Week 12: Post your Blog Entries as Comments to my Main Post Each Week

Post by Sunday at midnight




1. Mark Whitaker

2. The Infrastructure of Asbestos in Korea still there in surprising consumptive uses. A person who regularly puts salt on his fast food, puts talc powder on his body, chews gum, and rides a cheap train may intersect with asbestos unwillingly and unknowingly four different ways every day. If you are someone who lives near Hongseong and Boryeong, you have another infrastructure that's hard to avoid: a 'closed' asbestos mine that is perhaps associated with why half the people there have lung diseases though aren't miners. That's quite a basis for changing someone's institutionalized habit--if they listen to the information that is.

3. Interesting on the large scale of its 'inherited' use or its ongoing tainted use in many consumer products and experiences in Korea. So a person who regularly puts salt on his fast food, puts talc powder on his body, chews gum, and rides a cheap train may intersect with asbestos unwillingly and unknowingly four different ways every day. that's quite a basis for changing someone's institutionalized habit--if they listen to the information that is.

A huge lawsuit is possible I guess if the government refuses to alter this infrastructure and clean it up. I put brackets [] throughout the article where I see an example of forms of institutional habit, personal habit, legalization, and legitimation/delegitimation that keeps the regime of asbestos politically intact or politically challenged.

--------------


11-16-2009 17:52 여성 남성
Traces of Asbestos Detected in Trains


Members of the Korean Railway Workers’ Union read a statement calling on KORAIL to take steps to deal with traces of asbestos found in insulation materials in train cars during a news conference at Seoul Station, Monday.
/ Korea Times Photo
by Kim Ju-young
By Bae Ji-sook
Staff Reporter

Traces of asbestos, a grade-one carcinogen, were detected in heating systems installed in Mugunghwa and Saemaeul railway trains, the Korean Railway Workers' Union and the Korean Federation for Environmental Movement claimed [in a delegitimating way] Monday.

Since the ventilation is poor, the potential impact on the human body could be critical, the groups said, questioning KORAIL's [legitimating, self-assessing] claims that the amount was not big enough to be considered a heath hazard.

According to the workers' union, out of 28 heating and interior material samples collected from 21 carriages, 43 percent were found with traces of asbestos of varying densities but, in some cases, dangerously high.

They attributed it to the [political legalization] failure to refurbish materials installed when there were no regulations.

"The cars we surveyed were made between 1986 and 1998 [under previous institutional rules of construction no longer valid] but those found with traces of asbestos date from 1986 and 1987 in terms of the manufacturing period," said Lee Tae-young, the union spokesman.

Saemaeul and Mugunghwa are cheaper alternatives to the KTX bullet train launched in 2004. "It has been a long time since asbestos has been a hot issue nationwide, but the company doesn't seem to care about the less profitable units," he added. [delegitimating discourse to encouraging upset consumers and rightly so; this makes political allies of the general public around rejecting the material, as well aims to create legalization changes as in the government to regulate these train cars for asbestos.]

Currently, there are 1,006 Mugunghwa and 1,130 Saemaeul train cars in operation nationwide carrying an average of 200,000 passengers a day.

The group asked the [legalizing] government to conduct a health checkup on the health of passengers and railway workers. [delegitimating discourse:] "KORAIL needs to replace its fleets," Choi Ye-yong, an official of the environmental civic group, said.

[delegitimating alliance of agreement:] The World Health Organization has long designated asbestos as a life-threatening substance that is known to cause respiratory diseases such as asbestosis and lung cancer, but it was only recently that Korea started to take it seriously [with legislation against it as a materials choice.].

In April, the [other institutional ally, the] Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA) confirmed that it had detected asbestos in 11 brands of baby talcum powders. The revelation expanded to capsule wrappings of several drugs, chewing gum, cosmetic goods and many other products. The authorities banned the sales of the respective products [to legitimate themselves once more and via legislation] and called for a halt of the use of talcum powder in others. [Amazing how deep and widespread are the environmental implications of things, when you consider all different choices of using them in different consumptive categories as part of their general flow.]

In June, [another institutional ally in demoting the residual asbestos material regime] the Ministry of Environment confirmed that nearly one in two residents living in Hongseong and Boryeong near a closed mine in South Chungcheong Province contracted various lung diseases, apparently caused by asbestos inhalation.

