Blog @ MoreWhat.com

A perfect example of why the global warming crowd is misguided. Forget the disputes about who is right or wrong on the idea of AGW or whatever it is called now. Seeking solutions to issues, real or imagined, through the government, aka politicians, is never a wise choice.

The title of the piece below from The Hill also muddies the water. It is not a matter of ‘consumers’ seeking changes to the laughable ‘climate change bill’ rather it is a battle between special interests. Lobbyists in the form of manufacturing or industrial interests are facing off with interests who claim to champion consumers.

The public at large or the real consumer, is largely unaware of the specifics in legislation of any kind not to mention the global warming variety. This is a classic case of be careful what you wish for, you may get it.

Not unlike the issue of healthcare reform, the climate change legislation is subject to the business as usual in Washington that one politician after another said was going to change. Not the least of which was the current President. The power brokers in Washington, lobbyists included, still have the last word on legislation. If you go to that trough seeking change you will be subjected to the pecking order which renders no proposal, worthy or otherwise, exempt from producing an outcome not of your choosing.

Consider groups like AARP only involve themselves in this type of action to increase or maintain their membership. Could it be that win or lose so-called consumer groups benefit from these matters by saying they fought for their members? And are the majority of their members even paying attention? Or are they simply delegating their responsibility to someone else as when or if they step up to the ballot box on election day?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Consumers seek climate bill changes
By Jim Snyder
Posted: 07/22/09 06:31 PM [ET]

Consumer groups, including the powerful seniors’ lobby AARP, say House climate change legislation does not do enough to protect households from skyrocketing electric bills or to prevent power companies from reaping windfall profits.

They want the Senate to add more explicit language that requires local utilities to pass along the revenues from the sale of the free emission allowances distributed by the federal government to residential consumers.

The community organizer who is friends with the domestic terrorist William Ayers, hate monger Jeremiah Wright and hires friends from the most corrupt political machine (Illinois) has the audacity of something other than hope to reference the founding fathers and call on the public to support his agenda that is anything but American.

Like mutually exclusive terms President Obama insults the meaning of this nation’s Independence Day when he tries to connect the principles of the founding with his socialist agenda. Those who have dismissed the idea that his agenda is socialist overlook nationalizing private industry, spending and government expansion with the intent of complete government control that will render this great country into nothing more than a banana republic.

Addressing our dependence on foreign energy by taxing all we use rather than a transition approach that draws on our own fossil fuel resources until alternatives become viable in a free market is counter to American ideals which rely on the innovation of a free people. Expecting the public to buy into a universal or socialized, government-run healthcare system rather than encouraging free market solutions also runs counter to American ideals. With these two examples only God may know what the Obama agenda has planned for education, immigration and the remainder of his ideas for transforming the United States into another socialist country like some in the EU and others in this hemisphere.

And then we have the impotent GOP. Based on the report below the Senator who lost an election to the community organizer was chosen to give the opposition party response to ObamaGov. While we can all debate whether or not it would have been wise to have a united response from the US regarding turmoil in Iran the larger issues of our own nation under the leadership of Barack Obama seems more to the point or at least an issue of primary importance. We can do little to help others if we cannot help ourselves and the GOP response appears to be a continuance of Republicans being lost in the wilderness.

Will someone please find a way to encourage this nation’s leaders to remove their collective heads from their collective hind quarters and return sensible government to a young nation which just observed its 233rd birthday.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Pres. Barack Obama

On U.S. Independence Day, President Barack Obama is calling on Americans to remember the spirit of the nation’s founders, and to embrace his domestic initiatives. Republican Senator John McCain, meanwhile, wants stronger U.S. language against Iran’s violent crackdown on protesters.

President Obama, in his weekly address, asks Americans to remember the sacrifices and achievements of the men who voted for independence 233 years ago.

“We are called to remember how unlikely it was that our American experiment would succeed at all; that a small band of patriots would declare independence from a powerful empire; and that they would form, in the new world, what the old world had never known - a government of, by and for the people,” he said.

In July, 1776, the representatives of 13 British colonies in America, gathered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, voted to declare independence from Britain and formed a new nation. At the same time, colonists in hastily-organized and poorly-financed militias battled the British Army for several years, until London officially recognized U.S. independence.

Mr. Obama called on Americans to recall those patriots’ spirit and support his plans to reform the U.S. education, health care and energy policies.

“We are not a people who fear the future,” he said. “We are a people who make it. And on this July 4th, we need to summon that spirit once more. We need to summon the same spirit that inhabited Independence Hall 233 years ago today.”

The president is celebrating Independence Day with a traditional barbecue and fireworks on the White House lawn, with 1,200 military families invited to attend. He is also celebrating his daughter Malia’s eleventh birthday. Mr. Obama leaves late Sunday for a week-long trip to Russia, Italy and Ghana.

Sen. John McCain (file photo)

In the weekly Republican Party message, Senator John McCain of Arizona is also paying tribute to the nation’s founding fathers, who he says “stood up to a powerful oppressor and claimed their natural right to liberty.”

McCain is also invoking the patriots’ spirit as he calls on the Obama administration to speak out more forcefully in support of the anti-government protesters in Iran.

