Survival IS 'Job ONE!': Finally: 'SAFE’ nuclear power plants ARE on the horizon!

Well said, and welcome to CR4!

(8 >) . Welcome one and all . (< 8)

There is little doubt that Engineers play a vital role in the direction and sustainability of our world.

We have no hope of survival without Engineers taking up the mantle of responsibility for ethical, sustainable safe construction of anything substantial in our world.

Studies in England have shown that the amount of radioactive materials released onto the surface of our planet by the very small portion of radioactive material in coal that they have used for many centuries now has resulted in significant increase in radioactive contamination.

In regards to 'letting the future take care of itself' unless we make very radical changes immediately there will be 'no future as we know it' in a very short period of time. Surely we have more responsibility to reduce contamination by numerous different means that is already clearly having devastating impact on our world. While this may be disputed by many along with carrying on with the status quo until such times as the modeling information clearly indicates that we are in big trouble. It is already very questionable that much life will survive our world as it is. Are we to wait until the house is burnt almost down to the foundations before we call out the fire department, just to be sure that the house really is on fire? There already is enough significant date to support this. Extermination of species at an unprecedented rate has been well documented and established for quite some time now. If we choose to live only for today and look no further than that then our fate will be thrown in with lemmings, ostriches and the dodos.

I am in no way advocating the cessation of all engineering, technology and sciences. On the contrary, we have no hope at all except by more informed, knowledgeable and wise, cautious usage of such knowledge and it's application.

As the opening on this thread indicates, we are at a place where there finally IS a safe, sane and sustainable place for direct usage of nuclear energy on our planet. As I stated, all energy and hence life stems from it to start with. With the R&D done on the 'next generation' of nuclear power plants and the solving of the significant drawbacks of them, I am not calling for the moratorium on them. On the contrary, I am calling for as much resources as possible be put into these technologies including fusion power to bring them online as one of the realistic solutions that can be implemented in fairly short order that can have a significant impact and benefit on our planet that is definitely in need of urgent measures. It should be undertaken with the same sense of urgency as when the original atomic bomb was successfully created under. The circumstances are such that it is many orders of magnitudes above and beyond the imperative which brought nuclear weapons into our world.

Frankly I am quite astounded to find myself taking this stance. For prior to the advent of the possibility of building these new safe nuclear power plants I was totally adamant against them because we had no realistic way of dealing with the very long lived deadly and disruptive radioactivity that causes genetic damage to all living things for all intents and purposes 'forever' on a human time scale.

As has been pointed out many time over from many quarters: 'We don't have an energy shortage, we have a knowledge shortage' to which I am adding: 'and the application of such knowledge.' If we could harness only 1% of the solar energy that falls on our planet from the life giver: our sun, we would have enough energy to supply the entire world with all of the (electrical) power for all needs.

Fortunately there has been a very broad and significant increase in the awareness of our dire circumstances very rapidly in the last decade. With out which there would not be the consorted (political) will possible to bring about the dramatically needed changes in the most humane and orderly manner that we can. This is as opposed to waiting until it is way too late and then frantically go into total damage control mode to try and cope with the devastation when it will be way to little too late, as it already may be!

There has been a fundamental shift in awareness that has brought about the manifestation of the dire need for this which is most important.

I am urging for being very realistic about our predicament and prioritizing our NEEDS, as opposed to 'wants' as is now the driving force our unsustainable consumer based economics that is currently crashing down around us at this point in time as it is unrealistic and unsustainable.

The immediate need for drastic action is way above and beyond any such impetus that we have ever faced before, including the World Wars and the defenses against the forces of fascism.

Thus I have begun this thread in support of encouraging broader, more encompassing responsibility as a higher priority in human endeavors of which Engineers are fundamentally, pivotally and crucially involved in.

Hi Doug,

You very well pointed out that we will call the fire department to late when the house burning down. I think, it will be too late to call the non-existing fire department. Why it'will be non-existing. Everything around us is degrading and finally destroyed to non-useable status. Just compare the Canadian standard of life where I am living during the last 45 years. It went from excellent to ahrdly acceptable for average people. Just an example. The loaf of bread was 10 cents in the mid-sixties with yearly salary of around $12,000. Today, the same bread cost more than $2.50 and the salary growth up to $45,000 per year per individual. Just calculate the growth for one and another, and you get the answer. It's devastating!

Engineering must be directed by law to produce exclusively knowledgeable to those diplomed people who can create progress in and for the future. We have our schools diploming lawyers, MBAs, and other people who cost to society without collaborating too much or significantly to our progress. Construction is defficient, medicine only or practically distribute pills, food manufacturers creating obese people, and I can follow during pages...

Governments must elaborate the future for everyone and not for themselves. How to obtain the change? It cannot be like that all the time as is today!

Could we exploit economic way and for all, the constant energy supplied by Sun to us? We created electronic communication to a high level and cheap but we have extreme difficulties to stop an ordinary human cold. What's the problem? You mentionned "very broad and significant increase in the awareness" of many things but not necessarily important. We have no significant changes to the human population, and when something goes bad, everyone is affected without being involved. It was the same with cholera and the rest centuries ago. It's the same with flues and AIDS. Where is the progress?

It's never too late but we have to get onto realistic track by drastical ways and drive ourselves to something more sustainable, greener, and accessible to everyone.

My question is: How can we put the right people in acting position to finally obtain what we need or we must have? Someone has the answer, Gil.

You say "...where I am living during the last 45 years ...... The loaf of bread was 10 cents in the mid-sixties with yearly salary of around $12,000. Today, the same bread cost more than $2.50 and the salary growth up to $45,000 per year per individual. "

and

"Engineering must be directed by law ..... "

So are you saying that government has less control of our lives now than it did 45 years ago? I don't know about in Canada, but in the US it sure doesn't. Much of the reason that prices are so high now has to do with government and politicians thirst for power.

Hi JB,

Yes! In the sixties we have government for decades, not today. Sure, you don't know about Canada! Higher prices, after you words, are created by the government and politicians? The United States government don't have any authority on EPA, which is ruled by big companies with the collaboration of the your government without protecting the American people. Sorry, I don't want to interfere!

Standard of life in the 60s was higher than today. Divide $2.50 by $0.10, which is 25. Now, divide $45,000 by $12,000 and you get 3.75. The average Canadian salary is 6.6666 times lower today than was before. Let me know if my calculations are wrong?

Concerning the engineers: Our schools like yours cost lots of money, supplied by the governments or us, but producing less smart people than money looking individuals.

How come, in Washington you have more snow than we have here in Toronto? Are you finally visited Canada and become jealous about our snow? Come on JB! Don't forget to laugh, Gil.

Gil,

I agree that the standard of living based on your calculations was higher in the 60s than today. That's kind of my point. In the US, the government had a lot less influence in our lives in back then compared to now.

"United States government don't have any authority on EPA" What?!!!! The EPA was created by the government, the head of the EPA is appointed by the President of the USA.

I agree with you that their prime motivation is not protecting the American people...again that supports my position that more government doesn't always make things better.

Please don't get me wrong, I am not opposed to some level of regulation and guidelines to protect citizens from businesses polluting and such. But I don't think we need or should want the government telling us what we should be designing.

Hi JB,

It's the same here, the government has less influence in our life than in back. We elect someone to give us something, this should be the rule for the elected people.

The US government created or appointed the EPA to regulate certain things to protect the American population, isn't it? But you agree that they don't protect you, your family and others. A drug-maker can advertise a "product", pills or syrop to cure certain disease, and after a certain time the same "product" can kill a few people but we or the EPA don't and can't stop to sell the "product".

EPA knows that high glycemic index products in large and constant consumption cause obesity, diabetes, heart-attacks, and death, in that or any other order. However, they never told food manufacturers to use only low glycemic index products without excess of salt and sugar. Look around and you see overweight people everywhere. Look at a picture made from your grandfather when he was 20 years old. There were no obeses in the group. How come?

I promote designated education because we form people who don't work for the community, they work for themselves. What we design today? What will be tomorrow? There are no targets or goals, we just go further, Gil.

Much of the reason that prices are so high now has to do with government and politicians thirst for power

Decades ago feeling that I was lacking in the area of a 'classical education' I read all of the works of Aristotle, Plato and Socrates.

I believe it was Plato's dissertation on the requirements for those that govern be VERY stringent. Given the 'desire' aspect of our makeup, out of necessity. It's a good perspective to include.

As they say: 'Absolute power corrupts absolutely'

So are you saying that government has less control of our lives now than it did 45 years ago? I don't know about in Canada, but in the US it sure doesn't.

For those that now live in countries where they have the infrastructure to provide it, global telecommunications becoming widely available to everyone at large as opposed to the 'power brokers' and the transparency that comes with it will and is literally bringing more 'power to the people.'

Most never believed that the Berlin wall would be torn down in their lifetime, if ever. This was not because of the actions of their governments and diplomacy. It was purely by the united will of the people.

In spite of China's significant attempts and actions to strictly control and limit (outside) communications over the InterNet, it was through the InterNet that first broke the news of the events in Tiananmen Square Massacre that resulted because of the protests that were sparked by the death of a pro-democracy and anti-corruption official to the world.

We are in the beginning of the failed 'desire based consumer economics' experiment. The ensuing chaos of the Apocalypse that is upon us has only just begun and will manifest at an ever increasing rate.

All of these factors contribute to reducing the 'top down' power structures in favor of a broadly based 'bottom up' one that brings about consesnual governance that empowers people rather than making them feel powerless, helpless and desperate.

Even if the fascists had succeeded in 'conquering and dominating the world' in WW2, they could of never held it for long. These communication technologies make that more true than ever before. Look at the lessons of history. There have been many 'empires' before and eventually they all collapse because they are unable to control everyone and everything all of the time.

If everyone that the nazis rounded up and sent to concentration camps &/or exterminated. In spite of their brutal reprisals, by sheer numbers alone if everyone took an ordinary kitchen knife or any such similar object and stabbed a nazi solder as they walked by them, there military ranks would have been reduced very significantly very quickly. Of course I have the benefit of hindsight and most of these victims initially either did not know or could not believe that anyone would actually do such things, but here again history illustrates otherwise. Man's inhumanity to man over insecurities over differences and the devastation it has brought forth has existed for most of our million years of 'tribal history' and there are all too numerous illustrations of this.

The fall and collapse of the former USSR police state where 1 out of every 6 adults were active government spies is yet another very significant and powerful example of this.

