Archive for the ‘Forest Destruction’ Category

Wine to Water: Unveiling the Ethanol Con

Tuesday, April 1st, 2008

By David L. Brown

The carefully crafted coverup of the problems revolving around the ethanol craze is starting to come unraveled. People have noticed that they are spending more for food; learning how rain forests are being cut down at a rapidly increasing rate; and that — gasp! — turning corn into alcohol to burn in SUVs might even be LESS green than using plain old-fashioned gasoline.

The cover story on this week’s edition of Time magazine is good news for those of us who have spoken out against this bad idea for years — in my case since the whole idea came along back in the 1970s. I was an agricultural communicator at that time, and I knew a bit about how agriculture works. I wrote a technical farm management handbook. I well remember how a man who operated a small printing business that we used was passing out bumper stickers heralding ethanol as the answer to oil scarcity after the first oil shock of 1973. Even in those days of crop surpluses I knew there were many reasons why this was a bad idea that would mine our precious topsoil.

We didn’t hear much about ethanol for a long time, although it was always there lurking in the wings. Then a few years ago it began to pick up steam as Congress and the administration found a new way to subsidize farmers in return for their votes. Yes, the corn used to make ethanol is heavily subsidized by your tax dollars and mine, enriching farmers as it erodes our grocery budgets and spreads the threat of widespread famine in the Third World.

Now the real story is starting to get out about this con game that is driving our planet on a downward spiral toward social and environmental disaster. Here’s part of the Time cover that is on newsstands now:

time.jpg

The six-page article focuses on how rising grain prices and other factors are causing entrepreneurs around the world to mow down forests like fields of daisies, convert grazing land to crops, put fragile soil to the plow, and generally despoil the landscape all in the name of … well, not to put too fine an edge to it: Money. Yes they’re doing it all for money, cash, moolah, the Almighty Dollar, the Root of All Evil. Take note of the “leaves” in the cover illustration above. The whole biofuel scam is really all about nothing more than letting a few get filthy rich while doing nothing whatsoever to help rein in global warming and almost certainly making the situation even worse.

Although it is interesting and well worth reading I will not go into details about the content of the Time article because for nearly two years we have been trumpeting the word about fake fuels here on Star Phoenix Base. If you are interested in reading some of the things we have reported, use the search field at upper right to hunt for our numerous articles on the subject.

I will however quote the last paragraph of the Time article by Michael Grunwald:

Advocates are always careful to point out that biofuels are only part of the solution to global warming, that the world also needs more energy-efficient lightbulbs and homes and factories and lifestyles. And the world does need all those things. But the world is still going to be fighting an uphill battle until it realizes that right now, biofuels aren’t part of the solution at all. They’re part of the problem.

That pretty much says it all, and I will add the words of a United Nations food expert quoted in the article, who said that “agrofuels are ‘a crime against humanity’.”

We have said much the same thing here on more than a few occasions, and it is depressing to see this tragic boondoggle continue to gain momentum even as the facts about ethanol are emerging into the light of day. Even Iowa, sometimes called The Corn State, is on the verge of becoming a net importer of the golden grain, thanks to dozens of ethanol distilleries popping up all over the region. There seems to be no end to the enthusiasm for ravaging the environment to make a fast buck, whether there in the American Heartland, in the rainforests of Brazil or Indonesia, or in Europe where rapid expansion of ethanol production has recently been mandated.

As reported in the Time article, Lester Brown of the Earth Policy Institute has said of the ethanol craze that it “pit[s] the 800 million people with cars against the 800 million with hunger problems.” When the profit motive meets the best interests of humanity, it seems that greed always wins and the poor end up with the short end of the deal.

So who shall feed the hungry when food is turned to fuel? The simple answer is: no one, not while there is money to be made. The rich are abandoning the hungry poor and leaving them to join the legions of the doomed. May their spirits haunt those who engage for profit in turning food into fuel when there are hungry bellies in the world.

The mythic teacher Jesus is said to have turned water into wine, but only a living Satan would turn wine into water or food into fuel.