“They did not ask us to arm them or come to their assistance with anything other than public declarations of solidarity and public denunciations of the tyrants who oppress them. We have a moral obligation to do so,” he said.

Senator McCain is rejecting earlier White House claims that a more vocal response by Washington would have supported the Iranian government’s claims of U.S. interference.

“Do they really believe Iranians do not know why they are protesting, and who is oppressing them? Do they think Iranians whose votes were discarded, whose voices have been ignored, whose lives have been threatened by the regime they wish to be rid of, will think America has put them in that position?” he said.

U.S. Independence Day is traditionally celebrated with picnics, parades, concerts, fireworks displays, and readings of the Declaration of Independence.

The current President of the United States has expressed shall we say, disappointment, that the GOP is the party of ‘no’ and resists everything and that news sources like Fox rarely have anything positive to say about him.  It is not uncommon for liberals who call in to conservative talk radio to admonish the host for not giving Barack Obama a chance.  The following news report excerpt is representative of the kind of stories about Mr Obama’s agenda which understandably generate negative comments.  How can anyone promote such agenda items which demonstrate appalling stupidity?

Obama Announces New Energy Conservation Steps

“I know light bulbs may not seem sexy,” Mr. Obama said. “But this simple action holds enormous promise because seven percent of all the energy consumed in America is used to light our homes and our businesses.”

The president says the savings will be striking.

“Between 2012 and 2042, these new standards will save consumers up to $4 billion a year,” he said.

In his own words, seven percent of our expenditures for electricity are attributed to lighting.  Therefore the most we could save, assuming we abandoned lighting all together, which we  would not, is seven percent of what we spend.  Not sexy Mr President?  It is not even remotely sexy nor practical.  And if you divide the President’s estimate on savings to consumers for the compact ripoff by the number of households in the US it means less than 10 cents per day per household.  The additional cost of the ‘new’ lamps and questionable life expectancy could easily turn that minuscule saving into a net loss.  If you consider his words on savings and that his usage estimate includes businesses as well as residential use the savings are invisible.

additional data source: US QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau

This sort of government action is absolutely brain dead.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

(Video below provided for perspective)

Among a long list of other witnesses providing testimony on The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 at a hearing by the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s subcommittee on Energy and the Environment (whew!) are Newt Gingrich and Al Gore. Mr Gore’s prepared remarks are available on the House website and the linked text below will retrieve it for you. The excerpt below is representative of Mr Gore’s position on this issue. It expresses eminent crisis and his assertion we must act on it now. He has held this opinion for a long time.

By Repowering America with a transition to a clean energy economy and ending our dangerous over-reliance on carbon-based fuels, which is the common thread running through all three of these crises, this bill will simultaneously address the climate crisis, the economic crisis, and the national security threats that stem from our dependence on foreign oil.

We cannot afford to wait any longer for this transition. Each day that we continue with the status quo sees more of our fellow Americans struggling to provide for their families. Each day we continue on our current path, America loses more of its competitive edge. And each day we wait, we increase the risk that we will leave our children and grandchildren an irreparably damaged planet.

While Mr Gore expects you to believe his opinion is conclusive his own words, like Rep Lowey in another post on this blog, betray him. His first argument supporting his opinion in the prepared remarks states, ‘the entire Arctic ice cap may totally disappear in summer in as little as five years if nothing is done to curb emissions of greenhouse gas pollution.’ It would be more convincing if Mr Gore’s phrasing here used the word ‘will’ rather than ‘may.’ It underscores that even Mr Gore cannot be certain of his own view.

In another argument presented regarding the salmon population Mr Gore uses the phrase ‘Researchers are now working to determine the cause….’ While he states the dire consequences of not acting right now on this subtopic he admits the cause is not currently known. To be fair, Mr Gore makes other statements and draws other conclusions that would have to be researched to respond to in this post. And that is beyond the scope of this post by virtue of the time required to perform the task. The point is without dissecting every word in his prepared remarks Mr Gore regularly states all the facts are not available yet urges we act this very minute. And they wonder why so many reject his opinion.

A link is provided below from the subcommittee’s webpage on this hearing. It includes a witness list, an announcement that the hearing will be broadcast today on CSPAN and other links and information.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, Day 4

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The Thrilla in Vanilla: Gore vs. Gingrich in Global Warming ‘Showdown’? 

crossposted to:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

A resolution dated April 22, 2009 sponsored by Rep Nita Lowey (D-NY) and at the time of this writing co-sponsored by no one was presented at The Hill dot com’s Congress Blog by its author. Dismissing those who do not share her view on global warming as ‘deniers’ Lowey injects plenty of insulting rhetoric but appears to expect anyone reading her post (which is crossposted at HuffPo) to take her claim on faith. Lowey claims the evidence for global warming caused by humans is ‘conclusive’. But of course no details or links are provided to make her case.

The First Step is Admitting You Have a Problem (Rep. Nita Lowey)
April 22nd, 2009

In the past month, the House Minority Leader called the idea that carbon dioxide - a greenhouse gas and known carcinogen - is dangerous “almost comical,” and members of his party suggested that the planet is actually cooling and “carbon-starved” and invited a global warming denier as a public witness to a Congressional hearing on the topic.