I understand your statements about the US, you are a country of many dichotomies and paradoxes. I don't know if you saw it in another of my postings, but at the beginning of the twentieth century ~ ½ of the GNP of the US was controlled by and passed through the hands of only six families. Now 1% of the population of the US has (control) over 99% of the wealth! The USA IS a very good, or bad, example of the failed experiment of consumerism based economics that dominants and corrupts the governing and social/cultural and educational realms. Money is a necessary byproduct of successful economic endeavors as opposed to being the reason FOR them

I suggest reading Rudolf Steiner's 'ThreeFold Social Order' for insights into successful, correct and sustainable interactions between the various aspects of human societies.

We are at a junction now of either truly becoming one society of humanity globally or backsliding significantly very readily with the forthcoming chaos.

Regardless of the awareness or denial we are all now walking on the razors edge over and endless chasm on the only home that we have. 'Crunch time' is upon us. Will we rise en masse proactively to constructively work together to minimize the disasters and devastation or will we succumb to baser instincts and contribute to it and worsen and hasten the chaos and devastation?

Hi Doug,

I accept all citizens' actions however, money flows from people to governments. Let say, thousand years ago, the king or the local baron collected from mainly farmers everything the richer needed.

Industrialization created money collection from people and industries. However, industries started to be run by the richer, and people have to give to the government but the richer get favours, and paid less than people.

Today, the big companies don't pay or return to the government the same % as people do and get lots of advantages for growth. However, people still pay more than corporations, and people cannot hide or deturn any money or individual values to pay less.

The standard of life changed from the 60s to today because the bread is made by the same corporation and collect the "RMC + ROI + profits" as did earlier. We paid the $0.10 for the loaf and today we pay 25 times more but our salary did not have the same growth. I am not an accountant but it's "easy to catch the difference", isn't it? So, what's problem with it?

We put the government in place and we get a lower standard of life through these people with time. In the US is the same or you don't want to open your eyes and accept that you voted during decades for people who never did too much for you as thanking to you the dominating position they get from you!!!

I think, corporations who creates revenues, dominate and control everything or nearly. Explain me if I am wrong or totally off.

We have lots of lawyers, doctors, and MBAs because these professions are necessary and became well paid for the real work done. We must create educated people to build the future and not let people choose what they want. Education is paid by everyone but profits to a few. If someone wants special education, can go a private school and paying without the support of everyone.

We know that in business diversification conducts to disaster. The best example was Coca Cola with mainy other thinks except soft-drinks, and the famous Classic to add one more product or creating line-extention. Same for human organizations, stay focus on your duties, as few as possible, and converge and concentrate all efforts and money to the few important targets.

You explain well the Chinese and the German "united will" and other transforming movements, as did revolution against authorities in the past.

Today, the "top down" power exist and control! The "bottom up" power is the ideal but when we get it? After my simple view and opinion, it's possible when we have educated people with controlled education to do what people need, not the individual.

Collapses of governments was because they cannot control what was important for every citizen. It was practically "one individual" controlled everything. Pharaoh, King, Emperor, Staline, Hitler, and others were single power. Today's governments are practically minoritary, except of few and we can distinguish as no value for discussions.

Wait for more explanation about this, Gil.

It's never too late but we have to get onto realistic track by drastical ways and drive ourselves to something more sustainable, greener, and accessible to everyone.

My question is: How can we put the right people in acting position to finally obtain what we need or we must have? Someone has the answer, Gil.

Hi Gil,

The answer lies in a substantial portion of the public that is educated and aware of these things and factors and the (alternative) options available. Having them actively consolidated into effective organizations involved in expanding those involved and persisting in putting pressure on governments that are in the position to respond and implement the needed changes and solutions being on the wide variety of methods, manner and alternatives.

This is pretty well the only thing that can bring enough pressure to bear on such things and demanding that they are implemented on the scale and in the many situations that are in need of them ASAP.

A significant portion of well informed and pro-active population Is the ONLY thing that has enough potential to ensure and achieve these urgently needed (alternative) solutions.

This thread was created with this VERY much in mind and to assist and promote getting the needed numbers necessary for achieving this massive ground swell of needed proactive organizations required to ensure the achieve these vitally and desperately needed measures ASAP.

1. The earth will kill us before we kill the earth.

2. You are pretty much preaching to the choir here. So long as our politicians waste valuable resources on wild schemes like pumping CO2 into the ground, or subsidizing wind farms that will do more to cripple the grid than suplement it, or trying to capture solar energy in low earth orbit and beam it down to us, or I don't know how many other hairbrained schemes I have read of that gain support of our Great Leaders, there is really very little hope for viable action...Preach this to the politicians. Load and Long and keep them awake at night- obviously, their consciences don't keep them from sleeping...

3. Oh, yes- stop blaming the bankers and Wall Street for the financial mess. They are only taking advantage of the stupidity that prevails in the halls of government...

Hi Warner,

I would like to add some comments to your opinion about, first, the killer. It's not our planet who is the killer. We are! We want things and we don't care about consequences. We never learn when we make something wrong. We change to another actions and forget the past. It's easy and convenient!

Second, who voted our politicians to the positions they are? We! So, no blame to those elected people by us! We have to start to thing about how we vote in the future?

Third, Wall Street is pushing everyone to invest "more", to do "more", to sell "more", and consume "more". Without "more", Wall Street doesn't exist! Also, I correct your wording from "taking advantage of the stupidity that prevails in the halls of government" by saying that they are smart to exploit the possibilities to make "more" for themselves at place of doing something positive for the electors who put them in acting positions.

Tell me if I am wrong, Gil.

Gil-

Read "Atlas Shrugged", by Ayn Rand.

Then follow John Galt's lead, and tell the government to get out of the way, so those with the answers can do what they do best...

Hello again,

We would like to have your opinion. I already read many others opinion, including the mentionned by you.

Still, yours is what we want, Gil.

My opinion? I expessed that back in the '90's, when I essentially abandoned the Western lifestyle and sought a better way for myself.

As I see it, it is already to late. Modern civilization is doomed because there are too many vested interests trying to perpetrate the myth that there is more wealth than there actually is. The vested interests will continue to try to salvage what they can until total collapse occurs, and they finally realize that more of the same can not solve the problems created by more of the same...

The Renaissance in Europe beginning about the 14th Century began AFTER the Black Death eliminated about 1/3 of the European population. Something of similar magnitude is likely to occur before all the glaciers melt. It is unlikely that I will survive such a catastrophe, but there will be others, with enough sense one would hope, to recognize the errors of the past, and built a better future.

Meanwhile, I have found a lifestyle that is quite comfortable for me- I eat well, I have meaningful work that gives me a sense that my efforts make the world a bit better for the rest of humanity (albeit on a very small scale), I have a wonderful wife, and I have no need to pretend that I am weathier than I am...

Hi Warner,

Still we need your opinion! Where can we find what you did during the 90s? You turn your life to Eastern style or what? I'm not hassling but do not put an answer as this! We want to know what's happening and learn what to do later on.

We will not see the "total collapse" but it will occur! You are right! However, humanity will pass through with large or close to total losses. This is the price humanity pays for the refusal of the realities.

The attack doesn't come only from the nature under forms of global warming, extinction of many animals, luck of food, new sicknesses. We arrived and are being hurt by another human beings. Small wars become generalized and at place of 25 to 30 dies by roadside bombs we will get attacked everywhere in sometime without aware where, with what, how and when. We need more and more money to defend ourselves. This is another weapon!

I have around 35 ties but never wear one during the last decade. My question is: What's purpose to be a non-listener? Need an answer, Gil.

So long as our politicians waste valuable resources on wild schemes like pumping CO2 into the ground

I'm not sure I agree with this and the other sources of alternative energy evolving that you mention.

We obviously very rapidly need an effective multi faceted approach to reducing the considerably detrimental environmental impact of the majority of current power plants.

What do you think IS the best and most effective approach to this very significant urgent problem ?

DougRH-

The quickest and cheapest and only proven way to resolve the CO2 issue is extensive reforestation. I am not talking about stopping the harvesting of trees- I am talking about major planting programs.

The quickest and cheapest and only proven way to resolve the CO2 issue is extensive reforestation.

Our forest are the primary lungs of the earthen areas of our world and as such are most definitely very important. We don't have the kind of forestry reserves that they do in British Columbia, the western most province of Canada. But we do have a forestry industry in Alberta. In most of our non mountainous woodlands where logging occurs it is primarily a fast growing softwood tree: Aspen, also known as Poplar trees. There 'seeds' are quite unique in that they are a very fine sparse white strands of very thing fiber that tends to look like a cotton ball greatly expanded into a much larger volume. Thus they are very readily transported significant distances on the wind. In the spring when this occurs, in some areas there is so much of it looks like winter again both from the 'seeds falling like snow and the accumulation on the ground. It is hell for those that have 'spring defer' and are allergic to them.

Forestry companies are required to undertake reforestation of their harvest areas here and the trees are ready to be harvested again in under ten years.

Now if we can find a solution to the tropical deforestation which likewise are VERY vital to the health of our planet.

Hi Warner,

Good idea but what you think about: During the 70s, gasoline was restricted. pair-impair plate numbers. You remember? We did because was the only way to get what we wanted. If we do the same, we will reduce large percentage of CO2 emissions. Also, cell-pnones and the Internet must be the working, selling and business communication.

And, we can re-forest our lands.

Good suggestion to eliminate a human problem, Gil.

Unfortunately, the gas rationing in the '70's did not really reduce consumption- just created inconvenience for the common man. What is needed is a paradigm shift that gets people to use their private automobiles less. Like $10 a gallon gasoline.

Full disclaimer- I do not own an automobile, nor do I have any intention of ever again owning an automobile. If I can not walk to where I need to go, I have access to effective (and inexpensive) public transportation. My personal solution would most likely not work in the US....

Hi Warner,

I precisely said that only the "CO2 emmission" was reduced by roughly half. Sorry! I don't want to change people's habits because I cannot educate people, and much less provoke changes. It's hard or practically impossible. However, increase the price of the gasoline by five fold or more and why not the price of a car too. It was interesting in China in the late 1990s: You can buy an Isuzu pick-up (around 1 ton) for 90,000 yuan and pay 600,000 yuan for a VW. A business needs to deliver but don't need luxury to do business. This is Chinese thinking! This is the Chinese difference between what you need and what you can efford!

