Crucial graphs

Amazing set of graphs (pdfs) from the International Federation of Health Plans. (H/t, Ezra Klein, WA Post.)

Maybe President "Big Coal" Pelton will introduce the speaker!

Too funny -- a philosopher speaking at Willamette U. law school to inquire about whether we have any obligation to the future. Maybe Willamette President M. Lee "Big Coal" Pelton -- who sits in a very comfortable chair on the board of PGE, Oregon's top polluter and greenhouse gas emitter -- will introduce her and stay to argue that, no, our only obligation is to maximize the return to our shareholders (since that is, after all, PGE's position).

Wreaths to beautify and to build community

You can order online or send your check for $30 to Brenda Lawrence, 2086 Cottage St. SE,
Salem, OR 97302 by November 20.

Pickup is on Saturday, Dec. 5 at First United Methodist Church, 600 State St. in Salem, 8 a.m. - Noon.

For those who like eating regularly

Nope, that's a corn field, not a rice paddy. Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Dmitry Orlov has an excellent piece warning about most serious threat posed by climate disruption: the fact that all our knowledge and ability about growing our food was formed in a period of climate stability:

Thus, you don't have to think that humans caused climate change, or that humans can stop climate change before it is too late, but my feeling is that either you will agree that strange and dramatic climatic changes are afoot, or you just haven't done your homework. On this issue, I just don't see that there is any room for legitimate debate. The evidence is in.

It is also not controversial that the unusual climactic conditions are affecting the ability of farmers to grow food. I don't have to look too far to find examples: in New England, where I live, farmers are receiving federal disaster aid, because they lost over half of their crop. According to the Massachusetts congressional delegation, which petitioned for federal relief, "rain was 148 percent above normal in June, which was also the sixth coolest June on record in both Boston and Worcester, and likely the second cloudiest June on record since 1885. In July, rainfall was 200 percent above normal, with corresponding lower temperatures." "Corn growers in Norfolk County saw 83 percent of the value of their crop destroyed. In Essex County, strawberry growers could not bring more than 35 percent of their crop to market" reported the Boston Globe.

New England is by no means a unique case; everywhere you look, agriculture is under assault from the shifting climate. The barrage of strange weather makes it increasingly difficult for farmers to decide what to plant and when and where to plant it. According to the paleoclimatologist J.P. Steffensen, the stable climate that has prevailed during the previous 10,000 years is what made agriculture possible:

You can ask, Why didn't human beings make civilisation fifty thousand years ago? You know that they had just as big brains as we have today. When you put it in a climatic framework, you can say, "Well, it was the ice age. And also this ice age was so climatically unstable that each time you had the beginning of a culture they had to move. Then comes the present interglacial - ten thousand years of very stable climate. The perfect conditions for agriculture. If you look at it, it's amazing. Civilisations in Persia, in China, and in India start at the same time, maybe six thousand years ago. They all developed writing and they all developed religion and they all built cities, all at the same time, because the climate was stable. I think that if the climate would have been stable fifty thousand years ago it would have started then. But they had no chance.

Steffensen is a neo-catastrophist - a climatologist who believes in abrupt, catastrophic climate shifts. So is just about every other climatologist. They base their belief not on some exotic theory or complex computer model; in fact, they are often at a loss to explain the underlying mechanisms. Instead, they simply cannot disregard the overwhelming empirical evidence they have collected. Still, even after listening to a neo-catastrophist tell it like it is, I find no reason to think that agriculture will fail everywhere at once, and result in instant mass starvation. It seems more likely that, as agriculture becomes less and less reliable, malnutrition will become chronic in many places, resulting in high death rates, low birth rates and high childhood mortality, and an overall dwindling of the population over several generations.

Anthropoclastic climate change does not have to be a catastrophe, but it can be made catastrophic by clinging on to a failing agricultural model of food production. If we insist that farmers produce monoculture cash crops on the industrial model, we shall surely all starve. But if instead people make a concerted effort to reclaim the entire landscape, both rural and urban, for informal food production, growing edible plant species on former golf courses, parking lots, cemeteries, town greens, suburban back yards, urban rooftops and balconies, and front lawns of stately homes, then it seems quite likely that, no matter which way the climate lurches in a given year, something somewhere will be bearing fruit, enough to make it to the next season.