As anyone with experience with recovery knows, the first step in addressing a crisis is to admit that you have a problem. Unfortunately, these displays and others make it increasingly clear that, despite conclusive scientific evidence on the existence of global warming and the human role, some elected officials refuse to take Step 1.
As Congress begins the process of legislating to protect humans and ecosystems from the effects of global warming, I believe we need a “temperature check.”

It is interesting that Rep Nita Lowey makes the statements above with such conviction. Yet the resolution she authored and introduced in Congress April 22nd in stark contrast has no such confidence. She offers seven ‘whereas’ statements which list her arguments supporting that human activity causes global warming. But twice she is only mildly hinting that such is the case with two statements. ‘Recognizing that the climate system of the Earth is warming and that most of the increase in global average temperatures is very likely due to the observed increase in human greenhouse gas emissions.’ And ‘Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives– (1) recognizes that the climate system of the Earth is warming and that most of the increase in global average temperatures is very likely due to the observed increase in human greenhouse gas emissions; and (2) recognizes legislation is needed to mitigate risks humans and ecosystems face from a warming climate system.’

Seven details in an effort to support her claim that we are causing global warming followed by two statements in her conclusion that this is ‘very likely’ rather than something reflecting she is convinced by her own argument. Maybe she missed arguments to the contrary or in her zeal to support her political party dismissed everyone that disagrees as a ‘denier’. There was an article in the Politico which offered the following last November.

Scientists urge caution on global warming
By: Erika Lovley
November 25, 2008 04:48 AM EST

Climate change skeptics on Capitol Hill are quietly watching a growing accumulation of global cooling science and other findings that could signal that the science behind global warming may still be too shaky to warrant cap-and-trade legislation.

There are scientists on both sides of this issue. Another excerpt from the same article points out one example.

Armed with statistics from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climate Data Center, D’Aleo reported in the 2009 Old Farmer’s Almanac that the U.S. annual mean temperature has fluctuated for decades and has only risen 0.21 degrees since 1930 — which he says is caused by fluctuating solar activity levels and ocean temperatures, not carbon emissions.

The article also stated ‘most’ scientific bodies support the notion of global warming and our involvement in it. Organizations may not reflect the opinion of everyone connected to their organizations. But over 30,000 scientists who signed the Petition Project since 1998 make an even stronger case than global warming or cooling. They have objected to the idea that the debate is over and the science is done. That presents an intelligent and reasonable conclusion. Science has always been about continuing the pursuit and regularly challenging theories and discoveries. Galileo risked his life for that pursuit as did others. Some people take science seriously. Here’s a snapshot of what the project and the signers are ‘about’.

The purpose of the Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climatological damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

In contrast to that and published in 1992 the Union of Concerned Scientists which boasts 250,000 members including scientists and ordinary citizens offered their National Call to Action on Global Warming which proposes essentially taking all sorts of steps to eliminate human causes of global warming. For an organization that gives at least some impression of being science related they have a troubling list of organizations supporting their position. That list may have a political agenda or at least be characterized as special interest. Or another way of putting it is lobbyists. Decide for yourself, here’s the list.

Organizations Endorsing the National Call to Action on Global Warming:

1Sky * ACORN * Alliance for Climate Protection * Audubon * Catholic Healthcare West * Center for International Environmental Law * Ceres * Clean Water Action * Climate Law and Policy Project * Climate Protection Campaign * Climate Solutions * Defenders of Wildlife * Democracia USA * Earthjustice * Eco-Equity * Ecology Center * Energize America * Energy Action Coalition * Environment America * Environment and Energy Study Institute * Environment Northeast * Environmental Law and Policy Center * Green for All * Greenpeace * Health Professionals for Clean Air * Hip Hop Caucus * ICLEI USA * Insitute for Agriculture and Trade Policy * Interfaith Power and Light * International Forum on Globalization * Kyoto USA * League of Conservation Voters * League of Women Voters * League of Young Voters * Massachusetts Climate Action Network * National Hispanic Environmental Council * National Teach-In on Global Warming Solutions * National Wildlife Federation * Oceana * Oxfam * Physicians for Social Responsibility * Progressive Future * Public Citizen * Religious Witness for the Earth * Rock the Vote * SEED Coalition * Sierra Club * Southern Alliance for Clean Energy * Teleosis Institute * The Humane Society of the United States * The Student Public Interest Research Groups * The Wilderness Society * Union of Concerned Scientists

This post does not suggest global warming does or does not exist. It does not even suggest whether humans are or are not responsible in whole or in part. But this is what it does suggest. Those who dismiss opposing viewpoints are ignoring scientific method. Just because you may want the argument resolved or that it would be expedient does not gurantee the science will support it or be available now.

As stated earlier in this post, Lowey is not even convinced it is real. That is why pursuing legislation based on the SWAG method is ridiculous. Check your politics and special interest agendas at the door. Causing panic to rush to legislation is a very good sign the proposal is flawed. That is what the science should help you avoid. Listen to the more than 30,000 scientists telling you the answer is not here yet.

Stanford Matthews
Morewhat.com

There’s something to be said for this. So go ahead, say it.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Three U.S. companies are being sued for selling material to the former Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein used in his chemical weapon attacks against Iraqi Kurds.

Five Iraqi expatriates filed a class action lawsuit this week in the U.S. state of Maryland, accusing the companies of violating the Geneva Conventions in connection with the attacks. The Republic of Iraq is also named in the suit.

