.

Before disclosing potential personally identifiable information (PII) or other potentially sensitive information, agencies must consider other publicly available data – in any medium and from any source – to determine whether some combination of existing data and the data intended to be publicly released could allow for the identification of an individual or pose another security concern.”

Is this an ominous development? You bet your black marker.

Have you ever seen documents released in redacted form, i.e., with certain names blocked out? Well, under the new rules, someone inside the government could argue that certain documents ought not to be released because someone outside the government, using other information sources, could put two and two together and figure out the information that was blocked out.

The result? Documents that were previously released, either in full or in redacted form, might now never see the light of day.
~ from New Obama Disclosure Block by Russ Baker ~

As I have pointed out many times before, perception is everything in the realm of politics. Frequently, it is of little import what an elected official says or how a legal document reads. What matters is how statements and wording are perceived.

In our overly legalized world, the ruling elite is very cognizant of the role of perception. This is why government officials, politicians and corporate heads go out of the way to present us with measured language. They spend inordinate amounts of time trying to figure how to share with us information that is more disinformation than anything else! They see it as their job as to how to communicate a set of ideals or initiatives that in no way matches up with their true intent.

In the example above, Russ Baker shows how a new policy -- one whose purpose is to engender the perception of greater government transparency -- actually is set up to do the precise opposite! As Baker notes, utilizing this new conceptual definition, almost any government document -- no matter how benign -- now can be withheld because some yahoo somewhere might connect certain dots. And that's the last thing a secretive government wants!

~

Let me offer another example of the art of perception -- one drawn from our everyday corporatized world.

Being viewed as a corporation that is earth-friendly offers a company the opportunity to cash in on a sector of the population's eco-consciousness. Understanding this, many corporations are investing much time and energy in trying to figure how they can continue conducting business as usual while appearing to have turned over a new leaf.

The other day I purchased a container of juice. On the bottle, in big lettering, was the following: "This container is made of up to 100% recycled material." Company gurus know that most people's attention will be drawn to "100%". They understand that this advertisement will lead to the perception by many that this company is committed to sustainable practices.

But it is the words hidden in plain view that turn this perception on its head. Those words are "up to". ANY percentage of the bottle's makeup between 0.0001 to 100% fits within this overly broad definition. My guess is that the bottle basically is made the same way it's always been made. Instead of adopting more sustainable manufacturing practices, I suspect that all this company really did was to add sustainable sounding language to its label!

Perception is everything, ya know.

Dry As a Friacking Bone

Trey Smith

Beverly McGuire saw the warning signs before the town well went dry: sand in the toilet bowl, the sputter of air in the tap, a pump working overtime to no effect. But it still did not prepare her for the night last month when she turned on the tap and discovered the tiny town where she had made her home for 35 years was out of water.

"The day that we ran out of water I turned on my faucet and nothing was there and at that moment I knew the whole of Barnhart was down the tubes," she said, blinking back tears. "I went: 'dear God help us. That was the first thought that came to mind."

Across the south-west, residents of small communities like Barnhart are confronting the reality that something as basic as running water, as unthinking as turning on a tap, can no longer be taken for granted.

Three years of drought, decades of overuse and now the oil industry's outsize demands on water for fracking are running down reservoirs and underground aquifers. And climate change is making things worse.

In Texas alone, about 30 communities could run out of water by the end of the year, according to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

Nearly 15 million people are living under some form of water rationing, barred from freely sprinkling their lawns or refilling their swimming pools. In Barnhart's case, the well appears to have run dry because the water was being extracted for shale gas fracking.
~ from A Texan Tragedy: Ample Oil, No Water by Suzanne Goldenberg ~

Gee, as if there aren't enough reasons already to oppose fracking!!!

BeMuddled (Revisited)

Scott Bradley
Original post date: May 31, 2011

When I shared with a friend that post in which I said Pray For Plague he replied that he really liked it verbally, but wasn't it a bit negative and didn't it contradict my philosophy in general? It is negative, I guess, and it does in some ways contradict my philosophy, but it made its way to your computer screen because it expresses how I feel. I figured a bit of honesty is worth letting my contradictions and 'issues' air out in public.

The truth is, I am a bit bemuddled on the whole issue of environmentalism. How can I reconcile my deep love of nature and fear for its destruction with the way of flow and acceptance and laisez faire? How can I say All Is Well when all is not well with our fragile planet?

Ultimately, All Is Well, of course. It will all come out in the wash. In the infinity of space and time (and the exfinitity of no space and no time) and the Unknown Source of it all, how could anything be 'lost'? But there is also this present and real-enough human experience, and it has its requirements and its qualitative values.

Earth is good for humanity, and thus, from the human perspective, worth preserving. And Earth is also good in and of itself. When my heart fills with thankfulness and joy in just sitting among the poppies, do I need to question and justify this experience? I think not, therefore I am — more fully.

None of this gives me hope in the ability of humanity to stop, however. An estimated 160 species of living beings become extinct everyday. "Sustainable development" is not only an oxymoron, it is a pernicious lie. Recycling your plastic water bottles is not going to save the planet. Most all this "eco-friendly" greenism is a fraud intended to make you feel better about buying more, using more, disposing of more. We've got to keep consuming if there is to be growth and growth is the end all and be all of human industry and civilization.

I can thus be joyful in nature and attempt to share that joy with others, but I cannot yet see my way through to an activism imbued with hope. Perhaps this is a moral shortcoming and I should, like Confucius, strive for the implementation of the Good whether there is hope for success or not. But that saves nothing either.

Nature itself will, of course, solve this 'problem' in the end. Whether by preemptive plague (for which prayers are only a sentiment) or yet another aeon of reconstruction (for Earth has suffered massive ecological destruction in the past), it will all come out in the wash. And really, when I think about it, remove whiny 'me' from the equation and All Is Well once again in any case.

You can check out Scott's other miscellaneous writings here.

Gone (Revisited)

Scott Bradley
Original post date: May 30, 2011

Yesterday, while digging in the garden, I turned up an arrowhead. If you have ever found such a thing, you know that it is a very special experience. To hold in your hand something fashioned by another hand hundreds of years ago...by a hand of a people now extinct...well, there is wonder and connectedness and sorrow.

I definitely have a nostalgic inclination. When as a kid I would hike into the hills overlooking a bit of the San Francisco Bay delta I would always try and imagine it three hundred years ago. Ducks and geese filled the sky. Salmon teemed in the rivers and creeks. Golden grizzly bears lorded across the hills. Tule elk skirted the marshes. And here and there smoke rose from a tiny native american camp. Gone. All gone.

Three hundred years ago there was no San Francisco, no Los Angeles, no Chicago, no Saint Louis, no Kansas City, no Dallas. The speed of the European invasion and conquest of this American Continent never ceases to amaze me. But it is only symbolic of the human epidemic sweeping the earth. Growth! Housing starts are rising again! The economic indicators seem to promise 5% growth world-wide for the coming year! Like that blue-green mold that covers and destroys the orange, humanity cannot stop.

Had I any confidence in the ability of humanity to truly stop and care, I would not say this, but I have none: Pray For Plague.

Forgive me. I love Earth more than humanity. [If this upsets you, consider it one of the satanic verses, or simply that I have issues. That I add this should demonstrate, I think, that I, too, have my doubts about this attitude. I may follow it up with a re-think.]

But not to worry! If humanity destroys every other living thing on earth...when the sun dies or supernovas and this solar system is no more...all will still be well.

You can check out Scott's other miscellaneous writings here.