Last week, an environmental civic group claimed that traces of asbestos were detected at four salt farms nationwide, apparently due to the slated roof of the salt warehouse. [delegitimating it among general public, making a widespread uproar of concern, since salt is virtually unsubstitutable in its category of mineral foods. Poisoin a country's salt, and you have a rather wide base for social movement opposition to the asbestos material as a choice.]

bjs@koreatimes.co.kr

---
http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/11/117_55576.html

Recent books:

Fatal Deception: The Terrifying True Story of How Asbestos is Killing America by Michael Bowker (Paperback - Sep 2, 2003)

From Publishers Weekly

Journalist Bowker’s riveting, anecdotal look at the damage done by mining and manufacturing companies who denied the harmful effects of asbestos might have been titled "Evil Incorporated." Focusing largely on a vermiculite mine in bucolic Libby, Montana, Bowker shows a business that put its bottom line over its employees’ health. Interviews with victims of asbestos poisoning and their survivors are interspersed with EPA reports, company memos and other sources, as Bowker charts asbestos’s history, from its identification [i.e., social infrastructural legitimation] as a "miracle mineral" to the first signs that it might be dangerous, to the government’s ineffectual [legalization, pro-asbestos regime] policies and various companies’ decisions not to inform its workers of the health risks it posed. [legitimation via silence and omission, same with fluoride we will watch on Thursday] As one asbestos plant exec is alleged to have said, it was "the company’s policy to let workers continue on the job until they quit work because of asbestosis or died of other asbestos-related disease." Worker after worker describes how he was never told that the dust he encountered daily was poisonous: "The asbestos was whitish-gray and my hair was pure white after work. We never wore any protective gear, except the little paper masks they gave us," said one worker who now has asbestosis. The personal stories make for a sad and gripping read, as Bowker, in classic muckraking style, gives voice to many who suffer from long-term exposure to asbestos and argues for a ban on asbestos products in the U.S.
Copyright 2003 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.


Product Description

STILL LEGAL, STILL LETHAL

Most Americans mistakenly believe asbestos was banned long ago. In fact, it is still legal and can still kill you. Its microscopic fibers cause painful and incurable diseases.

Despite being outlawed in nearly every other industrialized country, asbestos remains a legal component of more than three thousand common products in the United States. These include toasters, washers/dryers, ovens, building supplies, and automobile brakes. Our confusion about asbestos is no accident.

Fatal Deception is a chilling exposé of the asbestos industry's successful seventy-year campaign to hide the deadly effects of its products from the American people. The stakes are high -- tens of thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. Michael Bowker rips the cover off the decades of deceit [around a particular material regime--are other material regimes that we think 'so legitimate' really so upon examination?], including the treachery in Libby, Montana, site of the most deadly environmental disaster in U.S. history. He also unveils a startling and ongoing cover-up at Ground Zero -- where thousands of New Yorkers may still be suffering from exposure to dangerous levels of asbestos fibers. [Do you know who said the air in New York City was 'completely safe'? Someone whose husband was heavily invested in new York real estate insurance companies. No joke. new York was covered in asbestos on 9-11-01 from the pulverized massive buildings and the burning craters for months afterward.]

Compelling, enraging, and very timely, Fatal Deception is not just a fascinating story, it is a plea to [delegitimate the government, and thus cause the government to legitimate itself to have] the government and to the American people to help sponsor research [state-science position] into asbestos-related diseases -- and a call to arms to ban asbestos now.

Defending the Indefensible: The Global Asbestos Industry and its Fight for Survival (Hardcover, 2008)

Review
given all that has been written and said about asbestos over the past 30 years is there anything else worth knowing? Do we really need another book on asbestos? After reading Defending the Indefensible the emphatic answer I reached was yes. This book is a tour-de-force of informed and concerned scholarship. Labour History [a] compelling book. The Lancet, Volume 373, Issue 9660

Product Description
In the early twentieth century, asbestos had a reputation as a lifesaver. In 1960, however, it became known that even relatively brief exposure to asbestos can cause mesothelioma, a virulent and lethal cancer.

Yet the bulk of the world's asbestos was mined after 1960. Asbestos usage in many countries continued unabated. [it's a silent 'inconspicuous consumption' regime, eh? How many people knew that asbestos was still legal in most countries and widely used?]

[The definition of a politicized raw material regime in the position of choice of materials, keeping out other things by politics instead of by economic or material requirements to be there:]

This is the first global history of how the asbestos industry and its allies in government, insurance, and medicine defended the product throughout the twentieth century. It explains how mining and manufacture could continue despite overwhelming medical evidence as to the risks. The argument advanced in this book is that asbestos has proved so enduring because the industry was able to mount a successful defense strategy for the mineral--a strategy that still operates in some parts of the world. This defence involved the shaping of the public debate by censoring, and sometimes corrupting, scientific research, nurturing scientific uncertainty, and using allies in government, insurance, and medicine.