Saddam’s government used various chemical weapons in the anti-Kurd Anfal campaign in the late 1980’s. At a ceremony last month honoring victims in Halabja, one of the most infamous attacks, Iraq’s environment minister Narim Osman told VOA Kurdish Service foreign companies should be put on trial for their role in the killings.

The companies being sued are Alcolac, VWR International, and Thermo Fisher Scientific.

from AP via Forbes….
BMW, whose brands include Mini, Rolls-Royce ( RYCEY.PK - news - people ) and BMW, said sales in the first three months of the year totaled 277,264 compared with 351,787 a year earlier.

from Car and Driver…..

The automotive world has been waiting for BMW’s response to the Mercedes-Benz R-class since the debut of that crossover/minivan curiosity for 2006. For a while, a pseudo minivan in the same vein as the R-class was expected from Mercedes’ German rival, but the R’s dismal sales may have caused BMW to chart a different course of action.

This blog recently published reports about US automakers and a couple of their concept cars targeting new ideas prompted by bailouts and political insanity (sorry, redundant) to force consumers to adopt the liberal global warming and other eco-frenzies. While one example featured on an article on the main site presented a partnership between GM and US national labs the other example was Chrysler’s GEM or global electric motor car. At least the post on Tesla Motors presented what appears to be a reasonable example of a practical electric car.

Add to this a column by George Will linked to on this blog regarding consumer reluctance to accept ‘choice’ mandates from elected representatives and the fact that two trucks are still this year’s best selling ‘cars’, the BMW story certainly adds to the mix in as yet undetermined ways.

But the video was entertaining.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted to:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

That 2014 is the current deadline for phasing out conventional incandescent lamps in the US makes a recent chronology appear eerie or at least a spectacular coincidence.

A few days ago I read a post at Right Truth regarding Debbie’s experience with the dreaded CFL, or compact fluorescent lamps, that are to replace the conventional incandescent variety. Several times I postponed purchasing replacement lamps determining I could wait until at least the next one to expire met its fate.

After reading the post at Right Truth, go figure, an incandescent lamp in my house failed that evening. I said as much in a comment on Debbie’s blog. As it sits now, related to that I had decided to offer some posts promoting George Will’s columns after reading one entitled ‘The Toxic Assets We Elected.’ You’ll understand why I am offering the suggestion to read another George Will column today when you read the excerpt below.

Okay, it’s another timely, skillful, refreshing contribution from an accomplished individual worth reading. But it has the added value of fitting the uncanny chronology described earlier.

Climate Change’s Dim Bulbs
Written by George F. Will, Washington Post
Thursday, 02 April 2009

The story recounted some Americans’ misadventures with the new light bulbs that almost all Americans — all but those who are filling their closets with supplies of today’s incandescent bulbs — will have to use after the phaseout of today’s bulbs in 2014. (You missed that provision of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007?)

A San Francisco — naturally — couple emerged from Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth” incandescent with desire to think globally and act locally, in their home. So they replaced their incandescent bulbs with the compact fluorescents that Congress says must soon be ubiquitous. “Instead of having a satisfying green moment, however,” the Times reported, “they wound up coping with a mess.”

And some want the same people who brought you global warming to manage your healthcare. Now that’s scary.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Tesla unveils world’s first mass-produced, highway-capable EV
Model S sedan has anticipated base price of $49,900, up to 300-mile range and 45-minute QuickCharge capability

March 26, 2009

HAWTHORNE, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE) —Tesla Motors is now taking orders for the Model S, an all electric family sedan that carries seven people and travels 300 miles per charge.

The Model S, which carries its charger onboard, can be recharged from any 120V, 240V or 480V outlet, with the latter taking only 45 minutes. By recharging their car while they stop for a meal, drivers can go from LA to New York in approximately the same time as a gasoline car. Moreover, the floor-mounted battery pack is designed to be changed out in less time than it takes to fill a gas tank, allowing for the possibility of battery-pack swap stations.

The floor-mounted powertrain also results in unparalleled cargo room and versatility, as the volume under the front hood becomes a second trunk. Combining that with a four-bar linkage hatchback rear trunk and flat folding rear seats, the Model S can accommodate a 50-inch television, mountain bike *and* surfboard simultaneously. This packaging efficiency gives the Model S more trunk space than any other sedan on the market and more than most SUVs.

“Model S doesn’t compromise on performance, efficiency or utility — it’s truly the only car you need,” said Tesla CEO, Chairman and Product Architect Elon Musk. “Tesla is relentlessly driving down the cost of electric vehicle technology, and this is just the first of many mainstream cars we’re developing.”

Tesla expects to start Model S production in late 2011. The company believes it is close to receiving $350 million in federal loans to build the Model S assembly plant in California from the Dept of Energy’s Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program.

Building on Proven Technology

Tesla is the only production automaker already selling highway-capable EVs in North America or Europe. With 0-60 mph in 3.9 seconds, the Roadster outperforms almost all sports cars in its class yet is six times as energy efficient as gas guzzlers and delivers 244 miles per charge. Tesla has delivered nearly 300 Roadsters, and nearly 1,000 more customers are on the wait list.

