Category Archives: environment

Caging Birds

by

I was flipping through the channels and saw that PBS was going to air a Nature spot featuring Hummingbirds.  Ah, I thought, a nice evening’s show.

Nope.

First, the hummers were doing their thing and going from flower to flower to get the nectar.  It showed ones with the ruby throat, ones with super-long beaks, and so on.

Then the show flips to the laboratory where a scientist is studying them.  The camera zooms into a hummer striking the glass “wall” in its confusion.  As the narrator tells the story of the scientist wanting to study the endurance of the hummer, it shows them attaching what looked to be a row of paper clips to the hummer’s feet, as it struggles to fly upward.

Well, that was it for me.

I can’t stand seeing animals caged.  I can’t understand why a scientist feels the need to, in essence, torture this bird that was once free to fly wherever it wanted.

And to those who would say, “hey, it’s getting food and is sheltered from predators…what’s the big deal…?”

To that I would say “Freedom is a big deal.”

That bird losing its ability to roam wherever and whenever and  just being let alone without someone poking at it –well, that’s what Spirit is about.  That’s what feeds the Soul. If that bird could talk, it would tell you the same thing.

Remember Fu Manchu?

The really chilling thing is….we’re not that far behind…

Enbridge pipeline

by

I don’t know why this story wasn’t carried by the mainstream media, leaving Hoosiers in the dark about this monster….on second thought, they did.  Unfortunately, this was in the Indianapolis market, but even with cable TV, was out of range for their broadcast area.

And if anyone needs a little reminder of why the conservatives love Hillary Clinton….(you’re asking what?? You’ll notice, as I have, that they will alternatively trash her and then say “she’s not so bad…”.  )  And why they luvs them some Bill, too.  Teflon. Clinton.  From the president who brought us NAFTA, gutting the financial industry protections that were put into place after the Great Depression, the misspent Haiti disaster funds….and on….

 

Blackwater, Monsanto, and Gates Foundation

by

In keeping up with all the dirty little deeds the Gates Foundation promotes….here is an article on the link between Gates, Monsanto, and Blackwater.   Really disturbing.

The article mentions The Nation with Jeremy Scahill—while looking for the Scahill article, I happened upon this with a scathing reply by the authors:

We agree that it will ultimately be up to farmers to decide what is best for them. Our concern continues, however, to be that the choices farmers face is systematically skewed, with some ideas being amplified over others. Any policies that involve redistribution–such as land reform–are off the Gates agenda, despite being a live concern to many African farmers’ movements. This demonstrates our broader point. Despite the foundation’s best efforts to be accountable once the policy has been laid down, the Gates Foundation’s interventions reflect, at heart, the undemocratic vision of a single very powerful and ultimately unaccountable organization.

Sincerely,

RAJ PATEL
ERIC HOLT-GIMENEZ
ANNIE SHATTUCK
www.foodfirst.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(italics are mine.)
Jeremy Scahill’s article here.

One of the most incendiary details in the documents is that Blackwater, through Total Intelligence, sought to become the “intel arm” of Monsanto, offering to provide operatives to infiltrate activist groups organizing against the multinational biotech firm.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Another fracking/nuclear/oil toadie on CSPAN

by

Michael Levi was on CSPAN this morning…he was vague in his assertions, but reading between the lines, I saw “fracking toadie”.

He has written a book on energy that they were highlighting on CSPAN.  It has the words  “battle for  America’s future”  ….words that are emotional and raise an immediate red flag.

Brookings Institute fellow—another huge red flag.

From the wiki page on it:

Funders

At the end of 2004 the Brookings Institution had assets of $258 million and spent $39.7 million, while its budget has grown to more than $80 million in 2009.[64] Its largest contributors include the Ford Foundation, the Gates Foundation, Sen. Dianne Feinstein and her husband Richard C. Blum, Bank of America, ExxonMobil, Pew Charitable Trusts, the MacArthur Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation, and the governments of the United States, Japan, Qatar, the Republic of China, the District of Columbia, and the United Kingdom.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Gates Foundation.  ExxonMobil. Republic of China.  Bank of America.  All giving money…for what payback…because these folks play to win and they don’t throw their money after something without expecting something in return.

And why is our government contributing to a think tank??