The book also discusses the problems of asbestos in the environment, compensating victims, and the continued use of asbestos in the developing world. Its global focus shows how asbestos can be seen as a model for many occupational diseases [and a model for a repressive raw material regime of politics]--indeed for a whole range of hazards produced by industrial societies. The book is based on a wealth of documentary material gained from legal discovery, supplemented by evidence from the authors' visits and researches in the US, the UK, Canada, Kazakhstan, Zimbabwe, Australia, Swaziland, and South Africa.

"Asbestos: The Other White Meat"



























The map above displays asbestos deaths from mesothelioma or asbestosis as reported to the federal government via death certificate records from 1979 through 2001. It likely represents less than 20 percent of total asbestos mortality during that time.

http://reports.ewg.org/reports/asbestos/maps/government_data.php

Week 11: Post your Blog Entries as Comments to my Main Post Each Week

Post by Sunday at midnight

This is the ecological modernization idea for saving rainforests we were unable to watch in class:

"Willie Smits restores a rainforest"
http://www.ted.com/talks/willie_smits_restores_a_rainforest.html (20 min)


------------------

The below relates to this week's topic of politicized materials as one rationale why we see the above solutions only rarely...despite many solutions for ecological modernization existing for all manners of environmental and economic problems.











1. Mark Whitaker

2. Ecological Modernization Success Story in Spain (and Political Consumptive Infrastructural Change in Spain)

3. Spain gets 45% of its electricity from wind power, now. (Meanwhile, the U.S. gets around 55% of its energy from coal, and little change in the oil regime at all.)

---------------------


Spain reaches new wind record: 45.1% of Spain’s total electricity demand
08 de noviembre de 2009

Wind energy in Spain reached a new record last night, providing at its peak 45.1% of Spain’s total electricity demand – 2.1% greater than the previous record set in November last year.

Spain reaches new wind record: 45.1% of Spain’s total electricity demand
Spanish electricity grid, Red Eléctrica, said that today’s record is a first since it was sustained over several hours during last night. Between 00.40 and 06.20 on 5 November wind met over 40% of electricity demand.

“There have been several peaks over 40% in Spain, but this new one – lasting nearly six hours compared to around one hour the previous time - shows the huge part that wind can play in meeting Spain’s electricity demand,” Jacopo Moccia, regulatory affairs adviser for EWEA said.

The surge in wind power last night triggered water pumping stations which transport water into reservoirs. This store of water will then be released over the day generating electricity via water turbines at times of peak demand.

The Spanish Wind Energy Association said the sustained peak in wind powered electricity production proves that “wind energy is no longer marginal”. By 2020 Spain is expected to double its wind-power producing capacity from the current level of 16 gigawatts to 40 GW. “With this expected growth in capacity we could envisage wind meeting the vast majority of demand during times of peak supply by 2020,” Moccia said.

On average throughout the year, wind energy meets 12% of Spain’s electricity demand. The largest producer of wind power in Spain is Iberdrola, with 27 percent of capacity, followed by Acciona on 16 percent and Endesa with 10 percent. Spain's wind farms are on track to meet a government target of 20,000 MW in capacity by 2010.

Installed wind capacity in Spain reached 16,740 MW in 2008 with the addition of 1,609 MW. Expectations for the Spanish wind energy industry for 2009 are very high, with 18,500 MW of total capacity will be installed.

The wind sector expected this growth after the 3,500-MW increase in 2007, a special year in which companies made an effort to start up the greatest number of wind farms so they could benefit from the previous support system. The total of 16,740 MW establishes Spain as the third country in the world in terms of installed capacity and will allow the 2010 objective (20,155 MW set by the Renewable Energies Plan 2005–2010) to be reached.

The addition of 1,609 MW in 2008 is an increase of 10.63%, the third highest increase in absolute terms in the short history of wind energy in Spain. The only higher annual increases were in 2007 (3,505 MW or 30%) and 2004 (2,297.51 MW or 37%).

Electrical energy demand in 2008 was 266,485 GWh, a growth of 1.21% over 2007. Wind energy met 11% of this demand and was the fourth largest contributing technology in the generation system, besting hydropower (7% of demand). The other contributors to the system were gas combined-cycle power plants (32% of total demand), nuclear power plants (20%), and coal power plants (16%).

On several occasions in 2008, wind energy covered more than 40% of hourly demand, and for several days it supplied more than 30% of daily electricity demand. For instance, on November 24, wind energy supplied more than 35% of the total electricity demand. And on several occasions, production of wind energy reached more than 40% of hourly demand.