Teslas do not require routine oil changes, and they have far fewer moving (and breakable) parts than internal combustion engine vehicles. They qualify for federal and state tax credits, rebates, sales tax exemptions, free parking, commuter-lane passes and other perks. Model S costs roughly $5 to drive 230 miles – a bargain even if gasoline were $1 per gallon.

The anticipated base price of the Model S is $49,900 after a federal tax credit of $7,500. The company has not released options pricing. Three battery pack choices will offer a range of 160, 230 or 300 miles per charge.

“Model S costs half as much as a Roadster, and it’s a better value than much cheaper cars,” Musk said. “The ownership cost of Model S, if you were to lease and then account for the much lower cost of electricity vs. gasoline at a likely future cost of $4 per gallon, is similar to a gasoline car with a sticker price of about $35,000. I’m positive this car will be the preferred choice of savvy consumers.”

The standard Model S does 0-60 mph in under six seconds and will have an electronically limited top speed of 130 mph, with sport versions expected to achieve 0-60 mph acceleration well below five seconds. A single-speed gearbox delivers effortless acceleration and responsive handling. A 17-inch touchscreen with in-car 3G connectivity allows passengers to listen to Pandora Radio or consult Google Maps, or check their state of charge remotely from their iPhone or laptop.

Tesla is taking reservations online and at showrooms in California. Tesla will open a store in Chicago this spring and plans to open stores in London, New York, Miami, Seattle, Washington DC and Munich later this year.

About Tesla Motors

San Carlos, Calif.-based Tesla Motors Inc. designs and manufactures electric vehicles with exceptional design, performance and efficiency, while conforming to all North American and European safety, environmental and durability standards. The Roadster, which has a 0-to-60 mph acceleration of 3.9 seconds and a base price of $101,500 after a federal tax credit, is the only highway-capable production EV for sale in North America and Europe. Tesla expects to begin producing the Model S sedan in late 2011. Details and photos are available at www.teslamotors.com.

CONTACT:

Rachel Konrad
Tesla Motors, Inc.
+1 (650) 701-2664
rachel@teslamotors.com

crossposted at:
Maggie’s Notebook
Screw the UN

Another in a long list of additions to the Obama Administration reinforces the concern that while Hillary Rodham Clinton was unsuccessful in becoming President she succeeded in establishing a third Clinton term in spite of the loss. Susan Rice is US Ambassador to the United Nations and was a member of the Obama Biden Transition Team as well as senior foreign policy adviser for their 2008 campaign.

It has been said of Obama that filling vacancies from the previous administration demonstrates a preference for persons with impressive resumes’ in both education and experience. This selection was no departure from that criteria or strategy. A Wikipedia account of Dr Rice states her father told her to ‘never use race as an excuse or advantage’ and that she was concerned her accomplishments would be viewed as the result of affirmative action. Her personal success is impressive. It is possible she hails from a family with above average means so affirmative action should be a moot point. But what if any is the role of nepotism?

Madeleine Albright is described in the same account as a family friend and mentor to Rice. She urged Clinton to appoint Rice as an Assistant Secretary of State in 1997. While she impressed many and certainly enough to be confirmed others felt she was inexperienced and inflexible. A few years in the Clinton Administration and then to the Brookings Institution. A common career path for unemployed public servants similar to former Congressman becoming lobbyists. Next up the Clinton Obama Wars and filling the Administration with former staff to appease the Clinton clan before the convention. Oh there’s no nepotism here. And this is not a criticism directed at Rice for it is the case with most if not all Obama selections. So how is that working or shaping up for the average citizen?

Regarding President Obama’s election UN Sec Gen Ban Ki Moon expressed ‘Our goals are shared. Together, the United States of America and the United Nations can look forward to a new era of strong and effective partnership, delivering results and the change we need.’ If you take that statement at face value avoid persons selling infrastructure in Brooklyn or vacant land in Florida. Moon had more to say. Earlier this week, he welcomed Mr. Obama’s election “with great optimism,” noting that the UN and US have many common goals. By his own admission and that of Obama and Clinton these goals include but are not limited to the following:

United Nations reform (which will never happen)

Climate Change (or the promotion of more gloom and doom)

The Darfur Peace Process ( which does not exist, resembles the climate change item and is as likely to fail as that in the Middle East )

Global Economic Crisis (his words, and something these spendthrifts no nothing about )

But what Ban Ki Moon and the rest of the posse at the UN were really interested in was this.

UN Launches $613 Million Appeal for Gaza
By Lisa Schlein
Geneva
29 January 2009

The United Nations is appealing for $613 million to help tens of thousands of people in Gaza recover from the three-week Israeli military offensive in the Palestinian territory. The money will provide life-saving assistance over the next six to nine months. The U.N. appeal was launched at the annual World Economic Forum in the Swiss alpine village of Davos.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is the first world leader to enter Gaza since Israel imposed a blockade on the Palestinian territory in June 2007. He describes his distress at what he saw.

And how does Moon qualify for the designation in the report above as a ‘world leader’? More to the point is what does the UN do besides make headlines and statements when they’re not collecting money and using it for who knows what? Could it be that aside from all the other conspiracy theories about the UN that they are quite happy with the Middle East conflict as another venue to work their craft of separating people from their money and giving it to their friends? If you object to that suggestion please explain why none of their ‘programs’ end in success or just end? Sustaining conflict in the world would be of benefit to them given their methods of operation.