Canada’s Tar Sands Oil: Environmental Disaster

Saturday, June 23rd, 2007

by Val Germann

As Star Phoenix Base readers know, Alberta has passed Texas as an oil-producing region and the North American petroleum pipelines are running north-to-south today instead of the other way around. Alberta is producing more than one million barrels of oil per day, on the way to three milion barrels per day by 2015. But the cost is high and getting higher, and not just in monetary terms, as this quote from a TERRADAILY article indicates:

Open pits now dot the northern part of Alberta province where vast tracts of the Boreal Forest once stood, and giant mechanical shovels now devour black oil-encrusted soil day and night.

Oil from tar sands is an environmental disaster, to say the least. The TERRADAILY article quotes Al Gore on the new Canadian crude:

“For every barrel of oil they extract there, they have to use enough natural gas to heat a family’s home for four days,” Gore [said]. And they have to tear up four tonnes of landscape, all for one barrel of oil. It is truly nuts.”

Yes, it is truly nuts, but it’s making piles of money for a lot of people, none of whom are interested in having U.S. consumers change their lifestyles or driving habits, not with petroleum spot prices at $65-70 US per barrel. There is simply too much money in it, regardless of any environmental downside. The Canadian Prime Minister, Brian Harper, summed up the general general attitude of his administration:

This government isn’t going to implement any measures that would do severe damage to Canadian jobs or to the Canadian economy,” Harper told reporters at the close of the spring parliamentary session. “We will continue implementing our (own) national system of regulations.”

This statement, from another current TERRADAILY article, was made in the wake of the Canadian Senate voting to force Harper’s government to abide by the Kyoto protocol, now a truly dead letter, world-wide. There is little doubt that oil from tar sands has ended any chance Canada ever had of living up to that agreement. The quote below quickly tells the sad tale:

A previous Liberal administration had agreed under the Kyoto Protocol to reduce CO2 emissions to 6.0 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, but a 2006 government environmental audit found emissions had instead increased by 35 percent.

And they are going to keep on increasing, too, because the intention is, as outlined above, to double tar sands oil output over the next decade or so, with devastaing effects for Canada’s CO2 emissions.

So, add Canada to the list of CO2 deadbeats, along with China, India and Brazil. Deliberate govenment policies have been put in hand that have made impossible any decrease in emissions from those countries. –

Australian Fires Overwhelming Officals

Tuesday, December 19th, 2006

by Val Germann

For this writer the Canberra area fires of 2003 were very shocking because the world famous Mount Stromlo Observatory was destroyed along with a surrounding forest.  Thanks to the internet the whole astronomcal world followed this event, complete with  photographs like the one below, showing the top of the mountain on fire.  

Mt. Stromlo on fire

The entire observatory was destroyed, the fire moving so quickly that no important equipment could be saved and many valuable and irreplaceble records lost.  All of the observaotory’s instruments were incinerated.   

 Telescope destroyed

Several people were killed in these fires which at first could not be stopped and so quickly reached into the suburbs of Canberra itself.  Local emergency response was overwhelmed because, for the first time, several Australian fires joined into one, creating a single massive blaze, a true firestorm, as an article in today’s THE AUSTRALIAN reports, quoting a coroner’s report.   

[the] two-year inquest concluded that the damage caused by four fires which linked to form a firestorm was more extensive than it should have been because of the ACT Government’s failures in preparation, firefighting strategy and public warnings.

It seems obvious that local response was slow and the situation was not taken as seriously as it should have been.  However, the emergency was a new one in some respects as a typical Australian “brush fire” quickly moved on to something much more destructive.  Two local officals stated:

“We were not given a briefing that alarmed us in any way or which was consistent with the Coroner’s findings.” 

“Decisions … were made in good faith by many very experienced personnel based on their professional assessment of what was known at the time, not on what ultimately occurred.”

No doubt, to a certain extent, the above statements are true.  That is, Australia is now facing fires beyond any seen before and those fires started burning in 2003.  What the future holds no one can say but the chances are great that Australian officials are not yet finished being surprlsed by this new class of conflagration.

**

Bamboo Plantings in Tropics Could Help Climate

Sunday, December 17th, 2006

By David Ponton

Everybody loves trees. We love the magic of a complete forest ecosystem, trees as front yard and back yard ornamentals, swing supports, climbing structures, shade givers. Trees stand in proud rows along beautiful streets and country lanes. They are essential to any park. We stand in wonder looking up at their heights.