Wind energy in Spain has also emerged as a driving force for industrial development. In 2008, investment was more than 2,250 million €, and about 50% of Spanish wind energy equipment production is dedicated to the export market. According to the “Macroeconomic Study on the Impact of the Wind Energy Sector in Spain,” the number of jobs related to wind power reached more than 40,000 in 2008. Of this total, the number of direct jobs in operation and maintenance of wind farms, manufacturing, assembly, research, and development is estimated at more than 21,800. The number of indirect jobs (linked mainly to components) is estimated to be more than 17,000.

The industrial sector participating in the Asociación Empresarial Eólica, or (Spanish Wind Energy Association) has established a new objective of 40,000 MW for 2020. Use of wind power has lowered CO2 emissions by about 18 million tons just during 2008. Furthermore, wind generation has saved up to 6 million tons of conventional fuels. Wind production has supplied the electrical consumption of more than 10 million households.

Gamesa installed more than 50% of new capacity, according to the Spanish Wind Energy Association’s Wind Observatory, with more than 9,480 MW (including the subsidiary company MADE) in Spain, which consolidates its leadership among manufacturers. VESTAS, the second largest manufacturer, installed more than 15% of new capacity in 2008, adding 242.2 MW.


www.ewea.org/

www.aeeolica.es/en/

demanda.ree.es/eolica.html


TAGS: AEE, Asociación Empresarial Eólica, wind energy, Spain, wind power, Spanish Wind Energy Association


---
http://www.evwind.es/noticias.php?id_not=2148

Week 10: Post your Blog Entries as Comments to my Main Post Each Week

Post by Sunday at midnight

1. Mark Whitaker

2. "Meat Creates More than Half of Greenhouse Gases": Another Model (Social Construction) Calls Into Question Previous Models (equally Social Constructions) on Climate

3. If a more accurate framework, it would argue that agriculture and animal raising--instead of industrial pollution--is the largest contributor to CO2 from humans in the atmosphere. Though what scale does the environment itself make CO2 and what percentage of it is anthropogenic? Or is even CO2 the major important chemical involved in climate?

------------------


Study claims meat creates half of all greenhouse gases

Livestock causes far more climate damage than first thought, says a new report

By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent

Sunday, 1 November 2009

Climate change emissions from meat production are far higher than currently estimated, according to a controversial new study that will fuel the debate on whether people should eat fewer animal products to help the environment.

In a paper published by a respected US thinktank, the Worldwatch Institute, two World Bank environmental advisers claim that instead of 18 per cent of global emissions being caused by meat, the true figure is 51 per cent.

Related articles

* Graphic: The real climate culprits?

They claim that United Nation's figures have severely underestimated the greenhouse gases caused by tens of billions of cattle, sheep, pigs, poultry and other animals in three main areas: methane, land use and respiration.

Their findings – which are likely to prompt fierce debate among academics – come amid increasing from climate change experts calls for people to eat less meat.

In the 19-page report, Robert Goodland, a former lead environmental adviser to the World Bank, and Jeff Anhang, a current adviser, suggest that domesticated animals cause 32 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), more than the combined impact of industry and energy. The accepted figure is 18 per cent, taken from a landmark UN report in 2006, Livestock's Long Shadow.

"If this argument is right," write Goodland and Anhang, "it implies that replacing livestock products with better alternatives would be the best strategy for reversing climate change.

"In fact, this approach would have far more rapid effects on greenhouse gas emissions and their atmospheric concentrations than actions to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy."

Their call to move to meat substitutes accords with the views of the chairman of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, who has described eating less meat as "the most attractive opportunity" for making immediate changes to climate change.

Lord Stern of Brentford, author of the 2006 review into the economic consequences of global warming, added his name to the call last week, telling a newspaper interviewer: "Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world's resources."

Scientists are concerned about livestock's exhalation of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Cows and other ruminants emit 37 per cent of the world's methane. A study by Nasa scientists published in Science on Friday found that methane has significantly more effect on climate change than previously thought: 33 times more than carbon dioxide, compared with a previous factor of 25.

According to Goodland and Anhang's paper, which has not been peer-reviewed, scientists have significantly underestimated emissions of methane expelled by livestock. They argue that the gas's impact should be calculated over 20 years, in line with its rapid effect – and the latest recommendation from the UN – rather than the 100 years favoured by Livestock's Long Shadow. This, they say, would add a further 5bn tons of CO2e to livestock emissions – 7.9 per cent of global emissions from all sources.

Similarly, they claim that official figures are wrong to ignore CO2 emitted by breathing animals on the basis that it is offset by carbon photosynthesised by their food, arguing the existence of this unnecessary animal-based CO2 amounts to 8.7bn tons of CO2e, 3.7 per cent of total emissions.

On land use, they calculate that returning the land currently used for livestock to natural vegetation and forests would remove 2.6bn tons of CO2e from the atmosphere, 4.2 per cent of greenhouse gas. They also complain that the UN underestimated the amount of livestock, putting it at 21.7bn against NGO estimates of 50bn, adding that numbers have since risen by 12 per cent.