Wild foods can make a difference as well. Last summer, the forests of New England were full of berries that went unpicked. We did not pick any berries this year, but we did get a chance to pick some wild mushrooms, which had a fine year. As I write this, garlands of wild mushrooms are drying in our hallway. Man doth not live by mushrooms alone, but it's a start. And start we should, the sooner the better, but certainly before the shelves in the shops are bare, and so are the ones in your pantry. Mitigating anthropoclastic climate change will not be up to the politicians or the scientists or the industrialists, it will be up to me and to you.

A really scary Halloween feature

Image by Tattooed JJ via Flickr

UPDATE II: a REAL scary interview here: The Case for Deflation.

Original post: Short version of "The Crash Course." Well worth a look.

UPDATE: Bill Moyers interviews James Galbraith, son of John Kenneth Galbraith, and one of the few economists who saw through all the "magic of the market" nonsense. It's so good you have to read the whole thing over there. I couldn't find one section that stood out enough to quote separately. The whole thing is outstanding.

Cut Crime: Plant more trees and gardens

A crime-reduction tool. Image by AF-Photography via Flickr

The smart-on-crime strategy: Less paving, more planting:

Planting gardens and parks in neighbourhoods reduces vandalism, graffiti, litter and yobbish activity, research has revealed.

Even in the roughest inner-city estates, those living near gardens, parks and green spaces tend to be better behaved, healthier and live longer than those in 'urban deserts', the study found.

Professor Frances Kuo, who did the research, said being close to greenery was 'essential to our physical, psychological and social well-being'.

Tree friendly: People living near green spaces such as Hyde Park in London (pictured), are less likely to commit crime

'The relationship between crime and vegetation is very clear - the more trees, the fewer crimes,' she said.

'It actually encourages people to use the spaces outside their homes which provides a natural form of surveillance.

'In fact, the data seem to indicate that if you have a landscape where you introduce well-maintained trees and grass, people will find that a safer environment.'

Professor Kuo studied some of the poorest districts of Chicago and demonstrated that crime in neighbourhoods with trees was lower - by as much as 7 per cent - compared with those without a view of greenery, even after factors such as income and education were taken into account.

The University of Illinois professor has carried out extensive research since the mid-1990s showing the benefits of green spaces.

Last Call for Salem Saturday Market 2009!

This is the LAST CHANCE to enjoy the Salem Saturday Market in 2009! Image by NatalieMaynor via Flickr

Don't miss it!

Hi Friends!

Saturday, Oct. 31, is the last day of the Salem Saturday Market for 2009!

Friends of Salem Saturday Market will be there holding a yard sale at our booth ~ our first big fundraiser. Swing by our booth on the northwest side of the Market to see the great stuff we’ve got for sale, at ridiculously affordable prices.

The money we raise Saturday will help get us through the winter months. Although the Market may be finished, our activities and events certainly are not! FSSM is a year-round organization, and we want to keep the momentum going that we’ve gained all summer. So come take a look at our booth, see what we’ve got for sale, or just say hi. We’ll miss seeing all of our great members & supporters every week!

We’re not the only ones with good deals Saturday ~ a lot of the vendors will be selling garage-sale items, too. You’ll find even more great stuff than usual!

Bring the kids, too, for trick-or-treating and a costume contest. There’s even a costume contest for dogs!

We hope to see you you down there – rain or shine! – to bid farewell to a wonderful Market season!

Oh, snap! Another U. Chicago prof. demolishes "Superfreakonomics" idiocy

Steven Levitt, your stool awaits you. Image by Candie_N via Flickr

A truly inspiring, thoughtful, and careful demolition of the superficial, wrongheadedness that permeates the "Superfreakonomics" chapter on the supposed "global cooling."

Upcoming: Trilogy Celtic Trio

Camerata Musica
Trilogy Celtic Trio
2:30 p.m. Sunday, November 8
Loucks Auditorium (Salem Public Library)

Trilogy Celtic Trio (affectionately known as “the three Lauras”) weaves a musical tapestry of misty remembrances, far-away places, and a foot-stompin’ good time when they bring their harp, voice and fiddle to town. Trilogy is a collaboration among Celtic harpist Laura Zaerr, vocalist Laura Berryhill and fiddler Laurie Goren.

Inspired by respect for tradition and tempered with an enthusiasm for new horizons, the group draws from Scottish and Irish sources, presenting innovative arrangements with innate graciousness and integrity. Audiences are encouraged to arrive on time for the 2:30 p.m. concerts. Late-comers will only be seated between pieces.