And so everyone’s favorite solution to global warming is to plant trees. Never mind that it will take a staggering number of trees to offset the carbon we are spewing out, it just makes plain old sense to plant trees. Never mind that our fire-free forests have gotten thick with combustibles and make fires worse when they inevitably burn. Trees and forests are impressive and nice and they absorb carbon year after year. But now, doubt has been cast that it will do any good to plant trees outside the tropics. According to a new study, forests in the tropics are effective at mitigating global warming, but in temperate regions, the benefits that come from trees reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide can be outweighed by their capacity to trap heat near the ground.

Ecologist Govindasamy Bala of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory says “Our study shows that tropical forests are very beneficial to the climate because they take up carbon and increase cloudiness, which in turn helps cool the planet,” But here is the surprise finding. “What we have found is in the so-called mid-latitude region where the United States is located and majority of European countries are located, the climate benefits of planting will be nearly zero.” Dr Bala and colleague Ken Caldeira, from the Carnegie Institution of Washington presented the findings of their computer study at a recent American Geophysical Union meeting.

If the model is accurate, it will not help global warming to plant trees in North America, and it might add some heat. The tree as shade giver is contrary evidence, but any camper knows that evergreen trees in the winter do stay warmer. But what about the massive deciduous forest of the eastern US? They are cool in the summer, and don’t seem warm in the winter because they have lost the huge surface area of their leaves.

All computer models need to be normalized to the real world: short term results checked against actual data, assumptions refined and narrowed, and fundamentals adjusted before any decisions can be made based on the long term projections.

My worst fear is that this preliminary study will be twisted into a justification for clear cutting forest ecosystems. That is in no way justified, even if it comes out that temperate forests are a little warm. Rather we should go after the root of the problem.

Bamboo is the fastest-growing and most widely-used woody species in the world, and it is easily grown and harvested in a sustainable manner. It is not a tree, it is actually technically a giant grass, but it makes s great wood. Bamboo has been used for ages for its unique strong hollow shafts, familiar around the world, and has hundreds of uses in its Asian home. It is now being used in laminated form to make beautiful durable flooring. Go here for more information on bamboo from the BBC web site.

17_bamboo_forest.jpg

A bamboo forest growing in Japan.

According to the climate study cited above, it is a good offset to global warming by planting woody things in the tropics. Using bamboo laminate in a long-lived structure such as a house is a way of storing carbon, so before we make a rash decisions about planting or not planting trees in temperate regions, we can safely plant bamboo in tropical regions and import its durable products to temperate regions.

The Smell of a World that’s been Burned

Thursday, October 5th, 2006

by Val Germann

The title above comes from a Jimi Hendrix (that’s right!) lyric of 40 years ago, about a time-traveling visitor to Earth.  The lines below have stuck with me from the moment I first heard them in the mid-1960s:

“I have been here before, in the age of ice,

and of course this is why I’m so concerned.

I’ve come back to find the stars displaced

and the smell of a world that’s burned,

the smell of a world that’s been burned.”

And so it is in the process of being burned, as has been happening all over the world, and in our American West, in Mexico, and even in Canada.  This writer happened to be visiting Rochester, New York, several years ago as fires burned out of control in Ontario province.  The smoke and haze was very acrid in Rochester, hundreds of miles to the south, making it difficult to stay outside.

And so it will likely come as no surprise to our readers that enormous forest fires are raging once again, this time on the islands of Indonesia.  Today’s TERRADAILY website features a startling article on these new fires, causing trouble thousands of miles away:

But on Thursday, the haze had spread 3,600 kilometres (2,250 miles) to smother islands in the western Pacific, authorities there said.

What is causing these fires?  Is it drought?  Is it lightning?  Is it bad luck?  Or is it something else:

The annual illegal burn-off in Indonesia, which officials have been accused of doing little to stop, sees choking smoke billow across the region, with Malaysia, Singapore and southern Thailand usually worst affected.

Yes, indeed, it’s people who are causing these fires, the hundreds of thousands of people in desperate need of land for slash and burn agriculture, torching ever more tropical forest every year.   There is no stopping them, apparently, and there will be no end to their burning until there’s nothing left to burn, nothing left but the smell, the smell of a whole world that’s been burned.