Eating meat rather than plants also requires extra refrigeration and cooking and "expensive" treatment of human diseases arising from livestock..., they say.

One leading expert on climate change and food, Tara Garnett, welcomed Goodland and Anhang's calculations on methane, which she said had credibility, but she questioned other aspects of their work, saying she had no reason to dispute the UN's position on CO2 caused by breathing. She also pointed out that they had changed scientific assumptions for livestock but not for other sources of methane, skewing the figures.

She said: "We are increasingly becoming aware that livestock farming at current scales is a major problem, and that they contribute significantly to greenhouse gases. But livestock farming also yields benefits – there are some areas of land that can’t be used for food crop production. Livestock manure can also contribute to soil fertility, and farm animals provide us with non food goods, such as leather and wool, which would need to be produced by another means, if it wasn’t a byproduct from animal farming.”

While looking into the paper's findings, Friends of the Earth said the report strengthened calls for the Government to act on emissions from meat production. "We already know that the meat and dairy industry causes more climate-changing emissions than all the world's transport," said Clare Oxborrow, senior food campaigner.

"These new figures need further scrutiny but, if they stack up, they provide yet more evidence of the urgent need to fix the food chain. The more damaging elements of the meat and dairy industry are effectively government-sponsored: millions of pounds of taxpayers' money is spent propping up factory farms and subsidising the import of animal feed that's been grown at the expense of forests."

Justin Kerswell, campaign manager for the vegetarian group Viva!, said: "The case for reducing consumption of meat and dairy products was already imperative based on previous UN findings. Now it appears to have been proven that the environmental devastation from livestock production is in fact staggeringly more significant – and dwarfs the contribution from the transport sector by an even greater margin.

"It is essential that attention is fully focused on the impact of livestock production by all global organisations with the power to affect policy."


Post a Comment LiveJournal
Subject: Message:

View all comments that have been posted about this article. [just a few comments from the thread]

Comments
( Leave a comment )
[info]catherineib wrote:
Sunday, 1 November 2009 at 12:49 am (UTC)
I'm not usually an annoying smug vegetarian, but after reading this I do feel a little that way inclined!
Link | Reply | Thread
Meat and greenhouse gases
[info]rbtgoodland wrote:
Sunday, 1 November 2009 at 12:53 am (UTC)
From Robert Goodland: As the Telegraph reports today, my co-author and I have assessed the life cycle and supply chain of meat and dairy products. We have deduced that at least 51% of worldwide human-caused greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) are attributable to livestock, and our full report is viewable on Worldwatch's website.

We show that a 25% reduction in livestock products worldwide can be achieved at minimal cost, while yielding at least a 12.5% reduction in human-caused GHGs. This is about as much reduction as is considered possible to achieve in an agreement at the upcoming U.N. conference on climate change in Copenhagen.

The FAO’s prior estimate is based on a simple model of the carbon cycle. However, a virtuous carbon cycle model does not work these days in the real world, which is much more complex. A simple carbon cycle model does not account for the tens of millions of hectares of forest converted in recent decades to grazing land and cropland to feed tens of billions more livestock each year.

In ranching in tropical regions, forest is cut and burned to create new pastures. Soil is depleted in a few years, so then more forest is cut and burned. That, added to by livestock’s breath and other excretions, has resulted in high levels of atmospheric carbon, significantly fuelling climate change.

In responses to Lord Stern, meat and dairy producers claim that their products use grass more efficiently than in tropical regions, and therefore should not be targeted in Copenhagen. However, in British pastures and other temperate regions, large amounts of soil carbon are released over time.

Moreover, while meat and dairy producers do not often reveal this, most British cattle – as elsewhere – graze for the first part of their lives, and then are fed carbon-intensive grains and legumes for the second part. In fact, a majority of the world’s crops become feed for cattle and other livestock.

Feed, meat and dairy products are global commodities, so they get flown, shipped and trucked all over the world. Then British and other tables get laden with highly carbon-inefficient foods. And global warming is trans-boundary, which means that Lord Stern and others must look beyond British borders in considering the impacts of meat and dairy products on climate.

In both tropical and temperate regions, much of the same land used to graze livestock and grow feed could instead regenerate tall grasses and forest, among which -- as well as in the soil beneath – much more carbon could be absorbed and sequestered than in land set aside for grazing and feed.

