Blog
STAY ON THE CANVAS, OR GET UP?
Posted on: 17th September 2009
Stay on the Canvas, or get up?
Some people never know when to give up. Should they or shouldn’t they? Well, you tell me.
I have been one of those people all my working life. When at 17 years of age I arrived in Australia from England, the land of my birth. I was greeted by a land that said, “…if you were prepared to work hard, you would be given encouragement and a fair chance of success.” As I walked through the next few years, I gained the life skills on which I have now, at 56, spent my time. I have been both an employee and an employer. Mostly the latter and self employed. I could have stayed as most, in the relative safety of another’s employ, but early on with motivation to do better, make a contribution and a difference, I choose the more perilous road. Was I right, or was I wrong? Are others right to do the same, or are they wrong; and when, if ever, is it time they stayed on the canvas?
During the late 80’s I moved from the safety of a well paid consulting position to launch my own (with a partner) consulting business. Although it was shortly after the stock market crash of ‘87, the firm went on to be number one in its market. Three years on, my partner left his wife (Oh dear I was exposed by his asset loss) and a merger with a global consulting firm was negotiated. Fulfilling contractual obligations, I went on to construct an employment advertising service with a menu of phone in/select the job categories and listen to the advertised positions. It was free for the 15% of the Australian workforce unemployed at that time. It was before its time and despite over 3 years of lobbying, the federal government refused the opportunity to use it for the small national investment needed of $150,000, preferring to continue with the expenditure of $22 billion annually on the unemployment service it would have completely replaced (which is still in place). This time of personal endeavour and investment cost us the family home.
Regrouping, I got up from the canvas and with my inherent never say die attitude, moved ahead. A decade seemed like a lifetime, but in ‘97 we again as a family struck out on our own to build a plastics recycling operation that I now refer to as ‘the overnight success that took us a decade.’ The innovative processes developed would be globally hailed as a world first and would, in 2004, achieve environmental recognition with what was referred to as a sheath of awards at State, National and International level. Through ‘97 to 2004, many a week and month went by where food on the table was a luxury the family went without. Should we, during that time, have taken the many opportunities to stay on the canvas? In 2006 this small family initiative would be acknowledged with the Global Environment Award for Plastics recycling.
Approached by a multinational to form a joint venture in 2005 to expand operations nationally, high hopes for its future turned into operational failure as their ineptitude snatched defeat from the hands of victory. Realising our remaining investment share by its sale, the funds were to form the base family investment in the Greenhouse Neutral Foundation. With the vision to contribute a voice for change by the many honours bestowed with awards for our initiatives, the environmental education foundation embarked to educate afar.
With no previous history of authorship to support success, I would write a book which would become published in New York on the illogical ‘business as usual’ approach to finite resource consumption; it would put in plain language for the common man the future we are inexorably heading for with climate change unless global actions are taken. ‘ZERO Greenhouse Emissions – The Day the Lights Went Out – Our Future World’ and what I see as the very critical information needed by the common man to a safe future for our children and theirs, would be to me, the reason I was meant to get up from the canvas once more. It has already and will continue to, when read by you and others, change the hearts and minds of all that can make a difference to our future.
Earlier this year the Foundation would be invited to take part in a 3 hour weekly radio program, to talk about the environmental changes that can be made everyday by everyone to that safer future. Led to believe the show was going out live each week to millions across four US states, it turned out to be an elaborate hoax. Over the next six months, many hundreds of hours of critical time were wasted, speaking to no one. Not a single US citizen would hear what they so desperately need to know. The Foundation is now completely depleted of all remaining funds and finds its self again prostrate on the canvas. Should it get up? Well, you tell me. Should the message and the voice be silenced? Well, you tell me.
The canvas has many blood stains, some still damp from recent blows. Should we this time stay down?
On my 50th birthday I was presented with a framed quotation by my brother-in-law. It was the words of Theodore Roosevelt;
It is not the critic who counts;
nor the man who points out how the strong man stumbled;
or where the doer of deeds could have done better.
The credit belongs to those who are actually in the arena;
whose faces are marred by dust and sweat and blood;
who strive valiantly;
who err and fall short again and again;
who know the great enthusiasms;
the great devotions;
and spend themselves in a worthy cause;
who at the best know in the end the triumph of high achievement;
and who at worst, if they fail,
at least fail while daring greatly;
so that their place shall never be with those cold and timid souls
who know neither victory nor defeat.
Will this time we stay down, or once more return to the arena? Does a leopard change its spots? As we rise yet again from the canvas, will this time someone reach out a hand to help and support the voice? Will it be you?