Here’s another piece I found on the Brookings Institute and their treatment of Diane Ravitch.  Pretty much says it all, doesn’t it?  I don’t know why they are considered liberal?

~~~~~~~~~

And the fact that Levi is a doctor doesn’t necessarily impress me–Mengele and Freud were also doctors who skewed things towards their point of view.  It’s especially troubling that his doctorate is in War Studies.

He was advocating “clean energy” another industry catch phrase that actually means “keep on doing what we’ve always been doing, but keeping our dirty business out of the public eye as much as we can…”  (as seen by the non-coverage of the Arkansas oil spill.)

He was also stating that fracking should be done, and concern for the environment should be a priority. Sounds good, eh?  But then….he states further in the interview that the *only* problem was what to do with the contaminated water once they had extracted the natural gas…um, yeah, he totally ignores that there is a HUGE problem with the chemicals traveling through the earth to people’s wells, contaminating them.   My blog on that here. And here. And here.

There was a male caller making outrageous statements about green energy and allowing even more leasing to oil/gas companies…and he was not characterized as emotional…

…but when a woman caller called in and raised the earthquake question and the contamination from the chemicals…whoa…she was *cough*  “emotional”.  (I can’t remember if that was Levi’s exact wording, but the meaning was the same.)  In other words, even though she brought up facts, she was discredited as being emotional.  ::don’t worry your pretty little head, darling, we men folk will take care of this important stuff::   Grrrr.

So, my conclusion from the above is the Michael Levi is an energy industry toadie.  He’s dirty.

 

Energy regulation

by

CSPAN featured Jon Wellinghoff, chairman of Federal Energy Regulatory  Commission.  Politico has this up.

A couple of callers commented on Wellinghoff’s demeanor.  He seemed to be no-nonsense.  He was formerly a consumer energy advocate.  It seemed that he was pro-consumer…but I couldn’t shake a bad feeling I had…

…he mentioned fracking as a viable practice for extracting natural gas at least two or three times during the short interview…and my heart began to sink…

He barely mentioned off grid and solar power, although when he did mention it, it was in a positive light.  What I would like to see is federal support for off grid classes in communities.  Let people create their own power for their needs, instead of huge coal plants and monstrous pipelines that spill oil (something else he said he was for.)

I hope that I’m wrong, but I can’t shake the feeling that he’s going towards the fracking industry.  He kept repeating that it could be done in an environmentally sound way.  Bullshit.

A woman caller had the same sentiment as me when she revealed that she is suffering from breast cancer due to methane gas released from fracking.  She said that he was feeding people a line and that her own governor was selling her state out from under the people.  (Unfortunately, I didn’t catch the state.)

Wellinghoff would not back down and repeated that fracking could be done in an environmentally friendly way. <sigh> So…another former consumer advocate has been bought off…

.~~~~~~~~~

Speaking of pipelines….

Why am I hearing about this after the fact?  Where was public radio BEFORE this took place?

And the Save the Dunes group apparently knew about it but, hey, as long as Enbridge *cough* promises to not spill any of its nasty ole’ oil into our rivers, lakes, and streams, hey, it’s okay with them….because, you know, Enbridge has such a stellar history of concern for the environment and the people and animals that inhabit it.  /very snarky, indeed.

From the article:

“IDEM, through its certification, is allowing Enbridge to disregard alternate pipeline routes and other opportunities to reduce and eliminate water quality impacts, in likely violation of the Clean Water Act,” said Kim Ferraro, staff attorney at the Hoosier Environmental Council.

Both Michigan and Illinois have laws governing interstate pipeline routing, requiring companies to assess environmental and community risks, but currently Indiana does not.

Good Grief….my head is about to explode…

 

 

 

Why Detroit Matters

by

I’m bopping around the web this morning reading up on Detroit….I just can’t get the dumping of petroleum coke out of my mind.

Whatever happens to Detroit happens to all of us….

Here’s a piece up on a refinery fire…by Marathon…where the residents were not even told what was going on.  It is just unconscionable that these folks were not told what was going on and that some were evacuated but others across the street were not.

This piece spouts the pro-corporate view that anything that supports the environment is bad for business.  Tell me, what good is business if so many are sick or even dead because of toxic overload?  Who will be left to buy your product?

From the article:

The document claims city planners fail to take into consideration that Metro Detroit’s poor and minority neighborhoods are already deluged with excessive pollution and contaminated industrial, commercial, and hazardous waste sites.