If regeneration of pasture and forest would occur on a large, global scale, then as much as half of today’s atmospheric carbon could potentially be absorbed. At the same time, many carbon emissions from livestock’s breathing and other excretions could be stopped. Most important, carbon absorption in forest, grasses and soil reclaimed from livestock and feed would be the only feasible way to absorb a significant amount of today’s atmospheric carbon in the near term. This analysis shows why Lord Stern dares to imagine a world where not all land today dedicated to livestock and feed would remain so.

Following submission of our article for publication, we learned that the number of livestock worldwide in 2007 was actually 56 billion, many more than we accounted for in our article. That would raise our estimate of GHGs worldwide attributable to livestock. On the other hand, our article noted that further work remained to be done on producing a reliable estimate of global carbon from methane not attributable to livestock. Once that estimate is available, it would offset some carbon attributable to the new numbers of livestock that we have learned about.

It will not suffice to substitute one meat product with another that has a somewhat lower carbon footprint. Marketing campaigns should pitch meat and dairy substitutes that can be eaten all week long – because they are tasty, economical, easy to prepare, and healthful. Most important, by replacing meat and dairy products with better alternatives, consumers can collectively take a single powerful action to reverse climate change. Action is needed now, before it is too late.
Link | Reply | Thread
Re: Meat and greenhouse gases
[info]reinertorheit wrote:
Sunday, 1 November 2009 at 01:07 am (UTC)

Thank you for this vitally important and ground-breaking research. Let's hope it puts the misleading information about carbon footprints into context.

...

and another:

the gas emissions allegedly produced from livestock retained for the use of human consumption pails almost into insignifigance, when compared to the gasses produced in the wild by Wildebeest's, variety's of Antelope of which there are many and other great consumers of vegetation. Plus the fact the greatest producer of methane gas can be laid at the door of the trillions and trillions of termites who run amok across the globe.



..

and another:

Now for the farmers and other vested interests backlash. Never mind, we vegetarians will weather the storm, I feel the hand of history...........

and another:

...

Some of our most beautiful countryside rich in nature exists for no other reason
than meat and dairy production. We must resist any attempt to destroy this sustainable and ecologically sound land use.


and another:

...

Concrete manufacture is a major source of CO2 in the atmosphere. Something we could change without causing starvation.

...


---

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/meat-creates-half-
of-all-greenhouse-gases-1812909.html

-----------------------------------------------------


[2]

1. Mark Whitaker

2. Another Post about Historical Environmental Degradation in South America: The Nazca, near the Incan Empire

3. Seems another issue of a short term 'good idea' that led to long term difficulties. The Nazca unravelled their forest they depended upon which contributed to their demise. Interesting article:

-------------------

Why the Nasca's big mistake was to cut down the huarango tree

Clearing key trees left pre-Inca culture exposed to floods and drought

By Steve Connor, Science Editor

Monday, 2 November 2009

An ancient huarango tree. The Nasca cut down the keystone species in the desert of Peru's coastal plains to make way for crops

At the height of their power, the Nasca had mastered the craft of weaving elaborate textiles and the art of painting fine, multicoloured pottery. They etched giant figures in the desert that only made sense if seen from the air, and they irrigated their crops with a network of underground aqueducts.

For more than eight centuries, the Nasca culture prospered in the coastal valleys of Peru until its sudden downfall around 600 AD, which many experts put down to the torrential rains and dramatic flooding brought on by one of the worst El Nino events in a millennium.

But a team of archaeologists has now found convincing evidence that this was only part of the story. The researchers believe the decline was self-inflicted and began with the cutting down of a tree that could have protected them from devastating climate change.

Related articles

* Money is the key to the success of Copenhagen
* The unwanted equation: poverty vs climate change

The Nasca, one of the most important of the pre-Inca civilisations of South America, are most famous for the "Nasca Lines", a series of elaborate geoglyphs etched into the desert covering huge areas, depicting animals, deities and geometric shapes.

After the Nasca Lines were discovered by the first passenger flights over the region, some pseudoscience authors suggested that since they could only be seen from above, they must have been made with the help of space aliens. It is now accepted [first time I heard this "accepted, anonymous" thing] that the geoglyphs were created mundanely with long ropes tied to stakes in the ground,...

The Nasca survived in the semi-arid region by building irrigation canals to grow crops such as maize, squash, sweet potato and manioc.

This reliable food supply enabled them to build a relatively sophisticated civilisation based on art and ritual, which nevertheless included the unpleasant practice of collecting severed heads as trophies.

All this came to an abrupt end, according to a new study, because the Nasca made the mistake of cutting down the huarango tree which would have protected them from the El Nino flooding and subsequent soil erosion and drought that turned the lush agricultural land into desert.