- post a comment
THE DEATH OF HUMANITY
Posted on: 1st September 2009
THE DEATH OF HUMANITY
We need to delete the word ‘Humanity’ from our description of man, as man no longer can claim current humanity and the future seems even more at odds with the words meaning or use. Humanity is defined as the condition or quality of being human; human nature and ss the quality of being humane; kindness; benevolence.
HUMANITY IS DEAD.
Many times, many turn away, desensitized by media reports of animal cruelty; of the slaughter of whales in the southern oceans, of mass killings of dolphins in the waters off Japan, or of the annual slaughter of baby seals; or of the killings of Gods creatures for the bush-meat trade.
We do nothing other than express our anger when we hear of the destruction of habitats by deforestation for commercial gain that results in species extinction around the world. We cage and exploit for our entertainment animals we share this planet with.
We farm for our western meat eating diets, cows, sheep/lambs, pigs, chickens and other living breathing creatures. We farm marine life and much more.
I am by no means blameless for these practices for I like many millions around the world, am a carnivorous human. I have never considered a strictly vegetarian diet, denying myself the taste of a filet mignon or breast of chicken. The pork roast for a Sunday lunch with the family has always been a favourite, and the turkey, ham and seafood, served up as a sumptuous Christmas dinner is a yearly feast we celebrate.
But reassess I just might.
When the practice of Balut eggs described to me as the practice in some Asian countries of cooking and eating a duck egg with a nearly-developed embryo inside, I was too sickened at that time to write this article. When I read the words of the person who had posted the picture on the internet I had nothing but disgust for him.
He wrote:
This is the cooked duck embryo. The yellow part tasted like a rich egg yolk whilst the "birdy" bit had a very light chicken and egg white flavour with discernibly soft feathers, bones and organs.
I will allow you to form your own opinion of where we go from here.
For me I will turn my back on the sickness of humanity that considers this form of barbarism acceptable to any culture and broadly denounce their claim to the word humanity; as in them, it is dead.
A GLOBAL PETITION TO BAN THE BAG
Posted on: 5th June 2009
STOPlasticBags
A GLOBAL PETITION TO BAN THE BAG
Sign here ……… Petition for an International Ban on Plastic Shopping Bags
Introduced just over 30 years ago in 1977, the ugly truth about our plastic bag addiction is that society's consumption rate is now estimated at well over 500,000,000,000 (that's 500 billion) plastic bags annually, or almost 1 million per minute.
The Greenhouse Neutral Foundation and its many friends and allies all around the world on Saturday September 26 2009 will call for the world to BAN THE BAG. Our vision will be that by the turn of the clock at midnight on December 31st 2010 they will be BANNED forever globally.
Sign here ……… Petition for an International Ban on Plastic Shopping Bags
By signing this petition today you will have taken a simple step to make this happen.
Why is this so important?
Some of the ugly facts:
-
Once brought into existence to tote your purchases, they'll accumulate and persist on our planet for up to 1,000 years.
-
The U.S. goes through 100 billion plastic shopping bags annually. An estimated 12 million barrels of oil is required to make that many plastic bags. That’s more than 1,200 bags per US resident, per year. Four out of five grocery bags in the US are now plastic.
-
The average family accumulates 60 plastic bags in only four trips to the grocery store.
-
Australia, a country of only some 22 million or so, consumes about 6.9 billion plastic bags each year, that's 326 per person. According to Australia's Department of Environment, an estimated 49,600,000 annually end up as litter.
-
Every single piece of plastic ever manufactured is still on the planet.
-
It is in use, intact in landfills, as windblown litter, and also toxically contaminating global river systems and oceans.
-
There is an estimated 46,000 pieces of plastic in each square mile of ocean. Plastic bags cause over 100,000 sea turtle and other marine animal deaths every year when animals mistake them for food.
-
There are 39,600 deaths of children around the world who die from asphyxiation from plastic bags.
-
There are over 3,300 deaths of children each year in the US alone who die from asphyxiation from plastic bags.
-
WSJ Target, the second-largest retailer in the U.S., purchases 1.8 billion bags a year. In the U.S. alone $4 billion per year is spent by retailers giving away free plastic bags.
Sign here ……… Petition for an International Ban on Plastic Shopping Bags
The simple act of saying NO to plastic bags is something every global citizen can do.
We have the choice and, the reasons to are clear.
Throughout the ongoing campaign Countries will be petitioned to implement a total ban on the use of plastic bags and confirm a date for their eradication.
Sign here ……… Petition for an International Ban on Plastic Shopping Bags
Companies who presently support the use of plastic bags will be highlighted for their environmental impact and disregard to the outcome of their actions.