So what does Dr Rice bring to the party?

26 January 2009 – There is no more important forum for effective cooperation among States that the United Nations, the new ambassador of the United States to the United Nations stressed today, following her first meeting with Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

“I am looking very much forward to engaging in a cooperative, constructive fashion with my colleagues here in New York. I will listen, I will engage and I will work to advance United States interests, recognizing that in many, many instances, our national interests are best advanced when we are working hand in hand with that of others,” Susan Rice told reporters at UN Headquarters in New York.

Ms. Rice said she had an “excellent meeting” with the Secretary-General, covering a range of issues including climate change, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), UN peacekeeping, non-proliferation, Sudan and the situation in the Middle East.

“The United Nations is a vitally important institution. It has great potential. It still has room for great improvement,” she said, adding that she and Mr. Ban also touched on the challenge of making the Organization more effective and more efficient.

She recalled that President Barack Obama had wanted to place the US at the centre of the fight against poverty, and had stated that the MDGs – the globally agreed targets to slash poverty and other development challenges by 2015 – were now US goals.

Based on President Obama rescinding The Mexico City Policy, the liberal thirst for abortion and a press conference by the executive director of the UN population fund the crew must be drunk with sadistic pleasure over the spoils of a political victory. Here’s the damming evidence from the UN press conference in their own words.

“President Obama’s actions sent a strong message about his leadership and strategic vision to support causes that will promote peace and development, equity and dignity, equality for women and girls and economic empowerment of the poor in all regions of the world,” she said. With the resumption of United States funding, UNFPA would be able to maintain recent gains during the current financial crisis and provide support to women in the poorest countries of the world. United Nations Member States had repeatedly said that progress for all would not happen without progress for women. That meant making women’s health, rights and equality an international priority.

She also welcomed the decision of the new United States administration to revoke the Mexico City policy, which paved the way for a restored United States partnership with some of the world’s leading non-governmental organizations that provide family planning services around the world. Access to safe and effective voluntary family planning, as Mr. Obama had said, was one of the most effective ways of preventing unwanted pregnancies and empowering women and men to plan their families. If a woman could not take decisions about her own fertility, she could not make decisions about anything else in her life.

And the final expression of support for ’safe’ abortions as ‘family planning’.

To a question about family planning, she said that its importance was demonstrated by the fact that unsafe abortion was considered the second leading cause of death for African women. Women who did not have access to family planning would go to have unsafe abortions, which often led to death.

Translation:: The money is used to pay for abortions the ‘patient’ cannot afford which would lead to back alley practitioners who care less about the patient than the liberals care about the unborn child. And ‘family planning’ is liberal-speak for abortion. The only reason they support contraception is political. It gives them another pork item to support in legislation and lets them believe they have convinced you they are trying to do things the right way. Could it be any more pathetic?

So Dr Susan Rice will be doing the bidding of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Bill and Hillary Clinton. Keep in mind both Clinton and Obama rescinded the Mexico City Policy. Also notable is Obama’s weakness for ACORN and voter and campaign finance fraud as well as the Clintons’ scandal history including illegal transfers of sensitive technology via Chinagate. The perils of international politics grow larger. And the threat is not always from without but within.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

You have to just love these stories. Several posts back is reference to an article where Scotch whiskey is touted as a ground water purifier. Needless to say, being a fan of Scotch whiskey, there is an upside to that story on environmental solutions. Now a story on very small homes as an answer for the downturn in the economy as well as a promotion for ‘green’ thinking and hopping on the global warming bandwagon. In general, most discussions including those on the environment and even global warming are worthwhile and serve a purpose. But to accept the premise of each and every one without performing due diligence on the proposals put forth nor the problem they are to solve screams undue panic and a less than sensible approach.

To be repetitive, doing nothing or instantly signing on to every suggestion proposed related to environmental practices are extreme notions and that is rarely where the answers lie. In the case of tiny homes and the story presented below, there is something to be said for examining the way we live and how it can be improved. Reducing waste and limiting the amount of ’stuff’ we have or seek is a legitimate pursuit. But the focus on green initiatives and measures whose sole purpose is to combat a global warming concern that is not without serious flaws lends itself to the criticism of a ploy by special interest to promote a money making enterprise.

Those in the scientific community who fully support the notion of global warming including the human contribution to it could have another motive for their support than altruism or finding of fact. It is not uncommon for those in research to compete for grants and dollars for programs which translate into how they make a living. Likewise it is not uncommon for those with an entrepreneurial spirit to latch onto the latest fad and build a business model for extracting as much cash as they can while the fad lasts.

Governments may also have a seflish motive for supporting the ‘green’ thing and global warming initiatives. This appears to be a topic in which many people have chosen not to challenge claims made or proposals presented in an effort to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Video: Tiny Home - Download (WM)
Video: Tiny Home - Watch (WM)

One man’s solution to tough economic times, the high cost of living, and all that housework… is to live in, build, and sell really tiny houses.

Eighty kilometers north of San Francisco in northern California is a rural community called Sebastopol, Jay Shafer, founder of the Tumbleweed Tiny House Company, lives and works there in his tiny home.