"The huarango is a remarkable nitrogen-fixing tree and it was an important source of food, forage, timber and fuel for the people," said David Beresford-Jones, an archaeologist and Nasca expert at the University of Cambridge. "It is the ecological keystone species in the desert zone, enhancing soil fertility and moisture, ameliorating desert extremes in the microclimate beneath its canopy and underpinning the floodplain with one of the deepest root systems of any tree known."

The researchers have excavated the lower Ica Valley of the Nasca domain and found clear evidence that vast swathes of huarango trees had been cut down to make way for crops. Dr Beresford-Jones believes that the Nasca eventually changed the landscape forever. "In time, gradual woodland clearance crossed an ecological threshold, which is sharply defined in such desert environments, exposing the landscape to the region's extraordinary desert winds and the effects of El Nino floods."

The huarango tree plays a "profound role" in preserving the sort of semi-arid environments where the Nasca lived, the scientists say in their study. "Successful agriculture is just not possible here without the protection afforded by trees. Indeed, these findings have undoubted contemporary resonance."

When the El Nino struck, the river [after they cut all the trees, now] cut [deep] into its floodplain, washed away the soil and destroyed the Nasca irrigation systems, making the farmland unworkable. The generations of Nasca that followed suffered higher infant mortalities and lower adult life expectancy.

Eventually, the Nasca capital of Cahuachi was abandoned and all that was left of the culture were archaeological artifacts.

Lost civilisations: Destroyed by nature

*Easter Island

It is thought that the native people felled the majority of the island's trees between 1200 AD and 1500 AD. [Actually, no, the latest bit from Easter Island is the introduced rats species eating the seeds of the emergent palms, and making them unable to grow, then] The loss of palm trees upset the eco-system, driving away wildlife and drying up water supplies.

*Maya

Mayan civilisation stretched across the Yucatan Peninsula until 900 AD when cities were mysteriously abandoned. It is believed that the culture was wiped out by a series of droughts [and human decisions to ignore the issues as elite houses were still being built with ever greater wood and plaster products as the crisis mounted over decades, then these palaces were burned, likely by rebellion that disbelieved in their elites anymore, and habitation ceased to be urban among the Maya.].

---
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/why-the-nascas-big-mistake-
was-to-cut-down-the-huarango-tree-1813180.html

Week 9: Post your Blog Entries as Comments to my Main Post Each Week

WITHOUT BLOG POST FOR MID-TERM WEEKEND

Post by Sunday at midnight, by November 1

Week 7: Post your Blog Entries as Comments to my Main Post Each Week

Post by Sunday at midnight

Week 6: Post your Blog Entries as Comments to my Main Post Each Week

Post by Sunday at midnight

1. Mark Whitaker

2. U.S. as example of world systems theory

3. There was a question in class expressing surprise about the U.S. economy's increasing loss of high-paying jobs. This was last week, when we were discussing Sassen's 'global city' argument as well as world systems theory views of developmental changes. Some were surprised that the U.S. 'core' (despite still being the largest 'country by GNP' which can be deceiving when it is the world's investment in U.S. financial centers instead of U.S. capital per se) would simply be a relay route of the world's external investment instead of representing U.S. economic strength.

I said I would post some recent data about U.S. economic demotion. This is from 2000-05--BEFORE the 2007 financial crisis:

"IN JUST FIVE YEARS, The declines in some manufacturing sectors have more in common with a country undergoing saturation bombing during war...

Communications equipment lost 43% workforce.
Semiconductors/electronic components lost 37% workforce.
Computers and electronic products lost 30% workforce.
Electrical/appliances lost 25% workforce.
Motor vehicles/parts lost 12% workforce.
Furniture/products lost 17% of workforce.
Apparel manufacturers lost almost 50% workforce.
Employment in textile mills declined 43%
Information sector lost 17% of its jobs
Telecommunications lost 25% of its workforce.
Wholesale and retail trade lost jobs.
Bookkeeping employment shrank by 4%.
Computer systems design lost 9% of its jobs.

In only five years (under Bush's policies), US economy experienced a net job positions loss in goods producing activities--while importing about 8 million more people." This data was assembled from Paul Craig Roberts, ex-U.S. Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the 1980s, Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Contributing Editor of National Review.

---------------------

full article:

Last week the Bureau of Labor Statistics re-benchmarked the payroll jobs data back to 2000. Thanks to Charles McMillion of MBG Information Services, I have the adjusted data from January 2001 through January 2006. If you are worried about terrorists, you don't know what worry is.

Job growth over the last five years is the weakest on record. The US economy came up more than 7 million jobs short of keeping up with population growth. That's one good reason for controlling immigration. An economy that cannot keep up with population growth should not be boosting population with heavy rates of legal and illegal immigration.