Consumers who support the use of plastic bags will be educated on the outcome of their choice and encouraged to say NO to plastic bags. Each high quality reusable bag used has the potential to eliminate an average of 1,000 plastic bags over its lifetime.
Sign here ……… Petition for an International Ban on Plastic Shopping Bags
By signing this petition today you will have taken a simple step to make this happen. Spreading the word to BAN the BAG will be an environmental achievement you can, and will be proud of.
Sign here ……… Petition for an International Ban on Plastic Shopping Bags
Thank you from all at the Greenhouse Neutral Foundation and the global team of STOPlasticBags.
HOLD ON TIGHT
Posted on: 22nd May 2009
Visitors to the facts on the Greenhouse Neutral Foundation site are encouraged to visit Letters from 2030 to see the future as it may unfold, unless we take collective action as detailed in the book ‘ZERO Greenhouse Emissions – The Day the Lights Went Out – Our Future World’ to provide the mandate to global politicians and demand they implement firm policy on Climate Change.
Seeing Alex and Patricia once more as they were in Victor’s memories, took him back in his. He had once asked the question of all that he met, as he asked in his book…. “What do we owe our children?”
He had penned……… and now in the quiet of his solitude he would speak those works again to all that may hear. That they might now answer that question; and hold on tight. He switched on the outgoing hologramletter transmission to share his “What did we owe our children?”
There was a native American Indian saying, "We don’t inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children."
What was it that we borrowed from them?
Their future was in our hands. Their safe future was in our hands.
From the time as parents that we brought them into the world our promise was made. Our promise to hold no tight to their hands; to hold on tight to their dreams; to hold on tight to their future.
Did we ever have the right to let them go? To turn away from the promise we had made? To releases their dreams? Or to abandon our hold on their safe future?
To leave them to solve problems for themselves; to leave them to solve problems we had inadvertently created? When was the time that we would say; sorry, sort it out for yourself? When we would say I no longer want to hold on tight?
In the book I gave a part of myself freely to those who would read it.
He picked up the book and read --
|
...The problem we face is a self-imposed journey to oblivion or a change of direction, to one where we hopefully still have somewhere safe to live. Can we not liken our grave and desperate situation to a person sitting in a doctor’s office? The doctor says: “You are not going to like the news, you are very, very sick. The treatment and medicine to make you well again is going to make you even sicker than you feel at the moment. It is going to take a long time for you to get well. But, if you don’t take it, you will die. What would you like to do?”
|
From the time we brought our children into the world until the time we are taken from it; our pledge to hold on tight to them, to commit to them, to honour that Indian saying ‘we borrow the future from our children’ must be a sacred oath.
They say that God created the Heaven and the Earth and he placed it in our care. We must daily ask ourselves if we are doing everything we can to honour that pledge and the scared oath we have collectively made to our children. By seeing the creation of a safe future for our children as a self imperative we can change ourselves with small acts even now to build a future for them that is as it was, left to us by our ancestors.
Listen to her plea and give her your answer. Will you hold on tight or let her go?
LEAKED GOVERNMENT LETTER
Posted on: 5th May 2009
Visitors to the facts on the Greenhouse Neutral Foundation site are encourage to visit http://lettersfrom2030.blogspot.com/ to see the future as it may unfold, unless we take collective action as detailed in the book ‘ZERO Greenhouse Emissions – The Day the Lights Went Out – Our Future World’ to provide the mandate to global politicians and demand they implement firm policy on Climate Change.
LEAKED GOVERNMENT LETTER
Leaked by a highly reliable government source to Bob Williamson Chair of the Greenhouse Neutral Foundation
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – FOR YOUR EYES ONLY
Dear Mother Nature
Would you very much mind delaying your climate change impacts on our species as a result of our commercially driven devastating activities, resulting in but not limited to, the destruction of most other species that inhabit the planet along with us? We are presently experiencing a difficult time to our planned expediential extraction of finite resources on planet Earth.
In a nutshell, we have a short term cash flow crisis due to our rapacious greed and the pursuit of individual global nation’s gross domestic product (GDP). We also presently need to maintain the general public perception that our current unsustainable lifestyles can continue indefinitely.
We would ask that you delay your warming of the planet from our polluting activities for a period of (initially) one to two years – open to our review due to further unexpected commercial circumstances that at this time, we cannot predict. Due to political and commercial pressures during the next 12 months we intend to take no action whatsoever to minimise our environment impact or curb Hothouse Gas pollution. After that time we would seek a commitment from you here, to extend this contract, in terms that will suit our species and the individual commercial circumstance of the industries that run the governments of our respective countries. We would like to point out and make clear to you that at this time we have an 89% backing from those ill informed complacent global citizens /voters who have given their approval by electing us to make this advance to you. They have said it’s our job to lead and we have them on our side LOL.