Everything in the tiny house is scaled down including this tiny kitchen

“Well there are a lot of reasons I’ve decided to live in a tiny house,” he explained. “Probably first and foremost is because it frees up my time otherwise. So all of the time I would spend earning money to pay off a mortgage or rent can be spent doing things I love to do. I don’t have much housework either.”

The average American family home has about 230 square meters. His is 30 years old. It is tiny, cozy, energy efficient and, according to Shafer, all he needs.

“I just don’t like the idea of spewing tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. I know that the average American house puts out eighteen tons of greenhouse gases per year, and you know, that’s not even including all of the consumption that is involved with the, you know, materials, and also just heating fuel,” Shafer said.

Margie O’Driscoll with the American Institute of Architects says Americans have a tendency to acquire stuff, a trend she thinks may be changing.

“You can hire professionals to come in and organize your garage and your closet, and really that speaks to having a lot of stuff. And if you have to organize it, and you don’t even know what it is, you sort of start to wonder: ‘well do I really need to have as much as I have’. And I think that the time of American excess has really begun to shift and people are starting to identify what is really important to them,” O’Driscoll said.

Bill Kastrinos gave up traditional home building last year to start a company called Tortoiseshell Homes.

“I’ve had several people, young people that just want to downsize. I’m getting rid of stuff. I’m having garage sales. I have three sets of China. What do I need three sets of China for?” Kastrinos noted. “So there is just a thought process that is going on where people are saying ‘well okay, if global warming is really a big problem, how much help am I by changing light bulbs to fluorescence.’ It is going to take a major rethinking of everything we do.”

Tortoiseshell homes are less elaborate than Shafer’s and cheaper.

Tiny home

But both constructions are well insulated, both can be mounted on trailers, and both sleep two comfortably, in an upstairs loft.

“The bathroom becomes the shower. I have another door over here to protect the window from water, and that works out pretty well,” Shafer explained. “The little composting toilet is down here, and I can pull a plastic curtain in front of that so it doesn’t get wet.”

Tiny houses are not for everyone, but Shafer is more than happy to call his tiny house, home.

It is a rare moment for this blog owner, blog author, whatever, when a story pops up on the subject of the environment that honestly grabs my attention. Like many I am really tired of all the talk about global warming and everything that goes with it. The topic while worthwhile in general has been reduced to two camps dominating the discussion with opinions approaching the limits of opposite extremes. Somewhere between do everything because the sky is falling and do nothing because there is no problem resides the optimum solution to this and other problems. Whatever that is, the latest entry to the list of possible environmental solutions from Scotland gets my vote.

Before this new idea takes hold I will have to respond in a similar fashion to one event attributed to the election of Barack Obama. People began making a run on gun shops for firearms. Once this story about Scotch whiskey gets the attention it deserves my favorite liquor may develop an inventory shortage and dramatic price increases. I better start stockpiling now before the rush is on to empty the shelves as my local liquor store.

Think of all the ground water I can salvage with a huge supply of my favorite Scotch whiskey. And if it turns out this was all a hoax I will still have the consolation of not running out of stock for some time. There’s no downside to this environmental initiative. But I suspect it will still have its opponents.

Cheers,
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Clark report - Download (MP3)
Clark report - Listen (MP3)

Scotch whiskey is said, by some, to have many magical qualities. Now, scientists in Scotland have discovered one more: it can be a weapon against polluted waste sites. A by-product of the spirit is 99.96 percent effective in cleaning contaminated ground water and scientists in Scotland are hoping to export their special clean whiskey to the world. VOA’s Mandy Clark reports from Aberdeen.

A wee dram of whiskey - it is Scotland’s national drink and locals say it cures the common cold.

But there is another Scottish DRAM that has even greater health implications. It is a water-cleaning technology invented by scientists at Aberdeen University.

This DRAM is derived from a scotch by-product and it can cure contaminated groundwater. Its clever name, DRAM, stands for Device for the Remediation and Attenuation of Multiple pollutants.

Soil toxicologist Graeme Paton says it can take chemically polluted water and make it clean.

“We are making something that fish can survive in, that plants, that can be used for washing and irrigation, that is the objective of this project,” said Paton.

DRAM is far quicker and more cost effective than current clean-up techniques. It can remove multiple pollutants simultaneously, such as pesticides or heavy metals, making once-tainted water safe enough to go back into the environment.

The scientists have conducted field tests around Britain, from toxic sites to water treatment facilities. The university research team considers the trials so successful it is keeping the by-product secret and Graeme Paton says they are contemplating setting up a company to exploit the commercial potential to a global market.

“Part of our ambition is not just to deal with the West and developed world, but also other very under developed countries, like Pakistan and Bangladesh and West Africa, where much of our tanneries are carried out to produce our leather and the by-product that produces is horrifically toxic to local areas,” added Paton. “We can actually deploy this as a very sustainable option to help those people as well. Water, clean water is the right of every human being that we should expect in the Western world.”

The inventors say it is also an environmentally friendly solution. Unlike current methods, DRAM does not use potent chemicals to clean the water - the pollutants simply get trapped in the organic DRAM material.

Leigh Cassidy came up the idea of using the whiskey by-product as a groundwater cleaner. She credits her profound knowledge of Scotch.