Over the past five years the US economy experienced a net job loss in goods producing activities. The entire job growth was in service-providing activities--primarily credit intermediation, health care and social assistance, waiters, waitresses and bartenders, and state and local government.

US manufacturing lost 2.9 million jobs, almost 17% of the manufacturing work force. The wipeout is across the board. Not a single manufacturing payroll classification created a single new job.

The declines in some manufacturing sectors have more in common with a country undergoing saturation bombing during war than with a super-economy that is "the envy of the world." Communications equipment lost 43% of its workforce. Semiconductors and electronic components lost 37% of its workforce. The workforce in computers and electronic products declined 30%. Electrical equipment and appliances lost 25% of its employees. The workforce in motor vehicles and parts declined 12%. Furniture and related products lost 17% of its jobs. Apparel manufacturers lost almost half of the work force. Employment in textile mills declined 43%. Paper and paper products lost one-fifth of its jobs. The work force in plastics and rubber products declined by 15%. Even manufacturers of beverages and tobacco products experienced a 7% shrinkage in jobs.

The knowledge jobs that were supposed to take the place of lost manufacturing jobs in the globalized "new economy" never appeared. [These Sassen described as the easiest to outsource internationally, given the information technology.] The information sector lost 17% of its jobs, with the telecommunications work force declining by 25%. Even wholesale and retail trade lost jobs. Despite massive new accounting burdens imposed by Sarbanes-Oxley, accounting and bookkeeping employment shrank by 4%. Computer systems design and related lost 9% of its jobs. Today there are 209,000 fewer managerial and supervisory jobs than 5 years ago.

In five years the US economy only created 70,000 jobs in architecture and engineering, many of which are clerical. Little wonder engineering enrollments are shrinking. There are no jobs for graduates. The talk about engineering shortages is absolute ignorance. There are several hundred thousand American engineers who are unemployed and have been for years. No student wants a degree that is nothing but a ticket to a soup line. Many engineers have written to me that they cannot even get Wal-Mart jobs because their education makes them over-qualified.

Offshore outsourcing and offshore production have left the US awash with unemployment among the highly educated. The low measured rate of unemployment does not include discouraged workers. Labor arbitrage has made the unemployment rate less and less a meaningful indicator. In the past unemployment resulted mainly from turnover in the labor force and recession. Recoveries pulled people back into jobs.

Unemployment benefits were intended to help people over the down time in the cycle when workers were laid off. Today the unemployment is permanent as entire occupations and industries are wiped out by labor arbitrage as corporations replace their American employees with foreign ones.

Economists who look beyond political press releases estimate the US unemployment rate to be between 7% and 8.5%. There are now hundreds of thousands of Americans who will never recover their investment in their university education.

Unless the BLS is falsifying the data or businesses are reporting the opposite of the facts, the US is experiencing a job depression [by 2005]. Most economists refuse to acknowledge the facts, because they endorsed globalization. It was a win-win situation, they said.

They were wrong.

At a time when America desperately needs the voices of educated people as a counterweight to the disinformation that emanates from the Bush administration and its supporters, economists have discredited themselves. This is especially true for "free market economists" who foolishly assumed that international labor arbitrage was an example of free trade that was benefitting Americans. Where is the benefit when employment in US export industries and import-competitive industries is shrinking? After decades of struggle to regain credibility, free market economics is on the verge of another wipeout. [Prescient]

No sane economist can possibly maintain that a deplorable record of merely 1,054,000 net new private sector jobs over five years is an indication of a healthy economy. The total number of private sector jobs created over the five year period is 500,000 jobs less than one year's legal and illegal immigration! (In a December 2005 Center for Immigration Studies report based on the Census Bureau's March 2005 Current Population Survey, Steven Camarota writes that there were 7.9 million new immigrants between January 2000 and March 2005.)

The economics profession has failed America. It touts a meaningless number while joblessness soars. Lazy journalists at the New York Times simply rewrite the Bush administration's press releases.

On February 10 [2005] the Commerce Department released a record US trade deficit in goods and services for 2005--$726 billion. The US deficit in Advanced Technology Products reached a new high. Offshore production for home markets and jobs outsourcing has made the US highly dependent on foreign provided goods and services, while simultaneously reducing the export capability of the US economy. It is possible that there might be no exchange rate at which the US can balance its trade.

Polls indicate that the Bush administration is succeeding in whipping up fear and hysteria about Iran. [And now Obama is whipping up fear and hysteria about Iran.] The secretary of defense is promising Americans decades-long war. Is death in battle Bush's [or Obama's] solution to the job depression? Will Asians finance a decades-long war for a bankrupt country?

-------------------------

Week 5: Post your Blog Entries as Comments to my Main Post Each Week

Post by Sunday at midnight