I agree with you to develop a good public transportation in every town. Excellent idea, just need to get action. Gil is waiting!.

These new safe nuclear power plants have been on the horizon for about 55 years but now we're taking another look; neat eh?

I think the new self contained disposable units are interesting, do you think they can be daisy chained for greater efficiency?

Please no theatrics or tossing wastes hither an yon into space...we don't know but we may find it useful someday.

Where's Roger Pink? Sometimes he's irascible at times but has a very disciplined mind and a measurably above average grasp of this subject.

I think the new self contained disposable units are interesting, do you think they can be daisy chained for greater efficiency?

Hi bWire,

What are you referring to specifically in this matter?

Have a look at the plant that Toshiba has designed and is in the process of trying to get approval for installation in Alaska...

Do you have a link to the relevant site(s) ?

Start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S

Toshiba also has some pretty detailed information on their site.

Hi Warner,

Did you ask Sarah Paline what's good or bad with the "laptop" maker Toshiba's design? Please, let us know the results. We stay impatient to know for the future, Gil.

After looking into these Hitachi 'micro nuclear power plants' while they have made some improvements in them, they still have the same VERY significant problem of all nuclear power generation up to this point in time: the very significant, dangerous radioactive remnants that cause DNA damage and as such are poisonous to all living matter that we have no realistic means of dealing with.

Hi Doug,

We have difficulties to catch some comments. After my simple mental catching ability (abilities): The unit(s) will be disposed before the start to work with it. It can be "self contained". It could be "self disposable". It can be new too. Finally it can be a "new self contained disposable" unit and "chained" like a slave to "greater efficiency".

This is like lawyers, politicians, and other crooks talk to everyone but do or realize absolutely nothing! It's beautifully said but no one have the brain to understand really.

I stay with you to catch all clear information supplies, Gil.

I hope that you are not attributing these statements to me, as I was not the one that made any of them.

After looking into these Hitachi ''micro' nuclear power plants' while they have made some improvements in them; they still have the same VERY significant problem of all nuclear power generation up to this point in time: the very significant, dangerous radioactive remnants that cause DNA damage and as such are poisonous to all living matter.

Right on. Welcome to CR4. Two posts and still batting 1.000. (There is an interesting thread here on this, but I'm spacing out on the title.)

There is an interesting thread here on this,

What about you Tornado?

What's your take on this subject?

We should be clear about the causes, however. Most people write it off to some combination of history and local circumstances. In fact there is only one cause: government.

While I agree with the points you make and the validity of them, it is an oversimplification and the problem and hence the solutions are considerably more complex than this.

There are many countries such as the US and Canada that do not fall directly into this category but whoser grids are badly overloaded and in need of considerable upgrades and the inclusion of new methods and technologies.

Hi Pe,

Every world organizations' publications are faulty. They said SARS will kill millions of humans but we have dead people only in hospitals, practically no one from the streets. They said the H1N1 flu virous will kill 20 million people. Where? On Mars? What's wrong with these highly paid people in those organizations? Oh! Some pharmaceuticals made profitable business with every country using the serums.

What it means this sentence? "Wealth enables employment of good long term planning and infrastructure that allow populations to grow without adverse environmental impacts". First, we have no ability to long-term planning because we cannot predict the future. Wealth allow to forget the rest of the world and act the way the wealthy wants, isn't it? Any growth has a big impact on the environment. When you build a plant, exploit a mine, or plan corn on hectars, you drastically modify the environment for humans, plants, and animals. It's not true?

I wait for better solutions, Gil.

Hello TVP,

Want to understand; What's "short-term problems? What's the short-term about nuclear or any other problems we encounter today?

You mention 30 years in the future. It's possible we will be not here at that date.

I was in China and I saw nothing after 50 metres because the pollution is so intense that you cry by the irritation of the yellowish gases in the air. In this town, over 4 million people living this daily inconviniences. From the hotel, from the 18th floor I was in the cloud, and never saw the threes, road, and people walking on the walkways. It can be the same here too.

Let me know, our government really plan for how many years in front or ahead? They have only two mandates to stay!

It's another "short-term problems", Gil.

Hi,

there is a cynical answer to the problem of severe pollution: this is the only way that works to stabilise human action and population density: by early death. (as in millions of years by nature).

There is a human answer: let us act - but we can't, governments won't let us go.

"... to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men... it is the right and the duty of the people to alter or to abolish them".

The same bad situation you described for Canada and the US is existing in western Europe too.

One solution: collapse of Atlantic civilisation? The wages may go to the geometric mean between the wages of Western-World and Bangla-Desh!

Another solution: real reforms! Not very likely, only possible at severest problems. Look at the historic examples: Solon of Athens, the Gracchen brothers in republican ancient Rome, Stein-Hardenberg in Napoleon-time Prussia. Anything else?

RHABE

Hi Rhabe,

Inherently, I am not against polluting people but after a certain period of time, we have to tell them to stop, and we can do that only the hard way. People know they do something wrong but don't want to talk about, so we have to radically change their behaviour and actions.

We will be around 9 billion within 10 to 15 years. The growth disease beat all statistical predictions. What do we do with those 9 billions? How we feed all of them, and I say reasonably? The agricultural lands are turned asphalt and cement covered areas, forests are cut down, the permafrost don't allow veggy and fruit growth, and water is become unuseable for most of the thing we want to do with or use it, drink, cook, and wash...

We created the nuclear but never turned into profitable. Every nuclear bomb we made, we expend lots of money to watch it, to spy on, and created small wars during the last 50 or so years.

The costs to correct Chernobyl and other accidents are higher than build 5 or 6 new facilities to produce electricity. We created nuclear but we cannot handle it, isn't it?

We talk again about the new technology but never exploit its possibilities to create a better life for humanity. Talk, talk but there are no actions. It's the same as meetings, open assemblies, government daily activities, senates and other costly but inefficient human activities.

Probably you're right by saying that half or more of humanity will disappear by some cataclysm in a near future, and we start over again with fresh ideas and actions. Again, it's a solution but we don't know if it's the best next.

Wait for the new nuclear plant and hope that the concrete will not cracks again, Gil.

Governments are relatively transitory things. Those in power now have been printing fiat currency to buy votes for decades, and the financial system turmoil we are now experiencing will probably result in their default or hyperinflation, leading to civil unrest and collapse of the government.

Government, by definition, is just a group of people we authorize to use deadly force. The only thing we really need it for is to protect us from other people who would use force or fraud. If we limit the next governments to that, the world will be a much better place, as technologies like nuclear will be freed from useless regulations and all power sources will be required to compensate for harm they cause. (See the book "Free Market Environmentalism").

Many people in democratic societies make the mistake of thinking that the government is there to provide 'freedom'. Though there is some validity to this, there primary purpose is to provide 'equality' and justice, primarily by limiting freedom! One only has to think about the various legal systems mandated and enforced by democratic governments. For example: everyone is not 'free' to kill anyone under the guise of 'freedom.' I purposely use this extreme example as it is very easy to readily relate and understand the validity of it.

Freedom is the 'watchword' and guiding principal for the cultural, spiritual, educational, artistic and religious and 'personal realms': 'The government has no place in the bedroom of adults. Whatever activities consenting adults want to carry out in private is entirely up to them.' Paraphrased from Pierre Elliott Trudeau. Former Prime Minister of Canada and constitutional lawyer.

The valid guiding principal for economics is 'co-operation'. This does NOT mean 'communism' whereby the government decides and controls these! Again governments role is to provide equality, fair play, justice and public safety in the market place. The marketplace co-operates to maximize and optimize the efficiencies of the many complex factors involved in it.

See Rudolf Steiner's 'ThreeFold Social Order'

Hi Rhabe,

Your solutions have some problems. First, the "collapse of Atlantic civilisation" is only a partial solution. The second, the "real reforms" is not possible. Reality doesn't exist, just dreams. We never arrived to the final point of anything. Something collapsed before the end!

How you get your electricity today and in the future? Wind solar panels are catching natural energy supplied by Sun or wind which we will have all the time. It's not very important because it's simple. We need complicated thinks that could be criticized later on.

Nuclear? It's complicated and risky! Solar radiation capture and use of wind are simple and easily feasible. Let me know your thoughts about, Gil.

Hi Gil Becker,

"collapse of Atlantic civilisation"

you are right, this would be only a partial solution, if it is any solution.

I assume, that if there would be a major collapse in one of the industrialised states then there would be severe consequences for whole the world.

But as with the black plague the catastrophic illness caused a subsequent wealth and boom. There may be winners of a collapse: those that survive and have bigger markets and an economy that is not totally incapacitated.

Wind: we do not have enough places in Europe where wind may be harvested, and the better sites offshore are plagued by high cost of construction, maintenance and cabling. Sun: not at all competitive except in some few situations.

Nuclear: complicated yes, but may be less complicated in the future. Risky - the new ones I don't know but any actively controlled instruments/machines may go mad.

So I prefer totally the heavy water moderated and light water cooled reactors that are intrinsically safe from the principles. I share this insight with a friend that was actively involved in reactor neutron distribution calculations and fuel yield calculations and other similar topics.

But I fear that the world will be dominated by the big power-players of GE, Siemens, Areva and Rosatom - with a much inferior concept and a new ultra-bad experience of nonfunctional cooperation between Siemens and Areva at sharing the construction of the new reactor in Finland that is now under construction.

At the same time I am convinced that oil and gas will be available for much longer time than we are told today - there are oilfields still productive that had been predicted to be exhausted in 1908.

Technology will give some more extraction rate and unusual sites will give some new fields as the newly found deep-water fields off Brazil and Texas to Mexico. And methane-hydrate mining will come into use not too far in the future.

RHABE

Hi Rhabe,

Thanks for your interesting reply! When I finished to read your comment, you gave me negative impulses. There is no known and/or viable and/or economical solutions to the energy problem we have, and above all, for the future?!

If we cannot produce more what's wrong with the idea of use less? Have you any suggestion about reduction of energy use in the near or far future? If you have, I will be patient and wait for it. Thanks again for your collaboration, Gil.

In the short term, nuclear is important, but not a panacea.

I agree with you that for much of the population of Earth just staying alive day to day is 'Job One' A sad but true indicative situation as we currently DO have the food required to feed everyone.

For these poverty stricken nations building, operating and maintaining a nuclear power plant by themselves is totally unrealistic for the foreseeable future.