**

Amazon Rain Forest Could Become Desert—Soon!

Sunday, July 30th, 2006

By David L. Brown

The latest nightmare of potential global warming comes in a report from the prestigious Woods Hole Research Center. According to a recent study (hat tip to Climate Ark), the Amazon basin, home ot the world’s largest rain forest, may be on the verge of becoming a desert.

Quoting a story in the British newspaper The Independent, Climate Ark points out that this would have:

…catastrophic consequences for the world’s climate. [The scientists] predict the Amazon rainforest cannot withstand more than two consecutive years of drought without “mega-fires” sweeping across the drying jungle, destroying healthy rainforest ecosystems, and resultant denuded soil baking in the sun ultimately becoming a desert. The Amazon is now entering its second successive year of climate change intensified drought, making it likely that widespread forest die-back will start soon. The Amazon rainforests contain 90 billion tons of carbon, enough to increase the rate of global warming by 50 percent.

As Star Phoenix Base recently reported (see “Revenge of Gaia: A Modern Horror Story,” posted July 23), a total rise of ocean surface temperatures of just 4 degrees C. would be sufficient to destroy the Amazonian rain forest, turning the “lungs of the planet” into a wasteland of scrub brush and desert. We now see evidence that just such an event may not only be possible, it may be taking place at this very moment as global temperatures continue to climb.

According to the article in The Independent, as reported by Climate Ark:

The research ­ carried out by the Massachusetts-based Woods Hole centre in Santarem on the Amazon river ­ has taken even the scientists conducting it by surprise. When Dr Dan Nepstead started the experiment in 2002 ­ by covering a chunk of rainforest the size of a football pitch with plastic panels to see how it would cope without rain ­ he surrounded it with sophisticated sensors, expecting to record only minor changes.

The trees managed the first year of drought without difficulty. In the second year, they sunk their roots deeper to find moisture, but survived. But in year three, they started dying. Beginning with the tallest the trees started to come crashing down, exposing the forest floor to the drying sun.

By the end of the year the trees had released more than two-thirds of the carbon dioxide they have stored during their lives, helping to act as a break on global warming. Instead they began accelerating the climate change.

The article went on to report that researchers predict that the loss of the Amazon forest would “spread drought into the northern hemisphere, including Britain, and could massively accelerate global warming with incalculable consequences, spinning out of control, a process that might end in the world becoming uninhabitable.” Truly ominous words.

(more…)

An Incredible Story the Press Never Noticed

Tuesday, July 25th, 2006

By David L. Brown

What if a four-year project by “the world”s top biologists” to study the subject of biodiversity loss revealed that the threat of imminent extinction was hanging over 12 percent of all mammals, 23 percent of all birds, and 32 percent of all amphibians? Surely there would be a huge outcry, with bold headlines screaming from the top of every newspaper front page and TV anchors wailing and gnashing their teeth. Right?

Well, as it happens, no.

Exactly that finding of widespread and imminent extinction, resulting from a survey called the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, was published 16 months ago, according to a news item in this week’s New Scientist magazine … and “its findings didn’t even make the front pages.”

Incredible? Yes. Surprising? Not when you consider the dimwittedness of the mainstream media and the politicians and pundits who play the MSM like Nero with his fiddle.

This week, according to the New Scientist report:

…conservationists will try again. In a declaration published in Nature, 19 leading biologists from 13 countries are calling for the creation of a new international body – modelled on the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) – to hard-wire the science of extinction into government policy-making. (read full story here; subscription required.)

According to Bob Watson, chief scientist at the World Bank and former chair of the IPCC, “virtually all aspects of biodiversity are in steep decline. There is an urgent need to bridge the gap between science and policy to take action.”

(more…)

Missouri Tigers, Real Tigers, facing Extinction?

Friday, July 21st, 2006

by Val Germann

The last twenty years or so have been pretty tough on Missouri Tiger sports fans. In general, our University of Missouri “revenue” teams (that’s what they call football and basketball) have not done well, and the athletic department has been rocked by scandal after scandal. Luckily, the state’s sports fans are pretty much proof against reality and continue to show up for games, saving the MU Tiger from what some might call a well-deserved extinction.

