Beckett: Labour -focus on the environment

"Setting out the scale of the climate change threat, she says that the economic cost ofthe 2003 European heatwave was �13.5bn. 'These events are certain to increase in frequency and intensity - the 2003 heatwave was a one in 200 year event. By 2050, it is estimated that it will be a one in two year event. For every 1C rise in global temperatures, Africa's GDP may fall by 4%. And while climate change is the most dramatic example, water shortages, deforestation and desertification also have high human and economic costs.'"



And who paid those costs? I bet it wasn't the oil companies ... but it's about time it was. It looks, though, like the insurance companies may start to make it so.



But we need to recognise the social justice angle in this too:

She adds: "Overwhelmingly, it is the poor who live in the worst environments and suffer most from environmental problems. Poorer people are twice as likely to live near polluting factories. And children from families on low incomes are five times more likely to be killed by road traffic than children from affluent areas."

Bush environmental agenda

Now I don't automatically think a headline saying that "Bush sets out plan to dismantle 30 years of environmental laws" is necessarily a bad thing; it depends on the laws, not all of them may actually be beneficial in the grand scheme of things; but the details cited seem to indicate concern is in order. and here's an interesting quote:

"The environmentalists point out that almost every local referendum on environmental issues carried out on election day achieved a green majority"

Independent News:

"clean coal" ?

Useful article on the prospects of coal in the world energy economy and the prospects for it being cleaner.



Bush admin isn't putting money where its mouth is on "clean coal" | By Amanda Griscom Little | Grist Magazine | Muckraker | 03 Dec 2004

concrete steps

Here's an article with a good load of specific, measurable, attainable, realisitc and time-able stsps we can take to do our bit ...

John Emory Parks, international marine expert, answers questions | Grist Magazine | InterActivist | 29 Nov 2004

Global arming -scientific consensus

This is a must bookmark page for use in those debates where the alleged lack of scientific proof of concept is trotted out. Short of it is that there is no peer-reviewed publication in the science world that denies GW is taking place.

In the words of the abstract: "In this Essay, [Naomi] Oreskes analyzes the existing scientific literature to show that there is a robust consensus that anthropogenic global climate change is occurring. Thus, despite claims sometimes made by some groups that there is not good evidence that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities, the scientific community is in overwhelming agreement that such evidence is clear and persuasive."

Science -- Oreskes 306 (5702): 1686

Peak Oil

"At this point, it could take years for alternative technologies to come online, no matter how much economic incentive there is--and meanwhile, since oil demand is relatively 'inelastic,' the price of oil will be bid up until it slows the global economy enough to reduce demand. That's an ugly picture."
Responsible Nanotechnology: Molecular Manufacturing vs. Peak Oil:

The Word is not M$

I have a great deal of sympathy for this idea of discouraging people from sending documents in Word format. I think mainly because of the last point: it endorses and promotes M$ products unnecessarily. Let's try to stick with rtf etc? I had got used to not making a fuss about this since OO.o reads and can write M$Word. I think I may write myown mild rebuke for Word attachments. The quoted one is a good start.
Perhaps mine might go:-
I note that you attached a MSWord document. Please may I encourage you to make a practice of saving and sending such documents in a plain text or .rtf format or at least checking that your correspondant has the necessary software to read Word. You may like also to consider that Word documents carry security and privacy risks and that by promoting the use of Word in this way you are contributing to the advancement of a particular proprietary brand of document as against commonly agreed non-proprietary formats. I would like to suggest that good global citizenship and etiquette involves the use of common rather than proprietary formats unless you have agreed to do otherwise.
Storyteller's World: What to do when you get Microsoft Word attachments