We offer as an inducement to you, to continue our demonstrated preparedness to blindfold the majority of the global population, to the consequences of our past and present actions. We also offer continuing activities to reduce that which we perceive as a burden on the planet, other species who do not contribute to our global GDP.
We strongly suggest that you use your influence to defer until our further communication, any acts of God that may impact on our financial position as countries; and desist in causing further devastation to the established communities we have constructed for our coastal habitation.
The global insurance industry have kindly sponsored this letter and we have the full backing of the Coal, Oil and Gas industry lobbies along with our other corporate backers who continue to provide their (behind the scenes) support. They assure us and we assure you, that this is in our best vested interests at this time. We can also state openly here that this approach to you is backed up by the majority of the global population that has not a bloody clue, as to what we are all about.
We also notify you here, just for your information, that we are committed to supporting our financial backers and will resist any and all global discussion of a tax on pollution such as the implementation of a Carbon Tax. We know this may fix the contamination of the atmosphere by our supporters that profit from the activity, but we also know that 89%+ of the population don’t, so we have an edge on intelligence or the suppression of it.
We acknowledge this is a long letter and you have other things to do such as melting the polar ice caps and planning a few droughts, so we will accept none responsiveness as your agreement.
Thanks; and by the way we are not negotiating, we are telling you.
Signed for and on behalf of all global politicians elected to make decisions for everyone else.
PS. In closing we will deny we ever wrote this letter, so don’t even think about making it public!
Are we getting confused? When we’re comparing CO2 Apples with CO2-e Global Warming Oranges?
Posted on: 5th April 2009
Visitors to the facts on the Greenhouse Neutral Foundation site are encourage to visit http://lettersfrom2030.blogspot.com/ to see the future as it may unfold, unless we take collective action as detailed in the book ‘ZERO Greenhouse Emissions – The Day the Lights Went Out – Our Future World’ to provide the mandate to global politicians and demand they implement firm policy on Climate Change.
When we talk of the global warming impact of CO2 and or CO2-e are we getting confused?
When comparing or talking about distance, area, volume, weight and temperature, we compare same with same.
In length 1 metres = 3.28 feet
In distance 1 mile = 1.61 kilometres
In area 1 square mile = 2.59 square kilometres
In volume 1 gallon = 4.55 litres
In weight 1 kilo = 2.2 pounds
In temperature Celsius (C) to Fahrenheit (F) multiply by 9, divide by 6, add 32 freezing point 0 degrees C, boiling point 100 degrees C.
We compare like with like; and wether we are using metric or imperial measurements we are clear of the reference. Each can be referred to as the same.
Unfortunately, this is not the same when referring to CO2 and CO2-e. This dual reference in many widely circulated scientific reports, reference documents, news items and indeed policy papers, is however very confusing for the lay person. It may have the effect for many in distracting us from the main issues of concern when talking about the warming of our world, from both man made and natural systems emissions and their warming impact and potential for the future. Referred to as global warming potential (GWP).
At the beginning of 2009 we are presently at what they term 385ppm (parts per million) in CO2 (carbon dioxide) related terms in atmospheric concentrations. Prior to the onslaught of the Industrial revolution when we commenced our release of carbon from the burning of fossil fuels, we were at 280ppm. We have added 105ppm CO2 and are increasing that total concentration by around 3ppm, per year. We presently release around 2 billion tonnes of additional carbon monthly.
The calculation is that the world’s atmosphere weighs 5.15 quadrillion tonnes (1 tonne = 1,000 kilograms) One one-millionth (ppm) therefore weighs in at 5.15 billion tonnes (a billion = 1,000,000,000 or a thousand million). However as carbon dioxide (CO2—greenhouse gas) is around 1½ times heavier as a gas than the oxygen or nitrogen that make up the atmosphere, 1ppm weighs in at approximately 7.77 billion tonnes (1ppm = 7.77 billion tonnes of CO2). Reports are that total global emissions of CO2 are rising by around 3% annually.
It is easily seen that by 2030 in just a mere 21 years we will be at 448-450ppm in CO2 concentrations under the business as usual model. By that time we will have put up since the industrial revolution and additional 1,320 billion tonnes of CO2 from the burning and release of earths stored carbon.
Clearly we should not let this happen.