If only things were working out as well for the real tigers, the ones in south Asia. But they’re not, as this quote from THE GUARDIAN today bluntly states:

But yesterday, a landmark study by leading conservationists warned that their plight is even more serious than previously feared. The big cat, the report warns, is close to extinction and the area in which it lives has been nearly halved in the last 10 years.

The situation is quite plain. The human population of India has shot through the roof while that of the Tiger has headed into the basement. The one is the same as the other, two halves of the same walnut, and all the hand-wringing in the world is not going to make one ounce of difference. But that isn’t going to stop some people, of course, who think that like King Canute they can bade the tide be still. Groups like Save the Tiger continue to have hopes:

The authors of the report – Setting Priorities for the Conservation and Recovery of Wild Tigers 2005-2015 – advocate a “tiger summit”, involving the heads of state of the 13 countries which still host the species.

But it’s all in vain, as anyone knows who has kept up with the overall situation. India, and all of south Asia, is “developing” at breakneck speed and its rampaging population needs more natural resources every day.

So, let’s hope the Missouri Tigers can avoid athletic extinction and MU’s athletic director can keep that tiger skin (donated by an alum who shot a Bengal Tiger in 1957) hanging on his office wall. That is, what a tragedy it would be if the tiger were to totally disappear!

Read the entire GUARDIAN article here.

**

More Forest Fires Result from Climate Change

Monday, July 10th, 2006

By David L. Brown

When faced with a growing body of evidence, those wishful-thinkers who deny global warming is real often fall back on the idea that the effects will not be felt until some point in the future. A commonly quoted time period is 50 or 100 years from now. Those are comfortable targets, at least for those living in the present, since it presumes that many or all of today’s adults will be safely dead by the time the trouble arrives. Nothing to worry about then, right?

Sadly, that is a false premise, and the effects of global warming are already here and growing. We have seen evidence of melting glaciers, intensifying hurricanes, changing weather patterns, species extinction — the list goes on and on. And here is another piece to add to the mosaic of impending disaster: The rising number of large forest fires has been tied to global warming through research reported today on ScienceDaily.com. Here are key passages:

Almost seven times more forested federal land burned during the 1987-2003 period than during the prior 17 years. In addition, large fires occurred about four times more often during the latter period.

The research is the most systematic analysis to date of recent changes in forest fire activity in the western United States. The increases in fire extent and frequency are strongly linked to higher March-through-August temperaturesnd are most pronounced for mid-elevation forests in the northen Rocky Mountains.

The new finding points to climate change, not fire suppression policies and forest fuel accumulation, as the primary driver of recent increases in large forest fires.

“I see this as one of the first big indicators off climate change impacts in the continental United States,” said research team member Thomas W. Swetnam, director of the Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research at The University of Arizona in Tucson.

“We’re showing warming and earlier springs tying in with large forest fire frequencies. Lots of people think climate change and the ecological responses are 50 to 100 years away. But it’s not 50 to 100 years away — it’s happening now in forest ecosystems through fire.” (Read it all here.)

The study showed that the wildfire season now starts earlier, fires last longer and the fire season ends later — in fact, the change is astonishing. “The length of the fire season has increased almost two-and-one-half months compared with 1970 to 1986,” according to Swetnam. “That’s a remarkable thing in itself.”Yes, it is truly remarkable, considering that it represents an extension of more than a month on each end of the season. How long will it be before the fire “season” will last for 12 months? And, just for fun, let’s ponder whether the hurricane “season” might also become a year-around condition.

Yes, global warming is real … and it is here now.

Tar Sands’ “Quasi-ness” Truly Starting to Show

Monday, July 10th, 2006

by Val Germann

We here at Star Phoenix Base have been trying to keep our readers current on the huge tar sands program up in Canada, the one that has seen Alberta pass Texas as an oil producing region. There is no doubt that the biliions of dollars spent up there have been a “success” and resulted in a whole lot of heavy oil being pipelined down to U.S. refineries. But tar sands oil is in fact a “quasi-solution,” as Alberta’s citizens are starting to discover. Let’s begin with a quote from a recent article in the Edmunton Journal:

Suddenly, Alberta’s generous oilsands royalty regime, and the inflation-stoking stampede of multibillion-dollar projects it has helped to trigger, is under growing fire from all sides.

(more…)