Is regards to 'nuclear being a short term panacea' I tend to view it the other way around. We are talking about mega projects that take a substantially amount of time, energy, money and resources which many nations do not have. They safe process of breeder nuclear reactors hasn't even gotten out of the laboratories yet, let alone all of the things mentioned above needed to have working breeder reactors widely 'OnLine'

Let me be perfectly clear about one thing here: I do not in any way agree with and will not in any way support the usage of any other types of the existing devastating, dangerous and deadly nuclear power plants anywhere. Most defiantly not in our back yard, which is being considered here for the first time to aid the mining and refining of the massive Athabasca tar sands reserves.

Of course 'short term' is quite relative.

In this instance, I am addressing immediate needs of many people of the world. It is obvious that there is no 'one size fits all' solution. The current 'oil based' geo-economic scenario is one of the impetuses driving the demand for alternative energy sources. The needs of both high density technologically advanced nations as well as the extremely poor ones on the other end of the spectrum are both likewise driving forces behind this as well.

Then there is the devastating reality of the fact that humanities economic driven, industrial, technological and scientific based activates have completely poisoned our planet for all living things.

Power generation is just one of many such contributing problems. Regardless of if the power is for personal, domestic, transportation, economic or industrial usage and applications. Alas most of these all add significant detrimental environmental factors.

One thing that is VERY CLEAR to me is the urgency of our situation. We are beginning to widely address the dire consequences of the environmental impact, especially of our 'technologically advanced' segments of our planet. It is not an insignificant factor that most of the impoverished peoples of our world understandably want to live the same way that they can now readily see and are aware of what and how the 'wealthy (but mostly bankrupt) industrialized nations of the world live.

I meant it quite literally that 'Survival IS job ONE' for life on our entire planet RIGHT NOW as the title of this thread.

We can no longer afford to have this at the bottom of the priority list and only attempt to deal with it as ancillary activity when it is 'convenient and economical for us to 'get around to it''.

It is ALREADY 'too little to late'.

Are we really that blinded to reality and stupid that we are just going to ignore this until such time as it DIRECTLY devastatingly affects us? Especially for the nations that still have the resources and technology to make some serious amending actions and try to at least 'save some of the patients' while we still can.

That we are not all already globally united and totally and completely focused on and in critical 'damage control' mode is almost unfathomable.

Here our 'rocket scientist' provincial premier has just announced that they are reducing the already pitifully small royalties that the people of Alberta that own these resources will get from the oil & energy companies mining the Athabasca tar sands because the little bit that they raised them has caused the corporations to 'cut back' a little and thus reduced 'immediate revenues' from them. He is already talking about reducing the currently inadequate pollution control standards by 2/3 for the Athabasca tar sands for 'immediate economic gratification!' More of the 'not on my watch' devastating denial, mentality and damaging deadly delaying actions.

FYI: We have already had numerous eco-terrorists bombings of oil installations here in the northern part of our province where the Athabasca tar sands are also located. They have recently resumed with the message that they will continue until such time as all oil (related) activates in the area are completely and permanently halted.

What WILL it take for us to realize that we are now already in the position of rapid global devastation for us to react accordingly and appropriately?

As with all life in nature including us it is literally 'survival of the fittest.' If we aren't 'fit and apt enough' to respond accordingly to the global extinction that is already underway, then we will all be whipped out as opposed to most of us. We are already currently on an irreversible track to most if not all life on our planet being extinct within a millennium as a very optimistic estimate.

Thank you for the reply. Do you have any good links to the environmental impact of the Athabasca tar sands extraction? We are considering similar projects in the US, and I don't have enough information to know which side I'm on.

Hi TVP,

First let me thank you for your participation. You are making significant contributions here.

I always get a good chuckle over your 'signature byline'. Alas it is all to true and applies to most of humanity.

Do you have any good links to the environmental impact of the Athabasca tar sands extraction?

There are lots of them. I suggest going to Google.CA and enter the name in and you will find many of them. There is also the website: www.CanadasOilsands.CA This is a direct quote from their home page:

"(Oil) is like heroin. It feels good and seems right at first but you get addicted and in the end it kills you – unless you have the will to force yourself off at some point."

Concerned Canadian, October 4, 2009

Though I get 'roasted' here regularly as it IS an engineering site and I do not 'do the math' and 'crunch the numbers' unless I have the direct personal need of doing so for a specific project that I am actually doing and thus have the immediate need for it. Unfortunately this also tends to minimize the credibility of my postings and results in getting what I feel is important input dismissed which is unfortunate. But I am what I am and we all have our roles to play. They are not all the same and regardless of some of the opinions of me here because of this, I am very clear that my role and input has significant validity and importance. Somebody has to 'stir things up' and play the role of attracting more attention, participation and input to such important matters.

If you do find some in your research, would you kindly post them here for others that may be interested in them as well?

Perhaps you (we?) should consider a thread dedicated to it? Though I have to be frank in that as a 'multi-disciplinarian' along with other factors in my life my time, energy and resources are already overloaded. I started this thread because of the dire situation we are in and the significant potential of these breeder reactors. Though my approach to this is more of being one of the participants in it as opposed to being the 'captain' here. I realize that it does require some ongoing input from me and as such am endeavoring to fulfill this task because of the vital importance and high priority of it in our present world and in its impact in our immediate future. I am planning on turning my writing and communication efforts to a much wider audience utilizing many more public media outlets as well as other scientific venues. I will be publishing this thread as a source of information and addressing these issues. I would likewise do the same with threads and blogs dedicated to the specifics of unique 'tar sands' resources and the implications involved with them.

These types of resource harvesting IS a quite a substantial endeavor with serious issues at stake with many significant factors and there are a lot of unique pros and cons to it that are unique because of the unusual and specific nature of these types of petro chemical reserves.

I can give you some information on it though. I have posted most of these in other threads here, but I'm sure you are very aware that my postings are verbose and lengthy and as such it is quite likely that many including yourself do not read them all in their entirety. Thus quickly skim over the ones that you have already encountered.

Firstly they have been know about for over a century by us 'new inhabitants': most of which initially were immigrants of European origins. There were also quite a sizable portion of Ukrainian settlers here because of the relative political situations for them within the USSR and here. The first nations peoples of this area have known about them for thousands of years and they primarily used these tar sands as effective sealants for their canoes.

There name is indicative of their significant difference in comparison to most petroleum reserves. Thus I have spoken about them as being 'mined'. A term not usually applied to the extraction of petroleum resources. There consistency is that of putty, and as is common with many such things, temperature does influence there state of rigity and flexibility. As their name indicates, the oil is thoroughly mixed in with sand. One of the means of mining these deposits is by what in appearances is very similar to a huge heavy duty 'Ferris wheel' Each of the buckets on the wheel are large enough to fit a modern large two story house including the basement into a single bucket! Its functionality and construction is very similar to traditional trenching machines though this one has had vast quantities of steroids making it gargantuan in comparison to most trenching machines.

There were no serious attempts to extract the oil form them in spite of the fact that they are 'surface deposits' that don't require drilling as much as a couple of a miles down in deep oil wells. This is due to the additional processes and thus expense to separate the oil which is in more of a 'solid state' rather than liquid form that oil is usually extracted in and thus readily flows through pipelines which the tar sand most definitely will not when in the initial form that they are mend and extracted. There are numerous plants both in Fort McCurry which is a highly overloaded, rapidly growing perennial 'boom town' along with all of the challenges that come with such urban centers settlement. There is also 'upgrader alley' which is a likewise rapidly expanding small city undergoing almost constant 'boom times' as well just north east of Edmonton that performs the initial process of separating the heavy oil from the sand.

One option that was considered about 50 years ago when our provincial government poured massive amounts of money into 'jump starting' the resource harvesting, was to sink a nuclear bomb into them and set it off to warm it up and make separating the oil from the sand much easier, even though this would result in the extracted oil containing much more radioactivity than it inherently contains.

With the down turn in the global economy along with the raising of royalty rates from virtually nothing to miniscule which they are now planning to reduce them again as the revenue from them has dropped off from these factors and thus reap more immediate economic gratification. Again: the complete focus on the immediate rather than acting on any long term planning in order to win the next political 'popularity contest' and thus retain power. Given the very substantial amounts of money.

As with most petrochemical processing, there are numerous by products. With most of them being liquid, it is easier to keep them contained and move them. This is not the case with tar sands initially. BTW the provincial government here is trying to 'rebrand them' as the 'Athabasca OIL sands' for obvious reasons. In and around upgrader alley in the small city Fort Saskatchewan just NE of Edmonton, they have what is likely millions of tons/tonnes that has been brought in by train stockpiled awaiting processing. They try to keep them covered to minimize the petrochemical runoff from precipitation, but…….

One significant 'problem' that they have is that once the oil is separated from the sand, the sand takes up 10 TIMES more volume than it did when bound up with the oil! As they estimate that the tar sands covers approximately 25% of the area of Alberta, this is going to literally amount to a very big and challenging problem. The whole area eventually be one huge elevated sub-arctic desert, though by then it will likely be a tropical desert like most on earth are. Sand is readily dispersed by the wind so….

In the north western part of the province where there is a conventional oil and gas field, there has been eco terrorists blowing up oil installations. There had been a hiatus for a couple of years while the man convicted of it was in jail but he is out now and they have resumed. Our national police service, the RCMP recently made a raid and a very extensive search on their communal compound and took him in for questioning, but it has turned up nothing. There has been information that the bombings will continue up until the time that all oil and gas activity in the area permanently shut down. You can draw your own conclusions about that.

The incidence of asthma in Alberta is higher than the national norm and there are segments where the cancer rate is higher. It is ironic that there is currently a trial going on from an incident about a year ago where a flock of ducks landed on one of the many tailings ponds in and around the processing plants in Fort McMurray and many of them died. This drew attention from the international media that resulted in 'negative press' and impressions around the world. More than the many other considerable impacts and implications of these huge tar sands which are currently considered to be the largest known oil reserves outside of the OPEC nations.

I hadn't heard of any tar sands in the US before. Can you supply more information on these?

Regards,

Doug

We don't have tar sands, but we have shale with oil and gas and the usual talking point is that, "Canada gets all that oil out of the tar sands without any problems, why should we worry about oil shale?" I'm pretty sure we'll have to do it. I just hope we don't screw up half the water supplies in the process.

….but we have shale with oil and gas

All most all underground oil deposits are not large pockets of underground oil lakes. It is usually found disbursed in permeable layers such as you are speaking of. I'm not sure if they even are any 'underground' lakes of it at all. If so they are very rare.