~~~~~~~~

Claims of “environmental injustice” (and environmental racism) are little more than catch phrases used by green activists to draw attention to the purportedly disproportionate negative effects of pollution in poor and minority communities. The accusation is that federal, state, and local governments have conspired to permit more pollution in impoverished black communities than in affluent ones.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

He goes on to say that there are the same health problems in more affluent neighborhoods.  He thinks the problem is their lifestyle rather than the toxic environment.  I think that’s too simplistic as it doesn’t take in the whole picture.  It is known that mercury damages a person’s DNA.  So…if the parents of affluent African Americans were poor and lived in these more toxic areas, being exposed to lead and mercury and arsenic, their DNA will be affected and pass that on to their children.  It gets worse with each generation.  Also, toxins do not stay in a particular geographical area, although it will be more concentrated in that area, it will drift, and also cause health issues (on a lesser scale) to those in affluent neighborhoods.

As far as environmental racism…it is a well known occurrence.  Probably should be better categorized as environmental “poor-ism” because it’s done towards the poor.  I say this with the thought in mind that it does not follow blacks whom have moved into more affluent neighborhoods.  Perhaps one can say that it is because whites also share that neighborhood.  Well….I guess you could say that, BUT then whites also share the poor neighborhoods with blacks….which leads me to conclude that it is against the poor rather than exclusively against blacks.

The last line about the gov’t allowing the poor to bear the brunt of toxins ignores the above~~you don’t see the petroleum coke being dumped on the Koch’s front lawn, do you?  When that happens, you can tell me that gov’t officials have not discriminated against the poor.

I notice that the author was once a commissioner….so I am left to wonder whether he, in his official capacity, willfully went along with poisoning the poor and is now trying to justify it?

On to the financial woes of Detroit, I found some interesting articles.

This one details the bad news. Note that they’re going after unions.  HUGE RED FLAG that Disaster Capitalism and ALEC are in the midst.  (related to this is a strike by fast food workers to form unions.)

This article on Slate paints a different picture of the stuff going on behind the scenes.  Note the link to the NY Times’ article on Dan Gilbert trying to make a fortune rebuilding the city…

The article talks about the cityscape with abandoned houses, empty spaces after demolition of houses, and the population dwindling from 2 million down to 700,000.    When reading that Gilbert’s solution is to bring business in, to spur people walking the streets (shoppers)…and it strikes me that there is so much opportunity here….but it feels like trying to fix the problem with the same old, same old…

With all the demolished houses…what about the urban farmer?  I know that would be difficult if the ground were polluted, as Detroit seems to be the dumping ground, but if the soil were not toxic, why not encourage that? It would help those in the inner cities to feed themselves as well as sell produce to earn income.

Why not encourage planting of trees to help the air quality?  As I blogged before, we need to include nature into our plans and stop ignoring the impact we have on nature and the colossal impact nature has on us.

It also ignores the devastating impact that Big Box stores have had on our local economies.  Walmart moves in….independent small businesses die…and entire downtowns are destroyed…not only do the businesses die, but our feeling of connectedness dies with them…

 

The Powerful Seed

by

The organic farmers group posted a link to this article.  The humble seed contains the beginnings of life.  You could even say that the seed rules the world….

Below this article was a link to Vandana Shiva’s “Everything I Needed to Know I Learned in the Forest”.  Bless her for her dedication to sustainability.

From that article, I was intrigued about the link for Ecuador recognizing the rights of nature in its Constitution…Wow……somebody who “gets it”.  See, we humans want to think that we are so superior that we are more valuable than all other life forms.  Worse than that, we have fooled ourselves into thinking that we are independent…that we could actually survive without them.  We pollute the air, water, and soil without regard that it will harm nature.  We survive in a circle…truly, what goes around comes around…and the balance of life–when we take something, we must give something of equal value in return…this simple rule is ignored.

 

To DEET or not to DEET

by

Just thought I’d re-post this on the DEET controversy.  The mosquitoes are really bad this spring due to all the rains, so I’m sure that cases of West Nile will be popping up.  I still don’t think it’s worth the risk of putting DEET on my skin.  Be sure to follow the last link to a natural recipe for mosquito repellant.  Happy Camping! 🙂

(A side note~ – a phenomenon we noticed on the mercury support group is that we weren’t bitten by mosquitoes.  Apparently, we were so toxic not even they wanted our blood….haha….anyway, now that I’m getting better, I’m starting to get bitten like I was prior to poisoning….heh…)