Admission is free and open to the public. The series is supported by a grant from the Salem Foundation and contributions from patrons. More information is available at the Camerata Musica website, www.cameratamusica.org, or by phone from George Struble, 503-364-3929.

ADDENDUM: Boy, it's feast or famine isn't it? That's the same day that Cherryholmes plays at the Elsinore. Bluegrass is an offshoot of the Scots-Irish tradition, so some of the music might well sound familiar at either show.

The Carbon Footprint of War (The Progressive, Oct. 2009)

A war fought for oil is going to make oil impossibly high-priced, in a world where simply living will become harder for billions of people. Image via Wikipedia

. . . The U.S. armed forces consume about 14 million gallons of oil per day, half of it in jet fuel. Humvees average 4 miles per gallon, while an Apache helicopter gets half a mile per gallon. The Iraq War, which George W. Bush launched in part to protect vital oil supplies, consumed oil at a phenomenal rate. . . .

U.S. forces in Iraq during 2007 consumed 40,000 barrels of oil a day, all of which was transported into the war zone from other countries. The U.S. Air Force uses 2.6 billion gallons of jet fuel a year, 10 percent of the U.S. domestic market.

By the end of 2007, according to a report from Oil Change International by Nikki Reisch and Steve Kretzmann, the Iraq War had put at least 141 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent into the air, as much as adding twenty-five million cars to the roads. The Iraq War by itself added more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere than 60 percent of the world's nations. . . .

The mechanization of the military provided many more opportunities to increase carbon dioxide production during the world wars of the early twentieth century. World War II's Sherman tank, for example, got 0.8 miles per gallon. Seventy-five years later, tank mileage had not improved: the 68-ton Abrams Tank got 0.5 miles per gallon. Fighter jets' typical subsonic fuel consumption is 300 to 400 gallons per hour at full thrust (or 100 gallons per hour at cruising speed) during hundreds of hours' training, or combat missions. Blasting to supersonic speed on its afterburners, an F-15 Fighter can burn as much as four gallons of fuel per second.

During the 1950s and 1960s, U.S. B-52s were in the air at all times, on the theory that an airborne fleet would prevent the Soviet Union from obliterating the entire U.S. nuclear armed armada on the ground. Each of these B-52s burned hundreds of gallons of fossil fuel per hour while aloft. The B-52 Stratocruiser, with eight jet engines, consumes 500 gallons of jet fuel per minute, or 3,000 per hour. In a few minutes, a B-52 consumes what an average automobile driver uses in a year.

What I'd like to know is, how many years of riding a bike to work would it take for me to offset one F-15 flying for an hour? Assuming that my bike replaces a car that gets 25 miles per gallon, my daily commute of five miles would use a gallon a week. That's nearly seven years to fuel a fighter jet at top thrust for one hour.

We don't have that kind of time. Thermal inertia delivers the results of atmospheric change roughly a half century after our burning of fossil fuels provokes them. The weather today is reacting to greenhouse gas emissions from about 1960. Since then, the world's emissions have risen roughly 400 percent. The Cold War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Iraq War, and the Afghanistan War have all played their part. But we haven't even felt their full environmental effects yet. . . .

Global warming has already accelerated beyond even the predictions of pessimistic scientists. The polar ice caps are dissolving and the permafrost is melting, injecting more carbon dioxide and methane into the air. And as the ice caps melt, the sun reflects off the dark water instead of the white snow, and the atmosphere heats all the faster. This summer, large swaths of tundra have been burning, adding still more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. Before the hot wind blows in our face, we need to recognize the environmental insanity of war.

The Pentagon wants to go "green," though—and not only with its light bulbs. It is also using solar energy at some of its bases, and is even trying to manufacture a synthetic fuel for the B-1 bomber. But we don't need a "green" military with high-mileage tanks, or bombers flying on biofuel. Anyway, war, for the foreseeable future, will depend largely on fossil fuels. As the Pentagon now tells us, we have no national security without climate security. War has become the ultimate environmental oxymoron.

Instead, we need to address the reasons countries and groups go to war: nationalism, religious fanaticism, tribalism, poverty—and scarcity of resources, like oil. And we can't do that by consuming that oil in spasms of nationalism.

Peacemakers are often assumed to be naive dreamers. Given the environmental circumstances, however, a timely end to war is not naive, but necessary. The Earth can no longer afford war.