"Canada gets all that oil out of the tar sands without any problems, why should we worry about oil shale?"

Who ever made that statement most definitely does not know what they are talking about.

Before my father got into provincial politics full time, he was responsible for all of Imperial Oil's production in Alberta from Edmonton north as well as all of the NorthWest Territories where they have very significant reserves as well. Edmonton is pretty well right in the center of the province geographically and most of the oil fields are in the central and northern part of our province. Imperial oil has been a very major player from the beginning of oil extraction here. In the North Eastern part of the province, very close to the Alberta - Saskatchewan border and South East of Fort McMurray there is a place called 'Cold Lake' which has a major military base there, primarily AirForce. A lot of your best military pilots train there in their very highly ranked 'Top Gun' program. The name of the lake is an apt one: large, deep, clear and cold by Alberta standards. There are also 'Heavy Oil' reserves there that is considerably thicker than the best '(texas) light sweet crude' which makes it much more difficult to extract because as I said, in most instances it is in millions of microscopic pockets and pores or in all of the tiny cracks in layers of shale such as you are referring to; as opposed to just drilling down to the 'oil lake' and then it's all good to go all by itself..NOT!

I remember going up to Cold Lake with my father one time when I was quite young. He told me that Imperial Oil started building up the Oil Field and refinery about 25 years previous. He was up there because after 25 years of constant work and R&D along with huge sums of money, they finally were producing enough oil to fire their own boilers in there refinery!

The Tar sands were known about for at least half a century before any oil mining activity started up in the Athabasca Tar sands. This is because of the difficulty and the expense that goes along with it that made it such that it was not profitable to mine it prior to that period in spite of the fact that it is 'on the surface' it is considerably more expensive to produce. Again, it is not the top quality light sweet crude that goes for the highest price.

Also the Alberta Research Council in conjunction with a number of Oil and Gas firms spent decades working on it in the labs before they finally came up with a way to separate the oil from the sand at a production level and 'reasonably' cheap. But it is still much more expensive than having to drill down miles to get it even though they are currently doing surface 'open pit mining' at the tar sands.

This is a much more realistic picture, process and scenario than the statement you passed along.

Drilling for and extracting Oil from shale deposits is a very mature process with a LOT of experience behind it.

Being in the US it is very likely that they will have very stringent standards to adhere to like we do here. There was a time that most of the crews on most of the actual drilling rigs were mostly drunk most of the time, including while they were working! )< 8( But this has long since passed. Which is a very good thing as drilling is no simple straight forward and easy task most of the time and is inherently quite dangerous. Especially for the roughnecks that work on the floor of the derrick changing the pipe. The top person on the rig crew is the 'Tool Push' and he is the one that is manning and operating the controls that actually do all of the drilling and pulling the pip to change the bits etc that can be thousands of feet below the surface. The best tool pushes and the good ones are VERY highly paid for doing what is considered to be 'manual labor.'

All drilling in and around here and I'm quite certain in the US now all have 'blow out preventers (BOP)' in case they do end up with a blow out that would otherwise be spouting huge quantities of oil and gas into the area. There is no 'yippee' when the oil is spouting up hundreds of feet in the air when they strike crude like you see in old movies. In many cases there is no pressure to force it up and this is where you see the 'rocking horse' oil pumps that work on the same principals and way that a water pump in a well does. In such cases they often pump various liquids down into the well, especially at late stages to force more of the oil out that allows them to capture a higher portion of the existing oil.

FYI: there are some existing wells in oilfileds both here and in Saskatchewan that have been pumping CO2 into the ground specifically for this purpose. So in these cases it's not just a 'wild, stupid and wasteful' process that is just wasting huge sums of money. It only makes sense, including economically including to sequester of the CO2 deep underground is now. It's a 'win – win' process in these circumstances.

These BOPs are likewise a mature piece of equipment with VERY strict regulations made to very exacting tolerances. I did the machining on quite a number of them that were both being newly manufactured as well as ones being rebuilt and repaired. Like many things in the oil field, they are quite expensive. So when I ruined one I was 'shown to the door'.

These BOPs are constructed such that they automatically kick in and seal the blow out off at ground level if one occurs.

Any drilling done for gas and oil are now required to have BOPs at the top of the well by law.

I hope this information assists you.

What state is it in? Where is the location?

if they have a blowout.

Using CO2 to enhance oil extraction was NOT what I was referring to in my post about "wild, stupid and wasteful schemes". What I was referring to was the sort of project such as the one at a power plant in Illinois where more money is being spent on a scheme to sequester CO2 from a coal-powered plant, refine it, and then pump it into special wells intended to store it for millennia. The amount of money being invested in this project is very close to what it would cost to build a new nuclear facility to replace the coal-fired one. Using CO2 to enhance oil extraction is not a wild, stupid and wasteful scheme- it is proven technology. I am not sure it uses sufficient quantities of the gas to have a significant impact on overall atmospheric CO2 content, however...

No worries,

My posting that you are refereeing to had nothing to do with your postings on various ways of improving on powered technology while minimizing environmental damage.

It was in response to TVP45's query about gathering up more data to decide where 'he 'stands' on oil extraction that they are considering in his region. So the posting you are referring to was in no way a response to yours on CO2 sequestering, so please don't take it as such.

From your description it most definitely doesn't sound like a financially optimum approach to the problem to be sure. I think that CO2 can be PART of the solution and that there is a place for it, but as we see here, as with most things in our world; they are quite complex and multifaceted and all things have to be considered and try to come up with the best solution that fits the unique circumtances. I'm in 'Oil country' so it's a natural here where we already have thousands of wells drilled. Many of them just caped off as they are depleted. Or the flow rate and volume was too low to make them economical. In some case there is very little oil left, but in some cases half of the oil is still left in the reserve. In these cases reactivating them and pumping CO2 in to get more oil out at the same time makes sense, both economically and ecologically. Even in cases where the oil is virtually all depleted, it's fairly cost effective to open them up and pump CO2 into them as they already exist and the VERY expensive part has already been done. That certainly doesn't sound like the situation in your area.

In the instances where they are pumping other substances down the well to extract more Oil, it is a natural. Traditionally they use salt water here that in many cases they have extracted along with the oil and gas. In other cases they are using above ground water which is becoming more scarce which is likewise a waste of water as we are most definitely 'land locked' here and our rivers that in many cases are thousands of miles long and are supporting life along their entire length and are primarily sourced from snow, ice and glacial fields that are rapidly disappearing. So using CO2 is likewise a smarter and more sustainable method than pumping VERY significant volumes of water underground and taking it out of the life supporting systems on the surface. So the CO2 makes sense in these situations. But as you say, that doesn't mean it makes sense under the circumstances you are addressing.

Regards,

Doug

PS: I have seen quite a number of such misunderstandings here including ones that I have gotten caught up in because of taking a posting to be in response to a comment that it is not. I use the sequential, chorological listings work better for me. Especially with this being 'my thread' and thus having some responsibility to its upkeep and continuations, a task which I am more than happy to share with others BTW. Thus I think it will make things better for everyone if we try to be more aware of and 'following the thread' as opposed to unknowingly getting crossed over onto a different one. This is no personal attack on you. I've seen it numerous times and have done it myself numerous times as well. Just taking the opportunity to make this suggestion.

I think I'm going to try the other listings method again for a while where the comments are grouped by threads instead.

I believe I mistook / misunderstood the initial part of your posting on the time frames in my previous response. I to pointed out that these new safer, more efficient breeder nuclear power plants, which are the ONLY ones that I will support, are a ways off yet and as we have both pointed out there are wide ranging immediate needs and the numerous alternative solutions arising that don't require the intensive, extensive and expensive measures that these breeder reactors will require in order for them to be brought online are vital.

On February 24, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) announced that it had removed Saudi Arabia from the Special 301 Watch List as a result of the Kingdom's progress in the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR).

What do you forsee being the impact of this?

Removal of an impediment to trade.

Breeder reactors are very efficient and if we're going to use nukes in this country they should be breeders. I believe the projected waste from EBR2 was one cubic meter of pure plutonium after 40 years of operation. You can't beat that with any water reactor...we've all seen the amount of waste from those rods. Three percent of the fuel is burned and we store the rest. Plutonium has a 24,000 year half-life.

If this country turns to nuke power generators we should start reprocessing as well. To generate the kind of waste that water reactors do and not reprocess is completely irresponsible. Similar to our filling landfills with newspapers and plastic bottles.

Hi Doug,

Congratulations! I wish it will happen that way. Well said and I would like to add a few remarques.

80% of human population want to get to our level of standard of life and they do everything to arrive to target, including giant waste production, awful pollution, extremely bad eating habit through imitation, and many other excesses.

The 20% getting older and older, and don't care by saying: I will be not here for the "fatal moment"! We also vote old people to direct us and they are not willing to change the world because it's convenient for them.

You and me, we cannot do nothing other than exchanging few smart and disruptive words but without results. Sorry! Don't take for negative. I would like to make better things than I did during my life but it's hard and expensive. Just an example, I make waterbourne sealers and stains and my heating bill, I stay in Toronto, Canada, and need to maintain my shop at 10*C and plus year round with close to 4.2% of my total revenue. So, the cost of maintaining alive my business with solvent containing product will be much less, I can add for 2 to 3% compensation for insurance with solvents.

If I am a half billion dollar business, the interests of the company will stay with solvent for profits.

My business is small and I stay with non-polluting products!

It's hard to act because each individual is alone, Gil.

It's hard to act because each individual is alone, Gil.

Hi Gil,

That is a important point and purpose of this thread: you are NOT alone in this. We are legions and the ranks of our 'Green' (spiritual) warriors' in the defense of our Mother Earth Gaia and are growing at an ever-increasing pace. This thread is meant to do this as well.

It is also meant to inform, motivate, and to provide support for people such as yourself and bring about helpful constructive activates including getting as many people involved with this as this is what it will take to really turn this around as quickly as possible and get the level of activates doing 'damage control' significantly increased.

My business is small and I stay with non-polluting products!

Thanks Gil!

Such things do make a difference and if enough people do it all adds up and can and does make significant differences.

Do you 'Brand' your products?

Are you actively utilizing and featuring the fact that your products ARE more environmentally friendly that many of your competitors in your marketing and sales materials? This IS a selling feature that is becoming more and more important and bringing back better returns because people are starting to be willing to spend a little more if they can do the things they need to get done while minimizing the negative ecological impact.