“I started doing a check list of the ideal properties, and as I ticked off the list I thought, ‘Ohhh, I know what has got that in it,” said Cassidy.

Paton and Cassidy say they are thrilled with their scientific discovery of an environmentally friendly water-cleaning solution. Well, it is certainly a idea worth toasting.

With going green going crazy and global warming fear monger, Al Gore, the failed Presidential contender fanning the flames of doom, one of the strongest criticisms of biofuels like ethanol made from corn was two-fold. It takes more energy to produce corn-based ethanol than can be derived from it and using the amount of corn required to have any significant impact in moving from fossil fuels places extreme pricing pressures on the food supply.

With most of the ‘alternative’ sources of energy years off in the future in terms of practical application, the flames the likes of Al Gore, et al, are fanning are not producing a solution rather a panic of catastrophic proportions. And the far left loves this strategy. Create new victims, attack manufactured villains and the lines of people trying to get taxpayer funding to ‘research’ alternatives may eventually reach around the globe. That is about the only connection between the globe and the term, global economy.

But while the opposing sides, of which there may be more than two, sort out the energy future in this country, one report indicates we should take a more reasoned approach to any major shifts in widespread use of alternative energy sources. According to the report below, “The process yields about eight times more energy than it consumes so it is a much more energy efficient way to produce ethanol.”

If that statement is true, the case for sorghum as an alternative energy source is probably one of the more promising developments in this crazy pursuit. The pursuit is not crazy because it is intended to find non-fossil fuel alternatives but because of the total abandon excercised by most proponents. The Chicken Little posture demonstrated by the most fanatical fans does more damage than good. A little care and a reasoned approach to solutions will minimize mistakes and speed any postive results.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Sorghum: A Biofuel Alternative?

By Paul Sisco
Washington
Biofuel Sorghum report / Broadband - Download (WM)
Biofuel Sorghum report / Broadband - Watch (WM)

International research scientists are meeting in Houston, Texas August 19-22 to discuss various biofuel alternatives to corn, especially sorghum. Some scientists say sorghum - cultivated for food and fodder in various parts of the world - might one day help power our vehicles. VOA’s Paul Sisco has today’s Searching for Solutions report.

In the United States, sweet sorghum is grown for livestock feed and also used as a sweetener in the form of a syrup. In India, the sweet juice inside the plant’s stalk is turned into ethanol and used as a fuel.

This has spurred William Rooney and his team at Texas A & M to work with sorghum. They say it grows faster than corn and can produce more ethanol per plant. “In the near future as we move forward you will see these types of crops become more and more prominent,” Rooney said.

Today, nearly all the ethanol in the US comes from corn. It is widely used as a gasoline additive. But using corn-based ethanol has not stopped gasoline prices from rising, and researchers are experimenting with algae, grasses, and plant stalks as biofuels.

Gene Stevens, at the College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources at the University of Missouri, works with sorghum.

“We produced as much ethanol with the corn as we did with the sweet sorghum but the only advantage was that we used less fertilizer with the sweet sorghum,” he explains. “It may be that sweet sorghum may have a niche in some of those soils that are not so productive.”

Also, producing ethanol from sorghum uses less energy than corn — says Mark Winslow with the non-profit International Crops Research Institute.

“The process yields about eight times more energy than it consumes so it is a much more energy efficient way to produce ethanol,” Winslow says.

Critics of corn based ethanol production say it has contributed to rising food prices because of the amount of grain used to make the fuel. That explains, in part, why the search is on to find other biofuel sources.

“I think you are going to hear more about the crops that are starting to make sense,” Rooney says.

Among them sorghum, says Rooney, a proven source of ethanol with more potential than corn.

China Promises Safe, Peaceful Olympics

By VOA News
05 August 2008

China is promising a safe and peaceful Summer Olympics, despite a deadly attack on police officers in the country’s northwest.

A spokesman for China’s Olympics committee is assuring athletes and spectators arriving in Beijing for the Olympics that they will be safe from terrorists.

Tens of thousands of police were on alert across Beijing Tuesday as the Olympic torch arrived in the capital ahead of Friday’s opening ceremony.

Authorities also have increased security in the far western Xinjiang region, where 16 police were killed in a knife and bomb attack Monday.

Chinese state media say authorities have detained two men from a mainly Muslim ethnic group for their role in the attack.

Chinese authorities have linked the violence to the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, a group dedicated to gaining Xinjiang’s independence.

The group has not claimed responsibility for the attack.

Muslim Uighurs in Xinjiang have been waging a low-level rebellion against Chinese rule for years. Human rights advocates and Uighur groups say Chinese authorities often use terrorism as a pretext to persecute the country’s Muslim minority.

Chinese authorities say the East Turkistan Islamic Movement has been planning attacks ahead of the Olympics.

Another challenge facing the Beijing Olympics is air pollution.

Members of the U.S. cycling team arrived in Beijing Tuesday wearing face masks, showing the concern of many athletes that the smog could harm their health and performance.

But the International Olympic Committee’s medical commission chief, Arne Ljungqvist, said China’s air quality did not pose problems to the athletes or visitors.
Some information for this report was provided by AFP and Reuters.

from MoreWhat.com:

So what do you think about all this?

Stanford Matthews