In 2007 the prominent climate scientist James Hansen of NASA suggested that 450ppm was by him considered the level that would tip the world into catastrophic and run away global warming. Since that time as with many other reviewed predictions and opinions, he has suggested that he considers we now need to return the planet to a safe level of CO2 by getting back to 350ppm (take out 35ppm or get back 272 billion tonnes already up there) and clearly this would mean ZERO emissions now and forever. Not a very likely scenario is it? And that is even more concerning, when considered that Jim is talking in terms of CO2 only, as you will see below.
OK so back the CO2 and CO2-e comparison. Global warming and the resultant climate change we see in the future is not about just CO2 (carbon dioxide) Many other gases are global warming – greenhouse gases.
In defining greenhouse gases for the greenhouse effect, i.e. the global warming impact in carbon dioxide equivalent terms (CO2-e), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) along with CO2 work together as a cocktail of elements and thereby increase the warming effect of carbon dioxide alone. So when referenced in global warming potential (GWP),(generally over a 100 year timeframe) Methane has around 25 times the global warming impact of carbon dioxide (CO2) So 1 metric tonne of methane released today would be 25 metric tonnes of carbon in related terms. Nitrous oxide (N2O) has a warming effect of 298 times that of carbon dioxide. 1 tonne of Nitrous Oxide is equal in its global warming potential (again using a 100 year reference term) of 298 metric tonnes of CO2.
It is presently reported we are at around 455 – 465ppm in CO2-e terms of atmospheric concentrations. These CO2-e greenhouse gases are now increasing at an exponential rate and it is considered will continue to do so into the future.
There are many sources of methane release. These include but are not limited to emissions from livestock (a dairy cow will contribute 1.5 tonnes CO2-e per year) methane releases from landfills from the break down of organic waste, from mining operations such as coal mining and other geological deep formations, volcanic mud eruptions as an example, and the very big current concern; from thawing peat bogs on land in the northern latitudes of Siberia & Alaska (the West Siberian peat bog alone has an estimated 70 billion tonnes of stored methane- equal to 1,750 billion tonnes of CO2 or to put it another way 225ppm of CO2) (if this were to be added to the present ppm levels we would rocket to 610ppm). Another growing source of releases is from methane clathrates now thawing in waters in the previously frozen offshore Arctic sea bed. (when released to the surface 1 cubic metre of methane clathrates releases 164 cubic metres of methane) It is now suggested the Arctic will be ice free in summer by 2011 to 2015. It would be wise for us to start counting these inevitable releases into our projections.
Nitrous Oxide N2O is considered to be the fourth largest contributor to the greenhouse effect behind carbon dioxide, methane and water vapour (water vapour in a warmer world will rise). Nitrous Oxide too, is released from coal mining and the burning of coal for energy generation, steel manufacture and other industrial processes. It is also created in bushfires which in a warmer world are anticipated to become more prevalent. Thr recent bushfires in Victoria in a 2 week period released the equivalent in emissions of those the country reportedly emits in a year.
So are we facing global warming potential on levels of CO2 at 385ppm or on CO2-e at 460ppm and will we face the future on just CO2 levels or on CO2-e levels?
Should the science community and our political leaders wish to think and talk in terms of the end of the century 100 years (outside their term of office) we might suggest they collectively start talking same and same; and talk in terms of CO2-e in global warming potential terms; as by 2050 we are most likely to be past 1000ppm in CO2-e terms and in a much warmer world and future for the planet.
We can now see where James Hansen from NASA may borrow the line from the Apollo 13 crew “Houston we have a problem”
A Letter From The Future - 2030 AD
Posted on: 7th March 2009
Well it’s now January 1st 2030.
Thanks to all of you for your daily hologramletters, I look forward to them every day.
There seems more time in the day these last few years to put my thoughts down and to keep in touch with the few of you that are left. Sadly many of my friends and yours have fallen by the wayside. Their homes swallowed up by advancing deserts or inundated with rising sea levels. Some have sarcome to starvation and lack of clean drinking water and many to disease. I know a few must have survived by moving to the remaining isolated areas that can still support life, but many have lost contact and I fear we will never hear from them again.
As I sit down this New Years day to write this letter to you my friends, I look back on the last few years since the publishing of my book 'ZERO Greenhouse Emissions -The Day the Lights Went Out – Our Future World' and ponder what more I could have done to change the future, with a sense of sadness. Then I was only 56 now I am a 77. I have reached what they once called three score years and ten and passed it by seven long years. But what a time it has been.
Years have passed since the hope for our planet hinged on this or that politician being elected to make a change but none did.