If you are NOT prominently utilizing these techniques I strongly recommend that you do so.

Product 'branding'

Also try and track down such information and promotional sources including listing them on the internet yourself and featuring the fact that your products are more ecologically friendly.

You may find commercial and industrial, wholesalers, customers and distributors that are strongly orientated to more environmental products that may readily feature and promote your products because of this.

Are you aware that you can readily get very significant free advertising primarily in print media such as newspapers and magazines that you couldn't possibly afford by using 'press releases'? This is a technique that I have utilized numerous times in the past and works very well and is effective.

Product 'branding!'

Another free promotional activity that you can engage in is to became a 'expert consultant' in various mediums that you regularly appear in and provide answers and information to those that need this. You can become quite widely know with this method and brings you a lot of free, wide exposure. This is effective in many forms of media.

All of these things can increase your sales enough that you come out ahead and more than recoup your extra expenditures to make 'green' products.'

Thanks for your commitment, contributions, and dedication to following through on these and making a less ecologically harmful line of products.

Good luck to you and as the Azys say: 'Gud on ya mate!'

Oh yes: did I mention 'Product Branding'? (< 8)

DougRH-

Are you aware that the "Green" label has been so completely abused and misused, that it is no longer meaningful? If I see something marketed as "Green", I turn away, because I know it is going to be more expensive, and the claim to beining environmentally friendly is most likely a real stretch of reality. Environmentally Friendly- USE LESS. And plant trees...

Are you aware that the "Green" label has been so completely abused and misused, that it is no longer meaningful?

Yes I am. It would be good and should fall under government regulations and standards so that it isn't just 'white wash' and rendered meaningless.

I also find it ironic that so many of us equate (plant) life with 'green'. Most leaves of plants are green because the plants are UNABLE to utilize this part of the sun's spectrum and thus reflects it and absorbs as much of the other parts of the light spectrum as they can.

Did you know that the phenomenon of the 'fronts or tops' of leaves turning towards the sun is actually caused by the bottom of them turning AWAY from the sunshine and 'staying in the shade.'

Another such occurrence is the 'Omega 3' content advertized in foods now. There is such a minute amount of Omega 3 in most of these foods that one would have to consume dozens or even hundreds of time the normal helping in order to take in enough Omega 3 for it to be useful.

Hi Warner,

I understand that all "qualifiers" as ISO-...., no-VOC, Green something, environmentally friendly are "useless". Every company started with ideas that means good for the Planete but achieved nothing or very little commercially.

What kind of tree have to plant? Did you plant by yourself? Yes or no?

What was your latest action to make a better environment?

I wait for the first economic and safe or safer nuclear plant to produce electricity but everyone talks about but no action. Could you help me to push people to build the first? I ask you to help, Gil.

That is a important point and purpose of this thread: you are NOT alone in this. We are legions and the ranks of our 'Green' (spiritual) warriors' in the defense of our Mother Earth Gaia and are growing at an ever-increasing pace. This thread is meant to do this as well.

You're all being played like a fiddle...

What was Mik said...

I invite you to this link http://www.rense.com/general12/gobie.htm

Seriously? The Web site of a conspiracy theorist and anti-Semite?

Yeah pity eh? But the Author of the article would not be categorized as such and the information is in context and factual.

Though I will not vouch for the parent site...

"Even a blind chicken gets a piece of corn once in a while."

OK. I was worried about you for a minnit, there.

Hi Sue,

Don't worry! Life in general and the story of the Planet will be made without you and me. Cool down and enjoy the present!

Did you talk to your constituent about the new and safe nuclear plant? If you did, please let us know, Gil.

That is a important point and purpose of this thread: you are NOT alone in this. We are legions and the ranks of our 'Green' (spiritual) warriors' in the defense of our Mother Earth Gaia and are growing at an ever-increasing pace. This thread is meant to do this as well.

You're all being played like a fiddle...

I'm not sure who or what you are referring to here bWire, but you are quoting me!

I'm not anyone's 'dupe' or 'mouthpiece.' Life on this planet is in DEEP trouble. We are in the 'fight of our lives.' Literally: for life itself. Anyone that thinks otherwise at this point in time is either in deep denial, which most of humanity excels at. Ignorant of the hundreds of different scientific studies and results that clearly point this out, or are being duped and 'played like a fiddle' and/or quite likely all of the above.

I knew you couldn't see...

we're not in control of the planet

Hello Bwire,

I agree with Doug's comment. We work on! The Planet can be controlled. Was controlled up to now, isn't it? Just we have to collaborate a little and not escaping from responsibilities we all have. This is a note from, Gil.

Hardly,

I see quite clearly that we are but one part of a VERY broad, comprehensive, multifaceted, intimately intertwined and symbiotic system that are ultimately dwarfed in comparison and are not in control of the planet.

This does not however discount the fact that we are way out of balance and have had and are having devastating effects on all life here.

The planet, and life will ultimately survive us .

But we ARE way out of proportion and balance and have sewed massive damage and devastation on it and are a threat to all life at this point in time and situation.

Do you really think that the scope and scale of our irresponsible activates carried out without the wisdom to properly understand the effects on it that have poisoned it for all living things.

The US chemical society has over a million manmade chemicals on the books that never existed in nature that are all manmade. Less than 1% of them have been tested to know and understand the true impact of them. The VERY minor portion that there has been some testing on was very limited and only tested on a few insignificant other compounds in isolation in comparison to the 'real world' where the rest of life exists in, let alone out in the VERY complex environment that we have released them into where there are millions of different permutations and combinations of reactions that we have no real knowledge of their impact, let alone how to cope with the devastation.

I agree that we take the view of and are much more important in the scheme of things in our own minds and egos than we truly are. If you are in such denial that you can see nothing but a rose colored garden flourishing and being nurtured by us and take no responsibility for it, thus likewise have no sense of responsibility or the immorality of poisoning and destroy countless other life forms on our home.

Can you really honestly say that we have not had nor are having any detrimental effects of life on the only home that we have?

Undoubtedly the huge increase in cancer is only part of the 'natural process' and is entirely unrelated to any of humanities activities?

The ozone depletion. The rate of extinction of species on our planet that makes the ~ 250,000 years that it took for the dinosaurs along with 90% of the rest of life on our planet to be exterminated that scientists say was so rapid and radical that is was revolution and not evolution. In comparison to the current rate of species extinctions on our planet now from humanity that is oh so smart but completely oblivious or void of enough wisdom to wield such power and that makes the previous mass extinction look like paradise in comparison.

Countless species reproductive organs being distorted from the quantity of hormones and hormone mimicking chemicals in the environment.

A rationalization so that you can be 'comfortable' because you and the rest of humanity are 'powerless' so we bear no responsibility to and for it. This is just shallow delusional denial to abdicate the responsibility for the devastation that we have wrought and continue to do so. What do you think the millions of initiatives all over our planet in very late desperation to salvage some life here are for? Are all of those involved in such things just blind misguided fools that have all been hornswagled? If you want to see such persons. Look in the mirror!

Do you have offspring that you will be passing this 'Garden of Eden' that we have been taken such good care of and will be passing this paradise along to them that you can honestly say to them that we have been good Sheppard's and guardians of it and are passing it on to those that come after us that we have left it in better shape that we found it in?

It would seem so, as your grasp of the situation is not even up to the level of saccharin fairy tales: most of which are 'morality tales' which likewise you are apparently oblivious to.

Just where is it and what sort of naive isolated fantasy existence that is oblivious to such things do you live in?

This is just shallow delusional denial to abdicate the responsibility for the devastation that we have wrought.

Energy and Power requires a multifaceted approach.

Hi All,

I'm wanting to read everything and respond, but am snowed under. But spring is on the horizon, even in the great white north!

'Talk Amoungst YourSelves' LoL (< 8)

I want to get hold of that scientific American article about breeder reactors as they are talking about building the first nuclear power plant in Alberta for the Athabasca tar sands and use that article along with any other (concise) information on this topic as the foundation and get some articles into the media, and to activists and governments.

Also the federal government backed nuclear power plant R&D and production and sales entity: The CANDU ("CANada Deuterium Uranium") reactor is deeply in debt, currently accomplishing nothing being shut down. It should have its mandate altered to pursue these neutron breed reactors.

Up until the advent of these next generation breeder reactors I and most people understandably were VERY adamantly against them as it was basically suicidal for the planet.

I'm wanting to get an Alberta & Canadian awareness & lobbying campaign in high gear about this. These breeder reactors and Fusion finally getting into the ball park changes the whole scenario. There is understandably a very large portion of sensible people that quite rightly were dead set (I use this term intentionally) against them for good reason. I was very much the same for my whole life up until I learned about these neutron breeder reactors. We need to start doing everything that we can to change the awareness of this and enroll as many people as possible to create the political will to make these safe, sensible breeder reactors a VERY high priority, with fusion being likewise a secondary high priority and get them operational ASAP

I understand we need more immediate, but the breeder reactor program can be significantly increased with the will and pressure to do so. Though not fast enough considering the predicament we are in.

In the '80s I was a volunteer for several years in an awareness campaign sourced by Buckminster Fuller and Werner Erhard called the hunger project. We were a VERY effective organization. We had fortune 500 companies studying our SOP. By the end of the 1980s, there were ~ 50 nations on earth that from the end of WW2 went from their primary concern being that of feeding their people to by an large overcoming this and moving up the economic, cultural societal scale. Not all directly from The Hunger Project of course, but it only awareness that consolidates political will that makes these thing happen. We have enough food to feed everyone, for now. That currently isn't the problem. Another very well documented effect of societies moving beyond and out of the starvation zone is that the birth rate drops off dramatically. Another vital issue that NEEDS to happen VERY quickly.

It is the same with energy: all we have to do is capture 1% of the suns energy that shines on the Earth and harness it and we will have enough energy for everyone.

I saw one example that was brilliant in its simplicity and ingenuity that provided heat for a family in Asia living completely without any of the modern infrastructure of technological societies. It was used primarily for cooking, but was also used for light and space heating. They dug a large deep circular pit just outside their stone/earthen hut/home. All of the manure from their livestock and themselves went into it. They had a large heavy gauge clear plastic cover that covered it and was sealed by very low tech: pilling dirt, rocks etc around most of the perimeter and leaving a small section open of easily for adding to it. It produces methane. There was a clear flexible plastic hose about 1 cm ~ 0.5" ID that came off of it and went in through a window into the house. They had a simple gas burner with a couple of feet of no flammable tubing and a simple stop cock on it which they attached to the gas hose. When they wanted to use it, someone went outside and put a good sized rock on top of the plastic cover providing a little pressure. Where I live, it can be -40 in winter, but in the middle of a compost heap it can be as high as 165 degrees Fahrenheit. With proper measures it is quite likely they could keep the methane production going through winter as well when they really need i the most.

A few years ago someone won the $75,000 USD Rolex prize for a low tech, cheap 'refrigerator' with no moving parts that can be made virtually anywhere by anyone at VERY little or no cost. Virtually all refrigerators, freezers and heat pumps work by harnessing the energy of a phase change: typically between the liquid and vapor states. This is no different, though it is 'passive' and requires no moving parts or addition of energy. They are two very large fired clay bowls with no glazing on them. The intended market is the desert. If possible, both bowls are soaked in water for a couple of days and become saturated with water. The largest bowl is placed in a (sand) pit, preferably in the shade if possible, with the lip just above ground level. The smaller bowl is about 2" ~ 5 cm smaller in diameter. They put some sand in the bottom of the larger buried bowl and then place the smaller one in on top of about 1" ~ 2.5 cm of sand. The space between the 2 bowls is filled with sand and then water is poured into it the sand filled space and the entire gap is filled with water and then they put a cloth over it to cover it and keep it clean. As the water slowly evaporates, it cools the bowls and the content of the large inner bowl and they have a cheap, effective low tech 'refrigerator' that costs nothing to operate, just like the low tech methane production unit.

Many years ago, some techies: engineers, scientists etc got together and designed an optimal wood stove utilizing modern technology and science. Likewise it is made out of unglazed clay and fired. Again, something that can be reproduced readily with no high tech equipment required and optimizes wood fires for cooking and heating.

In India where there are smaller remote communities that like most are near a water source but where not being properly 'built up and cared for. They have a hydrology Engineer that goes around to these communities and gets the people involved and with his assistance he helps them design and construct a proper dam, etc that optimizes it and provides maxim benefits for the village. A key difference is that the village OWNS the dam as oppose to it being a position and responsibility of a remote government that does not have the resources to build, keep, maintain and repair them as needed. Because it is the villages, they take responsibility and take good care of it and do all required and upkeep and repairs to it on an ongoing basis as is needed rather than letting it fall apart all the while grumbling and understandably disgruntled that the government is not taking care of their water supply that they rely on for their very lives.

Another such example of the difference that the resources being owned by and responsible for it as is their own and thus look after it and take proper and better care of it is a country in the south west of the former USSR. Prior to becoming communist, it was a net exporter of agricultural products. Most of the agricultural land and resources became 'property of the state' and the farmers were now employees of the state that paid them for working on these large communal farms. Thus if the crops were lying rotting in the field and there shift was over, they left it and went home. Even our primarily urban population in industrialized nations realize that when things need done on a farm; the farmer and whatever help they have are out there doing it when it needs to be done: regardless!

When the farm lands were taken from the farmers, they were all given a good sized garden to compensate them. It didn't take long before these relatively small gardens in comparison to the large state owned farms were producing more than the bulk of the agricultural lands that no longer belonged to them and that they were not directly responsible for.

A man in his early middle age from an industrialized western society made a trip to Asia. While he was there in their large high population density urban centers he could hardly breathe for the massive amounts of pollution. A significant amount of it came from the very prevalent low quality 2 stroke motor bikes and small motorcycles that were everywhere constantly in use. He designed a kit for $50 ~ $75 that converts them to direct fuel injection right into the cylinder which improved their efficiency appreciably and greatly reduced their pollution.

These are just a couple of examples of very creative ways utilizing modern advanced science and technological knowledge can be harnessed and utilized in low tech ways in poorer countries that can make a cumulative significant difference while minimizing ecological damage.

Alternative power sources are coming online at an ever increasing pace. One can't just look at the current cost effectiveness and only use that as a measuring stick for decision making. We need to make the investment in sustainable energy and we see it happening all around us.

I have an energy storage system method that is especially applicable to wind farms and to a lesser extent solar cells, or for any other power generation source for that matter and will start another thread about it.

Democracy is the best we have so far, but is the pits for long term planning. Most politicians with any sense and awareness about the reality of the situation are mostly doing the 'not on my watch' song and dance.

Some say that 'raising awareness and consciousness about such things is a waste of time, energy and resources that could be better applied directly.

I'm not in the least directly involved with nuclear power. Though Engineers are not exactly 'on the front line' the way scientist and politicians are, they are most definitely tightly 'within the loop' and thus have the opportunity to make a very significant. Informing and enrolling as many Engineers and the credibility that they bring with them as possible in this will have a huge impact in its chances of success in a timely matter.

Awareness IS the most powerful tool we have to address the 'crisis' of our planet and PERHAPS save life on it IF we do everything that we possibly can as fast as we can! It is the ONLY thing that can and will make enough of an impact that may be the difference between any life on our planet, including humanity surviving; or the majority, if not all life forms being extinguished on our planet VERY quickly as they have been doing at an unprecedented rate for quite some time now

Look at the ground swell in the last 10 and even 20 years and the effects of it.

A VERY dramatic paradigm shift has taken place and needs to be enlarged, expanded and intensified as much as possible as quickly as possible.

As I said: those of you that are 'waiting for the 'Apocalypse'' need to wake up as we are most definitely firmly enmeshed in it. For those of you that don't believe in it: call it what you will. But we are most assuredly IN a global crisis the likes of which humanity has ever been in before by a large measure.

As they say: 'If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.' This applies now more than ever in a very concrete way:

Lead, Follow or get out of the way!

Hi Doug,

I want to support you and talk with a politician by telling that I give him at the next election 50,000 people's votes. I am sure he, the politician will be happy to have 50,000 people in his back but can he promote our project for the future? Will he be able to push enough to get results?

Why the CANDU is in financial trouble? When someone or organization is well regulated like banks in Canada, they make money and be profitable.

This new nuclear technology must build an example and show to others that is good and viable. They talk but there is no actions.

We have awareness of many things but the actions don't follow. Possibility come after the action, Gil.

Why the CANDU is in financial trouble?

There has been a considerable drop off in the number of nuclear power plants being built. It quite rightly has a 'bad reputation' and it will be even more difficult to overcome this now and do 'damage control' over very dangerous previous nuclear power plants, to say nothing of nuclear bombs. Up until becoming aware of these new, safe and efficient nuclear power plant I was most definitely completely against them.

Like most nations Canada is deeply mired in debt and the unprofitable and troubled CANDU organization has cost ~ $1.5 billion dollars a year. Like every other nation, though Canada has fared better than most (our banks are much more tightly regulated than most countries) this global down turn in the economy has made matters worse and is forcing the need to reduce unproductive debt. Our global economy will NEVER return to the 'good old days' of unsustainable consumerism as the foundations of economics. This IS a necessity but will bring about many (relative) hardships for EVERYONE in the return to a 'needs' based economy as opposed to a 'desire' based one that we have now and has been a short lived 'failed experiment'.

While Canada is a very large nation geographically, we are a very young country that is not heavily populated. There are numerous urban centers in the world that have more people living in them than all of Canada. Unfortunately most of the basis of our economics still comes from natural resources that both the demand and prices fluctuate very quickly very wildly and substantially.

Most people currently quite rightly are set against nuclear power plants because of the awareness of the significant problems they have created that we have been unable to resolve up until now.

Many nations have turned to nuclear energy out of necessity in spite of the many significant dangers and problems that come with them.

I made a suggestion of how to get rid of the nuclear wastes from current power plants that are a nightmare. As I said and other's have echoed in here: with the advent of these breeder reactors let's not be hasty about it now as these materials ARE a very significant form of very high density power. Only now can these be very 'green' and significantly reduce the environment damage currently being done by a significant portion of power plants..

The thing that will be the most effective for building these newer generation of safe, efficient nuclear reactors is a LOT of 'education and awareness'. The more people that can be made aware of this and can see the safety and advantages to it now and are openly and actively supportive of it, the more chance it has of succeeding. Without significant public awareness and active support of these breeder reactors, they will either be developed very slowly or not at all.

With our current global crisis time is most definitely of the essence, so we need to inform and get as many people as possible as fast as possible that are aware and supportive of this being a very high priority.

I urge everyone to act and do what they will to create this awareness of this as much as they can as quick as we can, for it is the key to the success of this. Do what you can to raise the level of awareness about this as quickly as possible; for it won't be very long before our world has 'decayed' to the point where we will be unable to develop, construct and get these breeder reactors online before the almost total collapse of civilization as we currently know it very soon. Doing so as widely and as quickly as possible is a very significant deed in helping to save our rapidly dying planet.

I think that in most Democratic societies with all of the modern telecommunications now, there is 'no place to hide' and most governments are 'following' according to opinion polls now as opposed to leading.

My father is a retired professional engineer. On one of the number of occasions that he was mayor of the Oil town where I grew up in, because of him we were the first settlement in Alberta and perhaps in Canada to have fluoridated water. Most of the younger generations have most of their teeth rather than a mouth full of metal like I (we?) do because of this.

Likewise we were the first place in Alberta to not just dump our raw sewage into the river for people thousands of mile downstream to ingest. He researched and designed the sewage disposal plant himself and had it built. The (oil) town had a population of about 1,500 then. It is modular and can readily be expanded very economically to handle 200,000 people.

He was the Minister of Health for the provincial government that brought in public MediCare, with the right to 'opt out of it,' which is no longer the case. He told them that health care cost would increase by 25% ~ 35% in the next year. it did.

He created the first 'Ministry of the Environment' in all of Canada: which is now a 'sales department' for our natural resources. About a half century ago oil companies received billions of dollars in subsidies to 'jump start' the now (in)famous Athabasca tar sands and paid virtually no royalties: ~1% which criminally persists to this day! This is thought to be the largest oil reserves outside of the OPEC nations and is estimated to cover about ¼ of the area of Alberta! When the oil is separated from the sand, the sand occupies 10 TIMES the volume of what it did when bound up with the oil. Eventually there will be a large sub-arctic man made desert. Though by then it will likely be a tropical desert )< 8(

While he was in the provincial Cabinet they considered a plan to sink a nuclear bomb into the Athabasca tar sands and set it off to warm it up to make extraction and the sand/oil separation easier and more economical.