I remember in 2009 when the first African American President was elected to the United States. President Obama just like my hopes and dreams has now passed into history. They say the mistake he made was to focus efforts on trying to save an economic system that was inevitably destined for demise. A system that relied not only in preserving the way of life of the American population that could not be saved under the way that they had lived, but missed the point that these issues were transitory, but the climate crisis was not.
I look back now with sadness that all were listening to today’s problems but ignoring those that would strike tomorrow. We had the chance back then but failed. I thought if enough woke up – bought my book and realised the truth then, we would become the army of concern for a safe future that would change our future to one that was not finite. As I sit here now I’m saddened that we missed that opportunity.
We will more than likely be described by those that survive this time in the short history of man, as those that could have made a change, but could not be bothered. Those that could have made a difference, but just didn’t care about others.
Those that could have saved humanity, but just kept on consuming.
Those that could have secured a safe future, but just kept bickering about who should be first.
Those that could have saved humanity, but preferred to go shopping.
I don’t know what more I could have done. Even now; looking back on the last 21 years, I don’t know what more; I could have done.
In 2008 when I wrote the book, I thought I could make a difference. I pushed for every mother of every child, every father of every child, to read it to understand how we were putting their children – not just theirs, but mine and yours in peril. They were deaf to the pleas. I, as with many others worked tirelessly to wake them up. Wake them up from the illogical sleepwalk they were on. They slept on. Many of these other crusaders for change have now gone. I still lament the passing of James Lovelock, Al Gore amongst others. I miss their wisdom and their passion.
So here we are in 2030 with the outcome of our global sleepwalk and that of our political masters back in those days. Here we are in world of irreversible of climate change. Here we are in a world of atmospheric concentration of CO2-e of 1,000ppm at the level of 55 million years ago. At the level as we are seeing now where all ecosystems have failed and only a few of us still survive. They say there may be as few as 200,000 of the 7 billion of the worlds population in 2010 left by 2050. I know I won’t be one of them.
It is amazing looking back that we fell for the claims from Industry and from world politicians that we could go on as we had and there would be no outcome to our lives or the planet. I know many at the time believed these messages and went on as they always had. Sad isn’t it that so many have died because of this ignorance and complacency?
I remember in the first decade of the 21st century when they saw the Polar Regions heating up at three times the global average and they just said that further evidence was needed before verifiable scientific reports could be presented. Then the West Antarctic ice shelves collapsed and they said well we thought they might. Millions then perished.
I remember at the same time they were telling us that the permafrost in the Arctic was melting and would release billions of tonnes of methane into the already overburdened carbon pool in the atmosphere, but no one listened. I remember at that time when we were at 390ppm that the world had been a very different place to when levels had been that high before. We knew that at 390ppm in 2008 the concentrations of CO2 were almost identical to those in the Pliocene atmosphere 3 million years ago and that global temperatures then were 3 degrees higher than the average in that first decade of the 21st century, but we just went shopping.
So we let emissions keep rising. We allowed the polluters of our fragile planet to keep polluting, we allowed ourselves to keep going on as we had. And then it hit. We didn’t think it would; but then as they say Shit Happens.
I’ll write tomorrow. Stay safe – stay indoors. Much hope to you all.
US newspapers pick up on the Foundation running the White House Blog
Posted on: 28th February 2009
US newspapers pick up on the Foundation running the White House Blog
Why? Due to the following letter sent to leading US newspapers
Letter to the Editor:
We, who walk in silence, walk alone, our troubles brewing for lack of speaking. It has been a little over a month since the O Man took office. There is a very long line of people who would like to express their opinions directly to the White House.
From the left we have; prosecute the previous administration for war crimes and stop the invasive eavesdropping on ‘We the Peps.’ From the right we hear, fiscal responsibility (oh what selective memories), super communist charges and so much more. Of course we have the traditional aspects of letters and radio talk shows at our disposal. Hey, wasn’t this the election of change about the man with a plan who is addicted to technology. Giving credit where credit is due, the new White House home page does have a blog. Blogs, are best when they fully utilize feedback, hence freedom of speech. Alas, the formal White House website cannot do this.
Enter author Bob Williamson from the land down under, who created the following organization in order to promote a national discourse on the issues. This site http://thewhitehouseblogus.blogspot.com/ is a mirror copy of the White House blog and open for commentary. Decorum is required and pertinence regarding subject matter as the following quote indicates. “The Greenhouse Neutral Foundation is committed to providing a voice for change http://www.greenhouseneutral.net and requests that all comments posted be relevant to the topic; or other current issues of the Administration and that comments left be free of profanity and in keeping with the intended purpose.”
In order to have your voice heard on the issues the White House is currently working on, check out this site. In order to post you must have an account with one of the following: Google Account, Live Journal, Word Press, Type Pad, AIM or open ID.
I will be setting up my account with Word Press today, as issues with the Gulf Coast have caught my eye. Spend some of that stimulus money on building artificial barrier reefs. What, you disagree? Get an account and let me hear about it.
Anthony J. Gerst
THE FOUNDATIONS STATEMENT:
The Greenhouse Neutral Foundation is now running the White House Blog @ http://thewhitehouseblogus.blogspot.com/
The Foundation has registered the web address http://www.thewhitehouseblog.us
I have been informed that a number of newspapers from Utah to Mississippi and Los Angeles in the United States have picked up on the story and intend shortly to run articles. As the Foundations intent may be misinterpreted (as we often find with newspapers), I thought it prudent to pre-empt any misunderstanding by explaining the purpose of our activities.
The Official White House Blog which may be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ provides daily postings of the activities of the Obama Administration. It is a noble and worthwhile attempt by the new President to keep citizens informed. Although called a Blog however it does not provide the reader/visitor with the opportunity to comment. So in essence, it is more of a newsletter than a Blog.
In a democracy we all have the right to present our opinions. Critical, constructive, supportive, or questioning; these add value to all parties. In the United States under the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights in its Constitution, it specifically provides for freedom of speech. This therefore was the first of two reasons to set up an interactive mirror White House Blog.
As all know the Greenhouse Neutral Foundation was established to provide a voice for change. Change to the business as usual model and change to the living as usual model. If this voice of logic is not heard in the developed and fast developing world, our illogical sleepwalk to our own extinction will continue to the final and ultimate destination.
This leads to the second reason for an environmental education Foundation to be running the White House Blog.
With the urgent crisis of climate change, if we do not look to act now, we may very well miss a small window of opportunity in which to do so.
This window will not remain open while we dwell on our daily shorter term problems and challenges.
There is great hope for the United States and indeed the World, that the Obama Administration will quickly address its policies for tackling its greenhouse emissions and help us all collectively fight the climate crisis. Eight long years under the Bush administration as with the decade of denial by Australia under Howard, have shortened our time to act.
The US has many; today issues to face. The wars and conflicts it is engaged in, in far off lands, the deepening recession, the financial crisis, crumbling Heath Care, rising unemployment, unparallel domestic and foreign debt, a faltering banking system and the crisis of confidence is widespread. These are by no means inconsequential, but unlike the crisis with climate change, all these have time to solve. Time is something that Mother Nature will not be convinced to give us more of.
We are running out of time.
At this point in time no amount of poking with an environmental stick will distract the attention of the majority away from their daily pressing issues.
How can we present a case for immediate and urgent action on climate change policy, if our much needed audience is not listening?
If they are deaf to us, how do we communicate and get their attention?
We must first engage with them on issues, they are open to listen to.
The Greenhouse Neutral Foundation was established to contribute a voice for change.
The White House Blog.US was established to contribute a voice for change.
This is a voice from those who are concerned for today; and those who should be very concerned about tomorrow.
We need to speak out collectively for action of climate change today.
This is not just your future, it is not just my future, it is the future of all those we care for.
Would you have your voice silenced?
Media in the US keeps US citizens ill informed on the urgency to act.
Posted on: 19th February 2009
This is a very worrying situation and deserves broad media attention in the US.
IT'S TIME TO GET PAST 'URGENCY DENIAL' By Jim Warren journalnow.com
January 17, 2009
http://www2.
Severe climate changes are occurring at an accelerating rate. Our planet is in crisis, according to the world's top scientists, and corrective measures that are proven, feasible and economically beneficial -- mainly energy efficiency -- need to be implemented now.
In 2008, the media and the public finally acknowledged that climate change is a serious problem, but now "urgency denial" is setting in. The gap between scientific and public understanding of the central aspects of the crisis actually widened last year. A Gallup poll showed that fewer Americans, 37 percent, were concerned about climate change than in 2007.
This is largely due to a lack of U.S. news coverage of a series of alarming scientific reports that support the argument by NASA expert James Hansen that, "We are running out of time" for correcting this accelerating planetary emergency.
The information deficit is fueling a dangerous misperception -- one promoted by CEOs such as Duke Energy's Jim Rogers -- that we have decades to slow global warming. This fallacy has become the dominant narrative nationally, as energy corporations, along with their elected and nonprofit allies, promote fictional "clean coal" and corporate-friendly "cap-and-trade" schemes.