Alberta traditionally has always been a 'one ruling party' province.

Historically they usually stay in power with large majorities for decades with virtually no opposition.

My father disagreed with the provincial government's policies to the point of resigning and sitting as an independent opposition member. He was subsequently re-elected as an independent MLA. Something virtually unheard of in Alberta. His 'practical training' as an Engineer served him and the people of our province well.

Our current Alberta premier, a farmer, is now talking about cutting the current weak emission standards for the plants operating on the Athabasca tar sands by 1/3! An outright atrocity!

Our federal government is a minority government. Historically these governments are able to accomplish very little and only stay in power for a very short period of time until a 'non confidence' vote in parliament ends their governance and causes an early election.

While Democracy is the best sort of governance we have come up with to date, it has also been described as 'the repression of the minorities by the majority'. Our current federal government has managed to continue like this for a number of years now. They have done so by negotiating and making concessions to the other parties and thus are ruling by consensus rather than by enacting everything that they want unilaterally. Rule by consensus is even harder to enact and carry out than democracy is. But it is the valid, just route that governments must take for the future.

With today's global telecommunications in many ways governance in democracies already is already beginning to being done 'from the bottom up' as opposed to from the 'top down' It is unlikely that this will be an easy, smooth journey and transition, but if we are to be successful and survive, it is a must.

Having to 'win a popularity contest' every few years is hardly to conducive to long term planning. Though there are many valid criticisms of the Chinese form of governance, they have had the foresight and enacted regulations to curb uncontrolled population growth: one child per family. From what I have heard, this is enforced more in the urban centers than in rural ones, which is appropriate. They are now calling for one international currency: another must for the future if we are to be successful and bring about equality for all.

We are truly united into a global village now in fact even though not psychologically or nationalities. In the coming dramatic chaotic times in the VERY near future of sever decay we have two choices: to get past this and allow for differences of all peoples, races and cultures and embrace it and celebrate these and be united as one as we already truly are; or to revert back into 'tribalism' which is the source of much current strife and destruction.

Population & Economics:

Though there is the 'Emperor with no cloths' atop of the 'pink elephant' in the middle of the living room which most are doing their best to ignore and denying that they even exist, especially in governments; our very grim but now inevitable drastica and rapidly decay is very close at hand and most short term 'elected' governments are mostly operating under the mandate of 'not on my watch' and are abdicating most of their responsibilities to the future while trying desperately to continue to artificially buoy up and support an unsustainable and bankrupt economic system.

Up until about 1960, even in the western industrialized countries, the economy as 'need' based as opposed to 'desire' based one of consumerism which we have now and is completely unsustainable. The tenets of modern economics are based on flawed premises taken from other spheres of influence. Most of those not in denial already know that this has now completely collapsed and except for some short term localized areas will by necessity will revert back to a more realistic and sustainable system of supplying products that are NEEDED as opposed to constantly changing everything just for the sake of change and stoking the fires of desire to create sales for these unneeded changes. One of the reasons that the ubiquitous VolksWagen 'beetle/bug' was so economical for so long is that they weren't constantly changing everything just for the sake of change itself! Duh!!! Do we really NEED 1000 different types on door handles for cars?

Our current population levels and growth are such that is it were any other species other than our own, we would rightfully and accurately describe it for what it is: 'A infestation and blight of biblical proportions on a global scale!' Like our current economic system which is now completely untenable, the consequences of this are quite obviously devastating. It would be a very good thing indeed if we learned from our past and avoided keep making the same devastating effects over and over again. Alas history shows us otherwise. Though with modern telecommunications and global interactions we now have the opportunities to overcome this and act responsibly to communicate and cooperate on both macro and micro scales in ways that were hitherto not possible and it is needed now more than ever!

As I stated in another posting, the birth rate does drop of dramatically as people are raised up out of poverty. When the ONLY 'social safety net' that is available, especially in locations of extreme poverty, very high infant mortality rates, shortened life spans with very high incidents of debilitating disease, the only security that most have comes from having a large extended family to rely on. This requires a great many number of births in order to have enough family members survive to provide this. Impoverished peoples are a net drain on society. It is in EVERYONE'S best interests to have a healthy, nourished and productive population. Successful semocracies require a large middle class.

At the turn of the previous century approximately half of the GNP (Gross National Production) of the USA went through the hands of only six families! I recently heard a very disturbing figure: 1% of the population on the USA now has 99% of the wealth. Hardly conducive to healthily, contented and productive societies as a whole. They also have more of their population in jail than all of the other G7 nations combined. Not surprising given these statistics.

There have been those in this thread addressing our constant erosion of our standard of living. I remember being in junior high school and being instructed that a family should spend no more than 1/3 of their income on 'food and shelter'. Hardly the reality for most people today, even in the so called 'wealthy nations.' 1.5 days out of a works week goes to just paying car loans for most people. But we need to start to adjust our priorities, as they are going to be getting more detrimental on this 'scale' at an ever increasing rate. We need to start focusing on 'quality of life' which is most definitely not the same as 'quantity' of possessions. David Suzuki, ( The David Suzuki Foundation is a science-based Canadian environmental organization, working to protect the balance of nature and our quality ... www.davidsuzuki.org/) the world renowned scientist and ecological sustainability advocate that did an excellent television series: 'The Nature of Things' made a very relevant point in on episode. He grew up in the 'dirty thirties', that last global world economic depression. He said that though they had very little in the way of 'worldly passions and affluence, they had excellent quality of life. If anything our large modern urban cultures that leave many in isolation and without the feeling of belonging to and being a member of a 'community. I believe that this is a primary reason why churches are starting to see a return to their organizations: to belong to and be and feel like they are part of a community again.

I have a sister that lives in Libya where she lived for ~ 35 years now and is married and has a family of her own. She has said that one of the things that she likes about living there is that they do not have the all pervasive (retail, consumer) society that exists in wealthy western societies where anything and everything is available and can be bought: including the services such as tradesmen and professionals. Thus they HAVE to rely on each other to get along and get things accomplished. This bring and binds them together into a community that does not leave people isolated as it tends to in our 'wealthy consumer societies' where one can get everything and anything that they need or want without others help, IF they can afford it. The World Health Organization (WHO) has extrapolated current data and forecasts that the second leading cause of death globally, that is only surpassed by cancer, will be from depression. I assume that this means by suicide. A very telling and disturbing fact and indicative of the lack of good 'mental health' that our current form of societies cause.

When my sister and her husband needed to build a new home for their extended family, most of the tradesmen required to achieve this were unavailable. So like myself and many members of our family, she learned how to do them all herself and then built it, primarily by herself. 'Mechanical aptitude' and capabilities are most definitely in the genes in our family.

I have (much) more to say, but have other matters to attend to, but have said enough for now, so I will arbitrarily cut it off here and leave things for another day.

My memory is not the best for these sorts of things, so I ask for your understanding and indulgence when, not IF, I repeat myself. I speak of such things often in numerous forums and don't always remember what I said where, when or to whom.

One thing that IS coming out very clearly in this thread, is the acknowledgment and the awareness of the dire situation that we are in and the need for very strict setting of priorities and if we are to survive at all. The need to be 'positively 'pro active'' as opposed to being helpless, powerless victims is very apperent.

Thus I urge ALL to activism in these causes in whichever way you chose or on the path that you are on. We have a lot to lose and a lot to try to maintain, survive and perhaps even improve on. If ever there was a time in need of it on a scale hitherto unprecedented scale and urgency, now is the time. We have many tools at our disposal now that have not been available to most in any other times of strife in human history. Thus we have the capacity to achieve results in the most vital and pressing issues of the dire circumstances we are now in; for which there is NO parallel in human history. Except perhaps that of the (myth) of 'The Great Flood' which exists in almost every culture.

So my Brothers and Sisters the world over (and to those among us from other worlds [aren't we all?] (< 8) go forth and sing loud and clear and strong and do whatever you can do to be of aid and assistance regardless of what path it takes or the extent of it. It is out of the unity of the quality of such innumerable contributions that the hope for the future salvation of life on our planet lies.

Hi Doug,

Lots of good in your comment. However, I would add a few words about "democratic societies". How many do really we have today in 2010? Talking about countries! Not very much when we start to count.

Yes, we, Canadians, created many things before others but we turned all for not what supposed to do, to mean, and to act for.

The Athabasca tar sand operations could be cut or leaved as is, will not change to the dammages made up to now. Who will pay for the correction? We, all Canadian like in many local processes did or provoked before, as did the big Quebec Independence vote a few times.

Doug, concerning the Chineses: We don't have the idea how to maintain a country when the population is so big. Look "The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" was became 15 or 16 different countries with troubles, economic or political or others. Let Chinese government liberate people slowly but surely, and mainly without troubles, and let the Dalai Lama make his prayors out of Tibet, it will be better for the Tibetans.

So, you clearely tell us that human population will grow because poverty is growing.

Everyone dreams about the "wealthy consumer societies", and everyone will get it some level. Our efficient methods to communicate constantly with everyone make impossible to get in the mood to help others. We turn against ourselves. Just see the actual world. No one government told its people that the economic turn-down is coming but we have to pay for everything. Athabasca Co pay its taxes like we pay it but at the end the government return to big organizations, the trouble causers, large amount of money to help them to survive and repeat the same later on. We never learn!

It's not only our memory is not very good for these kinds of comments but realistic or simply the reality. We don't want to expose ourselves to others with our own opinions because the critics will be ferocious. If is not today, it will come tomorrow.

Still I would like to see my government to work for the majority who elected them because we will have another Sodome-and Gomorrah, French, Bolshevic revolutions, the Long March, Khomeini in Tehran, Berlin Wall, and other, Gil.

Doug, concerning the Chineses: We don't have the idea how to maintain a country when the population is so big.

I agree about the Chinese.

So, you clearly tell us that human population will grow because poverty is growing.

NO: as our eco systems goes into cascading failure as they now are, along with the rest of life on this plant, there will be a lot less of it including us..

At this point, really we are just trying to do enough damage control that life, including humanity won't be (almost?) life will be entirely wiped out. But as is most often the case, we are to prone to denial, or have such a limited perspective, that we are not responding with anywhere near the scope and rate that we need to in order to perhaps not stem off total annihilation of life here.

"Toshiba+Alaska" scores quite a few Google hits.

Try Toshiba 4S- Toshiba has some pretty extensive information on their site, but I have lost the direct link...