Such delaying tactics, if successful, will virtually ensure that we reach tipping points that Hansen says "will cause rapid changes out of humanity's control" and lead to "a different planet." If we cross that threshold, the choice between solar, coal, wind or nuclear power will barely matter.
Unfortunately, many news stories and even accounts by environmental groups still describe climate change as "in the future." While record-breaking weather extremes and their results, such as wildfires, are increasingly prominent in the national news, their connection to climate change is rarely mentioned. Climate studies that do make the news are rarely placed within the context of clear scientific evidence showing the gravity of the climate crisis.
Among the key 2008 developments ignored or under-reported by the U.S. news media are:
1) Atmospheric CO2 levels are already 10 percent higher than normal, and that major reductions in emissions are urgently needed, according to reports by Hansen's NASA team.
2) Two separate teams of European researchers report that millions of tons of methane are bubbling into the atmosphere as the Arctic floor has begun to thaw. This could trigger a dramatic advance of global warming, and it supports concerns reported in 2006 by the University of Pennsylvania'
3) Arctic ice thickness has plummeted. Just a few years ago, scientists warned that summer Arctic sea ice could be gone by 2100. Since 2007's dramatic record-breaking summer melt, some experts warn that it could disappear by 2012. In 2008, the extent of surface melting was slightly less than 2007, but the overall volume of ice (including thickness) broke previous records.
4) Sea level is rising. British researchers warn that sea level could rise nearly five feet this century, based on new understanding about polar ice sheets. This is far more than forecast in 2007 by the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
5) U.S. weather extremes are increasing. A U.S. government report on extreme weather warns that human-induced climate change is making heavy downpours more intense, that abnormally hot weather is likely to become more frequent, and that wildfires in the American West are "strongly associated with increased spring and summer temperatures and correspondingly earlier spring snowmelt in the mountains."
Rep. Ed Markey, the chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, said, "There is no safe haven. There is no place you can live that won't suffer the consequences of global warming. People have been watching huge floods, droughts, storms that are otherwise unaccountable and historic in their nature."
6) Global weather disasters have quadrupled since 1987. British-based charity Oxfam International reported this in late 2007, but it remains off the U.S. radar screen. Oxfam says, "This is no freak year. It follows a pattern of more frequent, more erratic, more unpredictable and more extreme weather events that are affecting more people."
R.K. Pachauri, the head of IPCC, concludes: "The cities, power plants and factories we build in the next seven years will shape our climate in mid-century. We have to act now -- to change the way we use energy -- and thereby avert nothing less than an existential threat to civilization."
The Greenhouse Neutral Foundation and its voice must be heard on the escalating climate crisis.
What do you think must be done?
Welcome to the first of the weekly blog postings.
Posted on: 12th February 2009
.jpg)
Welcome to the first of weekly blog posts on the new Greenhouse Neutral Foundation web site.
We are faced with many urgent challenges. Some are short term and impact our lives today. Some are off in the distance set in motion by our past practices and are added to daily by our current 'business and living as usual' lives.
The book ‘ZERO Greenhouse Emissions – The Day the Lights Went Out – Our Future World ask us many questions about today and tomorrow. It also provides some ways in which we as individuals can change to a future that is safer for our children to inherit. How we can take personal actions without much effort. How we can move from the destructive path we are on to one that has a future safe for those we care about. As harsh as it may seem, it’s not about changing a few light bulbs. Planting a few trees and going on as we always have.
We now need to ask; today, what would we do; what would we spend; what actions would we take; if our child was to die tomorrow without our action today. I can’t put a price on the life of my children, can you?
The book proposes: - We need not reinvent the wheel; we need to reinvent ourselves. I firmly believe man has the brilliance to solve each and every one of the many pressing, immediate, and significant challenges that are ahead. Unless we see these as self-imperatives and collectively take responsibility for our actions, they will be left up to a small band of others to solve. I doubt the solution will come from them alone. Feel no guilt for being part of the problem, but feel responsible and inspired to be part of a solution. A few great men and women may start out being the power of one, but no single great man, no single great woman, from the start of history or into the future, will make a change without collective will.
We need collective will, collective effort, and collective vision, for our collective future. You and yours. Me and mine. Them and theirs.
But it’s only your choice.
Both the Foundation and the book demand a change and show how this can come about.
A change to a future that is safe. Isn’t that all we want for those we care for?
If you bookmark this site and return to this blog, questions will be raised and others answered in future weeks, I hope you do.
Please feel you must leave a comment here.
It may be as simple a statement, as to what you think of the new Foundation web site, or you may wish to answer what price you would pay and what actions you would take for a safe future.
